SERVING THE BOTTOMLESS KOOL-AID: ‘BLAME RUSSIA’ RIDES AGAIN!

By Dany Sjursen, Antiwar.com.

July 1, 2020




https://popularresistance.org/serving-the-bottomless-kool-aid-blame-russia-rides-again/







When a nation touts its own exceptionalism, that’s called patriotism. Absolute Americanism so red-blooded that it’s become mandatory for all political aspirants (think Obama’s “belief” with “his every fiber”) to prostrate themselves at exceptionalism’s altar. Funny, when an individual believes himself exceptional – that’s diagnosable. Sociopaths afflicted with messiah complexes proclaim their exceptionalism. No one much mentions that twist. Well, only a mentally ill nation – and its symptomatic political-media spokesmen – would dare digest and obtusely deliver the latest headline prognosis: “Russia Secretly Offered Afghan Militants Bounties to Kill U.S. Troops, Intelligence Says.” (We’ll come back to the absurd doozy packed behind that comma)

Ah ha! And here you thought America capable of making a mess – and miring in the morass – of Afghanistan all by itself. Blasphemy. Two decades of military stalemate teetering towards outright defeat; a highly corrupt and perceptibly illegitimate imposed “partner” Kabul-cabal that still lacks sufficient GDP to pay its own soldier-cops; an indelible adversary that won’t quit; plus 2,219 dead American troops and who knows how many – well, at least 147,000 – vanquished Afghans? Yep, apparently Putin was behind all – or, forgive me, much – of it. Forget Arendt-ian “banality” – that’s the beauty of “evil,” especially the utility gift of eternal Russian evil: exceptional America is thereby never culpable, need never self-assess, nor reform its systems. Because, because…Russia. It seems there’s no limit to the almighty power of that nuclear petrostate with its Italy-sized economy.

Pick a self-imposed American problem: systemic injustice (and consequent mass protests); an archaic, undemocratic electoral system; the worst candidate (Hillary) in recent memory; and now Afghanistan – and the duopoly’s political and media elites have a ready responsibility-evasion tool: Russia (or China on the COVID flip-side). Context? Nuance? Critical analysis of intel “sources?” No need. Self-awareness? Not their jam. These professional Washingtonians would have you believe that behind every disastrous decision – running a Clinton against a professional troll; whistling into the graveyard of empires – is an omnipotent (and invariably shirtless) Putin riding a Russian bear. Pretty convenient, huh?

Surely, this reflex (or is it a tic?) belongs in the “you can’t make this shit up” pile. Yet loads of people still buy it! That’s enough to make many of us who didn’t buy what the Russiagaters were selling from Jump Street question our own sanity. Forgive the haughty petulance, but it’s hard as hell to be right in a room full of wrong people – particularly, when the pathologically mistaken are all loaded with Ivy League diplomas, celeb-level notoriety, and the seven-figure salaries that come with it. Publicly questioning the Russia-reflex in mainstream circles has the distinct imagined feel of passing on the Kool-Aid at a Jim Jones soiree. Suddenly one feels Katie Holmes’ pain. But the cultish myopic blame-game is older than Scientology itself. And Russia is the favorite mastermind monster under Washington’s bed.

To wit, should a crippling Depression drives tens of thousands of desperate World War I veterans (and their families) into the streets to beg an advance on promised bonuses, well, then, surely – according to a president and his generals – the marchers must be “Bolsheviks.” Three decades later, when a mass movement of black Americans had the temerity to call in their own 350-year unpaid promise of civil rights, they too became “communists” – witting (or unwitting) agents of Soviet machinations. Fast forward five decades further, and when a combat veteran, serving military officer congresswoman dare run for president on an antiwar platform, Tulsi too – according to Queen Hillary of the Moscow martyrs – is “totally” a “Russian asset.” Talk about a timeless script!

Which brings us to intractable Afghanistan, which – according to the ready Scooby-Doo narrative – wouldn’t be so intractable after all, if it wasn’t for that meddling Moscow. We all know the Maysles trope: “Tyranny is the deliberate removal of nuance.” True enough – but the same can be said for collective American mental illness. Subtract historical context, relevant comparison, and the (to put it lightly) tattered record of US intelligence “reporting,” and anything is permissible: like uncritically making supposed Russian “bounties” the story in America’s tortured Afghan adventure.

