The Evening Blues - 1-31-22
Hey! Good Evening!
This evening's music features Will "Son Brimmer" Shade. Enjoy!
Will Shade - Better Leave That Stuff Alone
“Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it.”
-- Mark Twain
News and Opinion
Glenn knocks one out of the park. This is worth a full read, here's a snippet to get you started:
The Pressure Campaign on Spotify to Remove Joe Rogan Reveals the Religion of Liberals: Censorship
American liberals are obsessed with finding ways to silence and censor their adversaries. Every week, if not every day, they have new targets they want de-platformed, banned, silenced, and otherwise prevented from speaking or being heard (by "liberals,” I mean the term of self-description used by the dominant wing of the Democratic Party).
For years, their preferred censorship tactic was to expand and distort the concept of "hate speech” to mean "views that make us uncomfortable,” and then demand that such “hateful” views be prohibited on that basis. For that reason, it is now common to hear Democrats assert, falsely, that the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech does not protect “hate speech." Their political culture has long inculcated them to believe that they can comfortably silence whatever views they arbitrarily place into this category without being guilty of censorship.
Constitutional illiteracy to the side, the “hate speech” framework for justifying censorship is now insufficient because liberals are eager to silence a much broader range of voices than those they can credibly accuse of being hateful. That is why the newest, and now most popular, censorship framework is to claim that their targets are guilty of spreading “misinformation” or “disinformation.” These terms, by design, have no clear or concise meaning. Like the term “terrorism,” it is their elasticity that makes them so useful.
When liberals’ favorite media outlets, from CNN and NBC to The New York Times and The Atlantic, spend four years disseminating one fabricated Russia story after the next — from the Kremlin hacking into Vermont's heating system and Putin's sexual blackmail over Trump to bounties on the heads of U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan, the Biden email archive being "Russian disinformation,” and a magical mystery weapon that injures American brains with cricket noises — none of that is "disinformation” that requires banishment. Nor are false claims that COVID's origin has proven to be zoonotic rather than a lab leak, the vastly overstated claim that vaccines prevent transmission of COVID, or that Julian Assange stole classified documents and caused people to die. Corporate outlets beloved by liberals are free to spout serious falsehoods without being deemed guilty of disinformation, and, because of that, do so routinely.
This "disinformation" term is reserved for those who question liberal pieties, not for those devoted to affirming them. That is the real functional definition of “disinformation” and of its little cousin, “misinformation.” It is not possible to disagree with liberals or see the world differently than they see it. The only two choices are unthinking submission to their dogma or acting as an agent of "disinformation.” Dissent does not exist to them; any deviation from their worldview is inherently dangerous — to the point that it cannot be heard.
The data proving a deeply radical authoritarian strain in Trump-era Democratic Party politics is ample and have been extensively reported here. Democrats overwhelmingly trust and love the FBI and CIA. Polls show they overwhelmingly favor censorship of the internet not only by Big Tech oligarchs but also by the state. Leading Democratic Party politicians have repeatedly subpoenaed social media executives and explicitly threatened them with legal and regulatory reprisals if they do not censor more aggressively — a likely violation of the First Amendment given decades of case law ruling that state officials are barred from coercing private actors to censor for them, in ways the Constitution prohibits them from doing directly.
MSM Pundits Push Idea That Criticizing US Policy On Russia Makes You A Russian Agent
One thing I’ve been meaning to write about these last few days has been the way mass media pundits have been insinuating or outright asserting that Fox News host Tucker Carlson is literally an agent of the Russian government.
Carlson has been accused of promoting Russian propaganda by mainstream narrative managers for frequently criticizing the Biden administration’s hawkish posture toward Russia regarding the entirely unsubstantiated claim that Moscow is preparing to launch an unprovoked military invasion of Ukraine. We’ve been seeing things like Anderson Cooper innocently musing that “It is striking how neatly Kremlin propaganda seems to dovetail with Carlson’s talking points” and this CNN segment from December with Reliable Sources host Brian Stelter and tinfoil hat Russiagater Julia Ioffe wondering aloud about why Russian state media seem to be so fond of Carlson. By mid-January, Democratic Party operatives were openly demanding that Carlson be investigated for violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act.
“This isn’t journalism, it’s an ongoing FARA violation. Tucker Carlson needs to be prosecuted as an unregistered agent of the Russian Federation and treason under Article 3, Sec. 3, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution for aiding an enemy in hybrid warfare against the United States,” tweeted former DNC official Alexandra Chalupa, best known for colluding with the Ukrainian government in 2016 on opposition research against Donald Trump.
This isn’t journalism, it’s an ongoing FARA violation. Tucker Carlson needs to be prosecuted as an unregistered agent of the Russian Federation and treason under Article 3, Sec. 3, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution for aiding an enemy in hybrid warfare against the United States. https://t.co/5JkLuCKoBn
— Alexandra Chalupa (@AlexandraChalup) January 19, 2022
The accusations and insinuations increased, eventually leading to Carlson outright denying being a Russian agent in a recent interview with The New York Times saying, “I’ve never been to Russia, I don’t speak Russian. Of course I’m not an agent of Russia.”
