bureaucracybusters

Archive for the ‘Entertainment’ Category

GREEN BOOK: A MOVIE WITH A TIMELESS MESSAGE

In Entertainment, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on July 11, 2024 at 12:30 am

Every year, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences hosts its Academy Awards ceremony, better known as “Oscar Night.” 

Each year, Academy members make their choices for such categories as Best Picture, Best Actor, Best Actress, Best Supporting Actor and Actress.

And each year, before those selections are announced at the ceremony, there is a huge buildup of anticipation among Americans over which person or movie should win acclaim.

Then that year’s selections are quickly forgotten.

But some movies should not be quickly forgotten. Among these: Green Book, which won the Oscar for Best Picture at the 91st annual Academy Awards in 2019.

Green Book is based on the true story of a concert tour by a black classical and jazz pianist, Don Shirley, and his driver and bodyguard, Tony Vallelonga. Mahershala Ali plays Shirley and Viggo Mortensen plays Vallelonga.

The two men are polar opposites: Shirley is cultured and eloquent; Vallelonga is streetwise and volatile. Shirley is used to dealing with the cream of New York society. Vallelonga is used to dealing with its dregs—as a nightclub bouncer. 

Mahershala Ali (29953410761).jpg

Mahershala Ali as Don Shirley

Gordon Correll [CC BY-SA 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)%5D

When his nightclub closes for renovations, he responds to an ad by Shirley for a driver for his eight-week concert tour through the Midwest and Deep South.

This is 1962, a time when a black Air Force veteran, James Meredith, must be given protection by deputy U.S. marshals when he enters the segregated University of Mississippi. White and black “Freedom Riders” are canvassing the South, sitting at segregated lunch counters and often being attacked by members of the Ku Klux Klan and equally racist Southern police.

In fact, the title of the movie—Green Book—is derived from a travel guide written for blacks venturing into the Deep South: The Negro Motorist Green Book. Written by Victor Hugo Green, its purpose is to help blacks find motels and restaurants that will accept them.

And as Shirley and Vallelonga make their odyssey through the South, they find themselves staying at separate hotels—and sometimes together, after Vallelonga slips Shirley into his own room.

Green Book (2018 poster).png

An AV Film review called Green Book “a kind of comforting liberal fantasy, a #NotAllRacists trifle that suggests that our deep, festering divisions can be sutured through some quality time on the open road, resolving differences over a bucket of KFC.”

Not so. It took far more than a bucket of KFC to cement the friendship between Shirley and Vallelonga.

At the start of the movie, Vallelonga throws away a glass after a black construction worker drinks from it. But during his tour of the South, he becomes increasingly sympathetic to the plight suffered by Shirley—and other blacks forced to daily endure a series of humiliations.

Viggo Mortensen Cannes 2016.jpg

Viggo Mortensen as Tony Vallelonga

Georges Biard [CC BY-SA 3.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)%5D

According to television critic Rebecca Theodore-Vachon: “Green Book is a feel-good movie. It doesn’t really require a lot of critical thinking or self-analysis. You know, people walk out of the movie feeling that, oh, well, racism is over, we’re good.”

Actually, the film makes clear that some people will always be racists. Thus, Shirley finds himself repeatedly forced to eat in the segregated rooms of the hotels where he’s to play concerts. And he’s almost murdered by a group of racists when he makes the mistake of going into a whites’ only bar. He survives only because Vallelonga arrives in time to rescue him.

And Shirley proves just as great a friend to Vallelonga. He introduces the semi-literate bouncer to the power of the written word by helping him craft articulate, heartfelt letters to his wife.

Toward the end of the movie, Vallelonga and Shirley are pulled over by a Mississippi police officer. Shirley’s “crime”: Being black—and out at night. When the officer insults Vallelonga, Tony punches him—and he and Shirley wind up in jail.  

Shirley asks for permission to call his “lawyer”—and the man he dials is Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy.

Kennedy, in turn, calls Mississippi Governor Ross Barnett. Barnett is already having his share of troubles with the Kennedys, and he orders the police: Let those men go—now! 

This scene underscores the importance of electing people who will stand against injustice. Watching the release of Vallelonga and Shirley, it’s impossible to imagine the Trump administration intervening in such a manner.

At the end of the movie, Shirley visits Vallelonga’s home—where he’s warmly received by Tony and his family. The film’s end credits reveal that the two men remained friends until they died, within months of each other, in 2013.

In 1950, a Western called Broken Arrow-–starring James Stewart as Tom Jeffords and Jeff Chandler as Cochise—told the true story of a friendship between a white man and an Apache. For many Americans, this came as a revelation.

After decades of seeing Indians depicted as bloodthirsty savages, audiences saw that there were those—among red men and white men—who could rise above prejudice and see each other as worthy of respect.

The lesson of Green Book is exactly the same. And it’s needed now more than ever.

DUELING PRESIDENTS–BIDEN VS. TRUMP–IN FICTION

In Bureaucracy, Entertainment, History, Politics, Social commentary on July 8, 2024 at 12:10 am

Joe Biden defeated Donald Trump to become the 46th President of the United States on January 20, 2021.

But before scoring that victory, he racked up a series of incredible adventures as a private investigator—in fiction.

In Hope Never Dies: An Obama-Biden Mystery, author Andrew Shaffer has fashioned a novel that is half-mystery, half-bromance.   

Vice President Joe Biden has just left the Obama White House and doesn’t know what to do with the rest of his life. Then Finn Donnelly, his favorite railroad conductor, dies in a suspicious accident, leaving behind an ailing wife and a trail of clues.

To unravel the mystery, “Amtrak Joe” calls on the skills of his former boss: Barack Obama, the 44th President of the United States. Together they scour biker bars, cheap motels and other memorable haunts throughout Delaware.

Hope Never Dies: An Obama Biden Mystery (Obama Biden Mysteries)

Then Biden unearths a disturbing truth about his longtime—and now dead—friend. This, in turn, leads Biden and Obama to uncover the sinister forces behind America’s opioid epidemic.

