Super sale on The Bionic Woman at Amazon

The Bionic Woman is a TV series that starred Lindsay Wagner as Jamie Sommers, a role for which Wagner won the Emmy for Best Actress.  We've ranked it as one of the "5 Best Super Hero Shows (Live Action) of All Time."

And this year, we've weighed in on the show in "The Bionic Woman Season One" "The Bionic Woman Season 2"  and "The Bionic Woman Season Three."


A large number of e-mails have come in on these articles and we know that a lot of you are fans of the show as well.  So when Carter e-mailed to tell us about a sale at Amazon, we knew we needed to do a heads up.

Right now at Amazon, you can get streaming of season one of The Bionic Woman and season two for $4.99 each.  This is purchasing the full season for streaming -- you can keep it in your Amazon cloud and access it whenever you want. 

1.

Bionic Woman (Classic) Season 2

(80)

Prime members: $0.00 (unlimited streaming, Join Amazon Prime)

Buy episodes: $1.99 per episode

Buy season: $4.98 ($0.22 per episode)

Watch instantly on your PS3, Xbox, Kindle Fire, iPad, PC and other devices.

2.

The Bionic Woman (Classic) Season 1

(163)

Prime members: $0.00 (unlimited streaming, Join Amazon Prime)

Buy episodes: $1.99 per episode

Buy season: $4.98 ($0.36 per episode)

Watch instantly on your PS3, Xbox, Kindle Fire, iPad, PC and other devices.

Season three isn't part of the special.  Not yet, anyway.  And we have no idea how long the sale will last but if you stream, that's a great deal.

Can't do their jobs, so they blame a film

[Senator Carl Levin and Senator Dianne Feinstein above are brainstorming before dashing off a letter.  Having polished off two bottles, they needed a third and Senator Barbara Boxer was kind enough to bring a bottle over.  Senator John McCain had already been drank under the table by the time the photographer shot this picture.]




Last week, Senators Dianne Feinstein, Carl Levin and John McCain felt the need to write the head of Sony Pictures, Michael Lynton (letter in full at the end of this article), decrying Kathryn Bigelow's Zero Dark Thirty.

The Senators explain they have "deep disappointment" and "believe the film is grossly inaccurate and misleading."  They maintain that they "understand that the film is fiction," but other than that half of a sentence, nothing in their letter suggests that they, in fact, do understand that.



 We are fans of many of your movies, and we understand the special role that movies play in our lives, but the fundamental problem is that people who see Zero Dark Thirty will believe that the events it portrays are facts. The film therefore has the potential to shape American public opinion in a disturbing and misleading manner.

 So what?

Every film has the potential to shape American public opinion in a disturbing and misleading manner.  That's in the hands of the audience.

And someone needs to explain to the three that the Senate has no role in art.


Let's get to the reality here.


The Senators are angry about a film.


First, the complaints they lodge are that the film distorts things that happened. 


If that's true, that's the fault of the Senators who have allowed programs to take place in secrecy.  If they fear the American people do not know what happened and might be 'swayed' by a film, that goes to the secrecy level that they Congress has allowed the CIA to operate in.


So in other words, Dianne, Carl and John are complaining about the fact that they didn't do their own jobs.  That's on them.

Second, the complaints they insist "The use of torture should be banished from serious public discourse for these reasons alone, but more importantly, because it is a violation of the Geneva Conventions, because it is an affront to America’s national honor, and because it is wrong."  If, indeed, they feel that way, they need to (a) hold hearings into the torture that took place (public hearings) and (b) demand the Justice Department prosecute cases of torture carried out by people working for the US government.

In other words, Dianne, Carl and John's real problems stem from the fact that they haven't done their jobs.

Now they want to whine about a film.

And insist that a studio add a disclaimer to the film.

Though they're too lazy to do the jobs they were elected to, Feinstein, Levin and McCain fancy themselves the new censor board. 



