“Yes She Can” is the latest in the long running series of Michael
Eric Dyson audition tapes for one of the Official Spokesnegro spots that
open up on MSNBC and similar places with every Democratic
administration. Michael didn't make the final cut for the Obama era, but
is making a strong bid in what he hopes will be the administration of
Hillary Clinton.
In the tradition of lazy employees with lazy bosses, Dyson
demonstrates his loyalty by not contradicting or criticizing his
prospective boss in any way, and telling the new bosses exactly what
Dyson imagines they want to hear.
-- Bruce A. Dixon, "Dyson's 'Yes She Can' Is Another Lazy, Shameless Official Spokesnegro Audition Tape" (BLACK AGENDA REPORT).
Monday, December 14, 2015
A note to our readers
Hey --
A Monday?
Try basically Tuesday.
First, we thank all who participated this edition which includes Dallas and the following:
The Third Estate Sunday Review's Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess and Ava,
Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude,
Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man,
C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review,
Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills),
Mike of Mikey Likes It!,
Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz),
Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix,
Ruth of Ruth's Report,
Wally of The Daily Jot,
Trina of Trina's Kitchen,
Marcia of SICKOFITRDLZ,
Stan of Oh Boy It Never Ends,
Isaiah of The World Today Just Nuts,
and Ann of Ann's Mega Dub.
And what did we come up with?
Peace.
-- Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess, Ava and C.I
A Monday?
Try basically Tuesday.
First, we thank all who participated this edition which includes Dallas and the following:
The Third Estate Sunday Review's Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess and Ava,
Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude,
Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man,
C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review,
Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills),
Mike of Mikey Likes It!,
Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz),
Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix,
Ruth of Ruth's Report,
Wally of The Daily Jot,
Trina of Trina's Kitchen,
Marcia of SICKOFITRDLZ,
Stan of Oh Boy It Never Ends,
Isaiah of The World Today Just Nuts,
and Ann of Ann's Mega Dub.
And what did we come up with?
Bruce A. Dixon gets the truest.
Take your bows, those of you who enable the illegal war to be never-ending.
Ava and C.I. reflect on the cheapness of the broadcast networks.
Susan Rice does impersonations! Who knew?
Last week's "Media: You Better Sit Down Kids" resulted in a ton of e-mails. Ava and C.I. develop one aspect of it more this edition.
This is part of that development.
As is this one.
Barack's got a wattle!
What we listened to while writing.
John Kirby has a hissy fit in the midst of a State Dept. press briefing.
Repost from Great Britain's Socialist Worker.
Press release from Senator Johnny Isakson's office.
Mike and the gang wrote this and we thank them for it.Peace.
-- Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess, Ava and C.I
Editorial: How the Iraq War continues
Last week, the Senate Armed Services Committee held a hearing on Iraq and Syria.
It was at this hearing
Secretary Ash Carter: Turning to northern Iraq , Peshmerga units, with the help of U.S. air power and advisers, have retaken the town of Sinjar, cutting the main line of communication between Raqqa and Mosul, the two largest cities under ISIL's control. To move people and supplies, ISIL now must rely on backroads, where we will locate and destroy them. Elsewhere in Iraq, we have about 3,500 troops at six locations in support of Iraqi Security Forces, or ISF. There, we've been providing increased lethal fire and augmenting the existing training, advising, and assisting program. And we're prepared to do more as Iraq shows capability and motivation in the counter-ISIL fight and in resolving its political divisions. After a frustratingly long time, we are starting to see some movement in the operation to recapture Ramadi. Over the past several months, the coalition has provided specialized training and equipment -- including combat engineering techniques like in-stride breaching and bulldozing, and munitions like AT-4 shoulder-fired missiles to stop truck bombs -- to the Iraqi Army and counter- terrorism service units that are now beginning to enter Ramadi neighborhoods from multiple directions. In fact, in the last 24 hours, the ISF retook the Anbar Operations Center on the northern bank of the Euphrates River across from Ramadi’s city center. This is an important step, but there is still tough fighting ahead. ISIL has counter-attacked several times , but thus far the ISF has shown resilience. The United States is prepared to assist the Iraqi Army with additional unique capabilities to help them finish the job, including attack helicopters and accompanying advisors, if requested by Prime Minister Abadi.
The week before, Carter was announcing that US troops would be in ground combat in Iraq.
Last week?
He's announcing that attack helicopters are being offered as well.
And maybe you heard about it?
Maybe from the corporate media.
Or maybe from this community where C.I. reported on the hearing in Wednesday, December 9th "Iraq snapshot," "Turkey's invasion and occupation of Iraq continues..." and in the Thursday, December 10th "Iraq snapshot" while Mike covered it in "So now attack helicopters" and "What is the plan?," Betty in "Joe Manchin is a sad US Senator," Wally at Rebecca's site with "Who knew Ash Carter was a fan of The Killers?," Ava at Trina's site with "Those shameful senators," Ann with "That posturing and preening Senate Armed Services Committee," Ruth with "Senator Blumenthal misses the point," Kat with "Disgusting 'answer' to the refugee crisis" and Elaine with "Senator Claire McCaskill is a pig."
But from the beggar media?
THE PROGRESSIVE can't be bothered with Iraq.
In fact, they've run from Iraq so much, you should call them THE COWARD.
Huh?
Did someone say Iraq Veterans Against the War?
Oh, the little bitch bois of whining.
They're not silent, you understand.
They can speak up for the transgendered, for example.
It was at this hearing
Secretary Ash Carter: Turning to northern Iraq , Peshmerga units, with the help of U.S. air power and advisers, have retaken the town of Sinjar, cutting the main line of communication between Raqqa and Mosul, the two largest cities under ISIL's control. To move people and supplies, ISIL now must rely on backroads, where we will locate and destroy them. Elsewhere in Iraq, we have about 3,500 troops at six locations in support of Iraqi Security Forces, or ISF. There, we've been providing increased lethal fire and augmenting the existing training, advising, and assisting program. And we're prepared to do more as Iraq shows capability and motivation in the counter-ISIL fight and in resolving its political divisions. After a frustratingly long time, we are starting to see some movement in the operation to recapture Ramadi. Over the past several months, the coalition has provided specialized training and equipment -- including combat engineering techniques like in-stride breaching and bulldozing, and munitions like AT-4 shoulder-fired missiles to stop truck bombs -- to the Iraqi Army and counter- terrorism service units that are now beginning to enter Ramadi neighborhoods from multiple directions. In fact, in the last 24 hours, the ISF retook the Anbar Operations Center on the northern bank of the Euphrates River across from Ramadi’s city center. This is an important step, but there is still tough fighting ahead. ISIL has counter-attacked several times , but thus far the ISF has shown resilience. The United States is prepared to assist the Iraqi Army with additional unique capabilities to help them finish the job, including attack helicopters and accompanying advisors, if requested by Prime Minister Abadi.
The week before, Carter was announcing that US troops would be in ground combat in Iraq.
Last week?
He's announcing that attack helicopters are being offered as well.
And maybe you heard about it?
Maybe from the corporate media.
Or maybe from this community where C.I. reported on the hearing in Wednesday, December 9th "Iraq snapshot," "Turkey's invasion and occupation of Iraq continues..." and in the Thursday, December 10th "Iraq snapshot" while Mike covered it in "So now attack helicopters" and "What is the plan?," Betty in "Joe Manchin is a sad US Senator," Wally at Rebecca's site with "Who knew Ash Carter was a fan of The Killers?," Ava at Trina's site with "Those shameful senators," Ann with "That posturing and preening Senate Armed Services Committee," Ruth with "Senator Blumenthal misses the point," Kat with "Disgusting 'answer' to the refugee crisis" and Elaine with "Senator Claire McCaskill is a pig."
But from the beggar media?
THE PROGRESSIVE can't be bothered with Iraq.
In fact, they've run from Iraq so much, you should call them THE COWARD.
Huh?
Did someone say Iraq Veterans Against the War?
Oh, the little bitch bois of whining.
They're not silent, you understand.
They can speak up for the transgendered, for example.
TV: Punishing the viewer
The boob tube.
One of the nicer names TV has been given over the years.
It's also been likened to a baby sitter.