The book is pure fantasy fun, as evidenced from this review by Alexandra Alter in The New York Times

“[Hope Never Dies is] a roughly 300-page work of political fanfiction, an escapist fantasy that will likely appeal to liberals pining for the previous administration, longing for the Obama-Biden team to emerge from political retirement as action heroes. But it’s also at times a surprisingly earnest story about estranged friends who are reunited under strange circumstances.”

A reader named Casey, reviewing the novel for Goodreads, writes: “While Shaffer could have leaned into nostalgia alone, he’s written a solid mystery with the characters fleshed out as more than just clichés. 

“The reader really feels Biden’s longing to be helpful and his anguish over seeing 44’s legacy undone so quickly by an individual who shall remain nameless. (The presidential zings in this book are incredible, truly.)

“The tension between the two rings as true as it did when they were in office….By all means, this book shouldn’t work as well as it does. For a few hours, I got to enjoy the company of politicians who behaved like adults (mostly). It sure was nice.”

Contrasting with the relatively lighthearted fictional images of Joe Biden and Barack Obama is the immensely darker one of Donald Trump.

Don Winslow offers Trump an extended cameo appearance in The Border, his massive, 736-page novel about America’s war on drugs—and the horrific violence it has spawned in Mexico. It’s the third of a trilogy of novels vividly portraying the violent costs of an unwinnable conflict. 

The Border: A Novel (Power of the Dog Book 3)

Art Keller is a dedicated agent of the Federal Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). For over 40 years, he has waged all-out war on Adán Barrera, the godfather of the powerful Sinaloa Cartel.

Appointed director of the DEA, Keller now faces a series of deadly enemies:

  • A heroin epidemic surging across America; 
  • Hitmen who want to kill him;
  • Politicians who want to sabotage his agenda; and
  • An incoming administration that’s allied with the very drug traffickers he’s trying to destroy.

And heading this administration is John DennisonDonald Trump in all but name—who:

  • Gratuitously insults people on Twitter;
  • Fires a Special Counsel;
  • Gets blackmailed by a woman he once bedded; and
  • Colludes with drug traffickers for a multi-million dollar loan to finance his Presidential campaign.

Whereas the reviews for Hope Never Dies were as upbeat as the book itself, those of The Border reflect the novel’s mercilessly grim take on a war that can’t be won. 

Los Angeles Times:The Border is intricate, mean and swift, a sprawling canvass of characters including narco kingpins, a Guatemalan stowaway, a Staten Island heroin addict, a kinky hit woman, a barely veiled Donald Trump and DEA agent Art Keller, who….has been noble and merciless, a conflicted wanderer who makes America face the transgressions committed in its name.”

Rolling Stone: “Clocking in at over 700 pages, it is his most overtly political installment yet. He takes on the Trump administration directly, creating a fictional candidate, then president, who stokes racist fears of Mexicans, campaigns on ‘building the wall’ and, along with his venal son-in-law, gets caught up in a shady real estate deal involving Cartel money.”

NPR: The Border becomes a book for our times. Like Shakespeare, it makes a three-act drama of our modern moment. Like Shakespeare’s plays, it shows us a world that is our own, a history that is our own, a burden that is our own, rendered out into the rhythm of scenes and arcs, chapters and parts.”

Obama concentrated the full force of his attention on reforming American healthcare—by making it available to millions whose insurance refused to provide coverage.

Trump’s top priority was to separate the United States from Mexico with an impenetrable wall—and he even diverted $3.6 billion from Pentagon funding to pay for it. 

Like John F. Kennedy, Barack Obama will likely be positively remembered as much for what he tried to do as what he succeeded at doing.

Like Richard M. Nixon, Donald Trump will likely be remembered as a menacing stain on American history. 

THE PRICE OF FANATICISM–IN FILM AND REAL LIFE

In Bureaucracy, Business, Entertainment, History, Military, Social commentary, Uncategorized on June 7, 2024 at 12:18 am

Anthony “The Mooch” Scaramucci desperately sought a high-stakes position with the Donald Trump White House.

He would have done better to have studied the truths offered in the 1940 movie, The Man I Married.

Carol Cabbott (Joan Bennett) is the editor of The Smart World,  married to Eric Hoffman (Francis Lederer) a German. They have a seven-year-old son, Ricky (Johnny Russell).

Sometime in the 1930s they decide to vacation in Nazi Germany. Eric is quickly enamored of the Third Reich. His ardor is shared by Frieda (Anna Sten) a former schoolmate who reunites with him.

Frieda and Eric attend Nazi gatherings, and he decides to stay in Germany. Carol, however, is appalled at the cruelty and barbarism of the Reich and can’t wait to return to the United States.

The Man I Married.jpg

As time  passes, Eric becomes more strident in his worship of Adolf Hitler. Carol and he grow increasingly estranged.

Eventually, Eric tells Carol he is in love with Frieda and wants a divorce. Even worse, he wants to keep his son in Germany, to become a loyal follower of the Nazis. 

For Carol, the situation is desperate: Under German law, Eric’s rights will trump hers.

But then fate takes a hand. While visiting his elderly father, Eric learns something truly shocking: His mother was a Jewess—the absolute worst calamity that could befall an ardent Nazi.

“If you won’t let your son return to America with his mother,” says his father, “I will go to the authorities and show them the marriage certificate.”

Eric is stunned. So is Frieda, who is standing by when the news breaks. Disgusted that she was about to “racially defile” herself, she angrily stalks out.

Suddenly, Eric now says he doesn’t know what came over him, and he wants to return to the United States. Even more startling, he expects to go on with his marriage to Carol, as if nothing has happened.

But, for Carol, the damage is too great and the marriage is over.

She and Ricky return to the United States without Eric—who has lost everything: His wife, his son and his future with the Third Reich.

Now, fast forward to the 21st century of Donald Trump’s America—and the fate of Anthony Scaramucci.

Anthony Scaramucci at SALT Conference 2016 (cropped).jpg

Anthony Scaramucci

Jdarsie11 [CC BY-SA 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0)%5D

In 2005, Scaramucci founded SkyBridge Capital, a global alternative investment firm.

But, in 2017, hoping to attain a position with the Trump administration, he resigned from his co-management role and ended his affiliation with SkyBridge.