As you would expect, this denial was then spun by the same demented mainstream pundits who’ve spent the last five years being wrong about Russia as evidence that Carlson is a Russian agent.
“Tucker Carlson told The New York Times he’s not a Russian agent amid controversy over his pro-Kremlin stance,” blares a headline by Business Insider.
“What would a Russian agent say if asked if they were a Russian agent?” tweeted former FBI special agent Clint Watts in response to Carlson’s denial.
“Tucker Carlson Denies Being Russian Agent After Taking Kremlin’s Side,” says a viral tweet by former FBI Assistant Director Frank Figliuzzi.
“Narrator: After he helped destroy American Democracy, it turned out he was, indeed, a Russian agent … though a rather silly one,” added MSNBC’s cartoonish “intelligence” expert Malcolm Nance.
“Tucker Carlson is walking proof that you don’t need to be an agent to be a useful idiot,” former FBI agent Peter Strzok told MSNBC’s Nicole Wallace, apparently less willing to commit to the bit than his FBI peers.
“Why hasn’t Tucker Carlson registered as a foreign agent?” reads a viral tweet from the notorious Lincoln Project.
I’ve never gotten used to the insane McCarthyite accusations which US liberals will hurl without a second thought at anyone who disagrees with them. Every time it happens it startles and alarms me, and this latest trend of claiming that opposition to US military posture toward a nuclear superpower constitutes evidence of being a treasonous foreign intelligence operative is a marked uptick in the madness.
I’m highlighting this deranged behavior not to defend the odious Carlson, but to point out that it works very much in the US empire’s favor to have a bunch of influential narrative managers aggressively manufacturing the consensus that anyone who criticizes America’s posture toward Russia is suspicious and untrustworthy.
The mass media, whose primary job is to propagandize the masses and who have an extensive history of lying to the public to manufacture consent for war, are not pushing the belief that Tucker Carlson is suspicious and sinister for questioning the official narrative about Russia. They are pushing the belief that anyone is suspicious and sinister for questioning the official narrative about Russia. That’s the message that people are receiving from this line that’s being pushed by narrative managers and ex-federal agents. Anyone who is successfully indoctrinated with this belief will become inoculated against wrongthink about that nation because they will reflexively distrust the motives of anyone who says anything that differs from the officially authorized line.
That’s the real value of this framing for the imperial propagandists. They don’t care about Tucker Carlson, who serves their agendas more often than not. They care about making sure that current and future establishment narratives about Russia will be swallowed hook, line and sinker by the mainstream public without the slightest twinge of gag reflex. You don’t even need to silence dissent if you can simply render it impotent.
It’s worth considering the possibility that all the artificially manufactured Russia hysteria we’ve seen over the last five years has been geared toward building public support for the exact escalations we are seeing today. After all, it says a lot that Russiagate began with unevidenced claims by US intelligence agencies who have an extensive track record of lying, resulted in the reignition of a new cold war against a nation long targeted for destruction by the US intelligence cartel, and now there are tons of weapons being flown in to Ukraine and US troops are being moved to Eastern Europe in response to a threat we’ve still seen no evidence is actually real.
Whoever controls the narrative controls the world. If you can control what people believe about a certain thing, then you can control what they will do and what they will allow in response to that thing. Controlling people’s beliefs about reality is controlling their reality. If you can convince people that anyone who disputes what you’re saying about a government you don’t like is suspicious and not to be trusted, then you can keep them believing everything you say about that government.
It’s clear that it is very, very important to the narrative managers that we believe what we are told about Russia. Now we’re just waiting to find out toward what specific end that agenda is being driven.
NBC Hires Iraq War LIAR In Latest Media Misinformation
Biden to Send Troops to Eastern Europe Amid Calls to End 'Warmongering'
Anti-war advocates accused the Biden administration of continued warmongering late Friday into Saturday after President Joe Biden confirmed he plans to send U.S. troops to Eastern Europe.
"I'll be moving troops to Eastern Europe in the NATO countries in the near term," Biden told reporters at Joint Base Andrews late Friday. "Not too many."
Earlier this week, the president announced that 8,500 troops were standing ready for a potential deployment to confront what the White House says is an imminent attack by Russian forces in Ukraine—despite pleas by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to stop creating "panic."
In a phone call Thursday night, Zelensky reportedly questioned the Biden administration's belief—promoted by the corporate media—that a Russian invasion is "imminent."
"I'm the president of Ukraine, I'm based here and I think I know the details deeper than any other president," Zelensky told the press after the call. "The image that mass media creates is that we have troops on the roads, we have mobilization, people are leaving for places. That's not the case. We don't need this panic."
Veteran journalist John Pilger tweeted that Zelensky's comments exposed "the warmongering of Biden... as a crime."
As Common Dreams reported Friday, U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin expressed hope that a diplomatic approach could avoid conflict with Russia, which has demanded a guarantee that Ukraine will be excluded from NATO, along with other security measures.
Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mark Milley also spoke Friday and called on Russian President Vladimir Putin to pursue diplomacy—after Putin reportedly spoke to French President Emanuel Macron about implementing a diplomatic agreement forged in 2014.
Milley warned that there will be "horrific" consequences if Russia invades Ukraine.
“Given the type of forces that are arrayed, the ground maneuver forces, the artillery, the ballistic missiles, the air forces, all of it packaged together—if that was unleashed on Ukraine, it would be significant, very significant, and it would result in a significant amount of casualties," he told reporters.
Peace group CodePink accused the Biden administration of reaching "putting the entire world at risk" while the U.S. public and international leaders make clear their anti-war stance.
"Russia doesn't want war. Ukraine doesn't want war. The American people don't want war," tweeted the group. "The Biden administration needs to get with the program and STOP endangering us all."
Ukraine President LIVID Over Biden, Media Warmongering
Ah, the anonymous officials tell us again. (Emphasis added in article.)
Russia moves blood supplies near Ukraine, adding to U.S. concern, officials say
Russia's military buildup near Ukraine has expanded to include supplies of blood along with other medical materials that would allow it to treat casualties, in yet another key indicator of Moscow's military readiness, three U.S. officials tell Reuters.
Current and former U.S. officials say concrete indicators -- like blood supplies -- are critical in determining whether Moscow would be prepared to carry out an invasion, if Russian President Vladimir Putin decided to do so.
The disclosure of the blood supplies by U.S. officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, adds another piece of context to growing U.S. warnings that Russia could be preparing for a new invasion of Ukraine as it masses more than 100,000 troops near its borders.
Russia, US, Ukraine to square off at UN Security Council
US Senate panel close to approving ‘mother of all sanctions’ against Russia
The leaders of the Senate foreign relations committee said on Sunday they were on the verge of approving “the mother of all sanctions” against Vladimir Putin, warning there would be no appeasement as the Russian president contemplates an invasion of Ukraine. “We cannot have a Munich moment again,” the panel’s Democratic chair, Bob Menendez of New Jersey, told CNN’s State of the Union, referring to the 1938 agreement by which allies ceded parts of Czechoslovakia to Hitler, believing it would stave off war.
“Putin will not stop if he believes the west will not respond,” Menendez said. “We saw what he did in 2008 in Georgia, we saw what he did in 2014 in pursuit of Crimea. He will not stop.”
Menendez said he believed bipartisan negotiations for severe sanctions were “on the one-yard line”, despite disagreements with Republicans over whether measures should be imposed before or after any Russian invasion. The UK government promised to ramp up sanctions against Putin and his associates.
Chinese ambassador Qin Gang warns US its strengthened Taiwan ties could lead to war
China’s ambassador to the US on Friday accused Washington of encouraging Taiwan to seek independence and said that such moves raised the risk of military conflict.
“The Taiwan issue is the biggest tinderbox between China and the United States,” Ambassador Qin Gang said in an interview with National Public Radio.
“If the Taiwanese authorities, emboldened by the United States, keep going down the road for independence, it most likely will involve China and the United States, the two big countries, in the military conflict,” he added.
Qin’s comments follow a string of engagements between US and Taiwanese government officials that have led Beijing to accuse Washington of violating the one-China principle that has served as a foundation for the nations’ relationship.
Dylan Ratigan EXPLAINS: Is The Stock Market About To CRASH? |Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar
Manchin Gets Thousands From GOP Megadonor After Tanking BBB
After he announced in December he would not be supporting President Joe Biden's Build Back Better Act, Sen. Joe Manchin's political action committee received the maximum allowable contribution from billionaire Republican donor Ken Langone.
The Hill reported late Friday that the wealthy investor, who supported former President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign, gave $5,000 to Manchin's Country Roads PAC less than two weeks after the right-wing Democratic senator from West Virginia said he would not join his party in supporting the president's agenda.
Langone's wife also contributed $5,000 to the PAC, while other political donations the megadonor made around the same time went to the Koch family-backed Americans for Prosperity Action and the Senate Leadership Fund, a GOP super PAC.
As Common Dreams reported in November, Langone praised Manchin's "guts and courage" for standing in the way of the Build Back Better Act's passage and promised to hold "one of the biggest fundraisers" he's ever hosted to support the senator.
Briahna Joy Gray: Biden's SCOTUS Pledge Is An EMPTY Gesture To Make Up Ground With Black Voters
California Progressives Warn Dems Against No Vote on Single-Payer
Vote in favor of a bill on Monday to establish single-payer healthcare system for California residents or risk losing your endorsement from the state Democratic Party.
That was the message this week to Assembly members from the Progressive Caucus of the California Democratic Party ahead of a Monday vote on AB 1400.
The proposed legislation, introduced by Assemblyman Ash Kalr (D-San Jose), would establish CalCare, a first-in-the-nation system to provide universal healthcare coverage to state residents.
Opposed by industry groups, it's supported by the California Nurses Association, which says that "by streamlining payments and lowering per-capita health care spending," the measure would guarantee "quality health care and long-term care without creating barriers to care or out-of-pocket costs."