Let us begin with the backstory. Only an exceptionalism-disease-ravaged nation’s “paper of record” could “break” the original Russian-bounty story without solitary reference to the minor matter that the US military shouldn’t be in far-flung Afghanistan in the first place – and certainly ought not to have stayed on for a nation-building pivot after decimating Al Qaeda and toppling the Taliban 17 years ago. Or, for that matter, bother with the pesky past: wherein American “intelligence” definitely did arm, train, and pay (“bounty” anyone?) the Taliban’s Islamist forebears to kill Russian troops – to the tune of 15,000 battle deaths from 1979-89. Neither did the New York Times trouble itself with geographical realities – I.e. relative proximity of Russia’s borders with Afghanistan. Nor comment on the inconvenient (if not necessarily prohibitive) actuality that Moscow is no historic friend to – and has its own ongoing challenge from – Central Asia and Caucasus Islamists.

Furthermore, it’s hardly mere “what-aboutism” to note the wider irony – and rank hypocrisy – of Washington howling about ostensible Russian “bounties” on American trooper heads. After all, this comes from a US Government that literally just placed public bounties on Venezuela’s president, elected legislators, a former intelligence chief, and retired general – then acted shocked…just shocked, when some of its own American ex-special forces mercenaries tried to collect on the multimillion-dollar reward. Per sage-like Secretary Pompeo: “There was no US government direct involvement in this operation.” So, if the Russia-Taliban link is genuine – and that’s a big “if” – was Moscow’s operational “involvement” really all that much more “direct?”

Look, nobody – even we “Russian assets” and “Putin apologists” – in their right mind wants to see more Afghan-outbound flag-draped coffins. Nor is there much of a caucus favoring foreign actors paying for American soldier scalps. And sure, we don’t really know whether Moscow’s GRU actually did the now mainstream media-swallowed deed. Point is, there’s plenty cause for sensible skepticism. Surely just a short list of now-infamous touchstone terms – “WMD,” “Libya,” “collusion,” “[Pentagon or Afghanistan] Papers,” “EITs,” etc. – should be enough justification for caution. The same “intelligence says,” that’s quoted in the New York Times headline, has done a whole lot of says-ing on every one of those super-spook fiascoes.

That the entire spectrum of mainstream media has uncritically built front-page stories on anonymous “sources” from these very same – and not uninvested – US/Western agencies, is proof positive of how deep the malignancy has spread. But let us assume that every bit of this story is true: the press coverage has still been abysmal. America’s corporate media – and reviving-door politico-military talking heads – act like history begins anew each morning as the sun rises over Imperial Washington. This new world spares no time for context, past national sins, relevant contrast, or real reflection on US strategy (or lack thereof). As such, America the exceptionalist-sociopath carries on its insane life absent any real capacity for empathy or self-awareness.

Oh, and I almost forgot, wonder if “All the news that’s fit to print” will think it fitting to explain how exactly killing US troops and potentially spiking Trump’s Afghan peace/withdrawal program helps Moscow’s “master plan” to get The Donald reelected? Call me crazy, but something does seem awry – one of these narratives doesn’t fit…maybe both.

PRO-ISRAEL RACIST GROUP ADL MOVES TO CO-OPT BLACK LIVES MATTER

By Ali Abunimah, Electronic Intifada.

July 1, 2020




https://popularresistance.org/pro-israel-racist-group-adl-moves-to-co-opt-black-lives-matter/







For those who yearn for an end to systemic racism, these are exhilarating times as Black activists and organizations lead a global uprising against symbols and structures of white supremacy.

But if you are a racist group masquerading as a civil rights organization, these days are fraught with the danger that you’ll get found out.

It’s a balancing act that has for years bedeviled the Anti-Defamation League, a major Israel lobby group in the United States.

Its counterparts in the UK are facing the same challenge.

The crisis is particularly acute right now as the ADL tries to portray itself as an ally of Black Lives Matter while also shielding Israel from criticism over its plans to annex Palestinian land in the occupied West Bank, further entrenching the system of apartheid.

A leaked memo obtained last week by Jewish Currents writer Josh Leifer highlights the dilemma of ADL leaders.

The memo sets out how the lobby group can, in Leifer’s words: “find a way to defend Israel from criticism without alienating other civil rights organizations, elected officials of color and Black Lives Matter activists and supporters.”

The gist of the strategy is to allow some soft criticism of Israel while fending off more precise and accurate descriptions of Israel’s violations of Palestinian rights as “apartheid” and “separate but equal” – the latter a term long used to whitewash violently enforced, legalized racial segregation and subjugation in the United States.

The authors of the memo fear that a clash with progressive forces over annexation could put ADL on the “wrong side” of the Black Lives Matter movement and “challenge relationships between ADL and many civil rights organizations and coalitions.”