On January 12, 2017, he was named Assistant to President Trump and director of the White House Office of Public Liaison and Intergovernmental Affairs.

Then disaster struck. On January 31, Trump’s chief of staff, Reince Priebus, called Scaramucci “to tell him he should pull out of consideration.”

Priebus opposed Scaramucci’s appointment because of Scaramucci’s stake in Skybridge Capital. The reason: Skybridge held a majority stake sale to RON Transatlantic EG and HNA Capital (U.S.) Holding, a Chinese conglomerate with close ties to China’s Communist Party.

But then Scaramucci’s future with the Trump administration suddenly appeared a reality.

On July 21, 2017, he was named as White House Communications Director, to take office on July 25. Even more importantly, he would report directly to the President—and not to Priebus, as had White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer.

Spicer, who had opposed Scarmucci’s hiring, resigned on the day of the appointment. Priebus had also strongly argued against the hiring, to no avail. 

Then Scaramucci’s own hubris intervened.

On July 26, in a call to Ryan Lizza of The New Yorker, Scaramucci said he would rid the White House of “leakers.” He threatened to fire the entire White House Communications staff if Lizza didn’t reveal the source who had leaked the story of a dinner he had had with Trump.

He blasted Priebus as a “leaker” and “a fucking paranoid schizophrenic, a paranoiac” and predicted that Priebus “would resign soon.”

Scaramucci also had harsh words for Trump’s chief strategist, Steve Bannon: “I’m not Steve Bannon, I’m not trying to suck my own cock. I’m not trying to build my own brand off the fucking strength of the President. I’m here to serve the country.”

Steve Bannon

Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 2.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0&gt;, via Wikimedia Commons

On July 27, Priebus resigned as chief of staff.

The next day, Trump announced that he had named retired general John F. Kelley as Priebus’ replacement. 

Then, on July 31, Scaramucci joined Spicer and Priebus as an ex-White House employee—dismissed by Trump at Kelly’s request, according to The New York Times

And, like Eric Hoffman in The Man I Married, Scaramucci found himself without a marriage. 

His wife, Deidre Ball—like Carol Hoffman—despised the man he yearned to work for: Donald Trump.

Married to Scaramucci in 2014, Ball filed for divorce in early July 2017 when she was eight months pregnant with their second child. 

On July 24, Deidre gave birth to the couple’s son, James—while Anthony was in West Virginia attending the Boy Scouts Jamboree with Trump. He reportedly sent her a note: “Congratulations, I’ll pray for our child.” 

Like Icarus, the mythical character who flew too close to the sun, he rose to the heights—and plunged to his doom.

MILEY’S SIN

In Entertainment, History, RELIGION, Social commentary on May 31, 2024 at 12:10 am

Miley Cyrus has been called the “Teen Queen” of the 2000s. She is also one of the few child stars with a successful musical career as an adult.      

The daughter of country singer Billy Ray Cyrus, she became a teen idol at 13 as Hannah Montana in the Disney Channel television series (2006-2011) of that name.  As Hannah Montana, she achieved success on the Billboard charts with two number-one soundtracks.

But on March 1, 2012, she outraged the Christian Right by committing the ultimate sin: She believed in science.

She posted a tweet featuring a photo of the physicist Lawrence Krauss: “Beautiful.” 

But it wasn’t what then-19-year-old Cyrus wrote that enraged the “kill-for-Christ” types. It was the words—from Krauss—emblazoned against the photo.

Miley Cyrus

EVERY ATOM IN YOUR BODY CAME FROM A STAR THAT EXPLODED.  AND, THE ATOMS IN YOUR LEFT HAND PROBABLY CAME FROM A DIFFERENT STAR THAN THE ATOMS IN YOUR RIGHT HAND. 

IT REALLY IS THE MOST POETIC THING I KNOW ABOUT THE UNIVERSE.   

YOU ARE ALL STARDUST. 

YOU COULDN’T BE HERE IF STARS HADN’T EXPLODED, BECAUSE THE ELEMENTS (THE CARBON, NITROGEN, OXYGEN AND ALL THE THINGS THAT MATTER FOR EVOLUTION) WEREN’T CREATED AT THE BEGINNING OF TIME, THEY WERE CREATED IN STARS.

SO FORGET JESUS. STARS DIED SO YOU COULD LIVE.

Lawrence Krauss Pic

And it was those three words—“SO FORGET JESUS”—that roused right-wing Christians to deluge Cyrus’ twitter account with insults and death threats.  Among these:

“So are you no longer a Christian? Forget Jesus??? Seriously? What has happened to you out there in the famous world? What????”

“You seriously believe that crap? It’s so ridiculously stupid. Go to hell.”

Cyrus quickly made it clear she didn’t intend to meekly accept such aggression. She tweeted: “U have nothing better 2 do than hate? That saddens me. Im surrounded by love Im sorry 4 whatever happened 2 make u so bitter.

“How can people take the love out of science and bring hate into religion so easily?” she asked and then quoted Albert Einstein:

“It makes me sad to think the world is this way. Like Einstein says ‘Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind.’”

She demanded that Twitter (now known as “X”) police itself against the cyber-bullies who often use its service.

Twitter Logo Stock Illustrations – 7,488 Twitter Logo Stock Illustrations, Vectors & Clipart - Dreamstime

Twitter said that its users should just block their harassers.

That ignored the question: If you start getting scores—or hundreds—of insulting and threatening tweets, are you supposed to take the time to block each one?

Twitter said that it would investigate violent threats, but then slopped the problem back onto the victim. 

According to the Twitter Help Center:

Contact local Law Enforcement or Trusted Individuals: We will investigate reports of violent threats but please remember we are not the police and we cannot actively work with the police to report incidents that you report to us.

“If something has gone beyond the point of a personal conflict and has turned into actual violent threats that you feel are credible, call the police.”

In short, you’re on your own.

All of which raised the question: Why do so many people who claim to be filled with Christian love instantly resort to insults, threats or violence simply because someone has dared to express a different religious opinion?

Could it be that then-Senator Barack Obama was more insightful than many fundamentalist Christians wanted to admit? 

