World news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Colorado man suspected in wife’s death allegedly voted for Trump in her name

      by

      A Colorado man suspected in the death of his wife, who disappeared on Mother’s Day last year, is also accused of submitting a fraudulent vote on her behalf for Donald Trump in November’s presidential election, court documents show.Barry Morphew told investigators he mailed the ballot on behalf of his wife, Suzanne Morphew, to help Trump win, saying “all these other guys are cheating” and that he thought his wife would have voted for Trump anyway, according to an arrest warrant affidavit signed by a judge in Chaffee county.Trump and his supporters in the Republican party claim Joe Biden won the White House through mass electoral fraud – a lie repeatedly thrown out of court.In December, the Washington Post reported that “only a handful of cases” of actual voter fraud had “resulted in criminal charges alleging wrongdoing”.Some of the charges, it said, were “against Republican voters aiming to help Trump … including a man charged with trying to cast a ballot in Pennsylvania for the president in the name of his deceased mother”.In Colorado, Morphew, 53, faces possible first-degree murder and other charges in connection with the disappearance of Suzanne Morphew on 10 May last year. He was arrested on 5 May and is being held in connection with that case.Morphew posted a widely viewed video on Facebook pleading for his wife’s safe return shortly after she disappeared.Authorities say the arrest was the result of an investigation that has failed to find Suzanne Morphew’s body. After conducting more than 135 searches across Colorado and interviewing 400 people in multiple states, investigators believe she is dead but have not found her body, the Chaffee county sheriff, John Spezze, has said.An arrest affidavit by an Chaffee county sheriff’s detective sergeant, Claudette Hysjulien, says the county clerk’s office received a suspicious mail ballot in Suzanne Chaffee’s name in October.Sheriff’s investigators saw the ballot, which had been mailed by the state to Suzanne Chaffee, lacked Suzanne’s signature, as required by law. Barry Morphew had signed it as a witness.Morphew was interviewed by two FBI agents about the ballot in April. Asked why he sent it, he told the agents, “Just because I wanted Trump to win,” according to the affidavit. “I just thought, give him another vote.”Asked if he knew it was illegal to send someone else’s ballot, Morphew replied: “I didn’t know you couldn’t do that for your spouse.”The affidavit says Morphew faces two new counts: felony forgery and misdemeanor ballot fraud. On Friday, Morphew was being advised of the new charges in Chaffee county district court. More

    • 88 Shares149 Views

      in World Politics

      White America’s Burden in the Holy Land

      by

      Earlier this week, an Israeli military official evoked “a worst-case scenario” conducted by three Israeli infantry brigades that would amount to crushing Gaza on the ground rather than just bombarding it. Some observers have noticed that the current worse-than-ever-before-but-not-as-bad-as-what’s-to-come scenario has miraculously permitted Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, to hang on to power after the March 23 election deprived him of the hope of heading a new coalition.

      The Future of Jerusalem Matters to Us All

      READ MORE

      Washington Post reporter Steve Hendrix notes that “the escalation of fighting brought a last-minute reprieve from what could have been the end of [Netanyahu’s] record run at the top of Israeli politics.” Hendrix quotes Gayil Talshir, a professor at Hebrew University: “The riot came just in time to prevent the change of government in Israel.” Despite this “coincidence,” Hendrix avoids suggesting what some suspect: that Netanyahu’s policies and recent actions may have been designed to provoke the current crisis.

      Rather than delve into history, reflect on the meaning or explore possible hidden motives, Hendrix prefers the approach that Western media have long preferred: presenting the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a combined violent chess game and political popularity contest between two obdurate parties whose leaders are unwilling to compromise. Hendrix reduces an enduring historical drama of vast geopolitical dimensions to a petty game of leaders seeking electoral advantage by appealing to their base, à la Donald Trump. He calls the new wave of violence “a boon to the leaders of both camps — Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Hamas militants — who have been struggling and scraping to salvage their political standing.” That’s the kind of narrative that appeals to The Post’s readers living in their bubble within the Beltway. History be damned; this is electoral politics.

      .custom-post-from {float:right; margin: 0 10px 10px; max-width: 50%; width: 100%; text-align: center; background: #000000; color: #ffffff; padding: 15px 0 30px; }
      .custom-post-from img { max-width: 85% !important; margin: 15px auto; filter: brightness(0) invert(1); }
      .custom-post-from .cpf-h4 { font-size: 18px; margin-bottom: 15px; }
      .custom-post-from .cpf-h5 { font-size: 14px; letter-spacing: 1px; line-height: 22px; margin-bottom: 15px; }
      .custom-post-from input[type=”email”] { font-size: 14px; color: #000 !important; width: 240px; margin: auto; height: 30px; box-shadow:none; border: none; padding: 0 10px; background-image: url(“https://www.fairobserver.com/wp-content/plugins/moosend_form/cpf-pen-icon.svg”); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-position: center right 14px; background-size:14px;}
      .custom-post-from input[type=”submit”] { font-weight: normal; margin: 15px auto; height: 30px; box-shadow: none; border: none; padding: 0 10px 0 35px; background-color: #1878f3; color: #ffffff; border-radius: 4px; display: inline-block; background-image: url(“https://www.fairobserver.com/wp-content/plugins/moosend_form/cpf-email-icon.svg”); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-position: 14px center; background-size: 14px; }

      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox { width: 90%; margin: auto; position: relative; display: flex; flex-wrap: wrap;}
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox label { text-align: left; display: block; padding-left: 32px; margin-bottom: 0; cursor: pointer; font-size: 11px; line-height: 18px;
      -webkit-user-select: none;
      -moz-user-select: none;
      -ms-user-select: none;
      user-select: none;
      order: 1;
      color: #ffffff;
      font-weight: normal;}
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox label a { color: #ffffff; text-decoration: underline; }
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox input { position: absolute; opacity: 0; cursor: pointer; height: 100%; width: 24%; left: 0;
      right: 0; margin: 0; z-index: 3; order: 2;}
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox input ~ label:before { content: “f0c8”; font-family: Font Awesome 5 Free; color: #eee; font-size: 24px; position: absolute; left: 0; top: 0; line-height: 28px; color: #ffffff; width: 20px; height: 20px; margin-top: 5px; z-index: 2; }
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox input:checked ~ label:before { content: “f14a”; font-weight: 600; color: #2196F3; }
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox input:checked ~ label:after { content: “”; }
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox input ~ label:after { position: absolute; left: 2px; width: 18px; height: 18px; margin-top: 10px; background: #ffffff; top: 10px; margin: auto; z-index: 1; }
      .custom-post-from .error{ display: block; color: #ff6461; order: 3 !important;}

      The New York Times came closer to signaling Netanyahu’s implication in the current troubles. Isabel Kershner cites centrist opposition leader Yair Lapid, who “blamed the prime minister for the spiraling sense of chaos.” Kershner focuses on the likelihood that Israel will at some point in the near future have a coalition government including Mansour Abbas’ Islamic Raam party, which would mark a monumental change in Israeli politics. In the end, however, Kershner appears to believe that it’s still Netanyahu who will emerge from the rubble as the leader of whatever unstable political coalition he can cobble together.

      As the violence escalates, the world wonders what US President Joe Biden intends to do. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken was the first to express the administration’s take, which for the moment sounds like an endorsement of the status quo: “There is, first, a very clear and absolute distinction between a terrorist organization, Hamas, that is indiscriminately raining down rockets, in fact, targeting civilians, and Israel’s response, defending itself.” The idea that Biden’s administration might try, for once, to play the role of honest broker would seem dead in the coastal waters of Gaza.

      Blinken’s recognition of Palestinian suffering only appeared when he claimed that Israel has “an extra burden.” This, of course, implies that its main burden consists of “targeting terrorists” in response to indiscriminately launched rockets. The “extra burden” consists of trying “to prevent civilian deaths, noting that Palestinian children have been killed in Israeli strikes.”

      Today’s Daily Devil’s Dictionary definition:

      Extra burden:

      A responsibility supplementing the one Rudyard Kipling famously identified as “the white man’s burden,” which consisted of dominating “sullen peoples, Half devil and half child,” the kind of people who for their amusement launch rockets indiscriminately at white people.