 





-----------------------------------

December 19, 2012

Mr. Michael Lynton
Chairman and CEO
Sony Pictures Entertainment
10202 W. Washington Blvd.
Culver City, CA 90232-3195
Dear Mr. Lynton:
We write to express our deep disappointment with the movie Zero Dark Thirty. We believe the film is grossly inaccurate and misleading in its suggestion that torture resulted in information that led to the location of Usama bin Laden.
We understand that the film is fiction, but it opens with the words “based on first-hand accounts of actual events” and there has been significant media coverage of the CIA’s cooperation with the screenwriters. As you know, the film graphically depicts CIA officers repeatedly torturing detainees and then credits these detainees with providing critical lead information on the courier that led to the Usama Bin Laden. Regardless of what message the filmmakers intended to convey, the movie clearly implies that the CIA’s coercive interrogation techniques were effective in eliciting important information related to a courier for Usama Bin Laden. We have reviewed CIA records and know that this is incorrect.
Zero Dark Thirty is factually inaccurate, and we believe that you have an obligation to state that the role of torture in the hunt for Usama Bin Laden is not based on the facts, but rather part of the film’s fictional narrative.
Pursuant to the Senate Intelligence Committee’s recently-adopted Study of the CIA’s Detention and Interrogation program, Committee staff reviewed more than 6 million pages of records from the Intelligence Community. Based on that review, Senators Feinstein and Levin released the following information on April 30, 2012, regarding the Usama Bin Laden operation:

• The CIA did not first learn about the existence of the Usama Bin Laden courier from CIA detainees subjected to coercive interrogation techniques. Nor did the CIA discover the courier's identity from detainees subjected to coercive techniques. No detainee reported on the courier’s full name or specific whereabouts, and no detainee identified the compound in which Usama Bin Laden was hidden. Instead, the CIA learned of the existence of the courier, his true name and location through means unrelated to the CIA detention and interrogation program.
• Information to support this operation was obtained from a wide variety of intelligence sources and methods. CIA officers and their colleagues throughout the Intelligence Community sifted through massive amounts of information, identified possible leads, tracked them down, and made considered judgments based on all of the available intelligence.
• The CIA detainee who provided the most significant information about the courier provided the information prior to being subjected to coercive interrogation techniques.

In addition to the information above, former CIA Director Leon Panetta wrote Senator McCain in May 2011, stating:

“…no detainee in CIA custody revealed the facilitator/courier’s full true name or specific whereabouts. This information was discovered through other intelligence means.”

We are fans of many of your movies, and we understand the special role that movies play in our lives, but the fundamental problem is that people who see Zero Dark Thirty will believe that the events it portrays are facts. The film therefore has the potential to shape American public opinion in a disturbing and misleading manner. Recent public opinion polls suggest that a narrow majority of Americans believe that torture can be justified as an effective form of intelligence gathering. This is false. We know that cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment of prisoners is an unreliable and highly ineffective means of gathering intelligence.
The use of torture should be banished from serious public discourse for these reasons alone, but more importantly, because it is a violation of the Geneva Conventions, because it is an affront to America’s national honor, and because it is wrong. The use of torture in the fight against terrorism did severe damage to America’s values and standing that cannot be justified or expunged. It remains a stain on our national conscience. We cannot afford to go back to these dark times, and with the release of Zero Dark Thirty, the filmmakers and your production studio are perpetuating the myth that torture is effective. You have a social and moral obligation to get the facts right.
Please consider correcting the impression that the CIA’s use of coercive interrogation techniques led to the operation against Usama Bin Laden. It did not.
Thank you for your assistance on this important matter.
Sincerely,
Dianne Feinstein
Chairman
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
Carl Levin
Chairman
Senate Armed Services Committee
Ex-Officio Member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
John McCain
Ranking Member
Senate Armed Services Committee
Ex-Officio Member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence

###

Nouri uses the military to bully journalists

That's Fakhri Karim, the owner and editor of Iraq's Al Mada newspaper.  He owned and operated the Al Mada Publishing House in Syria.  In the 1970s, he was the Secretary for Iraq's Communist Party.   In the 1980s, Saddam Hussein ordered him assassinated.  He was injured in the attack but survived and left Iraq.  Returning in 2003, he quickly started the newspaper and by 2004, it was garnering international headlines with its series on how Saddam Hussein had thrown lucrative oil contracts to supporters.