But these days, more and more, it acts like a parent determined not to lose a power struggle.
You will eat your broccoli, you understand.
Not only that, you will also eat the sugary crap that's going to rot your teeth.
That's the only way to explain airing something like BLOOD & OIL, after all.
We've noted already how shows like SUPERGIRL demonstrate that the last thing the networks are factoring in when green lighting is whether or not audiences want this or that offering.
But what's worse than that is the refusal to pick up on cues.
No one's watching BLOOD & OIL, ABC's hideous soap opera that wants to exclude women but lacks the guts to be a same-sex drama.
In seasons past, crap like this, attracting no viewers, would have been axed by the fourth episode.
"Well," you counter, "maybe the networks have decided to give shows a chance for a change."
No.
Giving shows a chance would have been, for example, NBC giving THE EVENT a second season.
What they're doing is showing contempt for viewers.
Where else, they argue, are you going to go?
Because can broadcast television lose any more viewers?
They've been bleeding since the 80s -- the first to be run off in large numbers were women -- a little truth the networks don't ever like to ponder, let alone admit.
Or what of Fox which allows LAST MAN ON EARTH to destroy its ratings?
The series premeried last spring to nearly six million viewers and then quickly sunk.
It wrapped up season one with an episode that brought in only 3.51 million viewers.
In season two?
Of the ten episodes aired so far, only one got more (3.58 million) while the rest have set records for low ratings (2.29 million being the lowest so far).
And yet it remains on the air.
In fact, far too much crap continues to air.
WICKED CITY did get the axe.
In fact, that ABC series was the only show this fall that did get cancelled.
Cancelled means they pull your show off the air.
Instead of cancelling, the networks treated failing shows as if they were mini-series, letting all the installments peter out -- even when they reduced the number of episodes such as with THE PLAYER (NBC) and MINORITY REPORT (Fox).
And, of course, with BLOOD & OIL.
ABC has finally done viewers everywhere a favor -- Sunday night was the final episode of that hideous series. No surprise, it's ratings hit an all time low.
'Oh, that happens when shows are getting the axe.'
No, not really.
What really happens when a network loses faith in a show and is kicking it to the curb is they move it around on the schedule.
BLOOD & OIL was aired on the same night and at the same time for every episode (the same was true of THE PLAYER and MINORITY REPORT).
ABC, for example, trashed HAPPY ENDINGS in its final season, shuffling it around on the schedule constantly.
But this season, the networks played dumb and it wasn't about ensuring that shows got a chance to find an audience, it was about being cheap.
They'd invested X amount of money and, damn it, these episodes that cost so much money were going to air.
And, damn it, viewers could lump it or leave it.
It's this arrogance that's driven viewers away each and every decade over the last forty years.
The networks are correct: You can punish the viewers.
What they don't get?
The viewer can (and does) rebel.
One of the nicer names TV has been given over the years.
It's also been likened to a baby sitter.
But these days, more and more, it acts like a parent determined not to lose a power struggle.
You will eat your broccoli, you understand.
Not only that, you will also eat the sugary crap that's going to rot your teeth.
That's the only way to explain airing something like BLOOD & OIL, after all.
We've noted already how shows like SUPERGIRL demonstrate that the last thing the networks are factoring in when green lighting is whether or not audiences want this or that offering.
But what's worse than that is the refusal to pick up on cues.
No one's watching BLOOD & OIL, ABC's hideous soap opera that wants to exclude women but lacks the guts to be a same-sex drama.
In seasons past, crap like this, attracting no viewers, would have been axed by the fourth episode.
"Well," you counter, "maybe the networks have decided to give shows a chance for a change."
No.
Giving shows a chance would have been, for example, NBC giving THE EVENT a second season.
What they're doing is showing contempt for viewers.
Where else, they argue, are you going to go?
Because can broadcast television lose any more viewers?
They've been bleeding since the 80s -- the first to be run off in large numbers were women -- a little truth the networks don't ever like to ponder, let alone admit.
Or what of Fox which allows LAST MAN ON EARTH to destroy its ratings?
The series premeried last spring to nearly six million viewers and then quickly sunk.
It wrapped up season one with an episode that brought in only 3.51 million viewers.
In season two?
Of the ten episodes aired so far, only one got more (3.58 million) while the rest have set records for low ratings (2.29 million being the lowest so far).
And yet it remains on the air.
In fact, far too much crap continues to air.
WICKED CITY did get the axe.
In fact, that ABC series was the only show this fall that did get cancelled.
Cancelled means they pull your show off the air.
Instead of cancelling, the networks treated failing shows as if they were mini-series, letting all the installments peter out -- even when they reduced the number of episodes such as with THE PLAYER (NBC) and MINORITY REPORT (Fox).
And, of course, with BLOOD & OIL.
ABC has finally done viewers everywhere a favor -- Sunday night was the final episode of that hideous series. No surprise, it's ratings hit an all time low.
'Oh, that happens when shows are getting the axe.'
No, not really.
What really happens when a network loses faith in a show and is kicking it to the curb is they move it around on the schedule.
BLOOD & OIL was aired on the same night and at the same time for every episode (the same was true of THE PLAYER and MINORITY REPORT).
ABC, for example, trashed HAPPY ENDINGS in its final season, shuffling it around on the schedule constantly.
But this season, the networks played dumb and it wasn't about ensuring that shows got a chance to find an audience, it was about being cheap.
They'd invested X amount of money and, damn it, these episodes that cost so much money were going to air.
And, damn it, viewers could lump it or leave it.
It's this arrogance that's driven viewers away each and every decade over the last forty years.
The networks are correct: You can punish the viewers.
What they don't get?
The viewer can (and does) rebel.
Gas and a giggle
It's not all frowns and furrowed brows at the White House.
Susan Rice, above in the Oval Office, attempts to get a laugh as she offers her imitation of Barack.
Susan Rice, above in the Oval Office, attempts to get a laugh as she offers her imitation of Barack.
Actresses and classic films (Ava and C.I.)
Last week, in "Media: You Better Sit Down Kids," we wrote:
E-mails made clear that we needed to expand on this. (The e-mail address is thethirdestatesundayreview@yahoo.com.)
We don't think Jane's filmography is useless.
For example, we've hailed her (Academy Award winning performance) in Alan J. Pakula's KLUTE as the finest performance by any actor -- male or female -- in the 20th century.
And, in 2005, we highlighted a series of her films as she prepared to return to movies with the comedy MONSTER-IN-LAW:
"DVD review: Cat Ballou"
"DVD Review: Barefoot in the Park "
"DVD review: Barbarella"
"DVD review Jane Fonda's Fun With Dick & Jane"
"DVD review: Jane Fonda in California Suite"
"DVD review: The Electric Horseman"
"DVD review: Nine to Five"
And we followed that with "DVD review: The Morning After."
The e-mail reactions to those pieces was strong.
And we're glad because that's the whole point of being here.
To ensure that women are a part of the canon.
When the rock canon was built in the 60s, only a token women or two were included.
It results from lists.
It results from fan boys pushing their bro crushes.
And we're here to be an antidote to that.
In terms of walking away from Jane Fonda?
Absolutely.
If she's not going to address the anti-Arab image she's got, that's on her.
We have enough work to do raising the profile of women, shining a spotlight on female artists, without having to take on her latest baggage.
It has to do with recognizing what's the best use of time.
In this edition, we're focusing on two artists, Faye Dunaway and Diane Keaton, with a list of their films.
As you look at the lists, you should be able to grasp that both actresses will have an easier time making it into the canon -- and staying there -- 40 years from now than will Jane Fonda.
That's not to say Fonda's got nothing.
But without feminist's championing her work, what she's got is largely BARBARELLA and THE GAME IS OVER (both directed by Roger Vadim) and HURRY SUNDOWN.
Now the Vadim films are part of the French New Wave and they're Vadim's vision.
He had a strong and uniform vision (which is why his section of SPIRITS OF THE DEAD is really the only part of that film which holds up today).
Otto Preminger also had a vision.
HURRY SUNDOWN is frequently downright laughable (especially when Jane's blowing an instrument between Michael Caine's legs).
But it does have Preminger's signature.
Other than those, only KLUTE easily makes it onto the list of classics.