      Contextual Note

      Thanks to the growing realization that Israel is firmly set on maintaining an apartheid state, for the first time in decades, US politicians have begun to wonder whether it makes any sense to continue the nation’s unconditional support of every Israeli government. Israel has continued expanding its illegal settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories in direct violation of UN resolutions and the Geneva Convention. The current troubles began with Israel’s brazen attempt to evict Palestinian families from their homes in East Jerusalem and replace them with Jewish settlers, followed by the storming of Al-Aqsa Mosque.

      For Blinken, the social and historical context of these events simply doesn’t exist. He wants people to believe it all started with the launching of rockets by the Palestinians. Nor do context and historical reality interest Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III, who insisted that details are irrelevant when the US has vowed “‘ironclad support’ for Israel’s right to defend itself.” This is totally consistent with Biden’s promise, in a phone call this week to Netanyahu, of “unwavering support” for Israel’s “right to defend itself.”

      Blinken showed less concern for the possible war crimes now taking place than for the bad PR they might generate. “[W]henever we see civilian casualties, and particularly when we see children caught in the crossfire losing their lives, that has a powerful impact,” he said. Blinken worries about what “we see” and its  “impact” in the media. This implies that if we didn’t see it and if the impact was reduced, all would be well. Ignorance is bliss.

      Biden reinforced everyone’s expectation that there would be nothing new under the shining sun of US diplomacy when he offered this comment: “My hope is that we will see this coming to a conclusion sooner than later.” What conclusion is he thinking of? And why is an American president just hoping that something good will happen? Why isn’t he intervening to facilitate not a “conclusion” but a resolution? Some will point out that every US president’s hands are tied by a status quo that holds as its first commandment, thou shalt never criticize Israel, its leaders or its policies.

      Historical Note

      Following World War II, Western nations assumed the entire civilization’s shame at the crimes of Nazi Germany. The British used the newly created United Nations as the instrument by which the West could atone for Germany’s racist sins through the creation of the state of Israel in 1948. 

      Once that was done, the die was cast. The West, led by the British — who had assumed “responsibility” for the region of the former Ottoman Empire — decided how and at whose expense (not their own) the surviving European Jews might be rewarded. Giving them Palestine seemed like the easy way out for the Western world as a whole. The British wanted out anyway. It also had the advantage of establishing a state in the Middle East whose culture would be basically Western and European.

      Embed from Getty Images

      Neither the British, the Americans nor the French — all in various ways implicated in the new order to be established in the Middle East — imagined that Israel would evolve to become an aggressive nation increasingly focused on bullying its neighbors and claiming its own particular version of exceptionalism. French President Charles de Gaulle was the first to notice it, on the occasion of the Six-Day War in 1967. Western leaders may have naively believed that the same Arabs who allowed themselves to be bullied by the Turks for centuries would accept with docility the rule of their new masters, who claimed to be building a modern nation on socialist and egalitarian principles.

      In the first decade of Israel’s existence, the US refused to identify with the new nation’s interests, notably during the Suez Crisis in 1956 in which the Eisenhower administration countered the Franco-British alliance. It also viewed with hostility the presumed socialist ideology of Israel. At the time, the WASP (white Anglo-Saxon Protestant) elite maintained a lingering anti-Semitic bias. But as the Cold War evolved and the importance of the oil economy grew, leading to increasing tensions between the West and the Muslim world, by the 1980s, the US was on track formulating its current “unconditional,” “iron-clad” alliance with Israel.

      This gradual evolution toward a position of increasingly blind support of Israel has had a profound influence on Western media in its reporting on the enduring, increasingly unresolvable conflict between the Jewish state and its Arab inhabitants. Western news media have largely accepted the role of encouraging their audience to sympathize with white, essentially European and American Israelis who feel threatened in an alien, hostile Orient.

      Greg Philo in The Guardian shows that an analysis of Western media in its reporting on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has, for decades, reflected “a strong emphasis on Israeli perspectives.” What better illustration than yesterday’s Washington Post: “Israeli jets strike Gaza; Hamas launches rockets as Israeli ground troops stand by”?

      *[In the age of Oscar Wilde and Mark Twain, another American wit, the journalist Ambrose Bierce, produced a series of satirical definitions of commonly used terms, throwing light on their hidden meanings in real discourse. Bierce eventually collected and published them as a book, The Devil’s Dictionary, in 1911. We have shamelessly appropriated his title in the interest of continuing his wholesome pedagogical effort to enlighten generations of readers of the news. Read more of The Daily Devil’s Dictionary on Fair Observer.]

      The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in World Politics

      Why the US Will Not Achieve Herd Immunity

      by

      The problem with the COVID-19 pandemic is that we don’t know if we’re coming or going. It’s as if we’re swimming far from shore, overwhelmed by one wave after another, and we’re unsure if we’re heading toward land or away from it.

      China was the early face of COVID-19, but it hasn’t faced many infections since spring 2020. Europe, like the United States, has experienced successive outbreaks. Brazil continues to be hit hard, while Turkey is seeing a reduction of cases from a mid-April surge. Thailand and Cambodia are only now dealing with their first major upticks in the disease.

      Where India Went Wrong

      READ MORE

      But the real surprise has been India. Early on in the pandemic, journalists and scientists were trying to figure out why the coronavirus had made so little mark on the subcontinent and left so few deaths in its wake. Now, after a collective sigh of relief following a modest surge in late summer and fall last year, India is now overwhelmed by over 400,000 cases and more than 4,000 deaths a day, which are both likely to be undercounts.

      There are several reasons for India’s current catastrophe. A more infectious variant started to appear in the population, which the World Health Organization this week labeled a global health risk. The Indian government was not only unprepared for the crisis, but it was dangerously cavalier in its approach to the disease. After last year’s surge, it grew lax on testing and contact tracing. Nor did it put resources into the country’s inadequate medical system or in stockpiling key supplies like oxygen.

      Embed from Getty Images

      Then there are the errors of commission. The government did nothing, for instance, to prevent Kumbh Mela, a Hindu religious event last month that drew millions of pilgrims to a holy location on the Ganges, from turning into the largest super-spreader event on the planet. Prime Minister Narendra Modi even continued to hold mass political rallies as the COVID numbers began to rise.

      When it comes to vaccines, the government has been slow to order doses, distribute them to the population and secure the raw materials to scale up manufacturing. Although India is the world’s largest producer of COVID vaccines, less than 3% of Indians are fully inoculated against the disease.

      Well, that’s India, you might be saying to yourself. They have a Trump-like fanatic for a leader. Their medical system has long been inadequate. It’s an obvious place for COVID to have a final encore.

      In the United States, meanwhile, the number of cases has fallen dramatically since January. Hospitals no longer face overcrowding. More than a third of the population is fully vaccinated. The Biden administration is expecting that the country will return to some semblance of normality this July. But wasn’t it a similar complacency that proved India’s undoing? So, is India the ghost of America’s past or a taste of things to come.

      Our Herd Problem

      In early 2020, the scientific community went into hyperdrive to develop not one but several vaccines against COVID-19. In the US, the government and the medical community worked overtime to set up the infrastructure to get doses into arms around the country. Clinics and volunteers have jumped into action at a community level to make sure, as of this week, that 58% of adults have gotten at least one shot and over 70% of those older than 65 are fully vaccinated.

      But all this effort is now hitting up against resistance. Or hesitancy. Or barriers to access. States are cutting back on their vaccine orders from the federal authorities. Daily vaccination rates have dropped nearly 20% from last week. Employers are basically bribing people to get their shots. Millions of people aren’t even bothering to show up for their second doses.

      Barriers to access is perhaps the easiest problem to address. According to a recent survey, 72% of African-Americans and Latinos want to get vaccinated, but 63% reported that they didn’t have enough information about where to get a shot.

      While lack of information may well be the reason why some Americans have yet to sign up for their vaccinations, a hard-core resistance has developed to vaccines in this country — and COVID vaccines in particular. According to polling in April, around 45% of Republicans report that they’ll never get the vaccine. In all, as much as 37% of Americans are now saying that they’re going to opt-out. That means that tens of millions of doses are now chasing the remaining 5% of Americans who want to be vaccinated and haven’t yet gotten their first shot.

