Bombing in Mideast

THE ABSURD TIMES

Remember him?

HISTORY IS DEAD

As Zarathustra climbed down the mountain, he asked himself "Has the Historian not yet heard – that history is dead?"

We tend to forget that 9/11 was exploited first to supposedly hunt down bin Laden.  A real objective was hidden for while – a way to effect regime change by eliminating Saddam Hussein.  The details are too numerous to list, but it is clear that Saddam (intentionally mispronounced "Sodom" by George Jr.) had made the mistake of providing a good example to other leaders in the Middle East.  He was, of course, constantly vilified by both Georgie Bush and Bin Laden as he was a benefactor of many individuals in many countries, especially Palestinian families. 

What we now call ISIS comes out of that adventure.  Al-Bagdadi was a graduate of the Abu Garib prison we maintained using the methods of Guantanimo.   He was considered a model and given special privileges.  While there is much to lament about the activities of ISIS, in fact to detest, Israel has benefited greatly by taking attention away from its systematic exploitation of what little remains of Palestine.  When is the last time you have seen coverage of that?  It enabled the change in Libya that brought such great benefit of Europe is the form of refugees.  We attempted the same in Syria, but forgot that Russia had two bases there on the Mediterranean and that Russia had been invited by Assad (we were not) and Russia does not give up bases. 

Now we talk about our talk of routing ISIS.  Here is an interview that tells a more accurate story of what we have been doing over there recently: 

Today we spend the hour looking at a damning new report that reveals how U.S.-led airstrikes against Islamic State militants in Iraq have killed far more civilians than officials have acknowledged. An on-the-ground investigation by the New York Times Magazine titled "The Uncounted" found the actual civilian death toll may be 31 times higher than U.S. officials admit. We interview one of the survivors featured in the report. Joining us from Erbil, Iraq, Basim Razzo describes the 2015 U.S. airstrike on his home in Mosul, in which his wife, daughter, brother and nephew were killed. Video of the strike on his home shows a target hit with military precision.

---

Transcript

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, Democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I'm Amy Goodman.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And I'm Juan González. Welcome to all of our listeners and viewers around the country and around the world. Today we spend the hour looking at a damning new report that reveals how U.S.-led airstrikes against Islamic State militants in Iraq have killed far more civilians than officials have acknowledged.

found the actual rate of civilian deaths may be 31 times higher than the U.S. is admitting. In fact, The Pentagon claims its air war against the self-proclaimed Islamic State has killed few civilians. But an on-the-ground investigation by The New York Times has revealed the U.S.-led military coalition is killing far more civilians in Iraq than it has acknowledged. The Pentagon claims just 89 of its airstrikes have killed civilians since 2014. But the Times the report reveals that as many as one in five coalition airstrikes on ISIS targets in Iraq resulted in civilian deaths.

The reporters write, "In terms of civilian deaths, this may be the least transparent war in recent American history." The investigation comes as U.S. military officials continue to insist coalition bombing in Iraq has been precise in hitting its targets. This is Army Lieutenant General Stephen J. Townsend.

ARMY LIEUTENANT GENERAL STEPHEN J. TOWNSEND: I reject any notion that coalition fires were in any way imprecise, unlawful, or excessively targeted civilians. I would argue that this is, I believe, the most precise campaign in the history of warfare, and we have gone to extraordinary measures to safeguard civilian lives.

AMY GOODMAN: But The New York Times investigation reveals many of the American-led airstrikes against Islamic State militants actually killed civilians. One of the survivors they interviewed, Basim Razzo, described a coalition airstrike on his home in Mosul, Iraq, in 2015 in which his wife, daughter, brother, and nephew were killed. Video of the strike on his home shows a target hit with military precision.

Well, today we are joined by that man, Basim Razzo. He's joining us from Erbil, Iraq, via Democracy Now! video stream. We're also joined in studio, here in New York, by the two reporters who co-authored this New York Times investigation headlined "The Uncounted."

Azmat Khan is an investigative journalist and a Future of War fellow at New America and Arizona State University, and Anand Gopal is an assistant research professor at Arizona State University and the author of No Good Men Among the Living. I want to start off in Erbil, Iraq, with Basim Razzo. Basim, that is not actually your longtime home. You lived in Mosul until 2015. Can you describe what happened on that fateful night when your home was hit by a U.S. airstrike?

BASIM RAZZO: Good morning, Amy. Thank you for having me on your program. That night, as I said in my story, I went to bed around 1:00. I had just checked my daughter to see if she was asleep, and I lied down. And then I woke up to a devastating explosion. Did not realize what had happened. I felt that I was in a nightmare, but then I felt that something had happened, because I looked up to the skies and I could see the stars.

There was a terrible smell in the air. And then I started feeling my legs, pinching myself. I thought I was in a dream or in a nightmare, but no, it was reality. I looked to the left at my wife, and all I could see was debris. And I started shouting her name—"Mayada, Mayada." She did not answer me. I started shouting at my daughter, Tuqa. No answer. And then I started shouting at my brother's house, but I could not hear a sound.

Minutes later, I could hear a sound from far away, and it seems that it was the groundkeeper that we have. His house was about 500 meters from my house. Minutes later, he started shouting at me. He said "Uncle Basim, Uncle Basim, I am coming, I am coming. But I need to get a ladder so I can climb up. Are you OK?" I said to him—his name is [inaudible]. I said [inaudible] "Please, help me. I think I am very hurt and something is broken. I cannot move."

I tried to stand up, but I fell down. I reached to my back because I felt my back was warm. And I touched my back, and then I felt something in my left arm. Something was warm. And it was blood. My back has been injured. My left foot had broken. My bed was in a v-shape, which resulted in a break to my hip. I tried to just move a little bit, but I could not move at all.

So minutes later, I could hear our groundkeeper climbing up to me. And then he came to me and he said "Are you OK? Are you OK?" I said, "I am badly hurt. What has happened to the other house?" That was my brother's house. He said "I don't know." But I could hear a female sound. And then when I started shouting at her, it was my sister-in-law, Azza. And she said "Basim, everybody's gone."

But I could not see anything. It was very dark. The bombing has damaged the electricity. The street was dark. Everything was dark. And then about half an hour later, I could see somebody was walking, entering the farm with a torch light. And they climbed up the ladder and three members of ISIS were looking down at me. So the first thing I said to them, I said, "Are you happy?"They looked at me in disgust and they left me. They climbed down the ladder and they left.

But they had called an ambulance, but they did not let the ambulance come right away.
Because usually when there is a bombing, most of the time it is followed by a second bombing, so they wanted to stay out. So they left for another like 15 minutes. And then when they could hear that the planes were out of the sky, they ordered the ambulance to enter my farm.