It is ironic that the ADL fears Israel being associated with apartheid.

While the Israeli-armed South African apartheid regime was still destroying Black lives in that country in the 1980s and 1990s, the ADL ran a massive spy ring in the United States.

As well as infiltrating Palestine solidarity groups, the ADL spy passed on confidential files about anti-apartheid activists to South Africa’s brutal intelligence agency.

The latest ADL leak confirms concerns that were revealed in a private report obtained by The Electronic Intifada in 2017.

That report – jointly written by the ADL and the Reut Institute, an Israeli think tank – lamented that Palestinian rights campaigners have been “able to frame the Palestinian struggle against Israel as part of the struggle of other disempowered minorities, such as African Americans, Latinos and the LGBTQ community.”

The report recommended that Zionist groups try to disrupt this dynamic by “Partnering with other minority communities based on shared values and common interests such as on criminal justice reform, immigration rights or in fighting against racism and hate crimes.”

Today the ADL sees Black Lives Matter as a chance to burnish its “civil rights” street cred while advancing its anti-Palestinian agenda.
Call For Tighter Censorship

The ADL is one of several lobby groups – which like the the Israeli government – have long seen Black Lives Matter as a major strategic threat.

Its effort to co-opt the Black Lives Matter movement – in order to manage and diffuse criticisms of Israel’s harsh racist regime against Palestinians – is currently on full display.

The group is a partner in the Stop Hate for Profit campaign which is pressuring major corporations to pull advertising from Facebook during the month of July to protest the social media giant’s supposed failure to crack down on hate speech.

Already, major names such as Unilever and Starbucks have agreed to comply.







There are real reasons for concern about this campaign: In effect it demands that Facebook act as a censor and arbiter of truth, a role no one should want an unaccountable private company to play.

It’s especially concerning given that Facebook has already appointed a former Israeli government official with responsibility for censorship to its new oversight board.

While few may have qualms about seeing white supremacists and Nazis having their public platforms taken away, the reality is that Palestinians have been among the main targets of online censorship, particularly by Facebook.

Israel lobby groups, including the ADL, have been promoting a misleading and politically motivated definition of anti-Semitism which conflates criticism of Israel’s policies and its racist state ideology Zionism, on the one hand, with anti-Jewish bigotry, on the other.




They have pushed governments, institutions and social media companies to adopt this bogus definition in order to muzzle advocates for Palestinian human rights.

The Stop Hate for Profit campaign explicitly demands that Facebook “find and remove public and private groups focused on white supremacy, militia, anti-Semitism, violent conspiracies, Holocaust denialism, vaccine misinformation and climate denialism.”

However much one may loath such viewpoints, that is a fairly sweeping demand for censorship and regulation of opinion that is unlikely to stop there.

Yet, notably, there is no demand that anti-Muslim groups be removed, despite rampant Islamophobia on the platform. That kind of hate is apparently just fine!

The Stop Hate for Profit campaign also provides an opportunity for big corporations to gain positive publicity while doing very little to address structural racism. No doubt such corporations will be happy to start advertising again on a Facebook sanitized of any dissenting views.
Boycott For Me, But Not For Thee

There is also the rank hypocrisy of the ADL, which is calling for a boycott of Facebook, while attacking and smearing BDS – the peaceful campaign for boycott, divestment and sanctions to end Israel’s racist abuses and crimes against Palestinians.

The Anti-Defamation League has even supported anti-BDS legislation, knowing full well that such laws are unconstitutional because they violate free speech.

Undoubtedly, the ADL values its own constitutional right to call for a boycott of Facebook even as it seeks to trample the free speech rights of others, including whose who believe that Palestinians should not have their rights denied in their own homeland just because they are not Jewish.

But in backing the Stop Hate for Profit campaign, ADL is joining forces with Black mainstream liberal civil rights organizations such as Color of Change and the venerable NAACP – and thus using these relationships to gain entirely undeserved credibility as an anti-racist ally.
Black Activists In UK Call For Israel Sanctions

The problem faced by the ADL and the Israel lobby more broadly was highlighted over the weekend when Black Lives Matter UK, an anti-racist coalition, tweeted its support for the Palestinian struggle:




“As Israel moves forward with the annexation of the West Bank, and mainstream British politics is gagged of the right to critique Zionism, and Israel’s settler-colonial pursuits, we loudly and clearly stand beside our Palestinian comrades,” the group tweeted.

The tweet got tens of thousands of likes and retweets.

Black Lives Matter UK followed that with a series of tweets debunking Israel lobby claims that criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic.




