The Common Ills: Iraq snapshot

Thursday, March 03, 2022

Iraq snapshot

Thursday, March 3, 2022. If a woman says she doesn't want to speak about harassment or an assult, why is a man taking it as his job to speak for her? And why are we acting like that's okay?

Last Thursday, the snapshot included, "And one of Joni's best known songs has had 24,000. Pink's "Try" will hit the 500,000,000 mark by the end of March." Pink didn't need until the end of the month. Yesterday, she reached 500,000,000 stream mark with the "Try" video posted to her official YOUTUBE channel.

You've gotta get up and try, try, try
Gotta get up and try, try, try
You've gotta get up and try, try, try

Gotta get up and try, try, try
Gotta get up and try, try, try
You've gotta get up and try, try, try
Gotta get up and try, try, try

You've gotta get up and try, try, try
Gotta get up and try, try, try

That's what you've got to do. That's what we've all got to do.

Yesterday, REVOLUTIONARY BLACKOUT posted this video.

I don't need to see something like that again and Ive lost a great deal of respect for Tony Zenkus as a result of the video.

At this point, I just don't care what happened because i don't give a damn about Madam X.

Stop playing, stop fronting, stop the bulls**t.

If she was harassed or raped or whatever she's telling people at this moment of the hour today, I don't care. And no one should.

She has refused to make her comments publicly. She hasn't made them in a criminal complaint. She's had every opportunity to tell her side of the story and she's refused. Sabby Sabs noted, when she interviewed Nick Brana last week, that she had reached out to the woman -- who no one wants to identify despite the fact that Nick's been identified as a creep, a rapist and everything else -- and the woman didn't want to appear.

You're not doing journalism with the video above.

Tara Reade came forward and I believed her and I still believe her. That's not because I believe all women because I truly do not. Not do I believe all who claim they have been harmed. People lie. Men lie, women lie, non-binary people lie.

If you're not coming forward, there's a reason that you're not coming forward.

Not coming forward doesn't make you a liar. There's a man who attacked me, tried to force himself on me and we note him from time to time. Why? He lives in fear that I'm going to out him and he reads this site. When he went on my local radio PACIFICA radio station, he trashed me and thought I would respond here. I waited several years (this year) until I did. (Elaine ripped him apart in real time.) I toy with it here. What he did was awful and vicious -- the attempted assault, not his bitchy remarks on KPFA, Knowing that he's upset and worried that his name might be blighted in his final years? I like to toy with that fear and let him feel nervous and fearful of what happens next, the way he did to me when he tried to rape me.

But, honestly, unless I get really mad -- and he's not a part of my life -- I probably won't because I don't want my name connected to his for all eternity.

But who knows, when he dies and people start lying about how wonderful he supposedly was, what I'll feel then. So ____, I may out you uet. And we both know it's only going to take one of us -- one woman -- to come forward and all the others will as well. For all your applause on the left and all your accolades, you're nothing but a rapist.

If I wanted to take him to court, I would. Back then, I did not. I was shocked, honestly. He had such a good reputation and he loves that wife, that mother of his children that's been with forever. And, of course, I was wodnering did I send the wrong signals -- although what signals say when a woman's screaming "no!" and pushing you off them, she's really saying, yes?

That was a few decades back and things have changed.

Everyone wants to act like the failed MeToo Movement was something new and novel and it wasn't. There was already an online list of men who were predators. And before the internet there were other actions.

There was an MSNBC commentator at the turn of the century, for example, who beat and raped a woman. And thought he could get away with it. He was confronted by a friend of mine and laughed that no one would believe the surivovr. (My friend I'm referring to was the survivor's aunt.) Maybe that was true. Maybe it was false. But what was real was he lost his TV appearances. He lost his upward trajectory. In the end, he lost everything. And we didn't need the courts for that nor did we need the internet. There are various ways to ensure that attackers pay.

Now in the case of the woman raped and beaten by MSNBC analyst, she didn't come forward because he was so sure that he was powerful enough (in the Clinton circle) that he couldn't be touched and that she wouldn't be believed.

That's one reason not to come forward. There are many reasons not to come forward. Long before the truth was told in print about Harvey Weinstein -- while various left groups were taking his money and doing his bidding -- we were calling him out because I knew what he had done to so many. And I knew that so many were not able to come forward for various reasons.

There will always be reasons to come forward. And we will always be protetive of our friends and our family.

So I can undertand's Tony' s impulse in the above video and I can even say he has good intentions.

But it needs to stop.

If you're not going to come forward, your case does not deserve a video. There are certainly more important things to focus on. But equally true, I'm not believing you.

I have no reason to. I haven't heard you and I cannot determine whether you are telling the truth.

At the end of the day, that's what we base things on. Is the person convincing?

That doesn't mean: Was she a nun? That means when I see her (or him) speak, do I buy it?