And they took me down, put me on the ambulance, and they rushed me to the hospital. When I reached the hospital, it was chaos. I was disoriented. I didn't know what was happening. I was in pain. And then I looked around and I could not know anybody. It was all ISIS members. But some person, he tapped on my shoulder and said, "Uncle Basim, don't worry, I know you are here, my son." He said, "I will be here for you. Don't worry. Don't worry."

So he started rushing me—he cleaned my wound in my back. They did some x-rays for me. They did a CT scan for—they were afraid that I have like brain damage or hemorrhage. Thank God, I did not have anything. They put a cast on my left foot. And then I woke up the next morning around 10:00 with my brother-in-law and another friend, and they had told me what just happened. They told me that all my member family are gone.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Basim Razzo, our deepest condolences to you and your family. You mentioned that your brother's house was next door. How many total members of the family were in both houses, and how many survived, and what kind of injuries did they have?

BASIM RAZZO: In my house, it was me, my wife, and my daughter. Two lost their life—my wife and my daughter. In my brother's house, which was about 20 feet away from my house, it was my brother, his wife, and his son. Only his wife survived. So total, four deaths, two survivals.

AMY GOODMAN: And can you describe the last day with your wife and your daughter?

BASIM RAZZO: Well, usually, before ISIS, I could come home late, like 10:00 or 11:00.
But since ISIS entered Mosul, it is better for me and more comfortable for me to be home early. I would sit with my family, sit with my brother's family, after sundown. We will go out to the farm. So it was just a regular everyday. I would come home from work around 5:00 or 6:00. I'd have dinner with them.

AMY GOODMAN: You had had a party the night before at your brother's house?

BASIM RAZZO: We had a party, like a party for women. And my daughter and my wife attended that party. And then we just have tea. And then when it's—and it is sundown, when the temperature cools down a little bit. Because you know, it was September. It is very hot in September in Iraq. So about 8:00 or 9:00, we would go out to the front yard. We would have tea, maybe some cold drinks. Maybe we will have some fruits. And then we would stay late until like 10:00 or 11:00. And that was my hours before my accident.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And your mention of the strike—how often were these airstrikes visited on Mosul or on your neighborhood in particular? Were these regular occurrences or was this an unusual occurrence in your neighborhood?

BASIM RAZZO: Well, at that time, there was not that much bombing, before the liberation of Mosul. You would hear some bombing every now and then, but it was not that often. But you could hear drones in the sky. But for bombing, it was not that often.

AMY GOODMAN: There is a picture in the New York Times investigation of your daughter Tuqa on the night before the airstrike. She's got that sparkler you describe.

BASIM RAZZO: Yes. She had found it somewhere. I think it was—I don't know if we had bought it earlier for her birthday, but it was left somewhere, and she had found it. And she lit it. And I was shouting at her because it was dangerous to light it inside. I told her, "Tuqa, honey, why don't you go outside?" She said, "No, it's not working. I think it is damaged because of the humidity, so it is not sparkling that much. So I will be safe. I'll be safe." So thank God she was safe. But she lost her life later.

AMY GOODMAN: We're going to break and then come back and hear what happened next. Has the U.S. claimed responsibility for what it did to your family? We will be joined by the two reporters who have investigated the attack on not only your home and your brother's, but so many others in Mosul, Iraq.

This is Democracy Now!, Democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report, and investigated airstrikes throughout Iraq. Please, stay with us.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: We are spending the hour looking at a New York Times investigation that reveals many of the American-led airstrikes against Islamic State militants actually killed civilians. One of the survivors the reporters interviewed, Basim Razzo, described a coalition airstrike on his home in Mosul, Iraq in 2015 in which his wife, daughter, brother, and nephew were killed. Video of the strike on his home shows a target hit with military precision.

AMY GOODMAN: Basim Razzo is just joining us, and you've heard a part of his story in our last segment as he speaks to us from Erbil, Iraq, via Democracy Now! video stream. And we're joined in our New York studio by the two reporters who co-authored the New York Times investigation headlined The Uncounted.... It was the cover of The New York Times Magazine this past Sunday.

Azmat Khan, investigative journalist and a Future of War fellow at New America and Arizona State University, and Anand Gopal, assistant research professor at Arizona State University, and the author of the book No Good Men Among the Living. Azmat Khan, talk about the U.S. figures for how many civilians have died, how many airstrikes, how many civilians killed, and then what you found.

AZMAT KHAN: So, the coalition, which is led by the United States, releases monthly civilian casualty figures. Our analysis of them shows that they have admitted to 466 Iraqi civilian deaths in 89 airstrikes. This is of more than 14,000 that they have carried out in Iraq, which is an incident rate of 0.6 percent. Less than one percent. What we found…

AMY GOODMAN: Less than 1 percent civilian killed.

AZMAT KHAN: Less than one percent, exactly—0.6 percent. What we found is that one in five airstrikes, or 31 times as high, resulted in civilian death.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And your analysis is based not obviously on all the 14,000, but you investigated about 103 separate incidents. Because 14,000 over roughly a four-year period, we're talking about 100 airstrikes a day on average that were occurring in Iraq in this war against ISIS.

AZMAT KHAN: Yeah. Many of these airstrikes took place near or around the time of liberation, but they were ongoing throughout. And so we saw an escalation around the time that Mosul or parts of Mosul were retaken. But you're basically looking at our sample, which was in East Mosul. It was in a neighborhood called Aden, a town that's—so and East Mosul is relatively an urban, densely packed neighborhood. Next, we had like a suburban municipality called Qayyarah. And after that, we had downtown Shura, which is probably a small settlement typical of many ISIS-held areas.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And in each of these 103 strikes, you actually went on the ground to interview people who were there at the time to find out what happened.

AZMAT KHAN: Exactly. So I've been to the site of every single one. We interviewed hundreds of survivors. We excavated the rubble. We looked for any presence of ISIS, whether that was in ISIS propaganda materials, weaponry. We analyzed bomb fragments. We analyzed satellite imagery before and after in order to assess the date ranges of when these airstrikes had happened. We also checked all of the civilian casualty allegations with local administrators, health officials, or law enforcement.

AMY GOODMAN: Anand Gopal, how does the U.S. military gather its numbers?

ANAND GOPAL: Most of these numbers come from internal reports by the U.S. military itself. For example, if they notice a mission irregularity, if let's say a pilot is dropping a bomb and all of the sudden a civilian vehicle appears after the bomb is dropped, they will report that to their superiors, and often times, they will investigate that.