Earlier this month, AB 1400 passed the Assembly's health and appropriations committees. It's now days away from a vote by the full Assembly, and has an end-of-the-month deadline to pass.
Sacramento's Fox40 reported Thursday that the state progressive caucus "is preparing to take away party endorsements from Assembly members who reject the proposal."
Progressive Caucus Chairman and California Democratic Party executive board member Amar Shergill confirmed that stance, telling the outlet: "Any Assembly member that thinks they can ignore the party, ignore labor, ignore people, vote against us, and then still get the endorsement might find they have a tougher reelection battle than they thought." ...
The warning about losing an endorsement was made clear to members earlier this week. Shergill said in a message:
"On Tuesday morning," Shergill said in a public announcement, "the Progressive Caucus sent an email to all of our members and to every delegate in the party, including elected officials, calling for a challenge to the endorsement of any Assembly member that fails to vote 'Yes' for AB 1400 on Monday. That email described a basic function of democracy and party organizing: elected officials vote on bills, then we vote on their endorsement. It's that simple.
F.B.I. Secretly Bought Israeli Spyware and Explored Hacking U.S. Phones
It is widely regarded as the world’s most potent spyware, capable of reliably cracking the encrypted communications of iPhone and Android smartphones. The software, Pegasus, made by an Israeli company, NSO Group, has been able to track terrorists and drug cartels. It has also been used against human rights activists, journalists and dissidents.
Now, an investigation published Friday by The New York Times Magazine has found that Israel, which controls the export of the spyware, just as it does the export of conventional weapons, has made Pegasus a key component of its national security strategy, using it to advance its interests around the world.
The yearlong investigation, by Ronen Bergman and Mark Mazzetti, also reports that the F.B.I. bought and tested NSO software for years with plans to use it for domestic surveillance until the agency finally decided last year not to deploy the tools. ... The U.S. had also moved to acquire Pegasus, The Times found. The F.B.I., in a deal never previously reported, bought the spyware in 2019, despite multiple reports that it had been used against activists and political opponents in other countries. It also spent two years discussing whether to deploy a newer product, called Phantom, inside the United States.
The discussions at the Justice Department and the F.B.I. continued until last summer, when the F.B.I. ultimately decided not to use NSO weapons. But Pegasus equipment is still in a New Jersey building used by the F.B.I. And the company also gave the agency a demonstration of Phantom, which could hack American phone numbers. A brochure for potential customers, obtained by The Times, says that Phantom allows American law enforcement and spy agencies to “turn your target’s smartphone into an intelligence gold mine.”
Leonard Peltier Has COVID; His Lawyer — an Ex-Federal Judge — Calls for Native Leader to Be Freed
Alabama city to investigate policing for profit accusations against officers
Residents of a small Alabama city will on Tuesday hold a town hall meeting to discuss claims by community members and activist groups that local police have pursued excessive policing for profit.
Officers in Brookside, a former mining town 20 min outside Birmingham, have been accused of generating hundreds of thousands of dollars in city revenue through ticketing, towing and other traffic-related fines, despite Brookside having no traffic lights and a few two-lane roads, news site AL.com first reported.
With a population of less than 2,000 and a median income of less than $40,000, in 2020 Brookside generated more than $610,000 in fines and forfeitures from drivers, a 640% increase over two years and almost half of city revenue.
Towing ballooned from 50 cars in 2018 to 789 in 2020, with residents reporting that they were required to pay thousands of dollars to get vehicles back. “Brookside is a poster child for policing for profit,” Carla Crowder, director of the nonprofit Alabama Appleseed Center for Law & Justice, told AL.com. “We are not safer because of it.”
Officers have been cited in at least five federal lawsuits for manufacturing reasons for traffic stops, “making up laws”, overcharging fines, using racist language and other misconduct allegations, AL.com said.
Ryan Grim: Dem Rep. Henry Cuellar's Home RAIDED By FBI After SHADY Business Dealings With Azerbaijan
Pennsylvania Court Strikes Down Mail-In Voting Law
A sweeping Pennsylvania voting rights law that won praise from across the political spectrum when it was passed in 2019 was struck down by a state court Friday after Republican lawmakers—several of whom had voted for the law—claimed it unlawfully helped President Joe Biden to win the state in 2020.
The conservative-leaning Commonwealth Court ruled 3-2 that Act 77 is unconstitutional, reasoning that an 1838 amendment to the state constitution says Pennsylvanians must vote in person on Election Day unless they meet certain criteria. The rule must be overturned by the adoption of a new amendment, said the court. ...
Act 77 will remain in effect for the time being, as the Pennsylvania State Department responded to the Commonwealth Court's decision by promptly appealing the case to the state Supreme Court, automatically placing a stay on the ruling.
Passed by a Republican state legislature and signed into law by a Democratic governor, Act 77 permits Pennsylvania to vote by mail or absentee ballot without providing a reason. It also invested $90 million in election infrastructure upgrades, created a permanent list of mail-in voters, and reduced the voter registration deadline to 15 days from 30 days before an election.