It was at an April 6, 2008 San Francisco fundraising event that the Presidential candidate said:

“You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them….

“So it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

Of course, if Obama had said this about conditions in the Arab world, millions of these same fundamentalist Christians would have wildly applauded.

Obama took a lot of heat from Christian fundamentalists for his comment.  But it remains true that the anger so many of these people aimed at Cyrus is out of all proportion to the “damage” inflicted by her single word: “Beautiful.”

She was not:

  • Preventing anyone from worshipping as s/he pleased;
  • Urging the Federal Government to ban religious worship;
  • Promoting some other faith—such as Islam—over that of Christianity.

She was merely agreeing with an observation—and an opinion—of an internationally-renowned physicist.

You can agree with her.  Or disagree with her.  Or ignore her completely.

But Cyrus has every right to believe as she wishes.

As do fundamentalists—who believe that a man who died 2,000 years ago is going to magically return from the grave to make everything wonderful.

Clearly, many religious people—of all faiths—desperately need to remember the words of the French philosopher Voltaire: “I do not agree with what you say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.”

And he warned: “Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices.”

A WARNING TO REPUBLICANS: VIOLENCE CAN FLOW TWO WAYS

In Bureaucracy, Entertainment, History, Politics, Social commentary on May 28, 2024 at 12:10 am

“We mock you. We mock your fear. We want your fear. It’s going to be accountability. We are taking apart the administrative state. We’re going to destroy the deep state, and we’re going to hold everybody responsible that put this republic in the situation its in today. 

“Accountability, responsibility. And that will come with authority. The authority of Donald J. Trump as the 47th president of the United States.”

The speaker was Steve Bannon, former Trump campaign manager and White House advisor. And he was issuing a warning to everyone who didn’t enthusiastically accept Donald Trump as his Once and Future Fuhrer

Threats of violence have become common among Republicans since 2015, when Trump first ran for President. And they continue to cast a shadow over the 2024 Presidential campaign.

On March 16, 2016, Trump warned Republicans that if he didn’t win the GOP nomination in July, his supporters would literally riot: “I think you’d have riots. I think you would see problems like you’ve never seen before. I think bad things would happen. I really do. I wouldn’t lead it, but I think bad things would happen.” 

An  NBC reporter summed it up as: “The message to Republicans was clear: ‘Nice convention you got there, shame if something happened to it.’”

Eight years later, on March 16, Trump made a similar threat: “Now if I don’t get elected, it’s going to be a bloodbath for the whole—that’s gonna be the least of it….If this election isn’t won, I’m not sure that you’ll ever have another election in this country.”

The Third Reich similarly relied on violence—or the threat of it—to preserve its dictatorial control over Germany.

A key representative of that violence was Reinhard Tristan Eugen Heydrich.

A tall, blond-haired former naval officer, Heydrich was both a champion fencer and talented violinist. Heydrich joined the Schutzstaffel, or Protective Squads, better known as the SS, in 1931, and quickly became head of its counterintelligence service.

In 1934, he oversaw the “Night of the Long Knives” purge of Hitler’s brown-shirted S.A., or Stormtroopers.

Reinhard Heycrich

In September, 1941, Heydrich was appointed “Reich Protector” of Czechoslovakia, which had fallen prey to Germany in 1938 but whose citizens were growing restless under Nazi rule.

Heydrich immediately ordered a purge, executing 92 people within the first three days of his arrival in Prague. By February, 1942, 4,000-5,000 people had been arrested.

In January, 1942, Heydrich convened a meeting of high-ranking political and military leaders in Wannsee, Germany, to streamline “the Final Solution to the Jewish Question.”  

An estimated six million Jews were thus slaughtered.

Returning to Prague, Heydrich continued his policy of carrot-and-stick with the Czechs—improving the social security system and requisitioning luxury hotels for middle-class workers, alternating with arrests and executions.  

Two British-trained Czech commandos—Jan Kubis and Joseph Gabcik—parachuted into Prague. 

On May 27, 1942, they waited at a hairpin turn in the road always taken by Heydrich. When Heydrich’s Mercedes slowed down, Gabcik raised his machinegun—which jammed.

Rising in his seat, Heydrich aimed his revolver at Gabcik—as Kubis lobbed a hand grenade at the car. The explosion drove steel and leather fragments of the car’s upholstery into Heydrich’s diaphragm, spleen and lung.

Scene of Reinhard Heydrich’s assassination

Hitler dispatched doctors from Berlin to save the Reich Protector. But infection set in, and on June 4, Heydrich died at age 38. 

The assassination sent shockwaves through the upper echelons of the Third Reich. No one had dared assault—much less assassinate—a high-ranking Nazi official.

Nazis had slaughtered tens of thousands without hesitation—or fear that the same might happen to them. 

Suddenly they realized that the fury they had aroused could be turned against themselves.

Which brings us to the leaders of America’s own Right-wing.

The names of infamous Nazis were widely known:

  • Reichsmarshall Hermann Goering;
  • Propaganda Minister Paul Joseph Goebbels;
  • Deputy Fuhrer Rudolf Hess;
  • SS-Reichsfuhrer Heinrich Himmler;
  • “Hanging Judge” Roland Freisler;
  • Architect Albert Speer;
  • SS Obergruoppenfuhrer Reinhard Heydrich; and
  • Fuhrer Adolf Hitler.

Adolf Hitler introducing his new cabinet, 1933

Members of the Nazi government

And so are the names of the infamous leaders of the American Right: 

  • Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell;
  • Texas Senator Ted Cruz; 
  • Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas;
  • Evangelist Franklin Graham;
  • Florida Senator Marco Rubio;
  • Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito; 
  • Florida Governor Ron DeSantis; 
  • Former President Donald Trump.

The difference between these two infamous groups is this:

In Nazi Germany, ordinary Germans could not learn about the personal lives of their dictators—including their home addresses—and to conspire against them.

In the United States, ordinary citizens have an array of means to do this. They can turn to newspapers, TV and magazines. And if that isn’t enough, “people finder” websites, for a modest price, provide addresses and names of relatives of potential targets.

In Nazi Germany, firearms were tightly controlled.