      Embed from Getty Images

      This resistance has nothing to do with a lack of information about how to sign up for a shot. It’s all about misinformation: that the vaccine is unnecessary, that it’s dangerous, that it comes with a microchip that will track you forever.

      Recently, Republican pollster Frank Luntz set up a focus group of vaccination-hesitant, Donald Trump voters to see what it would take to convince them to get shots. It was not an easy crowd. The husband of one of the participants had gotten seriously ill from COVID — and she stilldidn’t want to get vaccinated. In over two hours of discussion, Luntz brought in such vaccine-boosters as a former head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Senator Bill Cassidy, and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy — and still, the participants barely budged.

      Only after several emotional stories from former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie and a final round of facts from the CDC official did they start to change their minds. “I would say I was probably 80% against when this started today,” one man said. “Now I’m probably 50-50-ish.”

      Luntz considered that a success. But in this age of Twitter, it’s not a workable model to expect skeptics to sit still for more than two hours while Republican Party grandees and noted doctors barrage one small group after another with stories and facts.

      A more representative reaction to such attempts by Republican Party influencers is what happened when Ivanka Trump posted selfies of her own vaccination. Twitter responses included: “‘Love your family but this is a huge NO for me & my family. Will be praying you do not get any of the horrible [side-effects].’ Others replied, ‘Please stop promoting this nonsense,’ ‘HARD PASS,’ and ‘Sorry, don’t trust it.’”

      Even more concerning, some anti-vaxxers are already planning to use fake vaccination cards to get into public events. Hundreds of sellers have appeared on eBay, Facebook and Twitter to hawk such cards. In this way, “live free or die” is quickly becoming “live free and kill.”

      In a nutshell, the US won’t achieve herd immunity because a significant portion of the herd is suffering from mad cow disease. Whatever the reasons for this obstinacy — anti-government, anti-science, anti-liberal — it will ensure that large pockets of this country will continue to play host to a very infectious disease.

      This resistance potentially puts the US in the same category as the Seychelles. An island nation in the Indian Ocean, the Seychelles has the highest rate of vaccination in the world. More than 60% of the population is fully vaccinated. But that still hasn’t been enough to ward off COVID. The Seychelles is now experiencing its largest outbreak, which, on a per capita basis, is even larger than what has overtaken India.

      The same thing might happen again in America, for instance in states with very low vaccination rates, like Mississippi and Idaho. When it comes to COVID-19, the US is only as strong as its weakest links.

      Perennial Pandemic

      When I lived in New York City, I used to wonder why my apartment was so overheated in the winter. It turns out that the heating systems in old buildings had been designed (or redesigned) to accommodate open windows in winter. During the flu pandemic in 1918-19, open windows and greater circulation of air were supposed to guard against infection.

      .custom-post-from {float:right; margin: 0 10px 10px; max-width: 50%; width: 100%; text-align: center; background: #000000; color: #ffffff; padding: 15px 0 30px; }
      .custom-post-from img { max-width: 85% !important; margin: 15px auto; filter: brightness(0) invert(1); }
      .custom-post-from .cpf-h4 { font-size: 18px; margin-bottom: 15px; }
      .custom-post-from .cpf-h5 { font-size: 14px; letter-spacing: 1px; line-height: 22px; margin-bottom: 15px; }
      .custom-post-from input[type=”email”] { font-size: 14px; color: #000 !important; width: 240px; margin: auto; height: 30px; box-shadow:none; border: none; padding: 0 10px; background-image: url(“https://www.fairobserver.com/wp-content/plugins/moosend_form/cpf-pen-icon.svg”); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-position: center right 14px; background-size:14px;}
      .custom-post-from input[type=”submit”] { font-weight: normal; margin: 15px auto; height: 30px; box-shadow: none; border: none; padding: 0 10px 0 35px; background-color: #1878f3; color: #ffffff; border-radius: 4px; display: inline-block; background-image: url(“https://www.fairobserver.com/wp-content/plugins/moosend_form/cpf-email-icon.svg”); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-position: 14px center; background-size: 14px; }

      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox { width: 90%; margin: auto; position: relative; display: flex; flex-wrap: wrap;}
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox label { text-align: left; display: block; padding-left: 32px; margin-bottom: 0; cursor: pointer; font-size: 11px; line-height: 18px;
      -webkit-user-select: none;
      -moz-user-select: none;
      -ms-user-select: none;
      user-select: none;
      order: 1;
      color: #ffffff;
      font-weight: normal;}
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox label a { color: #ffffff; text-decoration: underline; }
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox input { position: absolute; opacity: 0; cursor: pointer; height: 100%; width: 24%; left: 0;
      right: 0; margin: 0; z-index: 3; order: 2;}
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox input ~ label:before { content: “f0c8”; font-family: Font Awesome 5 Free; color: #eee; font-size: 24px; position: absolute; left: 0; top: 0; line-height: 28px; color: #ffffff; width: 20px; height: 20px; margin-top: 5px; z-index: 2; }
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox input:checked ~ label:before { content: “f14a”; font-weight: 600; color: #2196F3; }
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox input:checked ~ label:after { content: “”; }
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox input ~ label:after { position: absolute; left: 2px; width: 18px; height: 18px; margin-top: 10px; background: #ffffff; top: 10px; margin: auto; z-index: 1; }
      .custom-post-from .error{ display: block; color: #ff6461; order: 3 !important;}

      Modern societies were once structured to handle periodic outbreaks of infectious diseases, from the steam heating in buildings to the TB sanatoriums that dotted the landscape. Americans braced for outbreaks with greater frequency than the cyclical reappearance of the cicadas. Three major waves of cholera struck the United States between 1832 and 1866. Typhoid killed 25,000 people in New York in 1906-07. The flu in 1918, diphtheria in the 1920s, polio in the first half of the 20th century: Americans became accustomed to infectious diseases as a way of life.

      COVID-19 isn’t going to disappear completely. It will return, again and again, just like variants of the flu or that other coronavirus, the common cold. If we’re lucky, it will come back in a less virulent form or the antibodies in our systems — those of us who received vaccinations — will render it so. If we’re not lucky, COVID-19 will generate ever more infectious strains that overwhelm us on a periodic basis.

      In the best-case scenario, what’s happening in India today is COVID-19’s last gasp. With the worst-case scenario, India is our future. So, don’t delete your Zoom app or give up your home office. Don’t throw away those masks. When it comes to infectious disease, we are all dependent on the herd.

      That’s great if you’re living in South Korea or New Zealand where compliance is second nature. But in America, the home of the free, the brave and the stupid, the herd may prove to be our collective undoing.

      *[This article was originally published by FPIF.]

      The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More

    • 175 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Cyber Ninjas, UV lights and far-right funding: inside the strange Arizona 2020 election ‘audit’