9 TO 5 is a classic and should be on the list.
And if women -- and men -- online did their part, we'd see a more inclusive canon.
But that's not what happens.
We rolled our eyes at PUMA for many reasons (while still supporting Party Unity My Ass) but primarily because one PUMA website included movies every weekend.
Movies you should watch.
Movies.
Movies revolving around men.
And they never noticed that.
A site supposedly interested in supporting women couldn't even support women in films.
We don't know what tomorrow has in store, but we do know that a lot more ground should have been covered by now.
E-mails made clear that we needed to expand on this. (The e-mail address is thethirdestatesundayreview@yahoo.com.)
We don't think Jane's filmography is useless.
For example, we've hailed her (Academy Award winning performance) in Alan J. Pakula's KLUTE as the finest performance by any actor -- male or female -- in the 20th century.
And, in 2005, we highlighted a series of her films as she prepared to return to movies with the comedy MONSTER-IN-LAW:
"DVD review: Cat Ballou"
"DVD Review: Barefoot in the Park "
"DVD review: Barbarella"
"DVD review Jane Fonda's Fun With Dick & Jane"
"DVD review: Jane Fonda in California Suite"
"DVD review: The Electric Horseman"
"DVD review: Nine to Five"
And we followed that with "DVD review: The Morning After."
The e-mail reactions to those pieces was strong.
And we're glad because that's the whole point of being here.
To ensure that women are a part of the canon.
When the rock canon was built in the 60s, only a token women or two were included.
It results from lists.
It results from fan boys pushing their bro crushes.
And we're here to be an antidote to that.
In terms of walking away from Jane Fonda?
Absolutely.
If she's not going to address the anti-Arab image she's got, that's on her.
We have enough work to do raising the profile of women, shining a spotlight on female artists, without having to take on her latest baggage.
It has to do with recognizing what's the best use of time.
In this edition, we're focusing on two artists, Faye Dunaway and Diane Keaton, with a list of their films.
As you look at the lists, you should be able to grasp that both actresses will have an easier time making it into the canon -- and staying there -- 40 years from now than will Jane Fonda.
That's not to say Fonda's got nothing.
But without feminist's championing her work, what she's got is largely BARBARELLA and THE GAME IS OVER (both directed by Roger Vadim) and HURRY SUNDOWN.
Now the Vadim films are part of the French New Wave and they're Vadim's vision.
He had a strong and uniform vision (which is why his section of SPIRITS OF THE DEAD is really the only part of that film which holds up today).
Otto Preminger also had a vision.
HURRY SUNDOWN is frequently downright laughable (especially when Jane's blowing an instrument between Michael Caine's legs).
But it does have Preminger's signature.
Other than those, only KLUTE easily makes it onto the list of classics.
9 TO 5 is a classic and should be on the list.
And if women -- and men -- online did their part, we'd see a more inclusive canon.
But that's not what happens.
We rolled our eyes at PUMA for many reasons (while still supporting Party Unity My Ass) but primarily because one PUMA website included movies every weekend.
Movies you should watch.
Movies.
Movies revolving around men.
And they never noticed that.
A site supposedly interested in supporting women couldn't even support women in films.
We don't know what tomorrow has in store, but we do know that a lot more ground should have been covered by now.
Diane Keaton's Classic Film Canon
Loretta Young, Myrna Loy and many other strong actresses are often overlooked in the film canon. It's becoming harder and harder to exclude women these days. But some women have to be included in the canon due to the films they've starred in.
Take Diane Keaton.
1) ANNIE HALL -- she won the Academy Award for this comedy directed by Woody Allen. A classic that's still nodded to and ripped off repeatedly.
2) REDS -- Warren Beatty directed (winning an Academy Award) and co-starred in this film with Diane, Jack Nicholson and Maureen Stapleton (who won the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress).
3 and 4) THE GODFATHER and THE GODFATHER PART II -- Diane's face as Al Pacino closes the door on her may be one of the strongest images from the two films. This is a rare case of the sequel actually being as powerful (or more) than the original. The cast also includes Marlon Brando, Talia Shire, James Caan and Robert Duvall.
5) SLEEPER -- Woody Allen's hilarious look at the future and a government out of control. This is the film that made reviewers realize Diane Keaton was more than just sufficient with a funny line of dialogue, she was actually a gifted comedian.
6) LOVE AND DEATH -- Diane and Woody follow up with this hilarious romp where they plot to assassinate Napoleon.
7) MRS. SOFEL -- Gillian Armstrong is a gifted director and one of the few female directors to earn attention from the male fan boyz. This film finds Diane co-starring opposite Mel Gibson. This is also one of two films she's done which was directed by a woman.
8) SHOOT THE MOON -- Alan Parker's powerful film starring Diane and Albert Finney. Her performance is so strong in this film that it may have undercut her chances for an Oscar for REDS (some argued give it to Katharine Hepburn for her wind-up doll, self-parody role in ON GOLDEN POND because Keaton's work in SHOOT THE MOON would surely result in an Oscar the following year -- in reality, she didn't even get nominated).
9) MANHATTAN MURDER MYSTERY -- Diane reteams with Woody Allen who proves he can still be hilarious after a series of films that mixed drama with comedy.
10) SOMETHING'S GOT TO GIVE -- this Nancy Meyers comedy pairs Keaton with Jack Nicholson and also co-stars Keanu Reeves and Frances McDormand. One of Keaton's biggest money makers, the film also resulted in her being nominated for Best Actress at the Academy Awards.
These are the ten that are not in dispute.
We'd argue the comedy FIRST WIVES CLUB, the comedy BABY BOOM, the drama THE GOOD MOTHER, the comedy-drama MANHATTAN, the comedy PLAY IT AGAIN SAM, the drama/neo noir LOOKING FOR MR. GOODBAR, and the flawed THE GODFATHER PART III should also be included in the canon.
Take Diane Keaton.
1) ANNIE HALL -- she won the Academy Award for this comedy directed by Woody Allen. A classic that's still nodded to and ripped off repeatedly.
2) REDS -- Warren Beatty directed (winning an Academy Award) and co-starred in this film with Diane, Jack Nicholson and Maureen Stapleton (who won the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress).
3 and 4) THE GODFATHER and THE GODFATHER PART II -- Diane's face as Al Pacino closes the door on her may be one of the strongest images from the two films. This is a rare case of the sequel actually being as powerful (or more) than the original. The cast also includes Marlon Brando, Talia Shire, James Caan and Robert Duvall.
5) SLEEPER -- Woody Allen's hilarious look at the future and a government out of control. This is the film that made reviewers realize Diane Keaton was more than just sufficient with a funny line of dialogue, she was actually a gifted comedian.
6) LOVE AND DEATH -- Diane and Woody follow up with this hilarious romp where they plot to assassinate Napoleon.
7) MRS. SOFEL -- Gillian Armstrong is a gifted director and one of the few female directors to earn attention from the male fan boyz. This film finds Diane co-starring opposite Mel Gibson. This is also one of two films she's done which was directed by a woman.
8) SHOOT THE MOON -- Alan Parker's powerful film starring Diane and Albert Finney. Her performance is so strong in this film that it may have undercut her chances for an Oscar for REDS (some argued give it to Katharine Hepburn for her wind-up doll, self-parody role in ON GOLDEN POND because Keaton's work in SHOOT THE MOON would surely result in an Oscar the following year -- in reality, she didn't even get nominated).
9) MANHATTAN MURDER MYSTERY -- Diane reteams with Woody Allen who proves he can still be hilarious after a series of films that mixed drama with comedy.
10) SOMETHING'S GOT TO GIVE -- this Nancy Meyers comedy pairs Keaton with Jack Nicholson and also co-stars Keanu Reeves and Frances McDormand. One of Keaton's biggest money makers, the film also resulted in her being nominated for Best Actress at the Academy Awards.
These are the ten that are not in dispute.
We'd argue the comedy FIRST WIVES CLUB, the comedy BABY BOOM, the drama THE GOOD MOTHER, the comedy-drama MANHATTAN, the comedy PLAY IT AGAIN SAM, the drama/neo noir LOOKING FOR MR. GOODBAR, and the flawed THE GODFATHER PART III should also be included in the canon.