Secret Billionaires Funding Dem Dark Money Cabal
US judge blocks sale of Gulf of Mexico drilling leases over climate concerns
A US federal judge has blocked a highly controversial sale of oil and gas drilling leases across 80m acres of the Gulf of Mexico, ruling that Joe Biden’s administration did not properly consider the leases’ impact upon the climate crisis. The decision, handed down by the DC court late on Thursday, represents a landmark victory for environmental groups that had sued the government to prevent what was the largest ever auction of oil and gas leases in the gulf’s history.
“I’m thrilled the court saw through the Biden administration’s horribly reckless decision to hold the largest oil lease sale in US history without carefully studying the risks,” said Kristen Monsell, oceans legal director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “New oil leases are fundamentally incompatible with addressing the climate emergency, and they’ll cause more oil spills and harm to wildlife and people in the Gulf.”
Rudolph Contreras, a US district court judge for the District of Columbia, was critical of federal government agencies for their environmental analyses that led to the lease sale, writing that they were guilty of a “serious failing” and a “grave error”. He ordered that the new leases be vacated and for the Department of Interior to conduct a new analysis that accounts for the planet-heating gases that would result if the drilling went ahead.
The lease sale was held in November, just days after UN climate talks in Scotland in which the president vowed the US would “lead by example” in tackling the climate crisis. Biden had previously promised to shut down all new oil and gas drilling to curb emissions of planet-heating gases. The administration had claimed that it was compelled to hold the sale due to a successful legal challenge by a dozen states to lift a blanket pause Biden had placed on new drilling projects on federal land and waters. The Gulf of Mexico auction eventually resulted in 1.7m acres sold off to oil firms including Exxon, Chevron and BP, the company responsible for the Deepwater Horizon disaster in 2010.
A previous Department of Justice memo, however, showed that the federal government did not believe it was obligated to hold the sale and climate activists have said the episode shows Biden is not sufficiently committed to averting the climate crisis.
Great Barrier Reef on verge of another mass bleaching after highest temperatures on record
Temperatures over the Great Barrier Reef in December were the highest on record with “alarming” levels of heat that have put the ocean jewel on the verge of another mass bleaching of corals, according to analysis from US government scientists seen by Guardian Australia.
On Friday the Morrison government announced $1bn for reef conservation over the next nine years if it wins the next election – a pledge branded by some as a cynical attempt to stop the reef being placed on the world heritage “in danger” list at a meeting in July. Conservationists and scientists mostly welcomed the pledge, but many said the government needed to greatly improve its greenhouse gas emissions targets and stop supporting fossil fuel projects.
In the three months leading up to 14 December, an analysis from scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa) says heat stress over the corals reached a level “unprecedented in the satellite record” for that time of year. According to the analysis, temperatures were so hot that between mid-November and mid-December, the minimum temperatures over more than 80% of the reef were higher for that period than previous maximums.
As greenhouse gas emissions accumulate in the atmosphere, the world’s oceans are getting hotter, and scientists say coral bleaching will become more frequent in the short term, whatever happens to emissions. The 2,300km reef has seen five mass bleaching events – in 1998, 2002, 2016, 2017 and 2020 – all caused by rising ocean temperatures driven by global heating.
Pipeline Rupture in Ecuador Causes oil SPILL in the Amazon
Burst Pipeline Sprays Crude Oil Into Ecuadorian Amazon
Indigenous environmental defenders in Ecuador on Sunday pointed to a pipeline rupture in the Amazon rainforest as "the exact reason why we oppose oil extraction" as the pipeline operator temporarily halted pumping crude oil.
A pipeline constructed by OCP Ecuador burst on Friday after a rockslide, according to NBC News. Videos posted on social media by the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador (CONAIE) and Amazon Frontlines showed oil spraying out of the pipeline into the rainforest.
OCP Ecuador claimed it had contained the spill so “it cannot contaminate any bodies of water," but environmental defenders said the spill would be a "disaster" for more than 27,000 Indigenous Kichwa people living downriver from the spill on the banks of the Coca River.
More than 60,000 people depend on water from the river, according to NBC News.
"The river is contaminated. Look," said a campaigner in a video posted by Amazon Frontlines, showing oil flowing into the Coca River. "Thousands of liters are being spilled into the river. Thousands and thousands."
The group said OCP Ecuador "lied and knowingly endangered Kichwa communities" when it said in an official statement Saturday that the burst pipeline was not "directly exposed to rivers" and that the oil flow had been controlled.
"These are the lies that put lives at risk," said Amazon Frontlines. "We must end the impunity!"
The ruptured pipeline has caused the second major oil spill in the Ecuadorian Amazon in two years.
Indigenous communities are "still suffering impacts of massive April 2020 oil spill," said Amazon Frontlines, noting that a lower court threw out a lawsuit filed by the Kichwa last year; the case is now pending before Ecuador's Constitutional Court, with the plaintiffs demanding remediation of the oil spill.