      by

      Sign up for the Guardian’s Fight to Vote newsletterOne of the first things you see when you step outside Arizona Veterans Memorial Coliseum, the ageing arena in Phoenix, is the Crazy Times Carnival, a temporary spectacle set up in the parking lot. In the evenings, just as the sun is setting, lights from the ferris wheel, the jingle of the carousel and shrieks of joy fill the massive desert sky.Inside the coliseum – nicknamed the Madhouse on McDowell – there is another carnival of sorts happening. The arena floor is where the Arizona senate, controlled by Republicans, is performing its own audit of the 2020 election in Maricopa county, home of Phoenix and most of the state’s registered voters. The effort, which comes after multiple audits affirming the results of the November election in the county in favor or Joe Biden, includes an examination of voting equipment, an authentication of ballot paper, and a hand recount of the nearly 2.1m ballots cast there. Republicans in the state legislature are simultaneously considering measures that would make it harder to vote in Arizona, which Biden carried by about 10,000 votes in November.The review – unprecedented in American politics – may also be one of the clearest manifestations to date of Donald Trump’s false claims of fraud and the conspiracy theories that spread after the election (the former president and allies have loudly cheered on the Arizona effort). Far-right conspiracy theorists appear to be connected to the effort and the firm hired to lead the charge, a Florida-based company called Cyber Ninjas, has little experience in elections. The firm’s CEO has voiced support for the idea that the election was stolen from Trump.Election experts are watching the unfolding effort with deep alarm, pointing out that officials are not using a reliable methodology – they hesitate to even label it an audit – and will produce a results that will give more fodder for conspiracy theorists. More troublingly, they worry the Arizona audit could be a model for Republicans to try elsewhere.“There’s not gonna be a valid result,” said the Arizona secretary of state, Katie Hobbs, a Democrat who is the state’s top election official. “They’re writing the playbook here to do this around the country.” Indeed, Trump allies are already pushing for a similar effort in a small town in New Hampshire. Marjorie Taylor Greene, the far-right congresswoman in Georgia, has called for a similar audit in her state.Trump and allies have cheered on the effort. Outside the arena, Kelly Johnson, a 61-year-old from California, was among a small group of five people sitting in a tent who supported the effort. Johnson, who said he was at the Capitol on 6 January, when rioters stormed the building, claimed Trump didn’t fully have a chance to make his case in court after the election. Judges across the country, including several appointed by Trump, rejected several lawsuits to try and overturn the election results.A lot of people, he said, “are concerned … about whether or not the results are accurate because there has been no review, thorough review, accounting for results that anybody can have any confidence in”, he said.Last week, Hobbs, who has received death threats over her opposition, sent a letter to audit officials detailing problems with how it was being conducted. Many of the audit’s publicly-released procedures are vague, she wrote, laptops left unattended, and there weren’t guaranteed procedures in place to protect the chain of custody of ballots. The justice department sent its own letter to the Arizona senate expressing similar concerns as well as questioning a plan to knock on voters’ doors and to confirm their 2020 vote, which could lead to voter intimidation.Karen Fann, the Arizona senate president, replied on Friday, saying that auditors would “indefinitely defer” knocking on doors and that there were procedures in place to safeguard the ballots. She noted that the senate had hired Ken Bennett, a former Arizona secretary of state, to be “integrally involved in overseeing every facet of the audit”.But during several interviews with reporters last week, Bennett – a mild mannered and cheery 61-year-old – said he was unable to provide basic information about how the audit was running. He declined to say how many ballots the auditors were counting each day, instead pegging the overall estimate at about 200,000 counted ballots (as of Monday it had gone up to 275,000). After Anthony Kern, a Trump elector and former state lawmaker, appeared at a ballot counting table, Bennett said he was unsure how workers were being chosen (the Arizona Republic reported that far-right groups were involved in recruiting counters for the audit).And while audits usually ensure that representatives from both parties are present to inspect ballots, it’s unclear to what extent that’s happening, if at all, in Phoenix. Bennett said that 70% of observers – who do not count ballots – were Republicans and the remaining 30% were independents, libertarians and Democrats.While there were 46 tables set up to hold ballot counters in the arena last week, less than half of them were in use each day. Bennett told reporters repeatedly that the tables would soon be filled with additional workers who were undergoing background checks, but those workers have yet to materialize.Officials have also been opaque about what exactly they’re looking for in their analysis for ballot authenticity. In late April, auditors were seen scanning ballots with UV lights, arousing suspicion because of a QAnon conspiracy theory that Trump watermarked legitimate ballots after the election. Last week John Brakey, an activist assisting with the audit, said officials were looking for bamboo fibers in a nod to a baseless conspiracy theory that ballots were smuggled in from China. “I do think it’s somewhat of a waste of time, but it will help unhinge people,” Brakey said Wednesday. “They’re not gonna find bamboo … If they do, I think we need to know, don’t you?” Bennett quickly distanced himself from Brakey’s comments, saying: “I think that’s more of a euphemism for saying, ‘We’re looking for everything related to the paper so that we can verify that the ballots are authentic.’”Jeff Ellington, the president and CEO of Runbeck Election Services, which prints ballots for Maricopa county, said he couldn’t figure out what exactly auditors were looking for by examining the paper of the ballots.“What they’re doing is so cryptic,” he said. “It’s hard to know exactly what their game plan is on that.”Bennett and audit leaders have also declined repeatedly to comment on funding for the audit. The Arizona senate allocated just $150,000 to pay for the audit, far below the estimated cost. Trump-aligned figures, including attorney L Lin Wood and former Overstock CEO Patrick Byrne, have reportedly already donated to the effort. Two anchors with the One America News network, a far-right outlet, have also been fundraising. Last Tuesday, Christina Bobb, a reporter for the network, recorded a segment from the press box that both reported on the audit and promoted the fundraising effort.Last week, the counting itself looked relatively simple, even boring. Workers were divided up into four teams. Tables with lazy susans in the middle were scattered across the arena floor. Three workers sat at each table with a tally sheet and counted votes in the presidential and US senate race as the ballots spun around the table. Once they finished counting a batch, the ballots go to a second table, where workers photographed each side, and then scanned the ballots under microscopic cameras. Observers dressed in bright orange shirts roamed the floor and watched for wrongdoing. A banner for Phoenix’s women’s basketball team hangs high above the floor that says: “The Madhouse is our house.”Despite the benign appearance, expert observers say there are glaring problems with the audit. Jennifer Morrell, a former election official designated a floor observer by the secretary of state’s office, noted that the ballots were spinning quickly around the table, giving counters little time to see the marks on the paper. In instances where there were discrepancies in the count, Morrell said she saw each table handle recounts slightly differently. She was also alarmed to see that once the ballots were tallied, there was no check to ensure that workers were entering aggregate totals into software.There’s nobody verifying that what they entered was correct“There’s nobody verifying that what they entered was correct,” she said. “One person, single point of failure, as a former election official, someone who does audits, it’s a huge red flag for me,” she said.The audit has been livestreamed online since it began in late April, but in-person public access is limited to just a handful of pool reporters who rotate in five-hour shifts and watch the effort from the arena’s press box, a dust-covered section about 20 rows up in the stands. It was close enough to see the counting on the floor, but not enough to see any details (some reporters brought binoculars to try and get a better view). Armed members of Arizona Rangers, a volunteer auxiliary law enforcement group, were stationed in the box and members accompanied reporters to the bathroom.It’s not clear what exactly the endgame of the audit is. Hobbs said she expected the officials to issue a report based on procedures that would be difficult to replicate because the process was so opaque. And Bennett acknowledged last week there was likely to be some discrepancy between the auditors’ total and the official total.“I don’t think anyone’s expecting that you’re going to count 2.1m somethings twice, using different methods, and you’re going to come up with exactly the same number,” he said. “The only unacceptable error rate is when it’s enough to make a difference in a particular race. And I’m not expecting there to be a difference of that magnitude.”Even though the audit won’t change the outcome of the 2020 race, it could still do damage by falsely making it appear that there was something amiss with election machinery.“They are taking advantage of the lack of information that the public has regarding the complexities of our system. And they’re creating a false narrative, and they’re setting themselves up to sell that false narrative,” said Fontes, who lost his re-election bid in November.That dynamic is already on display. Arizona Republicans last week accused Maricopa county of wrongly not turning over internet routers as well as administrative passwords for voting tabulators. County officials have resisted, saying that only Dominion, the election equipment vendor, has the passwords, which aren’t necessary to conduct an audit. Providing the routers, they said, would also jeopardize county security and personal information. The Maricopa county sheriff ,Paul Penzone, a Democrat, called the request for the routers “mind-numbingly reckless”. Conservative outlets have misleadlingly pointed to that denial as evidence of potential unusual activity.This may be the ultimate point of the audit – not to bring any finality to the 2020 election, but simply to provide more rabbit holes to go down to question it.Fontes, the former Maricopa county election official, doubted that the audit would change the mind of anyone who doubted the results of the election.“It can’t convince the conspiracy theorists. The only thing that will convince the conspiracy theorists of anything is a Trump victory,” he said. “That’s the only thing that they will accept. And if that’s the case, then this doesn’t matter. They don’t care about the truth.” More

    • 213 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Today is a great day for America’: Biden removes his mask as CDC relaxes guidance – live

      by

      Key events

      Show

      5.46pm EDT
      17:46

      Unvaccinated Latinos in the US want the shot – but have trouble with access

      5.01pm EDT
      17:01

      Today so far

      4.03pm EDT
      16:03

      ‘Today is a great day for America,’ Biden says as CDC relaxes mask guidance

      2.31pm EDT
      14:31

      Vaccinated people can participate in indoor activities without masks or distancing, CDC says

      2.09pm EDT
      14:09

      Government to ease up guidance on indoor mask-wearing

      1.22pm EDT
      13:22

      Today so far

      12.33pm EDT
      12:33

      Colonial Pipeline now reaching full operational capacity but ‘hiccups’ likely, Biden says

      Live feed

      Show

      5.46pm EDT
      17:46

      Unvaccinated Latinos in the US want the shot – but have trouble with access

      Latinos in the US are reporting the lowest rates of vaccination. According to a new poll by the Kaiser Family Foundation, “one-third of unvaccinated Hispanic adults say they want a vaccine as soon as possible, about twice the share as among unvaccinated Black and White adults.”
      Among unvaccinated Hispanic adults, nearly two-thirds were worried about missing work due to side effects, and half were worried they’d have to pay for it, the survey found. About 40% were worried they’d have to provide a social security number in order to get a vaccine and 35% were worried that signing up could affect them or their family’s immigration process – a holdover from the Trump administration’s “public charge” rule that held back green cards from immigrants who used public services.