Faye Dunaway's Classic Film Canon
You can't deny Bette Davis.
Even the sexist boys club that created the 'canon' of film greats can't ignore the one and only Bette Davis.
But they did largely ignore Gene Tierney, Linda Darnell, Jean Simmons, Joan Bennett, Ruth Roman and many others.
Faye Dunaway, seen as the real deal early on by Joan Crawford, is an actress that even sexist standards can't exclude from the canon.
Here are ten films she's starred in that break down the door with the "NO GIRLS ALLOWED" sign tacked on it.
1) BONNIE & CLYDE -- this 1967 film produced by and co-starring Warren Beatty established Faye as one of the all time great actresses.
2) CHINATOWN -- a non-40s and non-50s noir that gets it right. Faye and Jack Nicholson are the perfect coupling onscreen in a film, directed by Roman Polanski, that pulls no punches (Robert Towne wrote the amazing screenplay).
3) THREE DAYS OF THE CONDOR -- Sydney Pollack was at his best as a director when working paranoia and this film is bathed in it. Robert Redford stars and the film loses a lot of life when Faye disappears before the last third of the film.
4) NETWORK -- after multiple nominations, Faye finally won the Academy Award for Best Actress for this film. It's a parody and it stands up. It's also a very sexist film -- something the fan boyz work overtime to ignore.
5) BARFLY -- Babet Schroeder's finest film stars Faye and Mickey Rourke, both delivering two of the strongest performances of 1987.
6) THE THOMAS CROWN AFFAIR -- Norman Jewison directs Steve McQueen in Faye in one of the best -- and most stylish -- caper films.
7) EYES Of lAURA MARS -- John Carpenter got his first real break writing the original script that interested Jon Peters (the shooting script was written by Carpenter an David Zelag Goodman). Faye Dunaway stars opposite Tommy Lee Jones in this thriller.directed by Irvin Kershner.
8 and 9) THE THREE MUSKETEERS and THE FOUR MUSKETEERS -- Richard Lester directed these two adventure films which starred Oliver Reed, Michael York, Faye, Raquel Welch, Richard Chamberlain and Charlton Heston. They're lively fantasy films that make it look so easy (1993's THE THREE MUSTKATEERS directed by Stephen Herek proved it's not an easy film to make).
10) MOMMIE DEAREST -- Faye Dunaway was offended by the efforts of MGM to sell this as a camp classic during its original run -- encouraging audience participation at screenings -- but that's what allowed more people to see her play Joan Crawford (who won an Academy Award for MILDRED PIERCE). The move may have bothered her but it helped the film become a classic.
That's just ten. Other films could easily make the canon list including Jeremy Levin's DON JUAN DEMARCO which teams her with Marlon Brando and Johnny Depp, Volker Schlondorff's THE HANDMAID'S TALE, Michael Winner's THE WICKED LADY, James Gray's THE YARDS, and Luc Besson's THE MESSENGER: THE STORY OF JOAN OF ARC.
The years have not been kind
He may only be 54 . . . but he's looking much, much older.
Oh, well, maybe Greg Germann's Fish (ALLY MCBEAL) will want to stroke Barack's wattle.
This edition's playlist
2) The Mamas & The Papas' THE PAPAS & THE MAMAS.
4) Janet Jackson's UNBREAKABLE.
5) Aretha Franklin's ARETHA SINGS THE GREAT DIVA CLASSICS.
6) Tracy Chapman's GREATEST HITS.
5) Aretha Franklin's ARETHA SINGS THE GREAT DIVA CLASSICS.
6) Tracy Chapman's GREATEST HITS.
John Kirby's war on women
This is from the "Iraq snapshot" for December 10th.
US State Dept spokesperson John Kirby flaunted his own stupidty when he unleashed his bitchy at today's State Dept press briefing and launched his attack on RT [RUSSIA TODAY].
Gayane Chichakyan is the RT journalist who dared to ask a question.
It was a basic question and John Kirby turned into a full on bitch.
As shameful as he was, equally shameful was REUTERS whose 'reporter' rushed in to change the subject and rescue the State Dept.
Let's jump in to where Chickakryan attempts to get answers to her questions.
QUESTION: I have one more question on Turkey, please.
MR KIRBY: Okay, go ahead.
QUESTION: Thank you. Well, you were saying that it’s up to Turkey and Iraq to figure out the situation with the uninvited Turkish troops. But the U.S. does take upon itself to invite forces from other countries into Iraq and in Syria. Ash Carter was telling Congress yesterday that he personally reached out to 40 countries asking them to commit special ops for the fight and other support. The Iraqi parliament is concerned that their country is becoming this ground where different countries do what they want. The Iraqi parliament’s Security and Defense Committee is calling for the review or cancelation of the U.S. security agreement with Iraq. What does the U.S. do to address their concerns?
MR KIRBY: Address whose concerns?
QUESTION: The Iraqi parliament’s Security and Defense Committee that is now calling to review or cancel the agreement with the U.S.
MR KIRBY: I haven’t seen those reports, ma’am. We continue to work with the Iraqi Government. The troops that Secretary Carter referred to, that decision was done in full coordination and cooperation with the Iraqi Government. If you’re trying to suggest that somehow U.S. military assistance against ISIL is untoward or being done without full coordination with the Iraq Government, it’s just a completely baseless charge. And I don’t think it’s worth having any more discussions about it.
QUESTION: But you’re saying – are you saying that you’re not aware of the Iraqi parliament’s – this Security and Defense Committee’s initiative that they want to --
MR KIRBY: I haven’t seen that, no. I haven’t seen that.
QUESTION: Okay. What – the situation where the U.S. invites forces --
MR KIRBY: I’m going to give you just one more, honestly, and then that’s it. Okay?
QUESTION: Sure.
MR KIRBY: Go ahead.
QUESTION: The situation where the U.S. invites forces to Iraq and the U.S. is leading this coalition, but when something goes wrong, the U.S. says it’s none of our business, like with the Turkish troops. Let – you have to figure it out between yourselves. Should it be of no concern to Iraq?
MR KIRBY: Should what be of no concern? I love these questions that are 10 minutes long then I’m supposed to get the grain of it out of there. Should what be of no concern?
QUESTION: The fact that when something – you have this cooperation, you have this agreement, but when something goes wrong, the U.S. says it’s none of our business, like with what’s happening with the Turkish troops.
MR KIRBY: Oh, come on. Again, another ridiculous question. When have we ever said it’s none of our business?
QUESTION: You are saying that about the Turkish troops.
MR KIRBY: What I’m – no. No, I’m not. I’m saying that – I’ll say it again, okay? We want this to be worked out bilaterally between Turkey and Iraq. And the way you’re trying to twist all of this around to make it look like we’re doing something nefarious or that we’re – we’ve got some sort of inappropriate relationships here, I mean, it’s just so silly. And I can’t believe --
QUESTION: Well, am I really twisting it? You – have you --
MR KIRBY: I can’t believe, honestly, that you aren’t embarrassed to ask these questions. You have to be looking at these questions and almost laughing to yourself, don’t you? I mean, they’re absolutely crazy.
QUESTION: So --
MR KIRBY: So we are working very closely with the Abadi government, right. We are working inside a coalition of 65 nations – 65 nations that have signed up to go after ISIL in Iraq and in Syria – let me finish. You’ve had your moment. Sixty-five nations. And what we have said from the very beginning – I said it when I was at the Pentagon in uniform – is that we want any action against ISIL inside Iraq, specifically, to be done with full cooperation and coordination with the Iraqi Government and with their sovereign permission. That hasn’t changed one whit. Now there’s this dispute between Turkey and Iraq over the presence of a small number of troops, okay?
QUESTION: Should --
MR KIRBY: And we – I’ve said – I said it over the last several days and I’ll say it again: Nothing’s changed about our position about the sovereign nature of Iraq and the fact that troops operating against ISIL inside Iraq needs to be done with the Iraqi Government’s permission. And we’ve stated that publicly, we’ve stated that privately, to every member of the coalition. Nothing’s changed about that.