Occasionally, they get reports from outside sources, from the media, from Airwars, which is a great organization that tracks these things. But they tend, more often than not, to actually discount those reports, and it is their own internal reports they take the most seriously, which is why the number is so low—466 civilians killed in 14,000 airstrikes.

If that was true, it would make it the most precise air war in the history of humanity. But it's because the threshold for what qualifies as evidence for being a civilian is extremely, extremely high. So in practice, people like Basim are in fact guilty until proven innocent.

AMY GOODMAN: So is Basim included in this count of civilians? Even the far lower count that the U.S. military has?

ANAND GOPAL: Well, initially, he wasn't. And a large part of our investigation was to press that point. His family members were not counted. They were listed as ISIS, basically. After the airstrike on his house, the coalition put up a video of the strike claiming that it was an IED factory, car bomb factory, essentially. And so you could have gone on YouTube and found the video of the bombing that destroyed his family for over a year.

And it was only after we found this and sort of showed this to the coalition that they kind of took it off YouTube. And eventually, after a long process of hundreds of emails and back and forth, did they admit that they killed his family and that they were civilians, and they were eventually added to the count. Today they are part of the count, but they had not been for many years.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Now, this issue of the preciseness of these strikes, which the military is always touting that they hit exactly what they're looking for—your report suggests that the problem is not so much in the munitions themselves, but in the intelligence of what are the targets that they actually strike. That it's faulty intelligence. Can you talk about that?

ANAND GOPAL: Well, that's right. And in fact, talking about precision in some ways is a slight of hand, because—and in fact, it is true they are very precise. They hit exactly what they intend to hit. The question is, what do they think they're hitting? And the intelligence is often so poor.

And again, it goes back to this issue of Iraqis having to prove that they are not ISIS, which is the opposite of what we would think. We would think that the coalition would do the work to find out whether somebody is a member of ISIS or not. Essentially, they assume people are ISIS until proven otherwise. And that's what leads to this extremely high count.

AMY GOODMAN: Basim Razzo, I wanted to go back to you. Now you are in Erbil. Your home is in Mosul. You went to Western Michigan University in Michigan, here in the United States?

BASIM RAZZO: Yes, I was at Western Michigan. I graduated in 1988 in a degree with industrial engineering—B.Sc.

AMY GOODMAN: And you traveled with your wife in a sort of love journey across the country?

BASIM RAZZO: Yeah, that was in 1982 when she joined me. We went for like a honeymoon for about 40 days around the United States in my car.

AMY GOODMAN: So you moved home to Mosul. Your family was killed in 2015. And what has been your interaction with the U.S. military?

BASIM RAZZO: Well, first, when I was in Turkey for my operation, I received a text on my Viber from the American Embassy in Baghdad saying that would like to contact me. I texted them back. I told them I was in Turkey and I will get in touch with them as soon as I am back in Baghdad. I returned late, about December. And then I texted them and then they gave me an appointment to meet with them in February. That is when I visited the American consulate in Baghdad.

And I have gathered some report. I wrote down the report. I gathered some pictures. Some aerial shots of my farm. And then I went to the embassy. I submitted the report to them. The woman who interviewed me, she told me that they would have to make sure that my allegations were right, and that they will pass my information to the DOD for verification. And then I never heard from them for like two months.

I emailed them back, and the lady said, "We still had not heard anything from them." And nothing for months until about like five or six months later, I emailed them a letter, and it was returned, saying the mailbox is full. That is when I started doubting—that something is going on. And then that's when I really met Azmat, and then things starting rolling from there.

AMY GOODMAN: The reporter who did this amazing piece, along with Anand Gopal for The New York Times. So can you describe your meeting, when you went to the U.S. Embassy in—was it Baghdad? Tell us what you were demanding and what it was that they gave you.

BASIM RAZZO: OK. When I submitted my report, she looked at it and then she went inside into a room and she came back like 15 minutes later. In my report, I had demanded that first and most important thing to me was for them to state clearly that this bombing is a mistake. This is just to clear my name, and so I can no longer be afraid to go back to Mosul. Because at that time, I was labeled as ISIS. My second demand was for them to compensate me for the losses of my family. I demanded compensation for my injury. I had lost my job because of my injury. So this was basically my demands in my report that I submitted.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And what was their response?

BASIM RAZZO: Well, it took them months and months to—if it wasn't for Azmat's pushing—and then they offered me—first they admitted that the bombing was done by mistake. But this took months and months of emails back and forth. They still have not provided me with a clear letter saying that the bombing was done by mistake.

And then they gave me an appointment to meet in Erbil, to offer me a payment they call [inaudible] payment. When I met with them at Erbil airport, this lady lawyer, she expressed her sorrow and deepest sympathy to my accident. She said, "We are sorry. We know the bombing was done by mistake."

And I, for the second time and third time, I asked her, I said, "Listen, I need an explicit letter from you saying that the bombing was done by mistake." She said, "OK, I promise I will get you this letter." And then they offered me the payment of $15,000 as a compensation for the death of my wife and my daughter, which I immediately declined. And she said "I'm sorry, sir, this is the most that we can do [and we are tapped off?]."

And then I asked her for one more request. My farm has been ransacked by government officials. I cannot say who because there were so many government agencies that entered Mosul and liberated Mosul, being the Army, the federal units, the Hashd. I don't know. But they entered my farm and they have ransacked it and have stolen so many things. And I said, "Listen, lady, I need you to help me get the word to whoever is in charge of that area that stop anybody from entering the premises."

And she also promised she will get in touch through the American forces with the local commanders to stop anybody from entering. But this has not happened. Actually, until about three weeks ago, they have entered the premises again and they have stolen more material from storage that we have. So they have not offered me anything until now.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: I wanted to ask Azmat Khan—this is a family that is a professional family, well educated, was relatively middle-class. And there are many others who are victims who are not so fortunate and don't have the ability to really confront the coalition. You talk about one case in April of 2015 where 18 civilians were killed and where the coalition is still saying there's insufficient evidence that any civilians were killed in that attack. What is happening with all of these other cases?

AZMAT KHAN: Right. That particular incident was an electrical substation in East Mosul, for which there was ample evidence of online. When I went on the ground and interviewed people, dozens of people, they said, "Just go online. You'll find the videos." And I did.

They showed children who were maimed and hurt. Some of their legs were blown off.

These young, young children, boys and girls—there is no doubt about whether or not they are civilians. And so this was readily available to the coalition, but in the coalition's own assessment of this incident, they concluded there was insufficient evidence.

Now, to speak to this excellent point about how so many survivors that I have met really don't have the resources or access or networks in the way that Basim did, to, for example, arrange an appointment at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, what I found repeatedly were people who couldn't even afford to rebuild their homes. Some people who couldn't afford to even seek necessary medical treatment.