      5.17pm EDT
      17:17

      Chip Roy, a hardline conservative Republican congressman of Texas will run to replace Liz Cheney as GOP conference chair.
      Roy had raised concerns that Elise Stefanik, the New York representative who is poised to ascend to conference chair after Republicans in the House ousted Cheney over her refusal to endorse false Trump’s election fraud conspiracy theory, is too moderate.
      Despite Stefanik’s more moderate record on policy issues, the congresswoman has whole-heartedly embraced Trump and Trumpism, earning the favor of the former president. Roy, a member of the Freedom Caucus, wrote a letter to colleagues advising against electing Stefanik, based on her votes against Trump’s border wall and tax cuts, and her votes for climate action.
      Roy blamed members such as Stefanik for the party’s losses in 2018. It was members like her “playing footsie with Democrats on issues like HR5 (Equality Act) that led to Democrats steamrolling us in 2018” he said in his letter. The Equality Act would prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity – most Republican lawmakers have staunchly opposed the anti-discrimination law, but Stefanik voted for it once.

      Updated
      at 5.29pm EDT

      5.01pm EDT
      17:01

      Today so far

      That’s it from me today. My west coast colleague, Maanvi Singh, will take over the blog for the next few hours.
      Here’s where the day stands so far:

      The CDC said fully vaccinated Americans no longer had to wear masks in most settings, marking a crucial moment in the country’s return to normalcy more than a year after the start of the coronavirus pandemic. “If you are fully vaccinated, you can start doing the things that you had stopped doing because of the pandemic,” said CDC director Rochelle Walensky.
      Joe Biden celebrated the new CDC mask guidance, saying, “Today is a great day for America.” The president delivered remarks on the CDC news in the White House Rose Garden, notably not wearing a mask as he spoke to the American people. “For now, after a year of hard work and so much sacrifice, the rule is very simple: get vaccinated or wear a mask until you do,” Biden said.
      Biden said the Colonial Pipeline is now reaching full operational capacity, after a ransomware attack shut down the pipeline for several days. The president warned that it may take a few days to see the effect of the pipeline coming back online, as there could be “hiccups” as it resumes normal operations. Several east coast states have suffered gasoline shortages in recent days, as Americans went into panic-buying mode because of the shutdown.
      House speaker Nancy Pelosi condemned Republicans’ “sick” efforts to downplay the violence of the 6 January insurrection. The Democratic speaker addressed the comments from Andrew Clyde, who said yesterday that the footage of the insurrection looked like “a normal tourist visit”. “I don’t know a normal day around here when people are threatening to hang the vice-president of the United States or shoot the speaker in the forehead,” Pelosi said. “It was beyond denial. It fell into the range of sick.”
      Liz Cheney did not rule out the possibility of launching a presidential bid against Donald Trump to prevent him from returning to the White House. Speaking to the Today show shortly after she was removed as House Republican conference chair, Cheney said of Trump, “He must not ever again be anywhere close to the Oval Office.”

      Maanvi will have more coming up, so stay tuned.

      Updated
      at 5.05pm EDT

      4.43pm EDT
      16:43

      House speaker Nancy Pelosi told CNN that she will not be relaxing the rule requiring masks in the chamber because not all members have been vaccinated, even though they have been eligible for months.

      Manu Raju
      (@mkraju)
      Speaker Nancy Pelosi told me “no” she isn’t changing the rule requiring masks on the House floor.“No,” Pelosi said. “Are they all vaccinated?”

      May 13, 2021

      The Democratic speaker said two weeks ago that about 75% of House members have been vaccinated, a number that was virtually unchanged from a month earlier.

      4.31pm EDT
      16:31

      The mayor of Washington said she and her public health team are reviewing the new CDC recommendations to determine whether to relax the city’s guidance on masks.
      “Consistent with past practice, we are immediately reviewing the CDC guidance and will update DC Health guidance accordingly,” Muriel Bowser said on Twitter.
      The Democratic mayor added it is “critical that every resident, worker and visitor get vaccinated to help us crush the virus”.

      Mayor Muriel Bowser
      (@MayorBowser)
      1/ Consistent with past practice, we are immediately reviewing the CDC guidance and will update DC Health guidance accordingly.

      May 13, 2021

      4.20pm EDT
      16:20

      Joe Biden took a few questions from reporters after concluding his prepared remarks on the new mask guidance from the CDC.
      Asked about his meeting with Senate Republicans today to discuss his infrastructure plan, the president said they had a “very, very good” conversation.
      “I am very optimistic that we can reach a reasonable agreement,” Biden said, adding that both sides have engaged in a “good-faith effort” to find a compromise on an infrastructure package.
      With that, Biden and Kamala Harris walked out of the Rose Garden without wearing masks.

      4.15pm EDT
      16:15

      Joe Biden reiterated the new CDC guidance that fully vaccinated people are no longer required to wear masks in most settings.
      “For now, after a year of hard work and so much sacrifice, the rule is very simple: get vaccinated or wear a mask until you do,” Biden said.
      The president was also careful to encourage people to be kind to those who still feel more comfortable wearing masks.
      “We’ve had too much conflict, too much bitterness, too much anger, too much politicization of this issue about wearing masks,” Biden said. “Let’s put it to rest. Let’s remember we’re all Americans. Let’s remember that we are all in this together.”

      Updated
      at 4.17pm EDT

      4.10pm EDT
      16:10

      Joe Biden celebrated the new CDC guidance on mask-wearing, but he also emphasized that the country had much more work to do to get the virus completely under control.
      “The safest thing for the country is for everyone to get vaccinated,” Biden said.
      The president noted it was easier than ever to get vaccinated, as all American adults are now eligible to receive a shot.
      “We’re still losing too many Americans because we still have too many unvaccinated people,” Biden said.

      4.07pm EDT
      16:07

      Joe Biden noted that this “great day” has come at a great cost to country, which has lost more than 580,000 people to coronavirus.
      The president expressed his condolences to all Americans who had lost loved ones to coronavirus, and he expressed hope that their memories would soon bring more happiness than sadness.

      4.03pm EDT
      16:03

      ‘Today is a great day for America,’ Biden says as CDC relaxes mask guidance

      Joe Biden and Kamala Harris walked out to the Rose Garden without wearing masks, after the CDC announced that fully vaccinated people did not have to wear masks in most settings.
      As Biden walked up to the podium with an uncovered face, Harris could be heard telling him, “Great smile.”
      Biden began his remarks by saying, “Today is a great day for America in our long battle against coronavirus.”

      Joe Biden
      (@JoeBiden)
      Today is a great day for America in our long battle with COVID-19. Just a few hours ago, the CDC announced they are no longer recommending that fully vaccinated people need to wear masks.

      May 13, 2021

      The president said this “great milestone” was made possible by the country’s great success in getting hundreds of millions of vaccine doses to the American people.
      As of today, more than 250 million shots have been administered since Biden took office in January.

      Updated
      at 4.07pm EDT

      3.58pm EDT
      15:58

      The White House Rose Garden is all set up for Joe Biden’s remarks on the coronavirus pandemic and the CDC’s new guidance on mask-wearing.

