I really do not get why Joy Reid hates Kamala Harris and is working so hard to prevent a woman of color from being president? She has insisted this week that if Joe Biden is not backed, Black Americans were being disrespected and not listened to. That is wrong on so many levels including that Joy's stereotype of Joe's Black support really only applies to elderly African-Americans at this point. But what is true, is that Joy wants to deny an opportunity to Kamala.
Whether you consider Kamala bi-racial or Black, she's really the one next in line and I guess Joy's threatened by strong women and unwilling to see a woman of color succeed. If she were a Black man, we'd call her an Uncle Tom. So what do we call Joy? An Aunt Jemimah?
The argument that Harris is less risky might strike some as counterintuitive. Her vice presidency has been marked by strikingly low favorability ratings. Biden assigned her a politically sensitive policy portfolio that led her to, for example, take positions on immigration that brought her under fire from both the left and the right. And reports indicating that Harris felt frustrated and sidelined by Biden’s team mar the narrative of a natural passing of the torch.
Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"
ABC's NIGHLINE used to be a serious news magazine. Today? They deal with Alec Baldwin's trial, Rita Ora, THE BACHELORETTE, Jamie Foxx's health scare and other 'smart' topics as democracy hangs in the balance.
They cared about hostages a lot more back when they were a news program. In fact, back then, American hostages were such a big deal that they'd put any idiot on TV to talk about them, right, Joe?
+ According to Biden intimate Joe Scarborough, Biden believes Obama is behind the plot to oust him. “The Biden campaign and many Democratic officials do believe that Barack Obama is quietly working behind the scenes to orchestrate this. Joe Biden is deeply resentful of his treatment under not only the Obama staff but also the way he was pushed aside for Hillary Clinton.”
+ On the day Biden announced his abortive presidential campaign in 2008, he said this about Obama: “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.” Maybe Biden had decided to steal lines from his old pal Strom Thurmond instead of Neil Kinnock in this campaign.
+ Biden’s phone-in conversations on Morning Joe resemble Nixon’s with Kissinger during the Final Days, where his paranoia, petty grievances, aphasia and megalomania are on full display.
+ Obama enjoyed an approval rating of 60% when he left office (unjustifiably robust to my mind). That’s 25 percent higher than either Biden or Trump at the end of their terms. Blaming Obama for his misfortune is a losing game. But Biden’s a loser and a sore one at that. He owes his presidency to Obama, who cleared the field for him in the Democratic primaries in 2020.
+ Scott Fitzgerald said that a true sign of genius was the ability to hold two opposing ideas in your mind at once. I’m not sure if that’s really a sign of intelligence or evidence of schizophrenia. But the Biden campaign wants you to believe that Black Democrats are firmly behind him, while at the same time blaming the plot to oust him on Obama.
+ In fact, Black Democrats aren’t firmly behind Biden, according to a new poll by The Economist…
Should Biden step aside…
Black voters: Yes 49%, No 34%
Hispanic voters: Yes 56%, No 22%
Younger voters: Yes 58%, No 20%
Independents: Yes 60%, No 21%
+ Post-debate polling shows only 29% believe Biden has the mental capacity and physical stamina to serve for another four years. Even HRC is polling better than Biden. Stop the world, I want to get off…
Doctors who have had to perform "a constant flow of amputations" on injured children in Gaza
said Thursday that the injuries they have witnessed were consistent
with the use of "fragmentation bombs" loaded with shrapnel—which Israel has used in the past and which rights groups have said are designed to cause maximum casualties.
Volunteer doctors who have worked at European Hospital and al-Aqsa Hospital over the past three months told The Guardian that a majority of the patients they operated on were children who had wounds that were barely discernible—called "splinter injuries" by Dr. Feroze Sidhwa, a trauma surgeon from California—but caused catastrophic internal damage to the children's bodies.
"About half of the injuries I took care of were in young kids," said Sidhwa. "Children are more vulnerable to any penetrating injury because they have smaller bodies. Their vital parts are smaller and easier to disrupt. When children have lacerated blood vessels, their blood vessels are already so small it's very hard to put them back together. The artery that feeds the leg, the femoral artery, is only the thickness of a noodle in a small child. It's very, very small. So repairing it and keeping the kid's limb attached to them is very difficult."
The Guardian also spoke to explosives experts who reviewed pictures of the shrapnel found by medical staff and the doctors' descriptions of the tiny external wounds they treated on seriously injured children, and said the accounts were consistent with bombs the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) fits with "fragmentation sleeves" around warheads.
Amnesty International first documented the IDF's use of fragmentation bombs in Gaza in 2009 and said the explosives "appear designed to cause maximum injury and, in some respects, seem to be a more sophisticated version of the ball-bearings or nails and bolts which armed groups often pack into crude rockets and suicide bombs."