One family in Mosul had three injured. They lost eight individuals in an airstrike last November in East Mosul. What they told me was that "we are still injured." And the women took me to a room in the back and one woman revealed her headscarf and pulled open a cap and you could actually see the skull on her—you could see the skull visible from the top. Another woman, her hand…

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: She had had no medical treatment since…

AZMAT KHAN: She had had no medical treatment. They needed really expensive surgeries. And ultimately what we did is we provided all of the coordinates of these airstrikes to both the coalition and to the U.S. Air Force after we had visited the base in Qatar, where many of these aircraft take off from. What they told us in the case of, for example, the incident I just described to you with these injured women who could not afford medical treatment, was in that case, they had conducted an airstrike just meters away on that day.

So this is very likely a coalition airstrike.

And these individuals, who often don't even have cell phones that are working all of the time, have very little means and access. And we have now turned over all of those allegations that were close to where the coalition reported coordinates to us. And we are waiting to hear a response to them about whether or not they are even going to investigate them.

AMY GOODMAN: And Azmat, when Basim went to the U.S. lawyer and he laid out all he had lost—this is outside of the agony of the loss of his family—his wife and daughter, his nephew, deeply close to him, and his brother next door—talked about what the houses were worth. He owns a downtown building in Mosul, said something like $500,000. And then they said altogether, $15,000 if he signs on the dotted line. How common is this? I mean, he is talking about, even this wouldn't have happened—though he has not gotten a letter that he is not part of ISIS, even if they say it to him privately. How typical is this?

AZMAT KHAN: So this is one of two condolence payment offers that have been offered in this entire anti-ISIS air war. So since August 2014, and some 27,000 airstrikes in both Iraq and Syria, this is one of two offers. This is the only offer that was made for a civilian death. The other offer that was made was for damage to a car in a separate airstrike, but not for a civilian. And so Basim has…

AMY GOODMAN: How much has been allocated?

AZMAT KHAN: So, every year, for the last two years, Congress has authorized $5 million dollars in funds to be used for payments like these. There have only been two offers made.

Basim is the only offer for a civilian death that has been made during that time. And in this case, the $15,000, just to give you a sense, it was his wife and daughter only—that is even higher than what they ordinarily offer, which is usually capped at $2,500 per death.

AMY GOODMAN: Did it have something to do with you being there?

AZMAT KHAN: Anand was actually in the meeting with them.

AMY GOODMAN: Anand, describe that meeting and your participation in it.

ANAND GOPAL: Yeah. I went with Basim to the meeting at the Erbil airport, and we didn't exactly know how much they would offer, although we expected that it's not going to be high. And in the meeting, the JAG officials explained that the offer they were going to make wasn't an offer of compensation, but of condolence.

And it was an important difference, because the U.S. military is not in the business of compensating civilians who have lost things. Because of course, the problem is, from their perspective, if they feel that they start compensating people for what they have lost, then they're going to start having to pay out hundreds of millions of dollars, and it would impede their very ability to wage a war. So instead, it is an offer of condolence, ultimately with the idea of not having Iraqis upset at them. That's the purpose here.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And what has been the reaction by the U.S. military, by the coalition, since your article came out?

ANAND GOPAL: Well, almost nothing, actually. We have been waiting to hear something from them. We gave them all of our essential findings way before the article was published—three or four weeks before—and asked them for comment on each specific individual allegation that was made in the piece. And we haven't heard a thing.

AMY GOODMAN: We're going to break and then come back to this discussion. Our guests are Azmat Khan and Anand Gopal, co-authors of The New York Times Magazinecover story called, The Uncounted. Basim Razzo is joining us from Erbil, Iraq, who lost his wife, daughter, brother, and nephew during a U.S. airstrike on his home in Mosul, Iraq, in 2015. We'll be back with them in a moment.

[MUSIC BREAK]

AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, Democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I'm Amy Goodman with Juan González, as we continue to spend the hour looking at a damning new report that reveals how U.S.-led airstrikes against Islamic State militants in Iraq have killed far more civilians than officials have acknowledged. The Pentagon claims 466 civilians have been killed in 89 airstrikes since 2014.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: But an on-the-ground investigation by The New York Times Magazinetitled The Uncounted found the actual civilian death toll is much higher than the U.S. is admitting. In fact, the report reveals that as many as one in five coalition airstrikes on ISIS targets in Iraq resulted in civilian deaths.

The reporters write, "To understand how radically different our assessment is from the coalition's own, consider this: According to the coalition's available data, 89 of its more than 14,000 airstrikes in Iraq have resulted in civilian deaths, or about one of every 157 strikes. The rate we found on the ground—one out of every five—is 31 times as high." For more, we're joined by the two reporters who co-authored this investigation titled The Uncounted.

Azmat Khan is an investigative journalist and a Future of War fellow at New America and Arizona State University. And Anand Gopal is an assistant research professor at Arizona State University and the author of No Good Men Among the Living. Also with us is Basim Razzo in Erbil, Iraq, via Democracy Now! video stream.

Basim Razzo, I'd like to begin with you. In our headlines today, we talked about—and I understand that he is in the dark right now because the electricity has gone out in his city. But his line is still working with us. I would like to ask you—in our headlines, we reported that the United States is going to end up spending trillions of dollars just in interest over the next decades on all of the military, the interventions in Iraq and Syria. I am wondering, when you hear this enormous amount of funds and yet you find that you are one of the few people, civilians, who suffered from a U.S. airstrike that has actually been offered any kind of payment, your reaction when you hear these enormous sums spent, and yet so little that the United States is setting aside for the victims of its mistaken attacks.

AMY GOODMAN: I think his light has just come on.

BASIM RAZZO: Yes, it just came on. Well, really, it is very upsetting because, actually, the first time I heard that the civilian life of an Iraqi killed was $2,500, which was really, really upsetting, I felt it was degrading. And I talked to one person—I said, "How would you feel, like if you are in an airplane accident in the United States, and you lost somebody you love, and the airline will give you $2,500 for it?" He said, "I would be outraged." I said, "How do you think I feel? My wife, daughter, brother, and nephew were killed by an airstrike, and they were innocent civilians, and now they offered me $15,000 for two people." I was outraged really by this amount. Very, very upset.

AMY GOODMAN: Anand Gopal, can you talk about the effect of this on Iraq? The far more—far greater number of civilians killed than the U.S. is willing to admit, as it says it is routing out ISIS, the so-called Islamic State?

ANAND GOPAL: Yeah. The U.S. has effectively defeated ISIS, but at the cost of destroying whole cities and leaving thousands, if not tens of thousands, of families completely broken. Mosul is an example in which at least half of the city of Mosul is nearly in rubble. And these are not accidents in the sense that we would normally think about it.