      Steve Holland
      (@steveholland1)
      Nice day in the Rose Garden pic.twitter.com/FBMi7DjzC5

      May 13, 2021

      It’s 70 degrees Fahrenheit and sunny in Washington, so it’s a beautiful day to announce that fully vaccinated people no longer have to wear masks in most settings.
      Biden was supposed to start speaking about 15 minutes ago, but as per usual, he is running late, so stay tuned for updates.

      3.41pm EDT
      15:41

      Shelley Moore Capito said her group of Senate Republicans had a “very productive” meeting with Joe Biden to discuss the president’s infrastructure plan.
      “We did talk specifics,” Capito said. “And the president asked has asked us to come back and rework an offer so that he could then react to that and then re-offer to us, so we’re very encouraged.”
      She added that she was “grateful to the president and his staff for the give and take that we shared in the Oval Office”. Capito described Biden as being “very much desirous of striking a deal”.

      Updated
      at 3.47pm EDT

      3.31pm EDT
      15:31

      Joe Biden and Republican senators took their masks off during their infrastructure meeting after hearing about the new CDC guidance, according to Shelley Moore Capito.
      “We heard all about it,” Capito said of the CDC update after leaving the meeting. “The president took his [mask] off too.”

      Jennifer Jacobs
      (@JenniferJJacobs)
      “We did,” @SenCapito tells me when I asked of they all took their masks off in Oval. “We heard all about it” she said of new CDC guidance. pic.twitter.com/LHJM5BlWv9

      May 13, 2021

      Updated
      at 3.37pm EDT

      3.13pm EDT
      15:13

      Ben Wakana, a member of the White House pandemic response team, said the CDC could relax the mask guidance for vaccinated Americans because the vaccines have proven effective and those who have been vaccinated are unlikely to spread coronavirus.

      Ben Wakana
      (@benwakana46)
      Here are the reasons why the masks can come off now:1. Vaccines are effective in the real world2. Vaccines work against the variants3. Vaccinated people are unlikely to spread COVID

      May 13, 2021

      3.05pm EDT
      15:05

      Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell was seen exiting the chamber without a mask on, after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention relaxed its mask guidance for fully vaccinated Americans.
      “Free at last,” the Republican leader told reporters on Capitol Hill.

      Nicholas Fandos
      (@npfandos)
      “Free at last,” says a maskless Mitch McConnell, as he exits the Senate for the week. pic.twitter.com/YfbWekZ9BW

      May 13, 2021

      2.55pm EDT
      14:55

      The White House has informed staffers that they no longer need to wear masks at work if they are fully vaccinated, according to the Washington Post.

      Tyler Pager
      (@tylerpager)
      NEWS: The White House just sent an email to staff that masks are no longer required on campus for those who are fully vaccinated.

      May 13, 2021

      2.50pm EDT
      14:50

      This is the exact wording from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on the new guidance for fully vaccinated Americans:

      Risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection is minimal for fully vaccinated people. The risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission from fully vaccinated people to unvaccinated people is also reduced. Therefore, fully vaccinated people can resume activities without wearing a mask or physically distancing, except where required by federal, state, local, tribal, or territorial laws, rules and regulations, including local business and workplace guidance. Fully vaccinated people should also continue to wear a well-fitted mask in correctional facilities and homeless shelters. …
      CDC prevention measures continue to apply to all travelers, including those who are vaccinated. All travelers are required to wear a mask on all planes, buses, trains, and other forms of public transportation traveling into, within, or out of the United States and in U.S. transportation hubs such as airports and stations.

      2.42pm EDT
      14:42

      This new graphic from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention demonstrates the importance of the agency’s new guidance for fully vaccinated people.
      On the righthand side of the visual, it shows that fully vaccinated people can safely go without masks in almost all settings.

      Ed O’Keefe
      (@edokeefe)
      HELPFUL VISUAL AID via @CDCgov: pic.twitter.com/PYfmEbgwu1

      May 13, 2021

      2.38pm EDT
      14:38

      Despite the encouraging new guidance, Dr Rochelle Walensky said fully vaccinated Americans should continue to wear masks when on modes of public transportation, such as airplanes, buses or trains.
      But fully vaccinated people are not required to wear masks in almost any other setting, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said.
      Asked how fully vaccinated people should handle situations where they are not sure if everyone around them has been vaccinated, Walensky noted it is the unvaccinated people (not the vaccinated people) who are assuming some risk in that scenario. More

    • 100 Shares129 Views

      in World Politics

      How Reasonable Are Suspicions Promoted by the Media?

      by

      The New York Times editorial board cannot be accused of a failure of will, a lack of consistency or the cardinal political sin of flip-flopping. Many of The Times critics supposed that, over the past five years, the newspaper’s obsession with any random complaint against Russia — cast in the role of America’s archenemy — could simply be explained by the editorial board’s visceral hatred of President Donald Trump. Knowing their readers were 91% Democrat, they willingly fed their audience’s wish to view Trump as Vladimir Putin’s closest collaborator.

      With Trump gone, things should have changed. His election victory in 2016 now appears to have been merely the catalyst rather than the cause of an obsession that has had the effect of renewing the Cold War animus formerly directed toward what was then a much more powerful adversary, the Soviet Union. A week doesn’t go by without one or more The Times articles either reminding readers of Russia’s multiple attempts at skulduggery. These include cyberterrorism, industrial espionage and even the tendentious use of American social media. 

      Anyone vaguely familiar with what we call “the modern world” should understand that every government of a self-respecting nation-state has by now learned to emulate the institutions, methods and techniques elaborated in the West for the purpose of “gathering intelligence.” But just as departments of “defense” (considered good and moral) are configured to wage aggressive war (considered bad and potentially immoral), intelligence agencies are also hard at work producing and disseminating bad information. Some of these institutions have even been known to engage in “covert activities.”

      The New York Times Has Feelings for China

      READ MORE

      This permanent competition poses a slight problem for many Americans with a keen sense of morality, who don’t know how to deal with the idea of US skulduggery. Rather than denying it, they consider that even its obviously immoral actions — assassination, the overthrow of democratically elected governments, etc. — it is only employed as “a force for good.” Russian skulduggery, on the other, is a force for evil. It’s a lesson every baby boomer learned at school. The baby boomers appear to have passed on the information to the next generation. Curiously, Chinese skulduggery has now begun to worry Americans, but they tend to consider it annoying rather than evil (unless it includes creating and deliberately spreading a global pandemic).

      In the rubric Good Reasons to Hate Russia and Maybe Even Envision Going to War With It, The Times offers two major pieces this week. A new article on directed-energy attacks evokes suspicion of Russia before admitting that “the intelligence agencies have not concluded any cause or whether a foreign power is involved.” Another article with the title “Russian Spy Team Left Traces That Bolstered C.I.A.’s Bounty Judgment” revives the recently discredited story that the Russians offered a bounty for the killing of American military personnel in Afghanistan. The three journalists do their damnedest to persuade readers that this potential pretext for a new cold (or hot) war confirms Ronald Reagan’s famous identification of Russia (formerly the Soviet Union) as the “evil empire.”

      The authors inform us that the evil action of offering bounty is the work of “Russian operatives, known as Unit 29155 of the G.R.U.,” Russia’s military intelligence service. To bolster their case, the authors cite Czechia’s prime minister’s claim that there is “’clear evidence,’” assembled by intelligence and security services there, establishing ‘reasonable suspicion’ that Unit 29155 was involved in two explosions at ammunition depots that killed two Czechs in 2014.” The same people must be involved in the bounty story.

      Today’s Daily Devil’s Dictionary definition:

      Reasonable suspicion:

      Either a purely rational hypothesis emitted by an objective observer with no interest in particular outcomes or a self-interested innuendo corresponding to a hidden agenda

      Contextual Note

      “Clear evidence” to support a “reasonable suspicion” is all Times journalists need to justify publishing an article designed to create certainty where none exists. Who needs facts on the ground when you have suspicions to excite your readers? 