One weapons expert told The Guardian that Israel has claimed the weapons are more precise than large bombs designed to damage and destroy buildings.
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman, with Nermeen Shaikh.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: The Washington Post is reporting Israel and Hamas have agreed to the framework for a new ceasefire and hostage deal following talks in Cairo and Doha. Washington Post columnist David Ignatius reports a senior U.S. official told him that the parties are now, quote, “negotiating details of how it will be implemented.”
But a final deal may not be imminent. This comes as Israel intensifies its attacks on Gaza while ordering all civilians in Gaza City to leave the city despite having no safe place to go. The Israeli human rights group B’Tselem decried the evacuation order of the city as, quote, “absolute madness.”
AMY GOODMAN: On the diplomatic front, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz reports Israel negotiators have returned from Doha for consultations with Israeli leaders. In Doha, the Israeli negotiators met with Egyptian, Qatari and U.S. officials. On the U.S. side, it was CIA Director William Burns. On the Israeli side, it was the head of Mossad, David Barnea.
We’re joined now by Daniel Levy, president of the U.S./Middle East Project, former Israeli peace negotiator, joining us from London.
Thanks so much for being with us again. Can you explain what’s at stake? What is this three-stage deal, Daniel?
DANIEL LEVY: Yes, indeed. Good to be with you.
So, the idea is that in the initial phase, there would be the withdrawal of the troops from large parts of Gaza, the Israeli military. You would have the release of those Israelis being held who are still alive and are not male soldiers. You would allow the real ramping up of humanitarian access — of course, that should happen anyway. And you would have Palestinian prisoners being released. And then you would move on to a second phase, where there would be a more significant Palestinian prisoner release, a full Israeli military withdrawal. The remaining soldiers would be released. And a third phase, in which bodies would be returned, and there would be the start of more consummate rehabilitation efforts.
But those are supposed to flow one to two to three. The big question — and it’s been the question for months — is whether you can just do phase one and then continue with the destruction, with everything you’ve been reporting on for months now, 21,000 children unaccounted for, 38,000 dead in Gaza and counting, and that’s without knowing what’s under the rubble. Does that continue? Or are there serious commitments that this will be a permanent cessation of this kind of hostility?
And here’s the rub. The document is trying to create a degree of constructive ambiguity, I think. And Hamas have said, “Look, we know there’s nothing ironclad” — I’m paraphrasing, OK? “We know there’s nothing ironclad, but we need to know, with maximum plausibility, that there is a commitment to this being a permanent cessation.” And what you have, on every occasion, is the Israeli prime minister stepping forward and saying, “Whoa! No, I am committing to continuing the war until its objectives are realized.” Those objectives are unrealizable. The military knows that. The families of the hostages know that. And therefore, he is trying to do everything to prevent a deal. And what we are seeing in the reportage is, unfortunately, still a lot of unsubstantiated optimism and, from the U.S. administration, continued deception.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: So, Daniel, if you could talk about — I mean, there was renewed hope that a deal could be reached, after Hamas last week reportedly gave up on its initial demand that a permanent ceasefire be part of the first phase of any agreement. If you could talk about the significance of Hamas doing that, why you think that they took that step? And the fact that there’s such, I mean, increasing opposition within Israel to Netanyahu’s stance, not just from hostage families, but this latest move that he made, saying, you know, that Israel — one of the conditions should be that Israel can resume fighting until conditions are met, that people were so widely critical within Israel of Netanyahu taking that position, do you think that might make any difference in the short term?
DANIEL LEVY: OK. So, on the Hamas side of things, I think there has been a deliberate misinterpretation of the Hamas position. The permanent ceasefire was never locked into phase one. It was always part of the transition from phase one to phase two. And there has constantly been this question of how to make that as reasonable, as likely as possible. Now, Hamas may be looking at this — I’m not privy to their internal conversations, of course. Hamas may be looking at this and saying, “We’re still here. We will be here if the Israelis resume their actions after a six-week hiatus.” We now have a situation where in order to dial down the escalation on the northern Israel-Lebanon, Israel-Hezbollah front, you very clearly need a situation to be dialed down. Maybe we can get the kind of humanitarian relief in. But all of these things will make it increasingly difficult for Israel, even if that’s what they intend, to resume these kinds of actions after six weeks, and we have a more desperate administration in the U.S. That might suggest where some additional wiggle room has been created. However, that wiggle room, I don’t think, can be sufficient enough to sustain what you mentioned in the second part of your question, which is to sustain a very vocal, very transparent and insistent Israeli forcing the issue that, no, there can be no permanent ceasefire. Netanyahu put out four conditions. One of them was any deal will allow Israel to resume fighting until all of the objectives of the war have been achieved. So, that doesn’t give you an ability to work.