QUESTION: Sir --
MR KIRBY: And we want Turkey and Iraq to work this out, and they are. You are trying to find a way to make this some big divisive issue, and even the Turks and the Iraqis know that it’s not and they’re working their way through it. So let’s let them work their way through it and let the rest of everybody keep focusing on ISIL, which is what we should do, and which, by the way, the Russians aren’t doing.
QUESTION: If I may – if I may – if I may --
QUESTION: Is it – I’m sorry, should I not – should I not ask --
QUESTION: If I may – if I may --
QUESTION: Should I not be asking what the U.S. assessment of Turkey’s actions is?
MR KIRBY: You – ma’am – I’m going take this one, Arshad, then I’m going to come to you. You can – you can --
QUESTION: Should I not be asking that question? Exactly which question should I be embarrassed about, sir?
MR KIRBY: You can ask me whatever you want. I’m just stunned that you’re not embarrassed by some of the questions you ask. And I notice that --
QUESTION: Exactly which question?
MR KIRBY: I notice that RT very rarely asks any tough questions of their own government. So you can ask whatever you want. That’s the beauty of this setting, right, here at the State Department. You can come in here and ask me whatever you want, and you can be as – just as challenging as you want to be and accusatory in your questions – some of those today, absolutely ridiculous. You can do that here in the United States, but I don’t see you --
QUESTION: Which question was ridiculous, sir?
MR KIRBY: I don’t see you asking those same questions of your own government about ISIL in Syria.
QUESTION: Which of my questions was ridiculous?
MR KIRBY: And I would love to see those questions get asked.
Arshad.
QUESTION: I’d like to switch to just saying one quick word about Barry Schweid.
First, way to go Arshad Mohammed. You're a little suck ass, aren't you?
Arshad is periodically selected as the go-to when the State Dept wants to leak and Arshad, like a declawed house tabby, earns those leaks (billed as "exclusives" and "scoops") by refusing to ever press the State Dept or practice actual journalism.
Now let's go to John Kirby's stupidity. One more time:
QUESTION: Thank you. Well, you were saying that it’s up to Turkey and Iraq to figure out the situation with the uninvited Turkish troops. But the U.S. does take upon itself to invite forces from other countries into Iraq and in Syria. Ash Carter was telling Congress yesterday that he personally reached out to 40 countries asking them to commit special ops for the fight and other support. The Iraqi parliament is concerned that their country is becoming this ground where different countries do what they want. The Iraqi parliament’s Security and Defense Committee is calling for the review or cancelation of the U.S. security agreement with Iraq. What does the U.S. do to address their concerns?
MR KIRBY: Address whose concerns?
QUESTION: The Iraqi parliament’s Security and Defense Committee that is now calling to review or cancel the agreement with the U.S.
MR KIRBY: I haven’t seen those reports, ma’am. We continue to work with the Iraqi Government. The troops that Secretary Carter referred to, that decision was done in full coordination and cooperation with the Iraqi Government. If you’re trying to suggest that somehow U.S. military assistance against ISIL is untoward or being done without full coordination with the Iraq Government, it’s just a completely baseless charge. And I don’t think it’s worth having any more discussions about it.
QUESTION: But you’re saying – are you saying that you’re not aware of the Iraqi parliament’s – this Security and Defense Committee’s initiative that they want to --
MR KIRBY: I haven’t seen that, no. I haven’t seen that.
Is he unable to do his damn job?
He hasn't seen the reports?
As of Thursday afternoon, he knew nothing of this?
Wednesday morning at 7:56 a.m., we posted "Turkey's invasion of Iraq continues" which included:
SPUTNIK reports:
The Security and Defense Committee of the Iraqi Parliament has called for a review or cancellation of an agreement with the United States on security over Washington’s lack of a clear reaction to the worsening situation in the country, committee member Hamid al-Mutlaq told Sputnik on Wednesday.
Wednesday morning, we were aware of this.
Thursday afternoon, the US State Dept is still ignorant of it?
John Kirby looks like a stupid fool.
His ignorance does not speak well for himself or for his department.
How can they counter terrorism or practice diplomacy if they can't even follow the news cycle? If 32 hours after a major bit of news makes it into the cycle, they still don't know what's going on, what does that say about their knowledge base or their efforts to carry out their core job functions?
John Kirby should curb his inner bitch and instead apply himself towards following the news cycle.
Not only was it in the news Wednesday morning, it is major news that the State Dept should have been following: A member of the Iraqi Parliament's Security and Defense Committee is stating that the Committee is going to review the security agreement with the US and the State Dept is unaware of that?
This is further proof that the State Dept is unable to carry out their diplomatic mission in Iraq because they've mistaken themselves for an annex of the Defense Dept (Kirby, after all, is the former Pentagon spokesperson -- so much for rewarding diplomacy or career diplomats at State).
Whose war on women?
John Kirby decided to go full on bitch and, it's worth noting, he's never done that to a man.
But, on the State Dept payroll, he thought he had the right to attack and attempt to humiliate a journalist for asking a question.
That sort of sexism certainly applied at the Defense Dept which -- all these years later -- still can't honestly address violence against women, let alone harassment.
What a wonderful way to be an ambassador to the world: Kirby's attack on Gayane Chichakyan and attempt to humiliate her -- and to use humiliation to try to silence her -- on the world stage with the whole world watching.
That's not diplomacy.
It's also unacceptable.
There is also the issue of the revived tensions between the US government and the Russian government. In that environment, the world doesn't need a bitchy US spokesperson attacking a Russian reporter.
Before we close this topic out, let's zoom in on this part of the exchange:
QUESTION: The situation where the U.S. invites forces to Iraq and the U.S. is leading this coalition, but when something goes wrong, the U.S. says it’s none of our business, like with the Turkish troops. Let – you have to figure it out between yourselves. Should it be of no concern to Iraq?
MR KIRBY: Should what be of no concern? I love these questions that are 10 minutes long then I’m supposed to get the grain of it out of there. Should what be of no concern?
QUESTION: The fact that when something – you have this cooperation, you have this agreement, but when something goes wrong, the U.S. says it’s none of our business, like with what’s happening with the Turkish troops.
MR KIRBY: Oh, come on. Again, another ridiculous question. When have we ever said it’s none of our business?
She's not wrong at all.
The US has done that repeatedly.
The State Dept has been one of the worst offenders.
Oh, we don't want to get into the oil disputes in Iraq -- but the central government out of Baghdad is right!!!!!!
Do you now how many times Victoria Nuland pulled that crap when she was spokesperson for the State Dept?
(To Nuland's credit, she never tried to shame a reporter -- or serve her up for public ridicule -- just for asking a question.)
Or how about the Hawaija massacre?
On one hand, you had peaceful demonstrators staging a sit-in.
On the other hand, you had the forces Nouri al-Maliki sent in to surround the square and attack the protesters.
For those who've forgotten (or maybe never knew to begin with), The April 23, 2013 massacre of a sit-in in Hawija which resulted from Nouri's federal forces storming in. Alsumaria noted Kirkuk's Department of Health (Hawija is in Kirkuk) announced 50 activists have died and 110 were injured in the assault. AFP reported the death toll eventually (as some wounded died) rose to 53 dead. UNICEF noted that the dead included 8 children (twelve more were injured).
The State Dept's response?
To call for both sides to be civil.
Both the unarmed protesters practicing civil disobedience and the thugs who murdered them.
And, go to the archives, the Sunday before the slaughter, I wrote about the State Dept contacting me with their concerns. They knew where this was headed: Violence.
And they did nothing.
Remember that, because we're coming back to that topic as we go into a Congressional hearing below.
US State Dept spokesperson John Kirby flaunted his own stupidty when he unleashed his bitchy at today's State Dept press briefing and launched his attack on RT [RUSSIA TODAY].
State Dept. dodges RT’s question about Turkish troops in Iraq, gets personal http://on.rt.com/6z72
Gayane Chichakyan is the RT journalist who dared to ask a question.
It was a basic question and John Kirby turned into a full on bitch.
As shameful as he was, equally shameful was REUTERS whose 'reporter' rushed in to change the subject and rescue the State Dept.
Let's jump in to where Chickakryan attempts to get answers to her questions.
QUESTION: I have one more question on Turkey, please.
MR KIRBY: Okay, go ahead.