One tweet declared that as annexation looms, “we stand with Palestinian civil society in calling for targeted sanctions in line with international law against Israel’s colonial, apartheid regime.”

The tweets were particularly significant as British politics remain in the grip of a witch hunt against critics of Israel, especially within the main opposition Labour Party.

Unsurprisingly, the tweets drew immediate hostility from the Jewish Labour Movement, a lobby group within the Labour Party that has acted as proxy for the Israeli embassy.



Mike Katz, chair of the Jewish Labour Movement, said he was “sad” to see the tweets from Black Lives Matter UK.

He also claimed that members of his organization “reject annexation and settlements.”

That can be seen as another effort to steer criticism of Israel into an acceptable “soft” form focused only on a limited number of Israeli actions, while trying to put criticism of Zionism off limits.

The Board of Deputies, a British Jewish communal organization and leading pro-Israel group, predictably accused Black Lives Matter UK of engaging in an “anti-Semitic trope.”

But the Board insisted that this would “not stop us from standing alongside Black people in their quest for justice.”




But, in fact, supporting Israel and Zionism is totally incompatible with any quest for justice. All the slick spin and PR campaigns cannot hide this simple truth: You can’t be an anti-racist racist.

TWITTER TARGETS ACCOUNTS OF OUTLETS COVERING UNREST IN BOLIVIA

By Alan Macleod, Mintpress News.

July 1, 2020




https://popularresistance.org/twitter-targets-accounts-of-outlets-covering-unrest-in-bolivia/






MintPress News, Along With A Number Of Independent Bolivian News Outlets And Journalists Covering The Unrest There, Were All Targeted For Suspension At The Same Time.

Social media giant Twitter took the step of suspending the official account of MintPress News on Saturday. Without warning, the nine-year-old account with 64,000 followers was abruptly labeled as “fake” or “spam” and restricted. This move is becoming a frequent occurrence for alternative media, especially those that openly challenge U.S. power globally.

Immediately preceding the ban, MintPress had been sharing stories about Israeli government crimes against Palestinians, the Saudi-led onslaught in Yemen (both funded and supported by Washington), and about activists challenging chemical giant Monsanto’s latest plans. However, MintPess correspondent Ollie Vargas, stationed in Bolivia and covering the coup and other events there, had another theory on the suspension. Vargas noted that his account, along with union leader Leonardo Loza and independent Bolivian outlets Kawsachun Coca and Kawsachun News were all suspended at the same time. “There was a coordinated takedown of numerous users & outlets based in Chapare, Bolivia. Thousands of fake accounts appeared after the coup. We believe they’re being mobilized to mass report those who criticize the regime,” he said. Since the November coup, Bolivia has been the sight of intense political struggle, with MintPress one of the only Western outlets, large or small, extensively covering the situation (and from a perspective that directly challenges the official US government line). Vargas added that all those accounts suspended appeared in his Twitter bio.

In December, MintPress reported how the strongly conservative Bolivian elite is treating social media as a key battleground in pushing the coup forward, with over 5,000 accounts created on the day of the insurrection tweeting using pro-coup hashtags. With the new administration still lacking both legitimacy and public support, it appears the next step is to simply silence dissenting voices online like they have been silenced inside the country. Kawsachun Coca and Kawsachun News, located in the Chapare region, still not under government control, are among the only remaining outlets critical of the Añez administration.

As Twitter has developed into a worldwide medium of communication, it has also grown an increasingly close relationship with Western state power. In September, a senior Twitter executive was unmasked as an active duty officer in a British Army brigade whose specialty was online and psychological warfare. It was almost entirely ignored by corporate media; the one and only journalist at a major publication covering the story was pushed out of his job weeks later. Earlier this month, Twitter announced it worked with a hawkish U.S.- and Australian-government sponsored think tank to purge nearly 200,000 Chinese, Russian and Iranian accounts from its platform. It has also worked hard to remove Venezuelan users critical of U.S. regime change, including large numbers of government members. Meanwhile, despite detailed academic work exposing them, Venezuelan opposition bot networks remain free to promote intervention.

Facebook has also been working hand-in-hand with the Atlantic Council, a NATO think tank, to determine what users and posts are legitimate and what is fake news, effectively giving control over what its 2.4 billion users see in their news feeds to the military organization. Reddit, another huge social media platform, recently appointed a former deputy director at the council to be its head of policy.