      .custom-post-from {float:right; margin: 0 10px 10px; max-width: 50%; width: 100%; text-align: center; background: #000000; color: #ffffff; padding: 15px 0 30px; }
      .custom-post-from img { max-width: 85% !important; margin: 15px auto; filter: brightness(0) invert(1); }
      .custom-post-from .cpf-h4 { font-size: 18px; margin-bottom: 15px; }
      .custom-post-from .cpf-h5 { font-size: 14px; letter-spacing: 1px; line-height: 22px; margin-bottom: 15px; }
      .custom-post-from input[type=”email”] { font-size: 14px; color: #000 !important; width: 240px; margin: auto; height: 30px; box-shadow:none; border: none; padding: 0 10px; background-image: url(“https://www.fairobserver.com/wp-content/plugins/moosend_form/cpf-pen-icon.svg”); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-position: center right 14px; background-size:14px;}
      .custom-post-from input[type=”submit”] { font-weight: normal; margin: 15px auto; height: 30px; box-shadow: none; border: none; padding: 0 10px 0 35px; background-color: #1878f3; color: #ffffff; border-radius: 4px; display: inline-block; background-image: url(“https://www.fairobserver.com/wp-content/plugins/moosend_form/cpf-email-icon.svg”); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-position: 14px center; background-size: 14px; }

      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox { width: 90%; margin: auto; position: relative; display: flex; flex-wrap: wrap;}
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox label { text-align: left; display: block; padding-left: 32px; margin-bottom: 0; cursor: pointer; font-size: 11px; line-height: 18px;
      -webkit-user-select: none;
      -moz-user-select: none;
      -ms-user-select: none;
      user-select: none;
      order: 1;
      color: #ffffff;
      font-weight: normal;}
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox label a { color: #ffffff; text-decoration: underline; }
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox input { position: absolute; opacity: 0; cursor: pointer; height: 100%; width: 24%; left: 0;
      right: 0; margin: 0; z-index: 3; order: 2;}
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox input ~ label:before { content: “f0c8”; font-family: Font Awesome 5 Free; color: #eee; font-size: 24px; position: absolute; left: 0; top: 0; line-height: 28px; color: #ffffff; width: 20px; height: 20px; margin-top: 5px; z-index: 2; }
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox input:checked ~ label:before { content: “f14a”; font-weight: 600; color: #2196F3; }
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox input:checked ~ label:after { content: “”; }
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox input ~ label:after { position: absolute; left: 2px; width: 18px; height: 18px; margin-top: 10px; background: #ffffff; top: 10px; margin: auto; z-index: 1; }
      .custom-post-from .error{ display: block; color: #ff6461; order: 3 !important;}

      The journalists laboriously develop a tendentious explanation of the notion of “confidence levels,” at one point even suggesting that “low” really means “high.” Discerning readers might have their own reasonable suspicion of this attempt to conflate supposition with the truth. What emerges from this and many of the Russia-based narratives promoted by The Times and other media, is an earnest effort to persuade the public to take at face value the stories intelligence sources share with their journalists. Behind it lies the idea that intelligence agencies know more than they’re willing to release to the public. 

      The authors actually propose an explanation of why the public should have high confidence in information the agencies have branded as worthy of low to moderate confidence: “When analysts assess something with low confidence … that does not mean they think the conclusion is wrong. Rather, they are expressing greater concerns about the sourcing limitations, while still judging that the assessment is the best explanation of the available facts.”

      Anyone who has studied the human brain knows that thought is a powerful tool. The Times authors see a direct correlation between thinking and truth. “The National Security Council statement,” they write, “identified other ‘nefarious operations’ around the world that the government thought the squad had carried out.” They see as solid evidence the fact that “some military officials based in Afghanistan, as well as some other senior Pentagon and State Department officials, thought the C.I.A. was right.”

      Historical Note

      Playing with our sense of both logic and justice, the authors offer a new line of reasoning when they write that “the intelligence community also had ‘high confidence’ — meaning the judgment is based on high-quality information from multiple sources — in the key circumstantial evidence.” With no real evidence, circumstantial evidence must suffice. 

      In the legal tradition of the United States, circumstantial evidence alone may lead to conviction, but only after testimony and full contradictory debate before a judge and jury. Attribution of guilt requires the unqualified respect of due process, including the accused’s right to a formal defense. As one legal argument puts it, “In order to sustain a conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence, the circumstances must be consistent with his innocence, and incapable of explanation on any other reasonable hypothesis than that of guilt.”

      Intelligence assessments, conducted in secrecy, cannot be compared to a fair trial. But the policy outcomes they provoke may be as extreme as invasion and war. This happened in 2003 when the George W. Bush administration used circumstantial — and in some cases fabricated or manipulated — evidence to justify the invasion of Iraq.

      In this highly controversial question, the intelligence agencies are given the role of the prosecutor, called upon to align circumstantial evidence to convince the jury that the accused is guilty. The public is the jury. What then should the role of the press be? If intelligence agencies can be compared to prosecutors and the nation’s executive compared to that of the judge, in the absence of the accused, who is left to play the role of defense? Without professional counsel there cannot be a fair trial.

      US Media Still Has Russia on Its Mind

      READ MORE

      Political theorists have traditionally attributed that role, which consists of raising possible objections to foregone conclusions proposed by the government, to the fourth estate — in other words, the press and the media. They alone make it possible to present and weigh the evidence on either side. The contradictory light they throw on a subject makes it possible for the public to understand what is behind the government’s decisions and policies.

      That effort of the fourth estate should be focused on challenging power, casting light on murky issues, reducing their ambiguity and tempering the abuses of the powerful. That was formerly advertised as the badge of honor of a free press. The New York Times is not alone not just in echoing the messages of the national security state, but in actively promoting them as unqualified truth. The corporate media have become the obedient stenographers of the most secret and aggressive governmental initiatives. Some see this as a betrayal of their mission in a democracy.

      Russia is certainly up to all sorts of dirty tricks aimed at the US, just as the US is up to tricks against most other nations, including allies. But obsessively blaming Russia alone for both verified and unverified crimes should not be the business of a serious newspaper.

      *[In the age of Oscar Wilde and Mark Twain, another American wit, the journalist Ambrose Bierce, produced a series of satirical definitions of commonly used terms, throwing light on their hidden meanings in real discourse. Bierce eventually collected and published them as a book, The Devil’s Dictionary, in 1911. We have shamelessly appropriated his title in the interest of continuing his wholesome pedagogical effort to enlighten generations of readers of the news. Read more of The Daily Devil’s Dictionary on Fair Observer.]

      The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More

    • 188 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      The point of the Republican party? To stroke the ego of Trump | Richard Wolffe