QUESTION: Thank you. Well, you were saying that it’s up to Turkey and Iraq to figure out the situation with the uninvited Turkish troops. But the U.S. does take upon itself to invite forces from other countries into Iraq and in Syria. Ash Carter was telling Congress yesterday that he personally reached out to 40 countries asking them to commit special ops for the fight and other support. The Iraqi parliament is concerned that their country is becoming this ground where different countries do what they want. The Iraqi parliament’s Security and Defense Committee is calling for the review or cancelation of the U.S. security agreement with Iraq. What does the U.S. do to address their concerns?
MR KIRBY: Address whose concerns?
QUESTION: The Iraqi parliament’s Security and Defense Committee that is now calling to review or cancel the agreement with the U.S.
MR KIRBY: I haven’t seen those reports, ma’am. We continue to work with the Iraqi Government. The troops that Secretary Carter referred to, that decision was done in full coordination and cooperation with the Iraqi Government. If you’re trying to suggest that somehow U.S. military assistance against ISIL is untoward or being done without full coordination with the Iraq Government, it’s just a completely baseless charge. And I don’t think it’s worth having any more discussions about it.
QUESTION: But you’re saying – are you saying that you’re not aware of the Iraqi parliament’s – this Security and Defense Committee’s initiative that they want to --
MR KIRBY: I haven’t seen that, no. I haven’t seen that.
QUESTION: Okay. What – the situation where the U.S. invites forces --
MR KIRBY: I’m going to give you just one more, honestly, and then that’s it. Okay?
QUESTION: Sure.
MR KIRBY: Go ahead.
QUESTION: The situation where the U.S. invites forces to Iraq and the U.S. is leading this coalition, but when something goes wrong, the U.S. says it’s none of our business, like with the Turkish troops. Let – you have to figure it out between yourselves. Should it be of no concern to Iraq?
MR KIRBY: Should what be of no concern? I love these questions that are 10 minutes long then I’m supposed to get the grain of it out of there. Should what be of no concern?
QUESTION: The fact that when something – you have this cooperation, you have this agreement, but when something goes wrong, the U.S. says it’s none of our business, like with what’s happening with the Turkish troops.
MR KIRBY: Oh, come on. Again, another ridiculous question. When have we ever said it’s none of our business?
QUESTION: You are saying that about the Turkish troops.
MR KIRBY: What I’m – no. No, I’m not. I’m saying that – I’ll say it again, okay? We want this to be worked out bilaterally between Turkey and Iraq. And the way you’re trying to twist all of this around to make it look like we’re doing something nefarious or that we’re – we’ve got some sort of inappropriate relationships here, I mean, it’s just so silly. And I can’t believe --
QUESTION: Well, am I really twisting it? You – have you --
MR KIRBY: I can’t believe, honestly, that you aren’t embarrassed to ask these questions. You have to be looking at these questions and almost laughing to yourself, don’t you? I mean, they’re absolutely crazy.
QUESTION: So --
MR KIRBY: So we are working very closely with the Abadi government, right. We are working inside a coalition of 65 nations – 65 nations that have signed up to go after ISIL in Iraq and in Syria – let me finish. You’ve had your moment. Sixty-five nations. And what we have said from the very beginning – I said it when I was at the Pentagon in uniform – is that we want any action against ISIL inside Iraq, specifically, to be done with full cooperation and coordination with the Iraqi Government and with their sovereign permission. That hasn’t changed one whit. Now there’s this dispute between Turkey and Iraq over the presence of a small number of troops, okay?
QUESTION: Should --
MR KIRBY: And we – I’ve said – I said it over the last several days and I’ll say it again: Nothing’s changed about our position about the sovereign nature of Iraq and the fact that troops operating against ISIL inside Iraq needs to be done with the Iraqi Government’s permission. And we’ve stated that publicly, we’ve stated that privately, to every member of the coalition. Nothing’s changed about that.
QUESTION: Sir --
MR KIRBY: And we want Turkey and Iraq to work this out, and they are. You are trying to find a way to make this some big divisive issue, and even the Turks and the Iraqis know that it’s not and they’re working their way through it. So let’s let them work their way through it and let the rest of everybody keep focusing on ISIL, which is what we should do, and which, by the way, the Russians aren’t doing.
QUESTION: If I may – if I may – if I may --
QUESTION: Is it – I’m sorry, should I not – should I not ask --
QUESTION: If I may – if I may --
QUESTION: Should I not be asking what the U.S. assessment of Turkey’s actions is?
MR KIRBY: You – ma’am – I’m going take this one, Arshad, then I’m going to come to you. You can – you can --
QUESTION: Should I not be asking that question? Exactly which question should I be embarrassed about, sir?
MR KIRBY: You can ask me whatever you want. I’m just stunned that you’re not embarrassed by some of the questions you ask. And I notice that --
QUESTION: Exactly which question?
MR KIRBY: I notice that RT very rarely asks any tough questions of their own government. So you can ask whatever you want. That’s the beauty of this setting, right, here at the State Department. You can come in here and ask me whatever you want, and you can be as – just as challenging as you want to be and accusatory in your questions – some of those today, absolutely ridiculous. You can do that here in the United States, but I don’t see you --
QUESTION: Which question was ridiculous, sir?
MR KIRBY: I don’t see you asking those same questions of your own government about ISIL in Syria.
QUESTION: Which of my questions was ridiculous?
MR KIRBY: And I would love to see those questions get asked.
Arshad.
QUESTION: I’d like to switch to just saying one quick word about Barry Schweid.
First, way to go Arshad Mohammed. You're a little suck ass, aren't you?
Arshad is periodically selected as the go-to when the State Dept wants to leak and Arshad, like a declawed house tabby, earns those leaks (billed as "exclusives" and "scoops") by refusing to ever press the State Dept or practice actual journalism.
Now let's go to John Kirby's stupidity. One more time:
QUESTION: Thank you. Well, you were saying that it’s up to Turkey and Iraq to figure out the situation with the uninvited Turkish troops. But the U.S. does take upon itself to invite forces from other countries into Iraq and in Syria. Ash Carter was telling Congress yesterday that he personally reached out to 40 countries asking them to commit special ops for the fight and other support. The Iraqi parliament is concerned that their country is becoming this ground where different countries do what they want. The Iraqi parliament’s Security and Defense Committee is calling for the review or cancelation of the U.S. security agreement with Iraq. What does the U.S. do to address their concerns?
MR KIRBY: Address whose concerns?
QUESTION: The Iraqi parliament’s Security and Defense Committee that is now calling to review or cancel the agreement with the U.S.
MR KIRBY: I haven’t seen those reports, ma’am. We continue to work with the Iraqi Government. The troops that Secretary Carter referred to, that decision was done in full coordination and cooperation with the Iraqi Government. If you’re trying to suggest that somehow U.S. military assistance against ISIL is untoward or being done without full coordination with the Iraq Government, it’s just a completely baseless charge. And I don’t think it’s worth having any more discussions about it.
QUESTION: But you’re saying – are you saying that you’re not aware of the Iraqi parliament’s – this Security and Defense Committee’s initiative that they want to --
MR KIRBY: I haven’t seen that, no. I haven’t seen that.
Is he unable to do his damn job?
He hasn't seen the reports?
As of Thursday afternoon, he knew nothing of this?
Wednesday morning at 7:56 a.m., we posted "Turkey's invasion of Iraq continues" which included:
SPUTNIK reports:
The Security and Defense Committee of the Iraqi Parliament has called for a review or cancellation of an agreement with the United States on security over Washington’s lack of a clear reaction to the worsening situation in the country, committee member Hamid al-Mutlaq told Sputnik on Wednesday.
Wednesday morning, we were aware of this.
Thursday afternoon, the US State Dept is still ignorant of it?
John Kirby looks like a stupid fool.
His ignorance does not speak well for himself or for his department.
How can they counter terrorism or practice diplomacy if they can't even follow the news cycle? If 32 hours after a major bit of news makes it into the cycle, they still don't know what's going on, what does that say about their knowledge base or their efforts to carry out their core job functions?
John Kirby should curb his inner bitch and instead apply himself towards following the news cycle.