These are policy decisions. For instance, in Mosul, the city of Mosul was surrounded and civilians and ISIS fighters were not allowed to leave the city in an exit corridor, which was one of the conditions which induced ISIS to take civilians hostage and led to extraordinary numbers of civilian casualties.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And Azmat, you had mentioned that your study area was East Mosul, but really some of the worst damage was in West Mosul, and you think that the casualty figures may actually be much higher than even your study shows?

AZMAT KHAN: Yes. Not just because we didn't include West Mosul, but also because these airstrikes that we were serving—the 103 in that sample—occurred before a rule change that stated last December, under President Obama, that authorized more ground commanders, to be able to call in and approve airstrikes. And many believe that this was one of the reasons why we saw a spike in civilian casualties from these airstrikes.

But I also want to point out what we found to be a lack of ability to investigate properly by the coalition. What we found repeatedly during the course of our investigation is not just that they were not necessarily locating evidence or verifying evidence for allegations, but also that they sometimes lacked the information to even determine sometimes whether an airstrike was a coalition airstrike or their own.

In the 103 coordinates, and even more than that, that we passed on, we were told sometimes, "Listen, this particular airstrike was not us. It is unlikely to be us. The nearest airstrike we carried out was as far as 600 meters away." But then we would find coalition videos uploaded by the coalition itself showing those airstrikes in the places that we had pinpointed, or in that area.

And when we followed up about it, we were told "We can only tell you what the log shows." And we had this happen on several occasions. And what it shows you is that their logs are incomplete or what they're searching is incomplete. And the number one reason that they cite when they deny a civilian casualty allegation is that they have no record of a coalition airstrike taking place in a geographic area. And that casts doubt on their credibility investigations so far.

AMY GOODMAN: Have they taken down all these YouTube videos?

AZMAT KHAN: They took down videos from YouTube. These videos still—and to distinguish, they still exist on other military websites, but YouTube was the one place where people could comment.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: So in other words, to follow up on this, what you're suggesting is that the actual record keeping, the logs of where the attacks occurred, are sometimes incorrect, which could either mean, one, just sloppy log keeping by the soldiers involved, or deliberate reports of the wrong coordinates for an attack?

AZMAT KHAN: It really is troubling that these records were not kept in a way that was conducive to accurately investigating or investigating properly, because what we were told when I visited Qatar and I went to the Combined Air Operations Center, is that "We have 100 percent authority over where we drop our weapons. We know exactly where they are landing." And that turned out in some cases not to be true.

AMY GOODMAN: The U.S. military says it is the most precise war and targeting that they have ever engaged in. We only have a minute, and we want to give that minute to the focus of your story, though you tell many. As we talk about what has happened to Basim Razzo, your final comment, your message to the world?

BASIM RAZZO: Well, I want to add just one more thing in this one minute. Just like Azmat said, because there was no exit corridor for ISIS, they were forced to stay in the city and fight. And the excessive use of force, because some—probably one member of ISIS would be on top of a roof of a building—just remember, Azmat, the guy we met from [inaudible] family. There were two numbers of ISIS on his roof, and the whole house was bombed. This was excessive use of force.

My friends in Mosul told me of really precision bombing on small cars and only the car will be hit. But when you want to kill one person, you demolish a whole house? This is really terrible. I'm sorry for all the loss that has happened. I really would like the Americans to restudy their strategy of using this precision [inaudible].

AMY GOODMAN: We are going to have to leave it there. I thank you so much for being with us, Basim Razzo, from Erbil, Iraq, and Azmat Khan, and Anand Gopal. We will link to their story, The Uncounted. I'm Amy Goodman, with Juan González. Thanks so much for joining us.

The original content of this program is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. Please attribute legal copies of this work to democracynow.org. Some of the work(s) that this program incorporates, however, may be separately licensed. For further information or additional permissions, contact us.

Palestine Now Documentary 2017

Palestine Now Documentary 2017

Harassment and sex sells?

THE ABSURD TIMES

Harassment and sex sells?

THIS CAME FIRST, THEN

This came.

This is Supposed to be about Substance?

So welcome to the new level of political and moral dialogue in our country.  For from attempting to blame the victim, the attacks on Al Franken seem a bit overdone when the activities of Republicans and some other Political figures of both parties and those simply motivated by greed (business).  Well, he apologized, she accepted, he called for an ethics investigation (which would not apply as he was not a member of the Senate at the time), and is clearly not a serialist [Yeas, it's my word].   We have no right to be more outraged than the victim.

Still, our noble leader was busy tweeting during his morning constipation routine [we suppose] and wrote about "Al Frankenstien …," and we can only assume he was not conversant with Mary Shelley's Novel and the correct spelling of Frankenstein."  Of course, it may have been one of those typos or covfefe moments.  At the same time, he feels that the voters of Alabama should make up their minds so he is not going to comment on something like that.   

On the other hand, we have Roy Moore, but he is a Republican and from Alabama.   He never dated before he asked the mother's consent, he said.  I try to imagine the mother, this 33 year old guy comes up, and says "I want to date your 14 year old daughter," then I remember it's Alabama?  The number keeps growing.

Perhaps there should be stricter laws guarding the safety of potted plants, as they seem to be the physical recipients of the abuse of guys who like to masturbate in front on women.  Save the plants!

Then we still have our President's behavior and there is a list of perhaps 20 accusers there and growing. 

I still wonder where these guys get this kind of strange energy.  Oh well.

Anybody remember Yemen?  Malnutrition, starvation, cholera, amputations, mass murders, all made possible by us?

Anybody remember Turkey?  It came up during the questioning of Sessions as Mike Flynn seems to have agreed to kidnap this cleric in Pennsylvania and send him to Erdogan in Turkey.  Maybe it's time for a sign like this:

Give it a real Christian flavor?

After all, Joseph was a pederast with Mary and we got Jesus.  I know you're all upset, but hey, this is actually Ray Moore's brother defending Ray Moore!   But, then, it is Alabama.

At any rate, lots of fun stuff happening, but we just do not care.  Tuition waivers are proposed to be taxable income in the new Republican "reform".  The word itself has become frightening.

Another time.

THE TALKING DOG

And I have to thank him here. :)

A guy is driving around the back woods of Montana and he sees a sign in front of a broken down shanty-style house:

Talking Dog For Sale 

He rings the bell and the owner appears and tells him the dog is in the backyard.

The guy goes around to the backyard and sees a nice looking Labrador retriever sitting there.

" You talk? " he asks.

" Yep," the Lab replies.

After the guy recovers from the shock of hearing a dog talk, he says:

 " So, what's your story ? "

The Lab looks up and says:

 " Well, I discovered that I could talk when I was pretty young. 