In the United States, the Right’s National Rifle Association has successfully lobbied to put lethal firepower into the hands of virtually anyone who wants it.

Eighty-two years ago, Reinhard Heydrich believed himself invulnerable from the hatred of the enemies he had made. That arrogance cost him his life.

The day may soon come when America’s own Right-wingers start learning that same lesson.

DOGS: A DETERRENT TO ISLAMIC TERRORISM

In Bureaucracy, Entertainment, History, Law Enforcement, Military, Politics, Social commentary on May 2, 2024 at 12:11 am

There’s a scene in the classic 1956 Western, The Searchers, that counterterrorism experts should study closely.

John Wayne—in the role of Indian-hating Ethan Edwards—and a party of Texas Rangers discover the corpse of a Comanche killed during a raid on a nearby farmhouse.

One of the Rangers–a teenager enraged by the Indians’ killing of his family—picks up a rock and bashes in the head of the dead Indian.

Wayne, sitting astride his horse, asks: “Why don’t you finish the job?” 

He draws his revolver and fires two shots, taking out the eyes of the dead Comanche—although the mutilation is not depicted onscreen.

John Wayne as Ethan Edwards in The Searchers

The leader of the Rangers, a part-time minister, asks: ”What good did that do?”

“By what you preach, none,” says Wayne/Edwards. “But by what that Comanche believes—ain’t got no eyes, he can’t enter the Spirit land. Has to wander forever between the winds. You get it, Reverend.”

Now, fast forward to May 1, 2011: U.S. Navy SEALS descend on a compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, and kill Osama bin Laden, the Al Qaeda chieftain.

Among the details of the raid that most titillates the media and public: The commandos were accompanied by a bomb-sniffing dog, a Belgian Malinois.

The canine was strapped to a member of the SEAL team as he lowered himself and the dog to the ground from a hovering helicopter near the compound.

Belgian Shepherd Military Dogs Shop 1692862558, 45% OFF

A Belgian Malinois SEAL dog

Heavily armored dogs–equipped with infrared night-sight cameras–have been used in the past by the top-secret unit.

The cameras on their heads beam live TV pictures back to the troops, providing them with critical information and warning of ambushes.

The war dogs wear ballistic body armor that is said to withstand damage from single and double-edged knives, as well as protective gear which shields them from shrapnel and gunfire.

Some dogs are trained to silently locate booby traps and concealed enemies such as snipers. The dogs’ keen senses of smell and hearing makes them far more effective at detecting these dangers than humans.

The animals will attack anyone carrying a weapon and have become a pivotal part of special operations as they crawl unnoticed into tunnels or rooms to hunt for enemy combatants.

Which brings us to the ultimate of ironies: Osama bin Laden may have been killed through the aid of an animal Muslims fear and despise.

Osama bin Laden

Muslims generally cast dogs in a negative light because of their ritual impurity. Muhammad did not like dogs according to Sunni tradition, and most practicing Muslims do not have dogs as pets.

It is said that angels do not enter a house which contains a dog. Though dogs are not allowed for pets, they are allowed to be kept if used for work, such as guarding the house or farm, or when used for hunting.

Because Islam considers dogs in general to be unclean, many Muslim taxi drivers and store owners have refused to accommodate customers who have guide dogs.

In 2003, the Islamic Sharia Council, based in the United Kingdom, ruled that the ban on dogs does not apply to those used for guide work.

But many Muslims continue to refuse access, and see the pressure to allow the dogs as an attack upon their religious beliefs.

Counterterror specialists have learned that Muslims’ dread of dogs can be turned into a potent weapon against Islamic suicide bombers.

In Israel, use of bomb-sniffing dogs has proven highly effective—but not simply because of the dogs’ ability to detect explosives through their highly-developed sense of smell.

Muslim suicide-bombers fear that if they blow themselves up near a dog, they might kill the animal—and its unclean blood might be mingled with their own. This would make them unworthy to ascend to Heaven and claim those 72 willing virgins.

Similarly, news in 2009 that bomb-sniffing dogs might soon be patrolling Metro Vancouver’s buses and SkyTrains as a prelude to the 2010 Olympics touched off Muslims’ alarms.

“If I am going to the mosque and pray, and I have this saliva on my body, I have to go and change or clean,” said Shawket Hassan, vice president of the British Columbia Muslim Association.  

Hassan said that he wanted the transit police to develop guidelines that would keep the dogs about one foot away from passengers.

What are the lessons to be learned from all this? They are two-fold:

  1. Only timely tactical intelligence will reveal Islamic terrorists’ latest plans for destruction.
  2. But no matter how adept such killers prove at concealing their momentary aims, they cannot conceal the attributes and long-term objectives of the religion, history and culture which have scarred and molded them.

American police, Intelligence and military operatives must constantly ask themselves: “How can we turn Islamic religion / history / culture into weapons against the Islamic terrorists we face?”

These institutions must become intimately knowledgeable about the mindset of our Islamic enemies—just as the best frontier Army scouts and officers did about the mindset of their Indian enemies.

These institutions must become intimately knowledgeable about the mindset of our Islamic enemies, just as the best frontier Army scouts and officers became knowledgeable about the mindset of the Indians they fought.

And then they must ruthlessly apply that knowledge against the weaknesses of those sworn enemies.

UGLY–AND UNSPOKEN–TRUTHS ABOUT THE ISRAEL-GAZA WAR

In Bureaucracy, Entertainment, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on April 29, 2024 at 2:03 am

On October 7, the Hamas terrorist organization which governs Gaza invaded Israel, killing 1,139 soldiers and civilians, and kidnapping another 253—including women and children.

Since then, Israel has pounded Gaza with bombs, missiles. tanks and soldiers. About 62% of all homes have been destroyed. More than a million residents have been rendered homeless. Damages have been estimated at over $13 billion.

To date, more than  31,184 Palestinians have been killed and 72,889 injured, according to the local health authorities.

Across the nation, scores of university students have protested Israel’s retaliation against Gaza.

Among the universities targeted: Columbia, Harvard, Yale, the University of Texas at Austin, the University of Southern California, Emory University in Atlanta, Boston’s Emerson College.