Tony was not there, Sabby was not there.

Whatever took place in private is now being spoken of in the public square -- and not as gossip or as an aside but as a topic to debate. Tony wants to.

I don't.

I'm not staking my reputation on someone who won't come forward.

Jamie Leigh Jones. I believed her. When she lost her case in court, I didn't stop believing her. I still believe her. Telling the truth doesn't mean you get to win and justice is awarded.

It does mean you get to share publicly and people can decide on their own. With Jamie, I found her truthful. She came forward and she told her story and I believe she told the truth. I know the trash whores of MOTHER JONES don't and didn't it take two fat and ugly non-feminist women to go after Jamie?

Never forget that the two bitches running and ruining MOTHER JONES decided to do a hit piece on the woman standing up to the KBR corporation. That's how they defined their role.

I have no regrets about standing with Jamie. I still believe her. I think she told the truth and at a later date -- maybe after we're all dead and gone -- it will be known. She did a brave thing. I supported her and I support her to this day.

As Pink sings, "You've got to try."

Madam X is not trying. She's hiding and that alone makes me doubt her. Nick is not all powerful. He's not really connected to a power structure. I have never met him personally. I am not a champion of his movement.

He wants to create a new party. I'd have to go back in my ind to remember all this but we noted some of their stuff ahead of their convention but not all of it and I remember at one point telling Martha and Shirley not to even bother opening the stuff being sent about it. It had reached the point of, "They just don't get what they're trying to do."

Didn't mean I hated them or disliked them, but did mean that they didn't understand the task they were trying to accomplish. That doesn't mean, "It's futile o they shouldn't try!" No one knows the outcome of anything. We're all just guessing. But there are certain mistakes you make that doom you and they were already doing that. Yesterday's snapshot noted how idiotic the Green Party was for doing a 'response' to Joe Biden's State of the Union Address on Tuesday night -- a live response -- and it was stupid because Wednesday morning, when the speech was at its high water mark in terms of interest, the Green Party hadn't posted the video (or even a written statement in response) online. You're just jerking off and wasting everyone's time. And when you're wating my time, you're pissing me off.

I'm not a Green. I note Green things here when I can because we should be noting everyone in a democracy, all parties. But when I'm making the effort to help your party and you're not even making the effort to help your party, then I'm pissed because that's time I've wasted that I am not getting back.

Jamie Leigh Jones? The time I spent in snapshots here covering what was done to her and what she survived was not wasted time. She came forward, she did everything she could. I applaud her.

Madam X wants to make claims about Nick but doesn't want to make them herself so she sends Tony out to do it for her or Tony takes it upon himself to do it for her (he recently came into contact with her he insists in the video).

Hey, Tony, what's Nick's cock like? Is it big? Is it thick? I picture it really skinny but long. The base, where it meets the nuts, I picture that it's highly populated with wispy, long black hairs. Is that what it's like, Tony?

What's that? You don't know?

That's because you don't know s**t.

You need to stay the f**k out of it.

If Madam wants to go public, we can evaluate her story. I'm not trusting you.

F**k you. I hope that's clear: F**k you.

If she wants to make a case, she needs to make it herself.

When the lunatic claims against Bob Dylan were made by that psycho woman, I didn't just note that they were impossible chronologically. I also pointed out that she's claiming to be a teen in the 60s who was assaulted then and it's decades later. If you're going to amke the charges, you should come forward but she wants to pretend like she's eight years old and hide behind an attorney.

No. I don't believe her. She comes off like a greedy,d eceptive hustler who wants to extort money.

Could she be a victim? She could be. If she is, she's victimizing herself.

Same with Madam X. She needs to tell her story or we need to move on.

I have no idea what happened.

If you'd asked me about Nick a month or two back, I would've told you I had no idea, I didn't know him and that he struck me as a gay bottom -- and not a power bottom at that. I was honsetly surprised when we watched Sabby (Ava and I covered it here) to learn he wasn't gay. I don't mean that in a mean way as anyone who knows me would know. I thought he was a cute guy and I thought he was gay. I thought the coolest thing about him was that he was gay. The only cool thing. So the interview stripped that away.

I believed Anita Hill when she came forward. A lot of time has passed sinc ethen so some may not know or may have forgotten but Anita was not as widely believed back then. But she came forward and she told her story and her truth grew as a result. It made a difference in real time but it made an even bigger difference as the years passed.

Tony playing telephone isn't helping anyone. BAck when Larry King had his CNN show and someone would go on and speak for someone else, it was obvious they were liars. That's why they couldn't speak for themselves. Bill clinton raped Juanita Broaddrick and that's why he has hid behind his attorneys and never spoken of the issue on his own.

I don't want to hear Madam X's story from Tony. I want to hear it from her. I want to judge her credibility myself and determine whether or not I believe her. I'll need to watch how she speaks as well as what she says. Tony can't give me that. And sicne Tony wasn't there and Madam X refuses to speak publicly, Tony needs to shut up.