Earlier this year, Facebook announced that it was banning all positive appraisals of Qassem Soleimani, the Iranian general and statesman assassinated by the Trump administration. This, it explained, was because Trump had labeled the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) a terrorist organization. “We operate under U.S. sanctions laws, including those related to the U.S. government’s designation of the IRGC and its leadership,” it said in a statement. This is particularly worrying, as Soleimani was the country’s most popular public figure, with over 80 percent of Iranians holding a positive view of him, according to a University of Maryland poll. Therefore, because of the whims of the Trump administration, Facebook began suppressing a majority view shared by Iranians with other Iranians in Farsi across all its platforms, including Instagram. Thus, the line between the state, the military industrial complex, and big media platforms whose job should be to hold them to account has blurred beyond distinction. The incident also once again highlights that big tech monopolies are not public resources, but increasingly tightly controlled American enterprises working in conjunction with Washington.

More worryingly, it is the tech companies themselves who are pushing for this integration. “What Lockheed Martin was to the twentieth century,” wrote Google executives Eric Schmidt and Larry Cohen in their book, The New Digital Age, “technology and cyber-security companies [like Google] will be to the twenty-first.” The book was heartily endorsed by Atlantic Council director Henry Kissinger.

After an online outcry including journalists like Ben Norton directly appealing to administrators, the accounts were reinstated today. However, the weekend’s events are another point of reference in the trend of harassing and suppressing independent, alternative or foreign media that challenges the U.S. state power, an increasingly large part of which is linked to the big online media platforms we rely on for free exchange of ideas, opinions and discourse.

On the incident, MintPress founder Mnar Muhawesh said:


Twitter’s ban hammer and censorship army of flaggers is an attempt to re-tighten state and corporate control over the free flow of information. That’s why it’s no wonder independent media like MintPress News, Kawsachun, and watchdog journalists covering state crimes like Ollie Vargas have been targeted in what appears to be an organized effort to silence and censor dissent. Twitter’s message is very clear: our first amendment is not welcome, as long as it challenges establishment narratives.”

DOCTORS, NOT BOMBS, NEEDED FOR HUMANITY TO SAVE ITSELF

By Raúl Antonio Capote, Resumen English.

July 1, 2020




https://popularresistance.org/doctors-not-bombs-needed-for-humanity-to-save-itself/




At a time when the world is hit by one of the most dangerous pandemics in human history, the United States is arming itself for war. It allocates millions of resources to this sector, over and above basic services such as health, in the country with the most confirmed cases of COVID-19 on the planet.

“With nearly three million troops in service, 4,800 defense sites on every continent, and an annual budget of more than $700 billion, the U.S. military is considered the world’s leading fighting force,” according to CNN.

In the midst of the crisis generated by the new coronavirus, Washington is rapidly modernizing its armed forces, including its nuclear forces. This was stated by President Donald Trump, through different means, including social networks.

The powerful nation is also rushing to find hypersonic weapons. On May 20, 2020, the White House chief announced the intention to spend whatever it takes, “Our goal is simply to dominate the battlefields of the future.”

He emphasized that his administration has spent more than $2.5 trillion updating the Army during his administration, more than, according to him, any other American President.

“We have weapons that I pray to God we will never have to use,” he boasted.

World military expenditures in 2019 experienced the largest increase in the last ten years, according to a report by the International Institute for Peace Studies (Sipri), published on April 27. The historical record is held by the United States, which increased by 5.3% in 2019, to 732 billion dollars, 38% of the world total.

At a time when the planet is facing an economic recession, governments should reconsider military spending and attend to other priority sectors that show their weakness in the face of the pandemic.

If the United States had invested 10% of its military spending in strengthening its public health system, it would not have to face the painful situation in which it finds itself today. No one could have imagined that in the first country in economic power the emergency rooms and the intensive care units would collapse, that their doctors and paramedics would not be enough, and there would be a lack of equipment, beds and medicines.

The experience of the pandemic exposes the short comings of the White House with regard to its own people, the lack of resources for sectors such as health and education, while it maintains enormous military expenditures and attacks Cuban health cooperation programs it has with other peoples of the world.

“Doctors and not bombs,” said Fidel, because that is what humanity needs to be saved. The United States goes around the world blind to that philosophy; one eye open to war, the other eye dedicated to pursuing those who, like Cuba, are going down the same routes, to save.

FOUR GIANT REASONS TO REMOVE THE STATUES

By Lee Camp, Consortium News.

July 1, 2020




https://popularresistance.org/four-giant-reasons-to-remove-the-statues/






From A Robert E. Lee Descendant.

We should relocate our racist statues to museums where we can remember our racist history in the appropriate context.

I’m a descendant of General Robert E. Lee.