Clashes have erupted between pro-Palestinian and pro-Israeli students. Jewish students have been threatened with death. And several universities—such as USC—have been forced to cancel upcoming graduation ceremonies for fear of violence.

This has forced universities to call on police to clear pro-Palestinian encampments and arrest demonstrators who make it impossible for serious-minded students to get an education.

Aftermath of an Israeli air strike in Gaza

Palestinian News & Information Agency (Wafa) in contract with APAimages, CC BY-SA 3.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0&gt;, via Wikimedia Commons

As a result, it’s time for a commonsense update on the war—and the terrorism-supporting questions that go with it.

“Why are the Israelis bombing Gaza?”

Because they don’t like having their men, women and children slaughtered and kidnapped.

“Why does the United States allow Israel to bomb Gaza?”

Israel is a sovereign country and does not take its orders from the United States.

“Hamas only slaughtered 1,139 Israelis. But Israelis have killed over 31,000 Palestinians. That’s so unfair.”

Under this logic, Israel should be allowed to kill only 1,139 Palestinians: “I smacked you in the mouth once, so you should be allowed to smack me in the mouth once. Actually, you shouldn’t be allowed to smack me back at all.”

“Israel is waging war on civilians—not Hamas.”

Hamas has deliberately embedded itself among a civilian population: “Ha, ha, you’ll have to kill all these innocent people in order to kill us.” For Israel to accept such sanctuary would be to confer immunity on Hamas and guarantee ceaseless future attacks.

Emblem of Hamas

“Palestinians didn’t attack Israel—Hamas did.”

Hamas is overwhelmingly supported by Palestinians. A man who shelters a known killer is by definition an accessory to that killer’s crimes. Yet Hamas refuses to allow civilians to take shelter in its tunnels. Nor does it use its underground network to supply much-needed food and resources for Gazans.

“Israel is fighting a war of genocide against Gaza!”

The universal rallying cry among Gaza residents—and their Islamic and non-Islamic allies—is: “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.” Which means: When Israel is destroyed and its citizens are slaughtered.

For Hamas, no “two-state solution” will do.

According to CNN, several videos are circulating online that “show Israeli soldiers in Gaza behaving in offensive and disrespectful ways toward the civilian population. Other videos show soldiers ransacking private homes, destroying civilian property and using racist and hateful language.”

Soldiers are universally notorious for showing disrespect for their enemies, whether civilian or military.

During the Civil War, Union General William Tecumseh Sherman set out on his legendary “March to the Sea” through Georgia in 1864. His soldiers ravaged the countryside, destroyed all sources of food and forage and left behind hungry and demoralized Southerners. 

March to the Sea | Civil War Trails | Civil War Sites in Georgia

Sherman’s March

As for Israeli soldiers “using racist and hateful language”: During World War II, GIs referred to Germans as “krauts” and to Japanese as “Japs.” During the Vietnam war, grunts called Vietcong and North Vietnamese soldiers “gooks.” In Afghanistan and Iraq, Americans used “ragheads” and “Hajiis” to describe their enemies.

War is, by its nature, destructive—of lives, of property, of feelings for humanity.

William Tecumseh Sherman minced no words in describing its evil: “You cannot qualify war in harsher terms than I will. War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it….You might as well appeal against the thunder-storm as against these terrible hardships of war….

“They are inevitable, and the only way the people of Atlanta can hope once more to live in peace and quiet at home, is to stop the war….”

Sherman’s words—which appeared in a September 12, 1864 letter to Atlanta Mayor James M. Calhoun—could be addressed to Hamas and the Gaza residents who support it: 

“Now that war comes home to you, you feel very different. You depreciate its horrors, but did not feel them when you sent car-loads of soldiers and ammunition, and moulded shells and shot, to carry war into Kentucky and Tennessee, to desolate the homes of hundreds of thousands of good people who only asked to live in peace at their old homes, and under the Government of their inheritance.”

“The Holy Land.” 

There is no “holy land.” There is only desert claimed by two warring religions. Both sides believe “God is on our side.” So there will never be peace, only eternal war—until global warming finally makes the Middle East so hot that no one can live there.

MAJOR DUNDEE: 1860s AMERICA MEETS 21ST CENTURY AMERICA

In Entertainment, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on March 25, 2024 at 12:10 am

Major Dundee is a 1965 Sam Peckinpah Western focusing on a Union cavalry officer (Charlton Heston) who leads a motley troop of soldiers into Mexico to rescue three children kidnapped by Apaches.  

Along the way they liberate Mexican villagers and clash with French lancers trying to establish Mexico as a French colony under would-be emperor Archduke Maximilian 1.

The Wild Bunch is universally recognized as Peckinpah’s greatest achievement. It has certainly had a far greater impact on audiences and critics than Major Dundee. According to Heston, this was really the movie Peckinpah wanted to make while making Dundee, but he couldn’t quite get his mind around it.

As a result, Dundee’s virtues have been tragically overlooked. It has a larger cast of major characters than Bunch, and these are men an audience can truly like and identify with:

  • The charm of Benjamin Tyreen (Richard Harris), a Confederate lieutenant forced into Union service;
  • The steady courage of Sergeant Gomez (Mario Adorf);
  • The quiet dignity of Aesop (Brock Peters), a black soldier;
  • The quest for maturity in young, untried bugler Tim Ryan (Michael Anderson, Jr.);
  • The on-the-job training experience of impetuous Lt. Graham (Jim Hutton); and
  • The stoic endurance of Indian scout Sam Potts (James Coburn).

These men are charged with a dangerous and dirty mission, and do it as well as they can, but you wouldn’t fear inviting them to meet your family.

Sam Peckinpah: 'Mayor Dundee'

Major Dundee (Charlton Heston)

That was definitely not the case with The Wild Bunch, four hardened killers prepared to rip off anyone, anytime, and leave a trail of bodies in their wake. The only place where you would have felt safe seeing them, in real-life, was behind prison bars.

The Wild Bunch

Dundee is an odyssey movie, in the same vein as Saving Private Ryan. Both films start with a battle, followed by the disappearance of characters who need to be searched for and brought back to safety.