Not only was it in the news Wednesday morning, it is major news that the State Dept should have been following: A member of the Iraqi Parliament's Security and Defense Committee is stating that the Committee is going to review the security agreement with the US and the State Dept is unaware of that?
This is further proof that the State Dept is unable to carry out their diplomatic mission in Iraq because they've mistaken themselves for an annex of the Defense Dept (Kirby, after all, is the former Pentagon spokesperson -- so much for rewarding diplomacy or career diplomats at State).
Whose war on women?
John Kirby decided to go full on bitch and, it's worth noting, he's never done that to a man.
But, on the State Dept payroll, he thought he had the right to attack and attempt to humiliate a journalist for asking a question.
That sort of sexism certainly applied at the Defense Dept which -- all these years later -- still can't honestly address violence against women, let alone harassment.
What a wonderful way to be an ambassador to the world: Kirby's attack on Gayane Chichakyan and attempt to humiliate her -- and to use humiliation to try to silence her -- on the world stage with the whole world watching.
That's not diplomacy.
It's also unacceptable.
There is also the issue of the revived tensions between the US government and the Russian government. In that environment, the world doesn't need a bitchy US spokesperson attacking a Russian reporter.
Before we close this topic out, let's zoom in on this part of the exchange:
QUESTION: The situation where the U.S. invites forces to Iraq and the U.S. is leading this coalition, but when something goes wrong, the U.S. says it’s none of our business, like with the Turkish troops. Let – you have to figure it out between yourselves. Should it be of no concern to Iraq?
MR KIRBY: Should what be of no concern? I love these questions that are 10 minutes long then I’m supposed to get the grain of it out of there. Should what be of no concern?
QUESTION: The fact that when something – you have this cooperation, you have this agreement, but when something goes wrong, the U.S. says it’s none of our business, like with what’s happening with the Turkish troops.
MR KIRBY: Oh, come on. Again, another ridiculous question. When have we ever said it’s none of our business?
She's not wrong at all.
The US has done that repeatedly.
The State Dept has been one of the worst offenders.
Oh, we don't want to get into the oil disputes in Iraq -- but the central government out of Baghdad is right!!!!!!
Do you now how many times Victoria Nuland pulled that crap when she was spokesperson for the State Dept?
(To Nuland's credit, she never tried to shame a reporter -- or serve her up for public ridicule -- just for asking a question.)
Or how about the Hawaija massacre?
On one hand, you had peaceful demonstrators staging a sit-in.
On the other hand, you had the forces Nouri al-Maliki sent in to surround the square and attack the protesters.
For those who've forgotten (or maybe never knew to begin with), The April 23, 2013 massacre of a sit-in in Hawija which resulted from Nouri's federal forces storming in. Alsumaria noted Kirkuk's Department of Health (Hawija is in Kirkuk) announced 50 activists have died and 110 were injured in the assault. AFP reported the death toll eventually (as some wounded died) rose to 53 dead. UNICEF noted that the dead included 8 children (twelve more were injured).
The State Dept's response?
To call for both sides to be civil.
Both the unarmed protesters practicing civil disobedience and the thugs who murdered them.
And, go to the archives, the Sunday before the slaughter, I wrote about the State Dept contacting me with their concerns. They knew where this was headed: Violence.
And they did nothing.
Remember that, because we're coming back to that topic as we go into a Congressional hearing below.
Wave of protests brings anti-war mood onto the streets in anger
This is a repost from Great Britain's Socialist Worker:
by Tomáš Tengely-Evans
Thousands of protesters have taken to the streets against Britain joining another war in the Middle East.
Activists were building for a national demonstration in central London this Saturday.
Lucinda Wakefield, from Sheffield Stop the War, told Socialist Worker, “Our demonstration on the night of the vote was very lively and angry.
“We’ve now got links with other groups in Sheffield who we’re working with to get coaches down to London.”
Around 400 joined a Stop the War rally in Friends Meeting House in central London last
Saturday.Many young people new to campaigning brought their placards from previous protests.
Ismail is a sixth form student in west London. He told Socialist Worker, “I’ll be going to as many protests against the war as I can.
“We’ve been going round my sixth form talking to people and putting up posters for the demonstration.”
“I’ve not been involved before, but I thought now is the time to stand up and do something. “
Seb, a college student, added, “It’s totally disgusting what they’re doing—we just have to get more involved.”
Up to 500 people marched in Nottingham, where there had been reported Islamophobic attacks.
Around 2,000 people joined a demonstration in Bristol on the night of the vote—and were set to march again on Wednesday of this week.
“The demo is looking very big already,” said Unison union member Huw Williams from Bristol. “It’s been called by the same network of sixth form students who organised the demos after Tories got in.”
The protests are reigniting Stop the War groups. Huw added, “We’ve had a lot of support from local people on the march—there’s definitely a strong anti-war mood.”
In Manchester 2,000 people marched on the night of the vote, the city’s second anti-war protest in a week. Hundreds marched there again last Saturday.
Activist Mark Krantz said people stopped their shopping and got off buses to join the demonstration. “People are now signing up for the coaches despite it being so close to the holidays,” he said.
Birmingham already has two coaches booked—including one from the one of the mosques.
And Scotland has already had three demonstrations in Glasgow and Edinburgh.
Polls show the war is unpopular. The protests are our chance to turn that mood into active opposition.
British RAF fighters have launched waves of airstrikes on Syria since MPs voted by 397 to 223 for war on Wednesday of last week.
Tornados took off from British military base Akrotiri in Cyprus just hours after the vote. A further eight jets were sent to join the four already bombing.
Our rulers talk of “bombing Isis”—not bombing Syria.
The media reported how Russian bombs had killed a five year old girl in the north western town of Habeet last Saturday.
But just as in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, British bombs will kill ordinary people.
As MPs voted for Britain to join a new imperialist war around 3,000 people took the road outside parliament. The protest and mass die-in was organised by the Stop the War Coalition.
Anger erupted through the crowd as the news came in and chants of “Shame on you” and “No Justice no Peace” rang out. “They are murderers who are killing Muslims,” said Palestinian Nazra.
David Cameron smeared anyone who disagreed as a “terrorist sympathiser”. But one protester’s chant of “David Cameron—terrorist” rippled through the crowd.
Cameron said bombing was about “keeping the British public safe”. And shadow foreign secretary Hilary Benn claimed it was about the fight against “fascism”.
This helped justify the 66 Labour MPs who supported the Tories after leader Jeremy Corbyn called a free vote (see page 7).
In reality, the war is about keeping Britain’s place alongside the other imperialist powers.
Former Tory foreign secretary Lord Hague said that Syria’s borders weren’t “immutable” and might need to be “subdivided”.
He wants Britain to be part of an imperialist carve up of the region.
The Tories are buoyed by the large majority in parliament. But opposition to our rulers’ new war in the Middle East can be built in the streets.
Wave of protests brings anti-war mood onto the streets in anger
Demonstration in Manchester on Wednesday of last week (Pic: Mark Krantz)
Thousands of protesters have taken to the streets against Britain joining another war in the Middle East.
Activists were building for a national demonstration in central London this Saturday.
Lucinda Wakefield, from Sheffield Stop the War, told Socialist Worker, “Our demonstration on the night of the vote was very lively and angry.
“We’ve now got links with other groups in Sheffield who we’re working with to get coaches down to London.”
Around 400 joined a Stop the War rally in Friends Meeting House in central London last
Saturday.Many young people new to campaigning brought their placards from previous protests.
Ismail is a sixth form student in west London. He told Socialist Worker, “I’ll be going to as many protests against the war as I can.
“We’ve been going round my sixth form talking to people and putting up posters for the demonstration.”
“I’ve not been involved before, but I thought now is the time to stand up and do something. “
Seb, a college student, added, “It’s totally disgusting what they’re doing—we just have to get more involved.”
Up to 500 people marched in Nottingham, where there had been reported Islamophobic attacks.
Around 2,000 people joined a demonstration in Bristol on the night of the vote—and were set to march again on Wednesday of this week.
“The demo is looking very big already,” said Unison union member Huw Williams from Bristol. “It’s been called by the same network of sixth form students who organised the demos after Tories got in.”
The protests are reigniting Stop the War groups. Huw added, “We’ve had a lot of support from local people on the march—there’s definitely a strong anti-war mood.”