My family also descends from George Washington and John Marshall, the fourth chief justice of the Supreme Court. (The oligarchy was a rather small club back in the day.) And I, along with many other Lee descendants, say: Remove the statues.

Yet, this week President Donald Trump has made it his mission to catch and prosecute those who have taken down statues. I’m positive he’s not doing it out of any racist ideology, although it doesn’t help that he also retweeted a white power message soon afterwards.

With that said, here are four exceedingly stupid reasons to keep the statues in place, and how to refute them. If you agree with any of these arguments… ummm, stop doing that.

1) Removing statues means we will never again know our history.

YES! One can only learn history from metallic facsimiles which consist of 30 percent copper, 20 perent tin, and 50 percent pigeon shit. Seeing these monuments is the only way to learn about things. I myself had never heard of the existence of long pointy sticks until I saw the Washington Monument. I didn’t know of America’s love affair with beans until I saw the big shiny one in Chicago. And I didn’t know the creator of McDonald’s was a founding father until I saw the giant arch in St. Louis. (They have yet to paint it golden though.)

2) Our statues teach our children what to value in society.

I couldn’t agree more. Judging by the numbers of statue subjects, women and people of color are roughly 95 percent less important than horses. Indeed, our equine friends have exceedingly more representation in the monument world, but that is simply because they have accomplished so very much. Many of our best presidents were horses. A horse invented the light bulb. (You might argue that’s not true, but without a statue about it, you can’t prove it.)

3) The Confederate statues are not racist.

Indeed! They are just large monuments to remind us of the military prowess of brave men who fought… on the losing side of a war to keep black people as their property. Or in the case of Columbus, bravely fought… to claim he landed in India before enslaving and torturing–Let’s not get bogged down in the details. Let’s just leave it at “military prowess.”

Unfortunately, the statues are unequivocally racist. Most of the Confederate ones weren’t even put up immediately following the Civil War. I spoke with professor David Goldfield, one of the top Civil War historians in the country and the author of “America Aflame: How The Civil War Created A Nation.” He told me, “Most of these statues and memorials were put up during the height of the Jim Crow era, much less to commemorate the Confederate dead and the war itself, than to put an exclamation point on white supremacy and declare that African Americans – their past, their present, and their future – don’t matter. They’re invisible.”

And in terms of the Confederate battle flag — the so-called “stars and bars” — it didn’t enjoy much popularity either until it was used as a symbol of support for oppression. Goldfield said, “The battle flag came back in favor in the late 1940s, first as a symbol of the Dixiecrats (the breakaway faction of Southern Democrats opposed to President Harry Truman’s civil rights initiatives), and then in the 1950s when the civil rights movement launched its drive for racial equality.” So basically, the Confederate flag that we’re familiar with today was mainly just a middle finger to equality for African Americans.

4) Yes, America needs to evolve, and American policing needs to change. But don’t tear down the statues. If you do, you’ll be throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Of course, in this case the baby is racist and owns several people as property, but it’s a baby nonetheless. (Gotta be honest — I’ve never understood that expression. You’ve just washed the baby and then you throw it out with the bath water? Why would you throw out a clean baby? If you’re gonna toss a baby, ditch a soiled one. Everyone knows that. Don’t bother cleaning it first.)

Popular Mechanics – which is not as popular as the name suggests (thou doth protest too much) – recently published an article that was not meant to help people tear down statues of American racist icons but happened to be titled “How to Topple a Statue Using Science.” (Science? Ha! As if that’s a real thing. Do you see any statues commemorating it? Don’t think so.)

The article goes on to list how one could bring down a statue if one wanted to (but you totally should not read it and should not tear down a racist statue in what some consider vandalism). The article says you will likely need 70 people pulling on very strong ropes or straps to bring down a statue. (So do not find 70 of your closest friends and have a “topple the racist slave-owning dickwad” party. Do not suggest there will be free pizza there, which will help make sure people show up. Do not make sure to get the ropes or chains around the head of the statue because putting them around the feet will not create nearly enough leverage to accomplish the goal. …if you had such a goal, which you do not because you are not going to do this.)

To sum it up, we should relocate our racist statues to museums where we can remember our racist history with the appropriate context. This will make room in the middle of towns for new statues – of women, black people, Latinx, indigenous, white guys who aren’t slave-owning assholes. There must be some out there. Umm, Justin Timberlake? Um, Sherlock Holmes? How about Bruce Wayne? I think two-thirds of those are fictional, but I’m sure I’m forgetting some.

America may need to be dragged into the 21st century kicking and screaming, but we can do it. Let’s move past this racist shit. Let’s stop behaving as if we’re still twelve. … Nineteen Twelve.