Sam Dagher profiled him in 2007 for The Christian Science Monitor and noted:

A seasoned newspaperman and publisher with shrewd political instincts and friends in high places, Fakhri Karim's rise to the top of Iraqi media mirrors in many ways the path of Orson Welle's Charles Foster Kane.  
Mr. Karim, owner of the Baghdad-based Al-Mada newspaper, considered the country's most professional, came from the most humble beginnings as a Shiite Kurd.  He was a young idealist, later an exile.  But today, he holds court with the country's most powerful, such as Iraqi President Jalal Talabani and Massoud Barzani, president of the autonomous Kurdish region.



Recently, Nouri al-Maliki closed down al-Baghdadi satellite channel in Iraq.  This is part of Nouri's ongoing war on a free press that didn't stop with his lawsuit against England's Guardian newspaper.  And as part of this war, Fakhri Karim is being targeted by Nouri -- Nouri's office issued a statement  attacking the Al Mada editor -- because Karim believes Iraq can be and should be everything outlined in the country's Constitution.  For that, for faith in Iraq's future, Karim is being publicly attacked by Nouri al-Maliki.



Al Mada reported Tuesday that Fakhri Karim has received orders to evacuate his home immediately -- military orders.  And to try to enforce them, Nouri sent a convoy of troops to Fakhri's home.  Shafaq News reported:

Fakhri Karim said in a statement briefed by "Shafaq News", that "within the series of (Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki) to prevent freedom of speech, his office has sent a military convoy led by a colonel to Qadisiyah complex to evacuate my house immediately."



Nouri used the military to shut down al-Baghdadi as well.  What is it with Nouri sending the military in to attack the press?


Because that's what petty dictators do, that's how tyrants intimidate, bully and control.


The world better start paying attention to what's going on in Iraq and that includes the disgraceful Committee to Protect Journalists and Reporters Without Borders who both issued reports on journalism around the globe last week and both ignored Iraq.

Song of 2012

If the video doesn't display, click here for YouTube.  The one and only k.d. lang performing "Pullin' Back The Reins" (written by lang and Ben Mink) from her album Absolute Torch and Twang.  Though released some time ago, the chorus really hits 2012:

Pullin' back the reins
Trying to remain
Tall in the saddle when
When all that we had 
Ran away, ran away, ran away 
With a will of its own.


k.d.'s so cool, she sang 2012 back in 1989.

Judd The Sexist (Marcia, Ann, Ava and C.I.)

Judd Apatow is 'guest editor' for the latest issue of Vanity Fair.  As the four who wrote "We do not embrace sexism (Marcia, Ann, Ava and C.I.)," "We do not embrace sexism (Marcia, Ann, Ava and C.I.)" and  "We do not embrace sexism (Marcia, Ann, Ava and C.I.)," we were curious about the issue.  See, in that piece, we noted a plain fact:

Judd Apatow is her enabler, sponsor and the executive producer of her show.  Apatow's sexism in film after film -- yes, that does include Bridesmaids -- is well known.




But some people had a problem with it.  Judd, they insisted, was not a sexist.


So thank you, Vanity Fair, for allowing the pig to edit.  This is the magazine's comedy issue.  There are three different covers -- we went with the one featuring Leslie Mann (married to Apatow), Melissa McCarthy, Paul Rudd and non-comic Megan Fox.

Apatow isn't responsible for the entire issue, just for a segment beginning on page 53.  That's where "The Comedy Portfolio" kicks off.