I wanted to help the government, so ... I told the CIA.

In no time at all they had me jetting from country to country, sitting in rooms with spies and world leaders, because no one figured a dog would be eavesdropping. "

" I was one of their most valuable spies for eight years running.

" But the jetting around really tired me out, and I knew I wasn't getting any younger so I decided to settle down. 

I signed up for a job at the airport to do some undercover security, wandering near suspicious characters and listening in. 

I uncovered some incredible dealings and was awarded a batch of medals."

" Then I got married, had a mess of puppies, and now I'm just plain retired. "

The guy is amazed. 

He goes back in and asks the owner what he wants for the dog.

" Ten dollars,' the guy says.

" Ten dollars ? 

This dog is amazing! 

Why on earth are you selling him so cheap ? "

" Because he's such a bullshitter.  

He's never even been out of the backyard "

PARADISE PAPERS OR WHAT MONEY?

THE ABSURD TIMES

NATIONS ARE OBSOLETE

"Tax?  Tax what?  I'm broke!"

With all the nonsense about Russia interfering in our election, these Paradise Papers reveal what is really in control of the world.  We can play all we want about borders and immigrants and Parties, but it is all the banks these days.

Here is a discussion of it.  Again, it is just one more thing we always suspected, but just hadn't documented. 

This weekend, a slew of 13.4 million leaked documents revealed how the world's richest men stash away billions of dollars in wealth in offshore tax havens. The revelations, known as the Paradise Papers, implicate more than a dozen of President Trump's Cabinet members, advisers and major donors. The 13.4 million leaked documents also reveal how millions of pounds of the British queen's private estate were hidden in an offshore fund based in the Cayman Islands, and how the senior adviser to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau helped funnel millions of dollars to offshore tax havens. For more, we speak with Frederik Obermaier, co-author of the Paradise Papers. He is an investigative reporter at Germany's leading newspaper, Süddeutsche Zeitung. Obermaier also worked on a separate investigation, the Panama Papers, and is co-author of the book "Panama Papers: The Story of a Worldwide Revelation."

---

Transcript

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMY GOODMAN: We end today's show with a slew of shocking revelations about how the world's richest people stash away billions of dollars in wealth in offshore tax havens. The revelations, known as the Paradise Papers, implicate more than a dozen of President Trump's Cabinet members, advisers and major donors, among them Wilbur Ross, who's continued to conduct business with Vladimir Putin's son-in-law through a shipping company, even after Ross became Trump's commerce secretary. The shipping company, Navigator Holdings, is also linked to a Russian oligarch subject to U.S. sanctions.

The papers also show President Trump's Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was the director of a Bermuda-incorporated oil and gas company linked to ExxonMobil which ran a controversial scheme to export tens of millions of barrels of natural gas from the oil fields in western Yemen.

Trump's chief economic adviser, Gary Cohn, served as president or vice president of 22 separate companies based in Bermuda between 2002 and 2006, while he was at Goldman Sachs. The registered addresses of all 22 Bermuda-based companies were 85 Broad Street in Manhattan, then the headquarters of Goldman Sachs.

Even the Trump administration's top banking watchdog, Randal Quarles, vice chair for supervision at the Federal Reserve, was the officer of two separate firms based in the Cayman Islands. The 13.4 million leaked files also implicate Trump's Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin; Jon Huntsman, Trump's new U.S. ambassador to Russia; and Carl Icahn, Trump's billionaire former adviser.

They also reveal how millions of pounds of the British queen's private estate were hidden in an offshore fund based in the Cayman Islands, and how the senior adviser to the Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau helped funnel millions of dollars to offshore tax havens.

The documents also take aim at the world's biggest companies, showing how Nike and Apple avoid taxes and how Facebook and Twitter received hundreds of millions of dollars linked to the Russian state.

The files [were] obtained by reporters at the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitungand then shared with International Consortium of Investigative Journalists. The files were then analyzed by more than 380 journalists from over 90 media organizations across 67 countries.

For more, we're joined by Frederik Obermaier, co-author of the Paradise Papers, investigative reporter at Germany's leading newspaper, also worked on the Panama Papers investigation and is co-author of the book Panama Papers: The Story of a Worldwide Revelation.

Well, we do not have much time, Frederik, but if you could just start off by explaining how these papers were released, and then talk about some of the most outstanding examples within it, who this is implicating?

FREDERIK OBERMAIER: Hello. We started the Paradise Papers investigation more than a year ago. And it was the results—the first results were published yesterday noon or noonish U.S. East Coast time. The Paradise Papers show actually how the super-richest and how corporates hide their money offshore. Sometimes it's illegal. Sometimes it's still legal, but I think it's still illegitimate, because hiding and avoiding taxes means that there's money going away, money that our countries need, our societies need, for example, to building universities, to build streets, to build schools. So, I think this is a global problem. It's a problem in the U.S., but also in the European Union. And I think there's, therefore, a global approach needed.

AMY GOODMAN: So, can you talk about some of the most stunning findings in this, what you were most shocked by?

FREDERIK OBERMAIER: I was really surprised of the huge extent of how people being very close to Donald Trump being involved in offshore dealings. I think the case from Wilbur Ross shocked me the most, because we all know that there was—he was already questioned in regards to how he disinvested, but, I mean, nobody was aware of his connection to Russia. And, I mean, he now claims that the company, Navigator Holdings, where he is still holding some interest, that he didn't know that they—that the company they did business with in Russia, a company called SIBUR, that there is—one stakeholder is or one shareholder is, for example, Vladimir Putin's son-in-law or the oligarch Timchenko. And I think I must admit that from a secretary of commerce, I would expect to at least know this, to research it. And I think it shows a huge conflict of interest that, in my opinion, should now be investigated.

AMY GOODMAN: Now, explain, because the commerce secretary, when questioned, said he was divesting from his holdings. So, what does the Paradise Papers show?

FREDERIK OBERMAIER: The Paradise Papers show that he indeed did disinvest from most of his companies, but that he kept—even after becoming secretary of commerce, that he kept, via a chain of offshore companies, interest in Navigator Holdings and that he didn't disinvest from that one. And given the current debate in the U.S. about Russia's influence in the U.S., I think it is very important to have a close look at what went on there and that not only media, but also authorities and investigators, should have a look on that one.

AMY GOODMAN: You also uncovered, for example, Rex Tillerson, the secretary of state; Steve Mnuchin. Explain what you found.