Now, what about what’s going on inside Israel, your question regarding is the pressure now at a place where Netanyahu simply has to accept this? The unfortunate answer — and I so hope I’m wrong on all of this — the unfortunate answer is no. You do have greater protest. You do have the families more mobilized. You do have a military that is more clearly saying — again, I’m paraphrasing — “If we want a chance to deal with the situation in the north, whether deescalating or having the attention span to deal militarily, then you need a ceasefire in Gaza.” The military, by the way, prefers a deal. They prefer a ceasefire deal in Gaza because they know that’s the only way they’ll get a significant cohort of the hostages out. And they know that their reservists, their troops have been on the frontline for an awfully long time and are rather exhausted. So, the military, more transparently, has said that.
You do have the parliament going into a summer recess. And so, the hope, I think, was that Netanyahu could tell his right-wing — even more extreme than himself — coalition allies, “Guys, don’t leave me during the summer recess. There’s no urgency here. I promise you that by the time the parliament is back up to the Jewish holidays in October, I’ll be killing Palestinians just like I’ve done and just like you like me to do. We’ll be fighting a war in Gaza. In the meantime, you can have fun in the West Bank, causing provocation, causing mayhem, displacing Palestinians. Don’t rush to do anything crazy.” And they will say, “No, we’re going to bring you down.”
And Netanyahu is looking around, and he sees that the domestic pressure inside Israel is not a threat to his current viewed stability. And, crucially, he is seeing that the U.S. administration will continue, when push comes to shove, to say, “Ah, it’s Hamas’s fault,” and they will continue to send the weapons without which Israel could not be causing this death and destruction, the 500-pound bombs released again. And he knows he has a nice little date with Congress following the invitation by the Republican and Democratic congressional leadership on the 24th of July.
AMY GOODMAN: Daniel, let’s talk about July 24th. Yes, Netanyahu is scheduled to address a joint session of Congress on July 24th. A number of prominent Israelis, including a former head of Mossad, a former prime minister and a Nobel Prize winner have written a joint op-ed in The New York Times headlined “We Are Israelis Calling on Congress to Disinvite Netanyahu.” They argue the invitation will make a ceasefire agreement more unlikely. They write, “Netanyahu’s supporters in Israel will be emboldened by his appearance in Congress to insist that the war continue, which will further distance any deal to secure the release of the hostages, including several U.S. citizens. Giving Mr. Netanyahu the stage in Washington will all but dismiss the rage and pain of his people, as expressed in the demonstrations throughout the country. American lawmakers should not let that happen. They should ask Mr. Netanyahu to stay home.” Your response to this?
DANIEL LEVY: I don’t like giving one-word responses, but it would be “amen.” So, if you’re looking at it from the Israeli perspective, then, absolutely, the way that the congressional leadership — but, I would argue, the way the administration — has behaved has cut off at the knees any prospect of the shift in Israel that’s necessary to end this war, that has led to the ICC and the ICJ, those international courts, taking those measures.
By the way, if I was looking at this from the perspective of international law in general, and the perspective of the Palestinians living under these conditions, I would say, “How the hell can you invite Netanyahu?”
But let me just say this, because you referenced that piece by Ignatius in The Washington Post, and here’s what most concerns me this morning. Ignatius is not writing as his own opinion here. He’s a consummate insider. He is being a faithful stenographer of the spin being given to him by the administration. And Ignatius writes the following, that “it would be a ringing validation of President Biden’s patient diplomacy” and “a potential valedictory moment,” if he got this ceasefire. Now, just pause. What the spin that the administration is telling us is, “Wow! We could get it through our patient diplomacy.” Can I translate the term “patient diplomacy”? “Patient diplomacy” means that after nine months, you have tens of thousands who are dead, nine out of 10 people who are displaced, starvation, humanitarian catastrophe, scholasticide. This is patient diplomacy that you should be proud of? The hostages are still there. America’s international reputation, that which was still remaining, as an upholder of international law has been thoroughly taken to the cleaners.