      by

      What is the point of the Republican party?This isn’t a flip question. It’s one prompted by the last four months of grappling with the fallout of the bloody insurrection on Capitol Hill, and by the last four years of grappling with the fallout of installing a fascist in the White House.So, for real: what does the GOP stand for? Apart from trying to seize back power, what does it want to do?The answer, as Liz Cheney has learned, is to pander to the ego of a single Florida resident who has no obvious or coherent political purpose.This might just explain why the party has been struggling so hard to respond to the last four months of the most tenuous Democratic control in Washington.The Biden team has not commanded the nation’s capital from a position of strength because of LBJ-like powers of persuasion, Democratic unity or structural majorities. They have succeeded because Republicans sorely lack – as George HW Bush used to put it – the vision thing.There was a time, not so long ago, when the GOP stood for small government, or big business, or at least big churches, or sometimes the little guy. They were for standing up to foreign enemies and domestic taxes.There was, for what it was worth, a contest of ideas and worldviews between the two sides of the aisle: between the notion that government could do big things, and that government should only do small things – that markets and businesses either needed regulation, or were marvelously efficient at solving all our problems.After four years of Donald Trump, that is no longer the world we’re living in. To be fair, three decades’ worth of upheaval – the colossal failures of the war on terror, the financial crisis, a historic pandemic, the climate crisis and a technological revolution – may have made matters worse.But here we are nonetheless at a point where the Grand Old Party has shrunk into a small old cult of personality, willing to twist and turn to the whims of its sociopathic former leader.Consistency meant nothing inside the cult. More billions of spending on a nonsensical border wall? The deficit hawks said no problem. More bullying business leaders by presidential tweet? The capitalist caucus said bring it on. More cozying up to the leaders of Russia, China and even North Korea? The defense hawks thought that sounded fine. Paying off porn stars with campaign dollars? The party of family values barely blushed.Each one of these big and small sellouts brought the party to the point where it fired Liz Cheney from the House leadership on Tuesday for stating the obvious: Trump lost the election last year and stoked an insurrection to save face.Cheney is a conservative’s conservative, who voted with Trump 92.9% of the time – more than the party’s Senate leader, Mitch McConnell. But Cheney knows that if we cannot agree on democratic principles like free and fair elections, or the constitution, we cannot begin to debate the principles or policies that separate Republicans from Democrats.“I am a conservative Republican and the most conservative of conservative principles is reverence for the rule of law. The electoral college has voted. More than 60 state and federal courts, including multiple judges he appointed, have rejected the former president’s claims,” she said on the House floor on Tuesday.“Those who refuse to accept the rulings of our courts are at war with the constitution. Our duty is clear. Every one of us who has sworn the oath must act to prevent the unraveling of our democracy. This is not about policy. This is not about partisanship. This is about our duty as Americans. Remaining silent, and ignoring the lie, emboldens the liar.”Clearly most Republican members of Congress don’t care – mostly because they think they are on a winning track. There is a near-universal expectation that the Republicans will take back at least half of Congress next year, and that its lickspittle House leader Kevin McCarthy, will finally rise from his semi-prone position to become speaker.Democrats have succeeded because Republicans sorely lack – as George HW Bush used to put it – the vision thingBut while incumbent presidents tend to lose power in their first midterms, there is nothing pre-ordained about this prognosis. It just gets repeated so often, it feels that way.There was a president, not so long ago, who bucked that trend. His name was George W Bush and his vice-president was a man named Dick Cheney, father of Liz. While their opponents wanted to re-litigate the disputed election of 2000, Bush and Cheney were focused on supposedly keeping the country safe.Yes, the 2002 elections were the first after the 9/11 attacks, but the framing was devastatingly effective: are you with the president’s party, or with the terrorists? It wasn’t fair or accurate, but it was simple and successful enough to pick up seats in both the House and Senate.It’s not hard to imagine a similar election for Democrats next year, the first after Covid is finally crushed. Are you for or against the pandemic? Are you for or against building back better? Are you for or against investing in bridges, or childcare, or community college?Instead, the Republican party is determined to answer its own burning question about whether you are for or against Donald Trump.This may satisfy the legions of hardcore Trump fans, but they clearly do not represent a winning majority. So far, their broader attempts to portray Joe Biden as a scary socialist have failed: Biden’s approval ratings are much higher than Trump’s, and that includes positive ratings from almost half of Republicans.Where does the GOP end up? Much like its sidekick for the last several decades, the National Rifle Association. The NRA has been a fearsomely effective political machine, blocking any attempt at gun safety laws by mobilizing just 5 million members. Along the way, it became a cult of personality and corruption revolving around its leader, Wayne LaPierre.Now, after a failed legal gambit to declare bankruptcy, it faces the full force of New York’s attorney general, Letitia James, who is suing to shut the NRA down. “The rot runs deep,” she said on Tuesday. “No one is above the law. Not even one of the most powerful lobbying organizations in the country.”The rot runs deep across the right. Powerful political parties and organizations can suddenly seem brittle after years of hollowing out. Americans might love big personalities, but they love the law even more. More

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in World Politics

      The Future of Jerusalem Matters to Us All

      by

      No city in the world has seized the imagination or captivated the soul in the way that Jerusalem has. Revered by more than half the world’s population, Jerusalem is the beating heart of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. It is a city widely held to have been inhabited by the Jebusites, long before the coming of Abraham to whose descendants the land of Canaan is believed by some to have been divinely promised. However, such a claim, irrespective of its authenticity, does not and cannot be used to justify occupation, injustice and the undermining of the fundamental rights of peoples to live in their homelands in both peace and security.

      The suffering of Arab Jerusalemites — Christian and Muslim — has gone on for far too long. In 1967, the Arab residents of the Moroccan Quarter were forcefully evicted from their homes before Israeli forces razed the neighborhood entirely, and the same story seems to have repeated itself ever since, with the recent events at Bab al-Amoud, Silwan and Sheikh Jarrah being its latest iterations.

      Israel Must Accept ICC Jurisdiction Over Palestine

      READ MORE

      When on the June, 27, 1967, Israel extended the remit of its laws and administration to include the Old City and other areas, it acted in direct contravention of Article 43 of the Hague Regulations that requires an occupying power to “respect, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.” Any impartial examination of Israeli measures, both administrative and other, taken in relation to Jerusalem, would make patently clear that Article 43 has been violated, and so have Articles 56 and 46.

      Ample Evidence

      There is ample evidence of the demolition of privately-owned Arab property in Jerusalem to make way for the construction of large apartment complexes in the environs of a city now enlarged. There is ample evidence too of the expropriation of private land and property, which is not, in point of fact, necessarily justifiable on national security grounds. Dispossession, the purpose of which can only be to reconfigure the demographic balance and to prevent the Palestinians from exercising their right to self-determination, does, however, meet Israel’s demand for housing.

      Embed from Getty Images

      When expropriation amounts to confiscation, it is likely to be in breach of Article 46, which states that “private property must be respected” and “cannot be confiscated.” Demolitions clearly violate Article 53, which prohibits the destruction of property situated in occupied territory. In addition, when enacted as punitive measures, demolition and/or confiscation clearly amount to collective punishment, a crime under international law and a violation of the provisions of international humanitarian law and the principles of customary international law.

      Turning a blind eye to flagrant violations of human rights law and international law does have grave repercussions. In our rules-based international order, world peace and security depend ultimately on UN member states upholding Security Council resolutions that in relation to the question of Palestine criminalize the acquisition of territory by force, the building of settlements in occupied territory and the misrepresentation and falsification of facts on the ground. Not only are confiscation, demolition and annexation serious breaches of the UN Charter and the Geneva Conventions, but they also violate Security Council and General Assembly resolutions that hold “inadmissible” the taking of land or territory by war or by force.

      Equally inadmissible is annexation. Among the disastrous consequences of further annexation would be the resulting demographic imbalance in the occupied West Bank. Many Palestinians will neither leave their land or their home voluntarily nor relinquish them without resistance. Annexation is a clear breach of international law, which precludes, indeed considers a crime, any form of discrimination against or oppression of one people or racial group over another. This, as regards the situation in the West Bank, has been described by the United Nations, B’Tselem and others as constituting apartheid.

      Unless creeping annexation is halted, the viability of a Palestinian state will be further jeopardized, with any such state effectively reduced to a number of Bantustans: disconnected, walled-off islands of land, isolated, incoherent and with no territorial connection to the outside world. Such a result would render the two-state solution inviable, with obvious consequences for international efforts to resolve the conflict.

      Near-Perpetual Injustice

      Mediated by anger, frustration and hopelessness, decades of systematic humiliation and discrimination can lead to acts of violence, but violence cannot and must never be the response to the violence of others even when that violence is enacted with glaring impunity. Palestine is a woeful tale of an increasingly lonely people beset by near-perpetual injustice, whose moments of hope are oft-shattered by belligerent and reckless politicking. The toll of recent days — the lives indiscriminately taken, the trauma-mangled psyches, the futures broken — does drown out non-violent opportunities for change.

      International pressure is vital if violence on both sides is to be halted; a halt in hostilities in and of itself cannot win the peace. There is both the urgent need for new channels of communication and the desperate need for a vision that offers on-the-ground evidence, powerful and immediate, of what the dividends of peace would look like. The security-for-peace formula should be embraced and its goals achieved. Historical obscurantism is not a solution, and despite the legal and ethical obligation to respect human rights, it is crystal clear that neither law nor ethics can ensure either respect or compliance.

      Mutual respect and peaceful co-existence are requisites for a just, lasting and, comprehensive peace, which we can wage through the development of a greater receptivity: “I become myself by what I am given by the other.”

      We must remember why we care so much about Jerusalem so that once again it can be celebrated as the City of Peace. Jerusalem is a shared gift, not the exclusive property of one government or one people. Because the future of the Holy City matters to us all, we need to ensure the equal treatment of and prosperity for all its residents. Whatever happens in Jerusalem is testament to the strength or weakness of the relationship between the Abrahamic faiths and the relationship between our societies and cultures.

      The deadlock must be broken. The status quo is untenable.

      *[This article was originally published by Arab Digest. HRH Prince El Hassan bin Talal will appear on its podcast on Friday, May 14.]

      The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More