FREDERIK OBERMAIER: Well, in the case of Mr. Mnuchin, it is interesting that his former bank, the CIT Bank, that they help their customers to set up structures, when they, for example, bought airplanes, to set up structures to avoid taxes. And this is things we have seen in many cases, and we have already seen that millions of dollars of taxes are avoided through such structures. And given the fact that nearly every country of the world needs money, needs tax money, to—basically, to keep up the infrastructure, keep up universities and schools running, I think this is something the public should be well aware of, that in the Trump government, in the Trump administration, there are many people with offshore ties and that this is something they should have a close look to.

AMY GOODMAN: And very quickly, the companies, like Apple and others, what role the Paradise Papers exposes them playing?

FREDERIK OBERMAIER: The Paradise Papers show that those multinational companies are looking for—to find always a loophole in the global tax system. So, when one loophole is closed, they try to find another one. They try to keep their taxes as low as possible. And it is countries like the U.S. that basically miss the taxes. So, for example, if—when a company like Nike sets up a complicated structure in the tax haven of the Netherlands, this actually means that it is a huge amount of taxes that the U.S. state misses.

AMY GOODMAN: Frederik Obermaier, we're going to have to leave it there now, but we're going to do Part 2 and post it online at democracynow.org. He's co-author of the Paradise Papers. I'm Amy Goodman. Happy birthday, Andre Lewis!

In Part 2 of this conversation, Frederik, can you start off by explaining why it's called the Paradise Papers?

FREDERIK OBERMAIER: Well, actually, when we speak about tax havens, at least in Europe, we always speak about tax paradises. And as the Paradise Papers are not like the Panama Papers, focused on only one offshore provider, but on two offshore providers and the company registries of 19 tax havens, we thought that the title Paradise Papers would basically bring all these topics together, because the Paradise Papers shed light on around about a fifth of all global secrecy jurisdictions. So it is many of—we show how many tax paradises are in reality tax—a tax hell.

AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to go to a clip of the commerce secretary, Wilbur Ross, speaking during his confirmation hearing earlier this year.

WILBUR ROSS: I intend to be quite scrupulous about recusal in any topic where there's the slightest scintilla of doubt.

AMY GOODMAN: He'll go to recusal if there's the slightest scintilla of some kind of conflict of interest. Frederik Obermaier, what does the Paradise Papers show about him?

FREDERIK OBERMAIER: The Paradise Papers show that there is indeed a huge conflict of interest in the case of Wilbur Ross, because if you profit from basically business activities with a Russian company that is owned by individuals very close to Vladimir Putin, in my opinion, that's a huge conflict of interest. And that's something Wilbur Ross should have made public before becoming secretary. So, I think there are—

AMY GOODMAN: Explain—explain exactly what you mean.

FREDERIK OBERMAIER: —lots of questions open that he should answer now.

AMY GOODMAN: Explain exactly what you mean. I think you're referring to Vladimir Putin's son-in-law. Explain the business that Wilbur Ross has with him.

FREDERIK OBERMAIER: Well, Vladimir Putin's son-in-law, Kirill Shamalov, owns shares of a company called Sibur. That's a company that is dealing, for example, in gas. And they rented ships of Navigator Holdings. So, actually, Navigator Holdings made a fortune by doing business with Sibur. And Wilbur Ross owns, via—indirectly owns, via a chain of offshore companies, owns shares in Navigator Holdings. So this means he actually profits from doing business with Putin's son-in-law.

And given the situation that we currently do face in the U.S., that there's a debate about Russia's interference in the U.S. election and Russia's role in the U.S., this is something that, in my opinion, raises suspicions, and it should at least have been made public. In my opinion, Mr. Ross should have stated clearly that there is this interest he still kept in Navigator Holdings. And he should have been aware with which companies Navigator Holdings is doing business, because Sibur is not one among hundreds of customers of Navigator Holdings, it's one of the biggest customers. And, I mean, Mr. Ross, or at least his ministry, yesterday announced in a statement that he would not have been aware of the shareholders in Sibur. I, myself, ask the question—well, you should only have looked on their homepage. This is not hidden information. On the homepage of Sibur, you find the name of Kirill Shamalov.

AMY GOODMAN: I want to turn to Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, who we also discussed for a moment in Part 1 of our conversation. During his confirmation hearing earlier this year, the former Goldman Sachs executive defended himself against accusations he used a tax haven in the Cayman Islands in order to avoid paying taxes.

STEVEN MNUCHIN: Let me just be clear again: I did not use the Cayman Island entity in any way to avoid taxes for myself. I paid U.S. taxes on all that income, OK? So, there was no benefit to me from the Cayman entity. As I said, the Cayman entity was set up to accommodate nonprofit and pension funds that want to invest through offshore in a certain number of offshore—

AMY GOODMAN: So, Frederik Obermaier, can you respond to what Mnuchin said, now that you know what you know from the Paradise Papers?

FREDERIK OBERMAIER: Well, in his case, if we look closely, we do see that the bank he worked for before, that they actively helped their customers to go offshore, meaning that they helped them to set up complex structures to avoid taxes, for example, to be paid when you buy an airplane. So, even if he did not personally benefit from it, the bank he worked for actively helped to set up such structures. And I think this is also something that should be public, that he should have addressed, because, I mean, helping to set up those structures means also to help people to not pay taxes, for example, in countries like the U.S.

AMY GOODMAN: Goldman Sachs, the address, 85 Broad Street, links to Trump's chief economic adviser, Gary Cohn, who served as president or vice president of 22 companies based in Bermuda between 2002 and 2006, while he was at Goldman Sachs. The registered addresses of all 22 Bermuda-based companies were 86 Broad Street in Manhattan, then the headquarters of Goldman Sachs.

FREDERIK OBERMAIER: Well, it shows again that within the Trump administration there are many people and many individuals that did either do offshore business or helped others to do so. And given the fact that Mr. Trump tries to promote get corporations back to the U.S., back from secrecy jurisdictions, I think this shows—or at least I would question if everyone in his administration really supports this course. And in my opinion, it shows again that so many richest and powerful businessmen did offshore business activities. And this is something that needs to be investigated by the public, by journalists, because it's an important issue.

I personally do see a danger for democracy, if there is a small minority, a small elite, that can afford to go offshore and therefore avoid or evade taxes, but at the same time that the majority does have to pay taxes. And if they have the feeling there is the rich 1 percent that doesn't stick to the same rules as they have, this may help populist movements to grow even bigger than they are already now.

AMY GOODMAN: And what does the queen of England have to do with this story?

FREDERIK OBERMAIER: Well, the queen of England actually, I suppose without her knowing it, indirectly invested in offshore funds. So, when we and other colleagues approached her and her officials, they claimed that they would have not known where actually the investment went to. And as far as 'til now, we don't have any contradictory information that she would have really personally known where she's investing to. But it shows that if you do invest money, you should have a close look where you do invest, because many of the world—a big amount of the money invested worldwide is funded through secrecy jurisdictions. And this is, of course, something the public should know and the public should discuss.