Sanders Files Amendments to Force Pentagon to Pass Clean Audit, Require Mass Production of Free Masks for All

"National security," said Sen. Bernie Sanders, "means doing everything we can to improve the lives of our people, many of whom have been abandoned by our government decade after decade."


by
Jake Johnson, staff writer











https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/07/01/sanders-files-amendments-force-pentagon-pass-clean-audit-require-mass-production








Sen. Bernie Sanders late Tuesday filed a slate of amendments to the National Defense Authorization Act aiming to force the Pentagon to pass an independent audit, require the federal government to mass-produce and deliver free masks to everyone in the U.S., and bar funding for the Saudi-led assault on Yemen.

The amendments came in addition to the Vermont senator's plan to slash the Senate's proposed $740.5 billion Pentagon budget by 10% and redirect the savings toward funding healthcare, housing, education, and jobs in impoverished U.S. communities.


Sanders' amendment (pdf)—introduced alongside Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), and Mike Lee (R-Utah)—would require the Pentagon to pass a clean audit by fiscal year 2025 and would penalize Defense Department agencies that fail to pass an audit by forcing them to return a portion of their budgets to the Treasury."A major reason why there is so much waste, fraud, and abuse at the Pentagon is the fact that the Defense Department remains the only federal agency in America that hasn't been able to pass an independent audit," Sanders said in a speech on the Senate floor Tuesday. "It is time to hold the Defense Department to the same level of accountability as the rest of the government."

The Vermont senator also filed an NDAA amendment (pdf) that would use the Defense Production Act to mass-produce and distribute five free face masks per month to every person in the U.S. through the Postal Service—a proposal Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation's top infectious disease expert, endorsed during a Senate hearing earlier Tuesday.

"This amendment is about listening to the science and saving lives," Sanders said. "Here is what my amendment will do: It would require the Trump administration to use the Defense Production Act to make hundreds of millions of high-quality masks and deliver five of them, per person, directly to every household in America on a monthly basis, until the pandemic has ended."

"There are so many things we don't know about Covid-19," the Vermont senator continued. "But on this issue, the science is absolutely clear: masks save lives. We must act now to save tens of thousands of lives by forcing the Trump administration to follow basic science and protect the American people—and that's what this amendment is all about."

In addition to the major public health benefits of face masks, a team of economists at Goldman Sachs estimated that a nationwide mask mandate would save the U.S. economy $1 trillion by reducing the need for widespread lockdowns.

"A face mask mandate could potentially substitute for lockdowns that would otherwise subtract nearly 5% from GDP," wrote Jan Hatzius, Goldman Sachs' chief economist.




As the Washington Post's Christopher Ingraham noted, "the authors of the report are economists and not public health experts" and "their primary motivation is to protect the economic interests of Goldman Sachs' investors, which is why they're interested in the effects of federal policy on gross domestic product."

"But their findings are in line with a number of other published studies on the efficacy of masks," Ingraham wrote.


Sanders' office on Tuesday released a summary of the senator's six amendments to the NDAA for fiscal year 2021:
Cut 10% of annual Pentagon spending to invest in education, health care and poverty reduction in America's most marginalized communities. The amendment, cosponsored by Senators Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and Representatives Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) and Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), would take $74 billion in annual savings from the Pentagon—exempting salaries and healthcare—to create a domestic federal grant program to fund healthcare, housing, childcare, and educational opportunities for cities and towns experiencing a poverty rate of 25% or more. This amendment garnered the support of more than 60 national organizations fighting for economic, environmental, and racial justice, and peace.
Require the federal government to manufacture and distribute high-quality face masks to every individual in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic. In questioning by Sanders during today's Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) hearing, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, expressed support for the proposal. A new study found that nationwide use of face masks would not only fight the virus and save lives, but it would save the U.S. economy $1 trillion. At a time when the Trump administration has failed to respond to the dire coronavirus pandemic, which has killed nearly 130,000 Americans, the amendment would require the president to utilize the Defense Production Act and all available authorities to manufacture and procure face masks and distribute masks via the Postal Service to every household in the country.
Require the Defense Department to pass a clean audit by Fiscal Year 2025. Sanders was joined by Senators Grassley (R-Iowa), Wyden (D-Ore.), and Lee (R-Utah) on the measure, which would penalize Pentagon agencies that fail to pass an independent audit by returning a portion of their annual budgets to the Treasury. The Pentagon is the only federal department in America that hasn't been able to pass an independent audit—30 years after Congress required it to do so.
Prohibit funding for military aid and logistical support for unconstitutional and unauthorized U.S. military participation in the Saudi-led war in Yemen. Senators Lee (R-Utah) and Murphy (D-Conn.) cosponsored the amendment. A bipartisan majority of the U.S. Senate has already voted three times to halt all U.S. military support for the Saudi-led war in Yemen, and in April 2019 a bipartisan, bicameral majority of Congress passed the first-ever War Powers Resolution in our American history to direct the withdrawal of unauthorized U.S. forces from a conflict. Sanders' landmark legislation, was vetoed by Trump in 2019.
Provide statutory authorization for Beyond the Yellow Ribbon programs, which are state grants provided by the Department of Defense for programs which help members of the Armed Forces and their families in preparation for deployment, during deployment, and in reintegration post-deployment. These programs have helped thousands of service members, veterans, and their family members cope with the challenges associated with deployments and military service.
Implement a 0.1% cut to the Pentagon budget and transfer that funding to the State Department for cultural and educational exchange programs between the people of the United States and other countries. These important programs bring young people, students, scholars, and professionals from other countries to the U.S. to see our country, experience what life is like here, meet our people, and send our people to other countries to do the same. These programs promote greater cultural awareness, understanding and cooperation between different countries and emphasizes our common humanity, while decreasing conflict.