"Spills have become a part of our daily life, and we live with the contamination for decades. The oil industry has only brought us death and destruction," Andres Tapia of the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of the Ecuadorian Amazon told NBC News Sunday after the latest spill. "We are calling on the government to halt oil expansion plans and properly clean up this spill and all the others that continue to contaminate our territories and violate our rights.”
The pipeline that burst Friday pumps about 450,000 barrels of crude oil per day.
About two-thirds of the oil extracted from the Amazon rainforest is exported to the United States, and Ecuadorian President Guillermo Lasso has called for doubling the country's oil production since taking office last year.
Also of Interest
Here are some articles of interest, some which defied fair-use abstraction.
Defense Contractor CEOs Applaud Deteriorating Global Security
Ukraine’s Zelensky Slams West for Creating ‘Panic’ After Biden Call
Lavrov Says There Will Be No War If It’s Up to Russia
It Takes A Touch Of Madness: Notes From The Edge Of The Narrative Matrix
What Did Clinton Know and When Did She Know It? The Russiagate Evidence Builds
Georgia county purges Democrats from election board and cancels Sunday voting
'This Is Not Over': Alaska Supreme Court Rejects Youth Climate Case
A Little Night Music
Will Shade & Memphis Jug Band - Kansas City Blues
Will Shade And Furry Lewis - The Train
Will Shade - Sun Brimmers Blues
Will Shade - I'll Get A Break
Catherine Porter And Will Shade - Won't You Ride With Me Tonight
Will Shade & Minnie Wallace - Field Mouse Stomp
Memphis Jug Band - Going Back To Memphis
Memphis Jug Band - Stealin' stealin'
Memphis Jug Band (Will Shade ) - Harmonica Blues
Will Shade & Charlie Burse (Original Members of the Memphis Jug Band) - Kansas City Blues
Comments
Great music, great quotes, shit news -
from a non critically thinker. Many thanks.
evening mimi...
glad you're enjoying the eb as usual.
have a great evening!
This cartoon sums up the US foreign policy agenda.
evening humphrey...
excellent cartoon, thanks!
I have my doubts that any of this will be mentioned on ....
CNN or MSNBC.
heh...
your doubts seem quite well founded.
The Consortiumnews article,
Checkmate in Ukraine, by Scott Ritter, is followed by comments, a couple of which are by me. I want to clarify what I was saying.
My comment near the top of the list was meant to be a reply to the Editor's reply to my comment near the bottom of the list, which I posted yesterday.
I thought Scott Ritter didn't point out that Russia's concern, about nuclear missiles placed on its borders, not only has to do with Russia's security but also with our security and that of everyone on earth.
Putin has said, in answer to Oliver Stone's question about the chances of nuclear war, that he believes no one would survive such a war. I don't think the American people understand that our policy is to take that risk, to use nuclear weapons in Europe instead of conventional forces.
Russia's stated concern about our missile placement on its borders is that it reduces the decision making time for retaliation to 5-7 minutes.
evening linda...
putin once remarked while explaining that russia would absolutely respond to a nuclear attack that he had no use for a world without russia.
more and more, it seems to me that a large number of powerful american people have no use for a world that they can't control through full spectrum dominance.
Liberals discover that Orwell's 1984 is upsetting
Yes, that's the point
evening gj...
i wonder how long it will be before the democratic party holds regular book burnings.
Apropos of the Greenwald piece ...
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mh4s3J6aGZk width:500 height:300]
We wanted decent healthcare, a living wage and free college.
The Democrats gave us Biden and war instead.
evening azazello...
thanks for the video, have a great evening!
Brandon and his handlers are scrambling to resurrect his...
horrendous poll numbers.
I guess getting a cat was not enough.
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cXEAjMuwEw]
Time for a rerun. Notice the date!
https://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/joe-biden-cancer-research-moonsho...
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/592185-biden-to-relaunch-can...
Good evening Joe. Thanks for the Evening Blues.
Interesting decision by the DC court that
The underpinning of that is that made a grave error in not accounting for the greenhouse gases that would result if the drilling went ahead. If that stands, it sets a fabulous precendent that, to my knowledge, has not previously existed.
be well and have a good one
That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --
evening el...
with any luck, the biden administration will not appeal the decision up the chain to the korporate kourt (scrotus) to overturn the precedent, which i am certain that the liveried servants of the chamber of kommerce are itching to overturn.
have a great evening!
Also of interest? Mandate trucker protests go international
Europe, Brazil, US...?
Australian truckers' convoy arrives in Canberra:
link to Rebel News coverage
Oh, Canada.
From inside the convoy - white supremacist Russian stooges, perhaps?
You decide.
evening br...
it appears that there was considerable dilution of the message that the truckers seemed to be trying to send about mandates by an assortment of movement people that now the canadian government has an information strategy to assist them in avoiding the whole issue.
Trudeau: Canadians disgusted by anti-vaxxers who desecrated monuments
I'm sure that Trudeau, his handlers
and MSM are desperately *trying* to dilute the Freedom Convoy message - nothing like the serfs getting uppity and united to panic the ruling elite.