AMY GOODMAN: And finally, I know you have to go off to another interview, but I wanted to ask you about what happened last month in Malta. The investigative journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia was assassinated when a powerful bomb planted in her car exploded near her home in the Mediterranean island nation. She spent much of her time over the last two years reporting on revelations about Malta from the Panama Papers, that trove of more than 11 million leaked files that reveal how the rich and powerful in a number of countries used tax havens to hide their wealth. No claim of responsibility for the blast, although local media reported that Galizia filed a police report in early October to report on death threats. Can you talk about her assassination?

FREDERIK OBERMAIER: Well, Daphne Galizia was a brave journalist who stood up in Malta in the fight against corruption, fighting for more transparency. She was very outspoken, and she addressed a few issues many people in the government in Malta did not want to speak about. She was, I think, not an easy—like an easy reporter to deal with for Maltese—for the Maltese government and businessmen, because she always pointed her finger where it hurts. And it is a tragic loss that she was killed, but I personally do hope that other Maltese journalists now keep up the work and do investigate the stories she worked on before she was killed.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, I want to thank you for being with us, Frederik Obermaier, co-author of the Paradise Papers, investigative reporter at Germany's leading newspaper, Süddeutsche Zeitung.Obermaier also worked on the separate investigation, Panama Papers, and co-authored the book Panama Papers: The Story of a Worldwide Revelation. Thanks so much for being here.

The Deep Establishment

THE ABSURD TIMES

Last week, the Earl of Sandwich was born.  He invented the sandwich.  So much for the good news.

TIME TO SPEAK TRUTH TO STUPID

A short time ago, someone posted an update on a new bombing of Yemen.  I sarcastically said "At least they didn't use a pick-up", as I was fresh from talking about the fuss made over "Allah Akbar" or "Allu Akbar" in NY.  Someone had wondered why we didn't talk about this crisis and I had just told him it was like the Las Vegas thing, now is not the time to talk.  So, when I saw that post, I reacted fresh from that discussion.  I had to explain where I stood on Yemen and then directed them to the site Absurdtimes.blogspot.com and suggest they look in the left column where all the topics were listed.  It was revealing.  I actually had about 12 there or more.  So, why am I bothering?  Well, these were all new followers or non followers I soon realized.   I SHOULD BE MORE CLEAR.  BTW: Anybody know what the vowel sound before Akbar should be? 

TAX BILL

A number of things seem worth mentioning.  Next time, we'll just post the discussion of the ex-Greek Financial Minister on the "Deep Establishment".  Out alt-right morons have adopted the term "Deep State" to describe whatever they don't like about whatever good the government can still do with the remnants of the New Deal, Roosevelt's program to rescue capitalism by adopting some of the Ideas of Eugene Debs, a Socialist, who ran for President and was therefore put in prison.   It actually made things better for people.  It also made rules against what banks could do.

One thing that makes the new Tax program possible is Trump's base, which right now supports him at even a lower popularity rate than Herbert Hoover's at the peak of the Great Depression that was made possible by the Republican Party.  Since the Democrat Party instituted the reforms of the New Deal, these banks that now control our lives managed to infiltrate that party as well,  That is what gave Hillary Clinton the nomination and is now belatedly admitted by Donna Brazil.  Donald Trump is happy to see it as it is a handy deflection from the Russia investigation.  The complaint that Bernie is not a registered Democrat is just a deflection, as his state does not really have a party designation option. 

It doesn't matter.  We have the new tax program now.  The idea being used is to get all the lower classes and bigots, the intellectual south, at one another's throats so that the upper one tenth of one percent can grab more of the money.  Class warfare is the real goal behind it all.  It is just not the workers against the rich, but precisely the opposite.  Soon after then next crash, a new wave of austerity with come as a result of the increased deficit and cuts in more new deal programs will become needed.  After all, it's only immigrants that need social security and Medicare, right?  [We still remember one moron shouting "keep your government hands off my Social Security" to Arlen Specter who promptly had to become a Democrat.] 

It is worth mentioning that for the amount that this will cost, the government could instead issue a check for $17,000 to every family in the U.S.  As my favorite Math teacher in High School used to say on occasion, "How about them apples?"  (Spit).

SEXUAL HARASSMENT

When the charges started recently against Bill Cosby, I really wondered what the hell was going on.  After all, a guy who was that influential and powerful probably had females trying desperately to sleep with him in return for some sort of advancement or just to be able to say the had done it.  I thought it was very unlikely.  Roger Ailes as a predator I could understand as he was so fat and ugly that nothing would want to even be touched by him.  We also had O'Reilly, Weinstein (Fox made a great deal of this because he was not right wing), Dustin Hoffman (really?), and Kevin Spacey who apparently was very drunk and lifted a 14 year old boy across to a bed and lay on top of him.  Spacey claims not to remember this 30 year old incident,  but does admit he is gay today.  The thing is, I still don't get it.

No, I'm not a novice in Psychology.  I have degrees and certifications and all that type of stuff and practiced as well.  I understand Paranoids, Schizophrenics, and so on.  I even understand that our President is a sociopath.  But what is the point of such harassment?  Well, go figure.  Everybody, listen up!  If you have been near someone in a position of power and you don't like them, go to the papers or news and tell them you were sexually harassed.  Men or women.  I'd claim it about Betsy DeVoss except I never met her.

And that brings up to another point.   How's this for a nightmare?  Watch the show DESIGNATED SURVIVOR.  It is about the one cabinet member who has to stay behind in case there is a great disaster during the State of the Union address.  Imagine it is Betsy DeVoss and she becomes President.  Well, why not?

TRUMP AS A REPUBLICAN

There is simply too much criticism of Trump not being a Republican.  It is true that once he said that if he ran for President it would be as a Republican because Republican voters are more stupid than the others, but he is learning.  He has even learned how to speak.  Do you Remember Dan Quayle saying that his visit to Latin America was so nice that he wished he has paid more attention in Latin Class in High School?  How about Georgie Bush talking about "Strategery"?  Well, Donald talked about the "Diverserary" as a sham making our justice system the laughing stock of the world.  He took it back saying that's what people are saying, despite all the tapes of him saying it.  

DNC

So, they made Perez head of the DNC instead of Ellison.  You will hear a great deal of BS about this in the days to come.  Again, this is merely an evolution from Eisenhower's warning about the "Military-Industrial Complex" to the "Financial Force" that has taken over.  It is so overwhelming that there is no point in even addressing it other than to say it is now the deep establishment.