Thursday, July 06, 2017

Maybe this time we’ll win

"Hacked computer server that handled DNC email remains out of reach of Russia investigators".  This is, and will always be, amazing (and read down to the end for the CrowdStrike's $100 million payoff).  FBI agents must wonder how much easier their lives would be if only they had the power to compel the DNC to produce the server!  At least the DNC doesn't waste money on fancy new office supplies:
"The hacked server was last photographed in the basement of the DNC’s Washington headquarters near a file cabinet dating from the 1972 break-in of the DNC headquarters at the Watergate Hotel."
"#CNNBlackmail: Andrew Kaczynski Responds to the Pressure" and "CNN Warns It May Expose an Anonymous Critic if He Ever Again Publishes Bad Content".  One of these two analysts of media ethics isn't refusing to talk about Reality Winner!

"Jon Gabriel On CNN Blackmailing A Redditor: “This Isn’t Kaczynski’s First Attempt At Destroying A Private Citizen’s Life.”"  I'm guessing they can't fire Kaczynski, who simply comes off as a thug, as that would be an admission of guilt.

"Corbyn's earned the right to do what he pleases – and he's decided to leave mewling self-entitled Blairites out in the cold".  The Khazars call it 'facts on the ground'.

"The Specter of Fascism in Venezuela".  The plan everywhere is to exacerbate social tensions and 'solve' the problem with a strong, theatrical, ruler.

Politics in the Panopticon has removed the effectiveness of the gotcha techniques that used to be used to remove good people and control the rest, and change the subject from policy to personality:  "Reasons for Corbyn":
"One of the striking results of this new media ecology is that traditional smears no longer seem to work as effectively as they did. Both Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Theresa May in 2017 sought to do down their opponents by drawing attention to their past behaviour. A tape of Trump bragging about grabbing women ‘by the pussy’ was leaked, presumably on the assumption that it would finish off his campaign once and for all. Corbyn was hammered over and over again for his past sympathies with the IRA, with the effect that Labour’s manifesto (and its vulnerabilities on Brexit) went relatively untouched.

The strategy failed because in this new environment, there is something worse than to err, and that is to be two-faced. Trump’s behaviour was shocking but scarcely out of character. Aggression and an overturning of ‘political correctness’ were what fuelled his campaign in the first place. As for Corbyn, his entire political career has been spent challenging Western imperialism and military rule. These smears didn’t tell the public much that they hadn’t already sensed – and could find out by Googling – about the candidates’ characters and priorities. By contrast, ‘liberal elites’ are vulnerable to the charge that their public and private lives don’t match up: they preach public service and altruism, while having two kitchens (Ed Miliband), making $675,000 from speeches to Goldman Sachs (Clinton) or not knowing exactly how many properties they own (David Cameron).

Hannah Arendt remarked in On Violence that rage is less commonly provoked by injustice than by hypocrisy. The difficulty is that politics must involve some degree of hypocrisy, if public and private life aren’t to dissolve into each other. ‘Be the change you wish to see in the world’ is a useful ethical heuristic, but it doesn’t help judges, civil servants or ministers in taking decisions on behalf of the public. It won’t help Corbyn either if he becomes prime minister, despite his protestations that he would continue to maintain his allotment from Downing Street. Yet in many ways digital media serve to dissolve the division between public and private, allowing a relentless, unforgiving gaze to be cast on every discrepancy between words and actions, words past and words present. In the gladiatorial world of Twitter, the greatest mistake one can make isn’t to be offensive (that can be a virtue) but to contradict an earlier tweet, sometimes even from years ago, which can then be gleefully dug up again by trolls. Under these conditions, public credibility depends on boundless sincerity and obsessive consistency, as well as a disregard for the way one is seen by others. Trump’s archive does him few favours here: his back catalogue of tweets provides a constant source of entertainment in exposing the hypocrisy of his behaviour as president, though primarily for those who never believed him in the first place. This flies in the face of Machiavellian tenets concerning political prowess, which helps explain why non-politicians, marginal politicians and non-parties (En Marche!) are now reaping the electoral benefits."
"So this one time at a journalism conference…".  Back when journalists were competent and built up a positive reputation they were all from lower class backgrounds. Now they are credentialed elites, and shit.

"Dutch PM Pleased That MH17 Perpetrators Will Be Tried In Nl: "Next Step" Towards The Truth".  I'm guessing this theater won't involve putting Ukrainians in the dock, but is just more anti-Putin PR.  You'd think the families of the victims would be furious at being used this way.

"A Cultural Failure: U.S. Special Operations In The Philippines And The Rise Of The Islamic State".  It has become noticeable that the Americans are consistently 'incompetent' at fighting ISIS when ISIS is being used as an American proxy army, for Yinon or, in this case, against Duterte and, by extension, China.  It is particularly silly when they lay it on thick and blame the victims of the proxy army (e.g., the SAA isn't interested in fighting ISIS; ISIS wins in The Philippines because Duterte is too preoccupied with the drug war).

"Documents Expose How Hollywood Promotes War On Behalf Of The Pentagon, CIA, & NSA" (also Top Chef!):
"Another one-line quip that was censored by the DOD came in the James Bond film Tomorrow Never Dies.

When Bond is about to HALO jump out of a military transport plane they realise he’s going to land in Vietnamese waters. In the original script Bond’s CIA sidekick jokes ‘You know what will happen. It will be war, and maybe this time we’ll win.’

This line was removed at the request of the DOD.

Strangely, Phil Strub denied that there was any support for Tomorrow Never Dies, while the pre-eminent scholar in the field Lawrence Suid only lists the DOD connection under ‘Unacknowledged Cooperation’.

But the DOD are credited at the end of the film and we obtained a copy of the Production Assistance Agreement between the producers and the Pentagon."

Why does 'Hollywood' push Pentagon PR?:  "30 Years Ago, Neocons Were More Candid About Their Israel-Centered Views".

"Manchester bombing police say Salman Abedi did not act alone".  Closer to the truth.

"Black America is “Pro-Peace,” but Its Politicians Work for the War Party" (Ford).

"BDS campaign costs Israeli bus company $216m".

"U.S. soldier’s widow filed application to enforce $134M claim weeks before Khadr settlement".  It seems like the amount of $10.5 million is predicated on the fact that Khadr will have to split it with the American lawfarers, presumably as part of a final settlement of the American claims.  The whole thing is just a way for Khadr to get out from under the outrageous American legal system and its catering to American 'victims' in the face of international law.

"Saudi-Qatar Standoff Pushes Gaza Toward Uneasy Reconciliation".  The Qatar imbroglio was an Israeli trick to install their agent Dahlan in Gaza (typically, for the tiniest perceived benefit the supremacists will set the rest of the world on fire).  "Top 5 most ridiculous things said in *that* Saudi press conference":  'Why doesn't Qatar want us to smile?'
blog comments powered by Disqus