Just as Dundee assembles a small force to go into Mexico, so, too, does Captain John Miller (Tom Hanks) do the same, with his hunting ground being France.

Dundee’s men retrieve the kidnapped children and survive a near-fatal battle with Indians. Miller’s men twice clash with the Germans before finding their quarry, James Ryan.

Before Dundee can return to the United States, he must face and defeat a corps of French soldiers. Before Miller can haul Ryan back to safety, he must repulse a German assault.

Both groups of soldiers—Dundee’s and Miller’s—are transformed by their experiences in ways neither group could possibly articulate. (Miller, being a highly literate schoolteacher, would surely do a better job of this than the tight-jawed Dundee.)

Dundee’s soldiers return to a United States that’s just ended its Civil War with a Union victory—and the death of slavery. Miller’s soldiers return to a nation that is now a global superpower.

Of course, Ryan was fortunate in having Steven Spielberg as its director.  With his clout, there was no question that Ryan would emerge as the film he wanted.

Peckinpah lacked such clout. And he fought with everyone, including the producer, Jerry Bressler, who ultimately held the power to destroy his film. This guaranteed that his movie would emerge far differently than he had envisioned.

Sam Peckinpah.JPG

Sam Peckinpah

In 2005, an extended version of Dundee was released, featuring 12 minutes of restored footage. (Much of the original footage was lost after severe cuts to the movie.)

In this new version, we fully see how unsympathetic a character the martinet Dundee really is. Owing to Heston’s career of playing heroes—such as Moses and El Cid—it’s easy to overlook Dundee’s arrogance and lethal fanaticism and automatically view him as a hero.

If he is indeed that, he is a hero with serious flaws.

And his self-imposed mission poses questions for us today:

  • Where is the line between professional duty and personal fanaticism?
  • How do we balance the success of a mission against its potential costs—especially if they prove appalling?
  • At what point—if any—does personal conscience override professional obligations?

Whether intentionally or not, in Major Dundee, Peckinpah laid out a microcosm of the American history that would immediately follow the Civil War.

Former Confederates and Unionists would forego their regional animosities and fight against a recognized mutual enemy—the Indians. This would prove a dirty and drawn-out war, stripped of the glory and (later) treasured memories of the Civil War.

Just as Dundee’s final battle with French lancers ended with an American victory won at great cost, so, too, would America’s forays into the Spanish-American War and World Wars 1 and 11 prove the same.

Ben Tyreen’s commentary on the barbarism of French troops (“Never underestimate the value of a European education”) would be echoed by twentieth-century Americans uncovering the horrors of Dachau and Buchenwald.

And America would learn to project its formidable military power at great cost. Toward the end of the movie, Teresa Santiago (Senta Berger), the ex-patriot Austrian widow, would ask Dundee: “But who do you answer to?

It is a question that still vividly expresses the view of the international community as this superpower colossus hurtles from one often-disastrous conflict to the next.

KING HENRY VIII MEETS KING DONALD 1: PART ONE (OF TWO)

In Bureaucracy, Entertainment, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on March 4, 2024 at 12:10 am

There is more in common between Donald Trump and King Henry VIII than at first might seem possible.               

And the 1969 movie, “Anne of the Thousand Days,” brings it vividly to light.    

Throughout much of the film, Henry (Richard Burton) lusts to romantically—and sexually—capture the beautiful Anne Boleyn (Geneviève Bujold). The fact that he’s married to Catherine of Aragon matters not at all.

Henry justifies his infidelity on the fact that Catherine has failed to give him a male heir.

He’s been having an affair with Anne’s younger sister, Mary, but is now bored with her. The fact that she’s now pregnant with his child matters not at all, either.

He first notices Anne, 18, at a court ball. She’s engaged to the son of the Earl of Northumberland, and they have received their parents’ permission to marry. But Henry is enraptured with Anne’s beauty and orders his Lord Chancellor, Cardinal Wolsey, to break the engagement.

ANNE OF THE THOUSAND DAYS Movie POSTER 27x40 Richard Burton Genevieve Bujold - Picture 1 of 1

Anne is furious, and blames both Henry and Wolsey for ruining her happiness. But as the King’s infatuation continues, she becomes intoxicated with the power it brings her. 

Henry presses Anne to become his mistress. But she says she won’t bear an illegitimate child. Desperate to have a son, Henry decides to divorce Catherine and marry Anne.

For Anne, it’s the ultimate seduction, and she agrees. She’s ordained as Queen, but is popularly reviled by the supporters of Catherine.

Months later, Henry is dismayed when Anne gives birth to a daughter, Elizabeth—who will eventually become Queen after Henry’s death.

Henry turns his always-wandering eye to Jane Seymour, one of Anne’s maids. Anne banishes Jane from the court. 

Full-length portrait of King Henry VIII

Henry VIII

Anne is furious that Sir Thomas More, the King’s Chancellor, opposes Henry’s divorce from Catherine. She refuses to sleep with Henry unless he executes More.

Anne gets her wish: More is beheaded. But her next child—a boy—is stillborn.

By now, Henry is convinced Anne will never be able to give him a male heir. He schemes to divorce her and marry Jane. He contrives with his new chief minister, Thomas Cromwell, to have Anne falsely charged with infidelity.

At her trial, Anne vigorously defends herself, proving that the witnesses against her are lying.

In a private meeting with her, Henry offers to free her if she’ll agree to annul their marriage. Since this will make Elizabeth illegitimate, Anne refuses—and goes courageously to her death 

Throughout the movie, Englishmen from Henry on down are convinced that England will collapse if a woman ascends the throne.

And, of course, England not only survives but thrives under the 45-year reign of Queen Elizabeth.

Which brings us to Donald Trump.

Like Henry, Trump is a man of voracious appetites—for wealth, for fame, for sex. Like Henry, he is untroubled by scruples and will commit any crime to attain whatever he wants. Like Henry, he is a man of fierce temper—always eager to crush anyone he thinks has wronged him.

Related image

Donald Trump 

Countless Englishmen who lived under Henry thought England would collapse if a woman took the throne.

Now countless Americans believe the United States will collapse if a former President is brought to trial.

On March 30, Trump was indicted by a New York grand jury. He thus became the first current or former President to face criminal charges.