The first two page spread (we're not outtakes from the various covers) features Steve Martin and Apatow.  Then an interview with Chris Rock (conducted by Apatow) and a full page photo of Jorma Taccone, Andy Samberg and Akiva Schaffer, then two pages featuring Mindy Kaling, Aubrey Plaza, Zooey Deschanel and Dakota Johnson.  Then a page photo featuring Bo Burnham, Amy Schumer, Chelsea Peretti, Reggie Watts, Hannibal Buress and John Mulaney. a one page essay by Conan O'Brien, a two page photo spread of Mel Brooks and Carl Reiner, a page of "The Masters" Norman Lear, James L. Brooks, Roseanne Barr, David Milch, Paul Reubens and Garry Shandling, a one page photo of Jim Carrey, a one page photo of Will Farrell, 2/3 of a page of a drawing of Zach Galifianakis and a mini-essay from him with the other third being four minor paragraphs by Sarah Silverman, a two page spread of Sarah Silverman reclining with six unidentified elderly people.  And that's the photo essay.

Did you catch how many men were there versus how many women?

Let's count it or you.

Men:  21


Women:  8

Want to explain to us again how Apatow's not a sexist pig?

We'll come back to the photo essay.  He also 'guest edited' a look at a comedy film: The Blues Brothers.  It's a funny film.  It's not the funniest.  If Vanity Fair was going to highlight a film from that period, it should have probably gone with Tootsie which is a comic masterpiece.  But Judd Apatow probably finds Tootsie too 'challenging.'    Endless  photos of Dan Aykroyd, John Belushi and John Landis (no mention of how Landis is responsible for the death of Jennifer Jason Leigh's father).  Then a lengthy profile on comic actor Martin Short.  Endless pages on Apatow's failed TV show Freaks and Geeks.  Then Judd inteviews Albert Brooks.  Then Judd has Sam Kashner interview Elaine May and Mike Nichols.  So a TV feature, a movie feature and three profiles -- profiling three men and one woman.

Still want to pretend he's not a pig?

Let's go back to "The Masters" for those who don't get it.

Remember how Roseanne was the only woman included?  Here's what Apatow writes, "ROSEANNE BARR kicked down the door for women in comedy with her groundbreaking show.  More important, she gave me one of my first jobs, writing jokes for her, when I was broke and unqualified."

So we can blame Roseanne for Apatow?  Good to know.

But about that first sentence?

Roseanne did what?

Roseanne's sitcom Roseanne is a groundbreaking show.  But it's not groundbreaking for women.  It's groundbreaking for dealing with taboos, it's groundbreaking for being funny.

Lucille Ball broke down the doors for women in TV comedy and did it before Roseanne told her first joke.  Mary Tyler Moore was next.  And if Judd had bothered to speak to Carl Reiner, he'd know that.  Moore was hired to play Rob's wife on The Dick Van Dyke Show because of her pretty looks.  And that was her role on the show until Carl discovered, to his surprise, that she could be funny.  Mary Tyler Moore was hilarious on that show and on The Mary Tyler Moore Show.  Presumably, Judd Apatow believes Goldie Hawn is funny since, for one cover of the funny issue,  his wife dressed up as Goldie from her Laugh-In days.  Goldie was hilarious on Laugh-In.  Seventies television would feature comedic performances from Bea Arthur, Marla Gibbs, Jean Stapleton, Penny Marshall, Cindy Williams, Nell Carter, Suzanne Somers, Gilda Radner, Jane Curtin, Laraine Newman, Ja'net Dubois, Betty White, Cloris Leachman and Valerie Harper, among others.

All of those women -- and many more -- were making audiences laugh before Roseanne ever got her own sitcom. By the time Roseanne finally got a sitcom, Candice Bergen had already spent a year on CBS getting laughs in Murphy Brown.

We don't begrudge Roseanne any praise she's earned.  But you have to be a real idiot to think Roseanne kicked down any doors for women in TV comedy.

Women have to repeatedly reinvent the wheel exactly because of men like Judd Apatow who repeatedly want to erase their contributions.  All the women who came before Roseanne are erased -- probably because Judd didn't work on their shows.  The word for erasing the accomplishments of women is "sexism."

Judd Apatow is a sexist and we thank Vanity Fair for allowing him to 'guest-edit' a portion of the magazine because it really underscores just what a sexist pig he is.