In Manchester 2,000 people marched on the night of the vote, the city’s second anti-war protest in a week. Hundreds marched there again last Saturday.
Activist Mark Krantz said people stopped their shopping and got off buses to join the demonstration. “People are now signing up for the coaches despite it being so close to the holidays,” he said.
Birmingham already has two coaches booked—including one from the one of the mosques.
And Scotland has already had three demonstrations in Glasgow and Edinburgh.
Polls show the war is unpopular. The protests are our chance to turn that mood into active opposition.
Go to stopwar.org.uk
Airstrikes begin after MPs vote for imperialist war on Syria
British RAF fighters have launched waves of airstrikes on Syria since MPs voted by 397 to 223 for war on Wednesday of last week.
Tornados took off from British military base Akrotiri in Cyprus just hours after the vote. A further eight jets were sent to join the four already bombing.
Our rulers talk of “bombing Isis”—not bombing Syria.
The media reported how Russian bombs had killed a five year old girl in the north western town of Habeet last Saturday.
But just as in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, British bombs will kill ordinary people.
As MPs voted for Britain to join a new imperialist war around 3,000 people took the road outside parliament. The protest and mass die-in was organised by the Stop the War Coalition.
Anger erupted through the crowd as the news came in and chants of “Shame on you” and “No Justice no Peace” rang out. “They are murderers who are killing Muslims,” said Palestinian Nazra.
David Cameron smeared anyone who disagreed as a “terrorist sympathiser”. But one protester’s chant of “David Cameron—terrorist” rippled through the crowd.
Cameron said bombing was about “keeping the British public safe”. And shadow foreign secretary Hilary Benn claimed it was about the fight against “fascism”.
This helped justify the 66 Labour MPs who supported the Tories after leader Jeremy Corbyn called a free vote (see page 7).
In reality, the war is about keeping Britain’s place alongside the other imperialist powers.
Former Tory foreign secretary Lord Hague said that Syria’s borders weren’t “immutable” and might need to be “subdivided”.
He wants Britain to be part of an imperialist carve up of the region.
The Tories are buoyed by the large majority in parliament. But opposition to our rulers’ new war in the Middle East can be built in the streets.
Isakson Applauds Committee Passage of Legislation to Improve VA Accountability
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, December 9, 2015
Contact: Amanda Maddox, 202-224-7777
Lauren Gaydos, 202-224-9126
Isakson Applauds Committee Passage of Legislation to Improve VA Accountability
Committee also passes comprehensive VA health care, benefits bill
WASHINGTON
– U.S. Senator Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., chairman of the Senate Committee
on Veterans’ Affairs, today applauded the
committee passage of legislation aimed at increasing accountability at
the Department of Veterans Affairs and improving veterans’ benefits and
health care.
“I want to thank the committee
members for their hard work in coming together to create bipartisan,
commonsense legislation to help our veterans,”
said Isakson.
“The omnibus bill passed by the committee today will go a long way to
help ensure that our veterans receive the health care and services they
deserve in a fiscally-responsible way. We also passed a crucial bill
that will help force the VA to finally start
holding its employees accountable, something the VA has so far been
unwilling to do. I look forward to seeing these bills passed by the full
Senate.”
At a markup held today, the committee approved the
Increasing the Department of Veterans Affairs Accountability to Veterans Act of 2015
(S.290), which prospectively reduces the pensions for VA executives
convicted of felonies. Introduced by Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan., and Sen.
Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., the bill also reforms the VA’s
administrative leave policies and establishes new performance
standards for employees placed on probation.
In addition, the committee approved the
Veterans Homeless Programs, Caregiver Services and Other Improvements Act of 2015
(S.425), an omnibus bill originally introduced by Sen. John Boozman,
R-Ark., and Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont. It includes numerous provisions to
improve veterans’ health care and benefits, including measures to:
·
Expand the VA definition of homeless to include those fleeing domestic violence.
·
Increase the pension received by Medal of Honor recipients.
·
Provide legal services for homeless veterans and expand the VA’s program to provide dental services to homeless veterans.
·
Expand eligibility for the Department of Labor’s Homeless Veterans’ Reintegration Program.
·
Improve opioid
safety measures at the VA and establish a working group on pain
management at the VA and the Department of Defense.
·
Expand eligibility
for the VA’s family caregiver program and ensure the VA implements
improvements to the program identified by the Government Accountability
Office
·
Restore GI Bill benefits to veterans affected by the closures of educational institutions.
·
Increase eligibility for certain veterans education benefits and improve how those benefits are administered by the VA.
·
Expedite the payment of various survivor benefits to family members of deceased veterans.
Earlier this year, Isakson listed combating veteran homelessness as one of his
top priorities
as chairman.
The two bills approved by the committee today now go to the full Senate.
###
The Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs is chaired by U.S. Senator Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., in the 114th Congress.
Isakson is a veteran himself – having
served in the Georgia Air National Guard from 1966-1972 – and has been a
member of the Senate VA Committee since he joined the Senate in 2005.
Isakson’s home
state of Georgia is home to more than a dozen military installations
representing each branch of the military as well as more than 750,000
veterans.
Highlights
This piece is written by Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude, Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix, Kat of Kat's Korner, Betty of Thomas Friedman is a Great Man, Mike of Mikey Likes It!, Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz, Ruth of Ruth's Report, Marcia of SICKOFITRADLZ, Stan of Oh Boy It Never Ends, Ann of Ann's Mega Dub, Isaiah of The World Today Just Nuts and Wally of The Daily Jot. Unless otherwise noted, we picked all highlights.
"Iraq's Turkish infestation and purge of Sunnis," "Sunni Lives Matter#" and "The Iraqi government's still unacknowledged persec..." -- the most requested highlights by readers of this site.
"Iraq snapshot," "Turkey's invasion and occupation of Iraq continues...," "Iraq snapshot," "So now attack helicopters," "What is the plan?," "Joe Manchin is a sad US Senator," "Who knew Ash Carter was a fan of The Killers?," "Those shameful senators," "That posturing and preening Senate Armed Services Committee," "Senator Blumenthal misses the point," "Disgusting 'answer' to the refugee crisis" and "Senator Claire McCaskill is a pig" -- the community reports on the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing.
"Iraq's Turkish infestation and purge of Sunnis," "Sunni Lives Matter#" and "The Iraqi government's still unacknowledged persec..." -- the most requested highlights by readers of this site.
"Iraq snapshot," "Turkey's invasion and occupation of Iraq continues...," "Iraq snapshot," "So now attack helicopters," "What is the plan?," "Joe Manchin is a sad US Senator," "Who knew Ash Carter was a fan of The Killers?," "Those shameful senators," "That posturing and preening Senate Armed Services Committee," "Senator Blumenthal misses the point," "Disgusting 'answer' to the refugee crisis" and "Senator Claire McCaskill is a pig" -- the community reports on the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing.
"Iraq snapshot" -- C.I. reports on the House Veterans Affairs Committee's disappointing hearing.
"The Originals," "the hatred of women never ends" and "Vanilla Sky attacks Raven Symone" -- TV coverage in the community.
"Did you catch Cranky Clinton on Late Night with Seth Meyers?," "THIS JUST IN! THE BENEFITS OF LYING?," "Bill Clinton sees the upside," "Cranky Clinton is so beyond two-faced,"
"THIS JUST IN! IT'S FUNNY TO HER WHEN WESLEY DOES IT!," "Watch how the 'brave' collapse," "Another scandal for Cranky Clinton," "THIS JUST IN! TRIPPED UP BY HER OWN LIES!" and "Cranky Clinton's lies catch up to her" -- Cranky Clinton coverage in the community.
"Aziz Ansari's Modern Romance," "hellraisers," "Mindy Kaling" and "Carly's BOYS IN THE TREES"-- Mike, Rebecca, Ann and Kat cover books.
"Unbreakable" and "Some people have to invent things to b**tch about" -- Betty and Kat on music.
"Sandra Bullock," "Hollywood men" and "Mayberry's tot is as racist and sexist as ever" -- Elaine, Ann and Mike talk movies.
"Coward of the week: Ray McGovern" -- Mike picks the coward.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