And I'm just about as sure that there are government infiltrators/provocateurs working by whatever means they can to facilitate their boss's agenda.
Funny how BLM were *destroying* Canadian monuments in 2020 Trudeau could barely manage to fake a bit of outrage...
What about the right of establishment, one of the four freedoms
That are framed as so important- indeed - essential - to the EU bureaucratic state.
See: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/factsheets/en/sheet/40/freedom-of-establi...
Freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services
Load fact sheet in pdf format
The freedom of establishment and the freedom to provide services guarantee mobility of businesses and professionals within the EU. Expectations concerning the Services Directive are high, as it is of crucial importance for the completion of the internal market. Recent research indicates that the value of the benefits generated by legislation that Parliament has adopted in the area of free movement of services, including professional qualifications and retail, amounts to EUR 284 billion annually. (money saved on wages, i.e. "efficiency gains" from competition of people for jobs, and the race to the bottom on regulations and labor standards.
Legal basis
Articles 26 (internal market), 49 to 55 (establishment) and 56 to 62 (services) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).
Objectives
Self-employed persons and professionals or legal persons within the meaning of Article 54 of the TFEU who are legally operating in one Member State may: (i) carry out an economic activity in a stable and continuous way in another Member State (freedom of establishment: Article 49 of the TFEU); or (ii) offer and provide their services in other Member States on a temporary basis while remaining in their country of origin (freedom to provide services: Article 56 of the TFEU). This implies eliminating discrimination on the grounds of nationality and, if these freedoms are to be used effectively, the adoption of measures to make it easier to exercise them, including the harmonisation of national access rules or their mutual recognition (2.1.6).
Achievements
A. Liberalisation in the Treaty
1. ‘Fundamental freedoms’
The right of establishment includes the right to take up and pursue activities as a self-employed person, and to set up and manage undertakings, for a permanent activity of a stable and continuous nature, under the same conditions as those laid down by the law of the Member State concerned regarding establishment for its own nationals.
Freedom to provide services applies to all services normally provided for remuneration, insofar as they are not governed by the provisions relating to the freedom of movement of goods, capital and persons. The person providing a ‘service’ may, in order to do so, temporarily pursue their activity in the Member State where the service is provided, under the same conditions as are imposed by that Member State on its own nationals.
2. The exceptions
Under the TFEU, activities connected with the exercise of official authority are excluded from freedom of establishment and provision of services (Article 51 of the TFEU). This exclusion is, however, limited by a restrictive interpretation: exclusions can cover only those specific activities and functions which imply the exercise of authority. Furthermore, a whole profession can be excluded only if its entire activity is dedicated to the exercise of official authority, or if the part that is dedicated to the exercise of public authority is inseparable from the rest. Exceptions enable Member States to exclude the production of or trade in war material (Article 346(1)(b) of the TFEU) and to retain rules for non-nationals in respect of public policy, public security or public health (Article 52(1)).
B. Services Directive — towards completing the internal market
The Services Directive (Directive 2006/123/EC) strengthens the freedom to provide services within the EU. Its implementation deadline was 28 December 2009. This directive is crucial for completing the internal market, since it has huge potential for delivering benefits for consumers and SMEs. The aim is to create an open single market in services within the EU while at the same time ensuring the quality of services provided to consumers. According to the Commission communication entitled ‘Europe 2020’, the full implementation of the Services Directive could increase trade in commercial services by 45% and foreign direct investment by 25%, bringing an increase of between 0.5% and 1.5% in GDP. The directive contributes to administrative and regulatory simplification and modernisation. This is achieved not only through the screening of the existing legislation and the adoption and amendment of relevant legislation, but also through long-term projects (setting up the Points of Single Contact and ensuring administrative cooperation). The implementation of the directive has been significantly delayed in a number of Member States in relation to the original deadline. Its successful implementation calls for sustained political commitment and widespread support at European, national, regional and local levels.
Role of the European Parliament
Parliament has been instrumental in liberalising the activities of the self-employed. It has ensured a strict delimitation of the activities that may be reserved for nationals (e.g. those relating to the exercise of public authority). It is also worth mentioning the case that Parliament brought before the Court of Justice of the European Union against the Council for failure to act with regard to transport policy. This case, brought in January 1983, led to a judgment of the Court (Case No 13/83 of 22 May 1985) condemning the Council for failing to ensure free provision of international transport services or lay down conditions enabling non-resident carriers to operate transport services within a Member State. This was in breach of the Treaty. The Council was thus obliged to adopt the necessary legislation. The role of Parliament has grown with the application of the codecision procedure provided for in the Treaty of Maastricht, and now of its successor, the ordinary legislative procedure, to most aspects of freedom of establishment and provision of services.
Parliament also played a crucial role in the adoption of the Services Directive, and it is closely following its implementation. In addition, it is putting pressure on the Member States to fulfil their obligations under the directive and to ensure its proper implementation. On 15 February 2011, Parliament adopted a resolution on the implementation of the Services Directive, and on 25 October 2011 a resolution on the Mutual Evaluation Process of the Services Directive. Following the Commission communication of 8 June 2012 on the implementation of the Services Directive, Parliament’s Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection prepared a report on ‘the Internal Market for services: State of Play and Next Steps’, which was adopted in plenary on 11 September 2013.