With Sabby, I saw Nick nearly lose it repeatedly. He didn't alsh out, he didn't get mad, the typical behaviors of men who assault. And, yes, criers can rape.

But one person told their story publicly. Nick told it to Sabby. He also spoke to Jimmy Dore (whic I only saw days after I'd seen the Sabby interview). I saw a scared man who was trying to answer questions -- and do a victory lap on Jimmy Dore's show.

That's not meant as an insult. He has every right to want to do a victory lap. Someone tried to destroy him and a body did not agree that her claims had merit. It had to be a relief to him.

Sabby didn't pull punches and she didn't give him an easy interview. (Should the woman go on air with Sabby, I'd expet her to be as tough with that woman as she was with Nick.)

I don't believe all victims because people lie.

I saw Nick was deeply hurt by the whole matter. I know that he came fowrad and spoke to the issue. Madam X hasn't and I don't really give a damn what she and Tony whisper about and I'm surprised that he thinks he can get away with going around and doing itnerviews like that. It cheapens him and it harms his reputation.

If she doesn't want to talk, MAN Tony, don't talk for 'the little lady.' She's a grown up and she can speak for herself. I don't need you MANsplaining what happened when you weren't even there.

You're a good person, Tony, but sometimes your gender entitlement is just too much and leads you to take steps you shouldn't be taking.

Which is the other thing about that interview. Two men, discussing a woman's supposed assault. Two men.

Men can be assaulted, yes.

Were either of the two men assaulted in the past. Is there a reason that time and again we don't get women even in segments that demand their presence?

"So, Tony, what was it like when Nick grabbed your hand and stuck it down the front of his pants?"

"Well, Compton Jay, it was scary. I didn't know what was going on. I thought, at first, maybe Nick had a hernia and he needed a second opinion. But then my hand grazed something hard, I later realized it was the tip of his penis, and it was leaking something, I thought it was blood at the time and my eyes were darting around for a first aid kit . . ."

"Did you -- did you think maybe he just had a blackhead on his glans?"

"Yeah, Compton, I honestly did. Back in college, that happened to me once and it too me about 15 minutes before I squeed it the right way to get the blackhead to pop so --"

It's nonsense (and the above parody has more value than anything offered in that long bideo).

Madam X does not want to speak on camera. Fine. Let's all move on. It's not fair or right for Tony to be presented as Madam X. He's not Madam X. He wasn't there. He doesn't know anything other than what she told him and he's only recently encountered her and only over the phone.

He doesn't even make a good character witness at this point.

And he betrays his training and his reputation by personalizing this case. He really needs to take a look at his actions. He's not helping actual victims by going out on this limb for a woman who won't go out on it herself.

More to the point, Madam X is saying case closed by refusing to speak publicly. The last thing women need is another man taking it upon himself to speak for us. Fiand another way to get on camera, Tony.

Iraq. A number of e-mails to the public account about two 'big' stories. Covered a lot does not make them big. The oil issue? We're not interested. That the Baghdad-based court would rule in favor of the Baghdad-based government against the Kurdistan is not surprising. It's a historical pattern. Where have you been? Second, it's not surprising that Kurdistan is rejecting the verdict. It's not suprsiging because it's happened over and over and is one of the flashpoints that Brookings long ago identfied as an issue that had to be resolved or conflict would continue. And Brookings made that identification when? Back when Bully Boy Bush occupied the White House. That long ago.

A company may have helped ISIS! Or been in business! Or something! We covered that. We didn't obsess over it and because there's nothing new to it we haven't covered it since the snapshot we made it the main thrust of. When details, not opinions, emerge, new details, we'll probably revisit the topic.

We've repeatedly noted (since Saturday) western media remarks about how Urkanians are 'our kind of people' -- unlike those in Iraq and Afghanistan who just aren't this or that.

We've noted it because it's racism that needs to be called out.

We've noted it because it's racism that impacted the coverage. The march to war/? Absolutely. But even more so, the coverage that happened after the war started, the coverage that rendered Iraqis invisible and refused to tell their stories.

The racims involved resulted in selling the war and it resulted in continuing the war. That CBS NEWS has not announced they have broken off with an employee goes to how they tolerate racism in the news department. It was rank and it was offensive. And, no, a Tweet of 'woopise' does not make everything all right.

It's a serious issue and we will continue to note it. Here's Richard Medhurst addressing it.

For those who don't know, CBS NEWS is currently attempting to contain yet another sexual abuse scandal of their own. Now is really not the time for their failure to address their correspondent's on-air remarks. At the very least, Charlie should be having some sort of remedial training and be assigned a what-I've-learned essay to write and post to CBS' website.

On videos, an e-mail to the public account feels we should have noted this video.