Lily Tomlin received no two page spread.  Jane Curtin wasn't included despite starring in three successful comedy shows (Saturday Night Live, Kate and Allie and 3rd Rock From The Sun). Goldie Hawn and Cher were aped on the covers but they don't pop up in a photo essay, so many women who've consistently been funny are ignored and rendered invisible.

But, again, he can and did feature Megan Fox.   Fox might become a great comic actress but for now she's known for popcorn films and for her body.  Only a sexist would go out of his way to overlook many wonderful women of comedy to include Fox.

Murray fights for Veterans Dignified Burials

Senator Patty Murray (above) is the Chair of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee.  Last week, her office noted:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 

Contact: Murray Press Office

Thursday, December 20^th, 2012 

(202) 224-2834

Murray Bill to Ensure Dignified Burial for Every Veteran Passes Senate

Bill also includes provisions to improve veterans’ benefits, including transportation assistance and the creation of a burn pit registry

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray, Chairman of the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee, applauded Senate passage of the Dignified Burial and Veterans’ Benefits Improvement Act of 2012. This House and Senate-negotiated package contains proposals from Democrats and Republicans in both Chambers.

The legislation includes provisions from Chairman Murray’s original bill to authorize the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to furnish a casket or urn to a deceased veteran when VA is unable to identify the veteran’s next-of-kin and determines that sufficient resources are not otherwise available to furnish a casket or urn for burial in a national cemetery. Under current law, VA is not authorized to purchase a casket or urn for veterans who do not have a next-of-kin to provide one, or the resources to be buried in an appropriate manner. Earlier this year Chairman Murray and Ranking Member Burr, joined by U.S. Senators Bill Nelson (D-FL) and Marco Rubio (R-FL), introduced this legislation after a veteran, with no known next-of-kin, was buried in a cardboard container at a VA National Cemetery in Florida. The exposed remains were discovered during a project to raise and realign headstones at the cemetery. 

The Dignified Burial and Veterans’ Benefits Improvement Act of 2012 would also establish a registry for those veterans exposed to open burn pits while serving in Iraq and Afghanistan and commissions an independent scientific report on the health effects of such exposures. The legislation would expand and protect access to VA services by furnishing eligible veterans with transportation to and from VA facilities and provide transition assistance to eligible veterans and their spouses outside of military installations.

“When America’s heroes make a commitment to serve their country, we make a promise to care for them,” said Chairman Murray, following passage of the bill. “That includes helping them access VA facilities and providing them with a burial befitting their service.”

The House and Senate-negotiated package also includes authority for restoration of the Clark Veterans Cemetery in the Philippines and renames several VA facilities across the country, including the Spokane VA Medical Center, in honor of veterans and individuals who have made extraordinary contributions to veterans, to their communities, and to their country. The bill will now move on to the House of Representatives.

###

Kathryn Robertson
Specialty Media Coordinator

Office of U.S. Senator Patty Murray

448 Russell Senate Office Building

Washington D.C. 20510

202-224-2834

 

Senator Patty Murray's office

 

Senator Murray's YouTube Channel

 

Senator Murray's Press Office Twitter Account

 

RSS Feed for Senator Murray's office

Bradley Manning Person of the Year (WW)

Repost from Workers World:

Manning picked as Person of the Year

By Chris Fry on December 21, 2012 » Add the first comment.