On April 1, CNN reported/editorialized:  “Former President Donald Trump’s indictment….has thrust the nation into uncharted political, legal and historical waters, and raised a slew of questions about how the criminal case will unfold. 

“The Manhattan district attorney’s office has been investigating Trump in connection with his alleged role in a hush money payment scheme and cover-up involving adult film star Stormy Daniels that dates to the 2016 Presidential election.”

Trump has attacked Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg as pursuing a leftist vendetta to prevent him from running for President in 2024.

“If they can do this to me,” he has thundered in countless fund-raising appeals to his Right-wing followers, “they can do this to you.” 

Which raises the question: “How many others have tried to illegally overturn a legitimate Presidential election and/or paid hush-money to a porn ‘actress’?”

Trump has repeatedly tried to appear the victim of “a Democratic-led witch hunt.” But if politics has tainted the dispensing of justice in Trump’s case, it’s been on his behalf.    

As President, he had immunity from civil and criminal lawsuits. He couldn’t be tried at local, state and federal levels. And he had good reason to avoid facing trial at any level.  Among the cases facing him while he held office:

  • The Manhattan District Attorney’s criminal case against the Trump Organization for tax evasion.
  • The New York Attorney General’s civil investigation into the Trump Organization for fraud.
  • The E. Jean Carroll defamation lawsuit (he called her a liar after she claimed he raped her in the 1990s). 
  • The Mary Trump lawsuit: His niece is suing him for allegedly defrauding her out of millions of dollars.
  • The Trump Tower lawsuit: Five people claim that Keith Schiller, the Trump Organization’s then chief of security, hit one of them on the head when they were protesting outside of the company’s Manhattan headquarters in 2015. 

ADAM SCHIFF: STANDING UP TO A TRAITOR AND HIS ACCOMPLICES—PART TWO (END)

In Bureaucracy, Entertainment, History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on March 1, 2024 at 12:11 am

On March 24, 2019, Attorney General William Barr received the long-awaited report by Special Counsel Robert Mueller about Russian efforts to subvert the 2016 Presidential election.  

According to Barr, the report—which no one else in the government had seen—showed no evidence that President Donald Trump had colluded with Russian Intelligence agents.

And now House Republicans—acting entirely on that claim—suddenly went on the offensive.

On March 28, all nine Republicans on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence demanded in a letter that Representative Adam Schiff (D-California) resign as its chairman.  

On the same day, President Donald Trump tweeted: “Congressman Adam Schiff, who spent two years knowingly and unlawfully lying and leaking, should be forced to resign from Congress!”

Other Republicans quickly joined the chorus:

  • House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-California): Schiff owed “an apology to the American public” and should step down from his post as head of the Intelligence committee.
  • Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel: “They [Schiff and House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-New York] should be removed from their chairmanships. They owe the American people an apology. They owe this President an apology, and they have work to do to heal this democracy because this is our country we are talking about.”
  • South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham: “He’s getting into conspiracy land and he’s acting like an Oliver Stone type figure.” 
  • White House Adviser Kelleyanne Conway: “He’s been on every TV show 50 times a day for practically the last two years, promising Americans that this President would either be impeached or indicted. He has no right, as somebody who has been peddling a lie, day after day after day, unchallenged. Unchallenged and not under oath. Somebody should have put him under oath and said, ‘You have evidence, where is it?’”

On March 28, Schiff—speaking in a firm and controlled voice—addressed his critics in the House and beyond. 

It was a speech worthy of that given by Mark Antony at the funeral of Julius Caesar.

Adam Schiff official portrait.jpg

Adam Schiff

“My colleagues may think it’s okay that the Russians offered dirt on the Democratic candidate for President as part of what was described as ‘the Russian government’s effort to help the Trump campaign.’ You might think that’s okay.

“My colleagues might think it’s okay that when that was offered to the son of the President, who had a pivotal role in the campaign, that the President’s son did not call the FBI, he did not adamantly refuse that foreign help. No, instead that son said that he would ‘love’ the help of the Russians. You might think it’s okay that he took that meeting.

“You might think it’s okay that Paul Manafort, the campaign chair, someone with great experience running campaigns, also took that meeting.

“You might think it’s okay that the President’s son-in-law also took that meeting.

“You might think it’s okay that they concealed it from the public.

“You might think it’s okay that their only disappointment after that meeting was that the dirt they received on Hillary Clinton wasn’t better.

“You might think it’s okay that when it was discovered a year later that they’d lied about that meeting and said it was about adoptions, you might think it’s okay that the President is reported to have helped dictate that lie. You might think that’s okay. I don’t. 

Related image

“You might think it’s okay that the Presidential chairman of a campaign would offer information about that campaign to a Russian in exchange for money or debt forgiveness. You might think that’s okay.  I don’t.  

“You might think it’s okay that campaign chairman offered polling data, campaign polling data to someone linked to Russian intelligence. I don’t think that’s okay.

“You might think it’s okay that the President himself called on Russia to hack his opponent’s emails, ‘if they were listening.’

“You might think it’s okay that later that day, in fact, the Russians attempted to hack a server affiliated with that campaign. I don’t think that’s okay.

Related image

“You might think that it’s okay that the President’s son-in-law sought to establish a secret back channel of communications with the Russians through a Russian diplomatic facility. I don’t think that’s okay.

“You might think it’s okay that an associate of the President made direct contact with the GRU  [the Russian military Intelligence agency] through Guccifer 2 and Wikileaks, that is considered a hostile Intelligence agency.

“You might think that it’s okay that a senior campaign official was instructed to reach that associate and find out what that hostile Intelligence agency had to say, in terms of dirt on his opponent.

“You might think it’s okay that the National Security Adviser-Designate [Mike Flynn] secretly conferred with the Russian ambassador about undermining U.S. sanctions, and you might think it’s okay he lied about it to the FBI.

“You might say that’s just what you need to do to win, but I don’t think it’s okay. I think it’s immoral. I think it’s unethical. I think it’s unpatriotic. And yes, I think it’s corrupt and evidence of collusion.” 

Not one Republican dared challenge even one accusation Schiff had made.