And, of course, there’s the internal situation on the Democrat side. And I would simply say, because I listened to your earlier segment, that you have a real problem if you think you can sell this spin. And if you treat your voters with contempt, you do that at your own risk. And sitting here in the U.K. — and I’ve just come back from Paris — I’ll tell you what happened in our elections here. In our elections here, Labour won a stunning majority in Parliament, but lost and only received 34% in the popular vote, 6% less than Corbyn in 2017. Why? Because voters deserted Labour over Gaza. And then, in France, you saw a new left alliance come together, close the enthusiasm gap with the right. Yes, it was about keeping the extreme right out, but it was also because one of the things that new left alliance did was to come up with a credible position on Gaza. And I would simply ask the question: Is this stunning validation of your approach what you’re going to be selling people? And you still haven’t got the ceasefire. You’re still sending the weapons. You are still in violation of international law.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Finally, Daniel, I wanted to ask you about the position of the Israeli military, which are becoming, as you’ve pointed out, more and more public in their opposition to the war. What is the significance of that? And could that make a difference?
DANIEL LEVY: Wow, it’s a big issue. So, what’s going on here is the military knows they have no political plan. They’re being sent on a mission that is unachievable. They have actually openly said you cannot defeat Hamas in the way Netanyahu talks about. This deradicalization agenda in Gaza, it’s for the birds. So I think what the military are saying is, “We need a different approach.”
The problem here, in addition to, of course, what the military has been conducting in Gaza, is that these are the same guys in the military who were in charge on October 7th. And there is a fight. There is a blame game between the military leadership and Netanyahu. Was it political —
AMY GOODMAN: We have 20 seconds, Daniel.
DANIEL LEVY: Was it political failure, or was it military failure? You have blame games when there is a failure. That’s what it is. And Netanyahu may replace some of this military, and that could be even more dangerous.
AMY GOODMAN: Daniel Levy, we want to thank you for being with us, president of the U.S./Middle East Project, former Israeli peace negotiator under Israeli Prime Ministers Ehud Barak and Yitzhak Rabin.
That does it for our show. Democracy Now! will be broadcasting live from the Milwaukee Republican convention and the Chicago Democratic convention, expanding to two hours every day.
And we have a development director position opening to lead our fundraising efforts. You can check it out at democracynow.org. I’m Amy Goodman, with Nermeen Shaikh. Thanks so much for joining us.
Gaza remains under assault. Day 280 of the assault in the wave that began in October. Binoy Kampmark (DISSIDENT VOICE) points out, "Bloodletting as form; murder as fashion. The ongoing campaign in Gaza by Israel’s Defence Forces continues without stalling and restriction. But the burgeoning number of corpses is starting to become a challenge for the propaganda outlets: How to justify it? Fortunately for Israel, the United States, its unqualified defender, is happy to provide cover for murder covered in the sheath of self-defence." CNN has explained, "The Gaza Strip is 'the most dangerous place' in the world to be a child, according to the executive director of the United Nations Children's Fund." ABC NEWS quotes UNICEF's December 9th statement, ""The Gaza Strip is the most dangerous place in the world to be a child. Scores of children are reportedly being killed and injured on a daily basis. Entire neighborhoods, where children used to play and go to school have been turned into stacks of rubble, with no life in them." NBC NEWS notes, "Strong majorities of all voters in the U.S. disapprove of President Joe Biden’s handling of foreign policy and the Israel-Hamas war, according to the latest national NBC News poll. The erosion is most pronounced among Democrats, a majority of whom believe Israel has gone too far in its military action in Gaza." The slaughter continues. It has displaced over 1 million people per the US Congressional Research Service. Jessica Corbett (COMMON DREAMS) points out, "Academics and legal experts around the world, including Holocaust scholars, have condemned the six-week Israeli assault of Gaza as genocide." The death toll of Palestinians in Gaza is grows higher and higher. United Nations Women noted, "More than 1.9 million people -- 85 per cent of the total population of Gaza -- have been displaced, including what UN Women estimates to be nearly 1 million women and girls. The entire population of Gaza -- roughly 2.2 million people -- are in crisis levels of acute food insecurity or worse." Yesterday, THE NATIONAL noted, "At least 38,345 Palestinians have been killed and 88,295 injured in Israel's war on Gaza since October 7, the enclave's Health Ministry said on Thursday. In the past 24 hours, 50 people were killed and 54 injured, the ministry added in a statement." Months ago, AP noted, "About 4,000 people are reported missing." February 7th, Jeremy Scahill explained on DEMOCRACY NOW! that "there’s an estimated 7,000 or 8,000 Palestinians missing, many of them in graves that are the rubble of their former home." February 5th, the United Nations' Phillipe Lazzarini Tweeted:
-
-
The Wiz: Tiny Desk Concert3 hours ago
-
-
Science for kids12 hours ago
-
Antipasto Salad in the Kitchen12 hours ago
-
I do not get it12 hours ago
-
Pritzkers12 hours ago
-
Glory hogs harm the team12 hours ago
-
MELROSE PLACE12 hours ago
-
-
-
Louis CK and Shady Menendez12 hours ago
-
-
No comments:
Post a Comment