5

B. Manning

By an overwhelming vote of its online readers, the British newspaper The Guardian has been forced to name U.S. political prisoner Pvt. B. Manning its “Person of the Year.”
Daniel Ellsberg, the releaser of the Pentagon Papers, which exposed U.S. lies about the contrived Tonkin Gulf incident used in 1964 to justify U.S. attacks on Vietnam and the massive U.S. occupation, last year said this about Time magazine’s selection of its “Person of the Year”:
“The Time Magazine cover gives a protester, an anonymous protester, as ‘Person of the Year,’ but it is possible to put a face and a name to that picture of ‘Person of the Year.’ And the [U.S.] American face that I would put on that is Private Bradley Manning.”
Why has Pvt. Manning inspired such support?
In April 2010, the whistle-blower website WikiLeaks released a U.S. military video taken from an “Apache” helicopter in Iraq as it gunned down a dozen civilians, including a Reuters videographer and his driver. A month later, the U.S. Army arrested and jailed Pvt. B. Manning.
For more than two and a half years, Manning has been locked up, charged with the capital crimes of espionage and “aiding the enemy.” The “enemy” here consists of the world’s people. The “crime” is the release of thousands of military and State Department documents that made the public aware of human rights abuses, U.S. support of ruthless dictators, government and corporate corruption, and U.S. war crimes.
Manning endured months of torture in Kuwait and the brig in Quantico, Va. He was placed in solitary, in a tiny cage, and was often forced to strip naked.
Many “establishment” newspapers in the U.S. and Europe, including the New York Times and the Guardian, published excerpts from what was released by WikiLeaks. Nevertheless, none of these bastions of the so-called free press lifted a finger to defend the person accused of providing this information to them.
Early in December, the Guardian conducted a survey to choose its “Person of the Year.” The paper’s management made their choice clear — Malala Yousafzai, the Pakistani 14-year-old who was shot in October because she was waging a campaign for the education of Pakistani girls. The corporate media are trying to use her legitimate campaign in order to justify imperialist intervention in Pakistan and Afghanistan. (See article by Deirdre Griswold, Oct. 17, at workers.org)
However, some 70 percent of responders selected Pvt. Manning. Obviously Manning’s stirring courage in the face of overwhelming vilification and harsh treatment has attracted profound support among progressives and people in general here and abroad.
Manning exposed U.S. war crimes, which is supposed to be how an honorable soldier should behave, according to the U.S. Army Field Manual and the Nuremberg Principles determining war crimes. To jail and torture Manning obstructs the people’s justice. It is, in fact, itself a war crime.
Free Manning now!







Articles copyright 1995-2012 Workers World. Verbatim copying and distribution is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.

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.


"CPJ looks the other way as Nouri threatens Fakhir Karim" -- most requested highlight of the week by readers of this site.



"Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "The Deaths of Children" -- Isaiah takes on the Drone War.



"Kat's Korner: Stones release a tooth grinder" -- Kat takes on the latest Stones repackaging and shares additional thoughts in "Thoughts on the Stones."


"Iraq snapshot," "Iraq snapshot," "Brad Sherman,"  "Howard Berman's fuzzy figures (Ava)," "Waste at the State Dept. is okay (Wally)," "Gary Ackerman, Embarrassing Ass" and "Benghazi questions must still wait" -- C.I., Ava, Wally and Ruth attend the House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing and report on them.





 "The idiot Glenn Greenwald," "Iraq snapshot," "World Can't Wait goes completely nuts," "The sexism of Glenn Greenwald," "Dianne, Carl and John, shut the f**k up,"  "Debra Sweet, kiss my Black ass,"  "World Can't Wait jumps off the deep end" and "F**k you, Bill Van Auken" -- Ann, C.I., Kat, Stan and Elaine on the latest nonsense from our defocused friends.

  "Monkey Business," "good going for penny marshall," "Movies" and  "Total Recall" -- Stan and Rebecca go to the movies.



"Fringe 'Black Blotter'," "Gossip Girl as it should have ended" and "GG again" -- Mike and Marcia cover TV.


 "Stephen Zunes shows up late for the party" -- Elaine calls out a latecomer.


"The news today," "Another reason for concern in Iraq," and "Nouri's next move?" --  Betty, Ruth and Mike cover Iraq.

"THIS JUST IN! BAD NEWS FOR BOBBY!" and "Somerby's big lie gets rejected" -- Wally and Cedric fact check the asshole.

"How bad are things really?" and "Tuition rates don't bother everyone" -- Trina on the economy.

"Inouye's funeral" -- Betty calls out Barack's familiarity at a funeral.

"Holiday thoughts" and "Christmas work party" --  Betty and Ann note the holiday.


"Full On Federline" -- Isaiah dips into the archives.






"Tapping and slapping" and "THIS JUST IN! PRINCESS LOVES PSY!" -- Cedric and Wally on Princess Barry's main man.