"If the horrific pandemic we are now experiencing has taught us anything it is that national security means a lot more than building bombs, missiles, jet fighters, tanks, submarines, nuclear warheads, and other weapons of mass destruction," Sanders said in his floor speech Tuesday. "National security also means doing everything we can to improve the lives of our people, many of whom have been abandoned by our government decade after decade."

Watch the senator's full speech:

'The People Have Spoken': Thwarting GOP Push for Cuts, Oklahoma Voters Approve Medicaid Expansion

"Voters are tired of politicians ignoring the problem or worse, trying to take their healthcare away, and they're rejecting that approach in even the deepest of red states."


by
Jake Johnson, staff writer




https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/07/01/people-have-spoken-thwarting-gop-push-cuts-oklahoma-voters-approve-medicaid







Potentially derailing an effort by Republican Gov. Kevin Stitt and the Trump administration to slash the state's Medicaid funding by turning it into a block grant, Oklahoma voters on Tuesday approved a ballot measure to expand the healthcare program to around 200,000 low-income adults amid a sharp rise in new coronavirus infections.


Jonathan Schleifer, executive director of The Fairness Project, an advocacy group that organized in support of the ballot initiative, said in a statement that "in an election year that will be dominated by healthcare, Oklahomans just delivered the first big win of 2020."The vote makes Oklahoma the first state in the nation to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) by amending its Constitution—a move that could forestall efforts by the Republican-dominated legislature to gut the program. The initiative requires the government of Oklahoma—which has the second-highest uninsured rate in the nation—to submit Medicaid expansion paperwork to the federal government within 90 days.

"Voters are tired of politicians ignoring the problem or worse, trying to take their healthcare away, and they're rejecting that approach in even the deepest of red states," said Schleifer. "Americans want more healthcare—not less. And politicians who fail to heed that message are going to be in for a rude awakening this year."


The ballot initiative succeeded—albeit by an ultra-slim margin of less than 1%—despite opposition from Stitt, who earlier this year made Oklahoma the first state to seek a waiver from the Trump administration to turn its Medicaid funding into a block grant, a longstanding conservative goal. Experts have warned that block-granting Medicaid would hamstring states' ability to increase spending on the program in response to public health needs—flexibility that is desperately needed amid a pandemic.

Politico reported that Oklahomans' decision to enshrine Medicaid expansion in the state Constitution "could bar state leaders from making conservative changes to the program, like adding work requirements or premiums. It's an open question whether the ballot measure would preempt a block grant."

The Medicaid expansion measure passed days after the Trump administration intensified its legal assault on the ACA by asking the Supreme Court to invalidate the entire law. If successful, the effort would end Medicaid coverage for more than 12 million people nationwide.

Oklahoma's Senate Democratic Leader Kay Floyd applauded voters for overriding inaction by the Republican-controlled legislature and approving expansion of "healthcare access to more than 200,000 Oklahomans."

"The people have spoken," Floyd said in a statement. "More than 300,000 citizens signed a petition to place State Question 802 on the ballot and a majority of those who cast ballots voted to approve it. Our caucus has long supported and advocated for Medicaid expansion in Oklahoma. We stand ready to work with our colleagues in the legislature and Governor Stitt to fund the state share so we can implement Medicaid expansion as soon as possible."