On 7 February 2013, Parliament also adopted a resolution with recommendations to the Commission on the governance of the Single Market, emphasising the importance of the services sector as a key area for growth, the fundamental character of the freedom to provide services, and the benefits of full implementation of the Services Directive.
Parliament has, as a matter of priority, worked on legislative proposals concerning telecommunications services, such as a regulation on electronic identification and trust services for electronic transactions in the internal market (Regulation (EU) No 910/2014), and a regulation laying down measures concerning the European single market for electronic communications and to achieve a ‘Connected Continent’. In its resolution of 4 July 2012, Parliament made recommendations to the Commission with regards to financial services in the area of access to basic payment services and consumer credit and mortgage credit (Directive 2014/17/EU). Parliament also adopted a resolution on package travel and assisted travel arrangements on 12 March 2014. The Mortgage Credit Directive (Directive 2014/17/EU) increases consumer protection by enforcing minimum regulatory requirements that Member States are required to meet to protect individuals with credit agreements on residential property and by ensuring that consumers are informed and financially capable of paying their mortgage loan. Additionally, the Directive on Better Regulated and Transparent Financial Markets (Directive 2014/65/EU) aims to ensure regulation and transparency of EU-wide financial markets. In 2019, Parliament voted on Directive (EU) 2019/882 on the accessibility requirements for products and services. The directive aims to remove the barriers to free trade for products and services for citizens with disabilities and/or functional limitations.
In its resolution of 17 April 2020 on EU coordinated action to combat the COVID-19 pandemic and its consequences, Parliament indicated that the Single Market is the source of European collective prosperity and well-being and that it is a key element of the immediate and continuous response to the COVID-19 outbreak. It also recalled in its resolution of 19 June 2020 that the Schengen area is a cherished achievement at the very heart of the EU project, and called on Member States to reduce restrictions on the freedom of movement and to step up their efforts to achieve the completion of Schengen integration.
On 25 November 2020, Parliament adopted a resolution entitled ‘Towards a more sustainable single market for business and consumers’, which focuses on different policy areas, in particular the area of consumer protection and business’s participation in the green transition (key to enhancing the sustainability of the single market). At the request of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, the Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies of Parliament’s Directorate-General for Internal Policies published a briefing entitled ‘The European Services Sector and the Green Transition’ which contributed to this resolution.
On 20 January 2021, Parliament adopted a resolution entitled ‘Strengthening the single market: the future of free movement of services’. The resolution underlines the need to ensure the implementation of the single market rules for services and to improve the enforcement action of the Commission. It stresses the need to evaluate the level of implementation of the EU legal framework for services and to empower companies by providing them with better access to information.
Recent research[1] indicates that the value of benefits generated by legislation that Parliament has adopted in the area of free movement of services, including professional qualifications and retail, amounts to EUR 284 billion annually in the area covered by the Services Directive, EUR 80 billion annually in the area of professional services and EUR 20 billion annually in the area of services relating to public procurement. According to a study[2] published by the Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies on legal obstacles in Member States to single market rules, the services sector is an important contributor to economic growth in the EU. It accounts for 24% of intra-EU cross-border trade of goods and services (an increase from around 20% in the early 2000s). The study also found that while services account for 78% of gross value added in the EU, regulatory heterogeneity and difficulties in accessing information add to the cost of doing business and restrict the free movement of services and freedom of establishment.
The COVID-19 pandemic has seen many restrictions imposed on free movement in the EU single market, including the free movement of services. A webinar[3] on the impact of COVID-19 on the internal market and consumer protection organised by the Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies on 9 November 2020 discussed this topic. It found that the EU services sector is likely to see significant shifts in the nature of demand and supply in years to come, brought about by accelerated technological advancement and changes in consumer behaviour as a result of the pandemic. Furthermore, a study[4] commissioned by the Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies was published and presented to the Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection in February 2021. It found that while the initial border closures imposed by Member States significantly impacted the delivery of cross border professional services, the proliferation of digital tools has allowed a degree of normality to resume.
[1]Pelkmans, J., Contribution to growth: The Single Market for Services - Delivering economic benefits to citizens and businesses, Publication for the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies, European Parliament, Luxembourg, 2019.
[2]Dahlberg, E. et al., Legal obstacles in Member States to Single Market rules, Publication for the Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection, Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies, European Parliament, Luxembourg, 2020.
[3]Milieu Consulting SRL, The impact of COVID-19 on the Internal Market and consumer protection - IMCO Webinar Proceedings, Publication for the Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection, Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies, European Parliament, Luxembourg, 2020.
[4]Marcus, J. S. et al., The impact of COVID-19 on the Internal Market, Publication for the Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection, Directorate-General for Internal Policies, Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies, European Parliament, Luxembourg, 2021.
Paygo Pelosi (a great stock trader) has her priorities.