By the time the Weinstein Couch matter is no longer front page news, some of Hollywood's revered may have been brought to their knees in keeping with NFL players.
Another casualty of this sordid mess is toady Hillary who proudly stood by her own man and then proceeded to destroy those he abused.
We all know there is enough hypocrisy to go round the earth several times from the Hollywood and D.C. elite and now it has been revealed/exposed once again.
Eventually the cover-up of reporting will also work its way to the front pages and probably a few media entities will get burned as well.
Weinstein was a powerful man. No longer is that the case. I find it interesting when sex is involved the mighty are brought down but when breaking of the law involves destroyed tapes, sloppy handling of classified documents etc.mighty Hillary, Rice, Kerry, even Obama are allowed to escape. . I guess this is what is meant by selective justice.
There are some powerful lessons to be learned from all of this but, I suspect ,in a few weeks it will all fade from memory and Trump will be back in the news as mass media's Enemy Number One!
And
I submit, the pivot away from Weinstein has begun as the press attacks Trump for his Tweet regarding Puerto Rico.
Trump has provided Puerto Rico with enormous assistance but, in the process, learned the pre-hurricane conditions of Puerto Rico's failed infrastructure and enormous debt have impeded his administration's ability to be effective. Trump Tweeted government assistance and presence cannot be permanent suggesting, that at some point, Puerto Rico was going to have to pull itself up by its own bootstraps.
The timing of his Tweet provided the mass media an opportunity to pounce and they have portrayed/interpreted his comment to mean Trump does not place/view Puerto Ricans in the same class as Americans. Gen. Kelly tried to put this interpretation to bed but the mass media see blood and an opportunity to mis-characterize a fact that the government cannot be permanently involved - the emphasis is on the word permanent.
Nothing Trump says or does will be allowed to be taken at face value. The effort toward laying the foundation for impeachment continues.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Meanwhile, is Turkey getting ready to move into Syria? According to George Friedman's Stratfor, the answer is yes because of their fear of the Kurds. (See 1 below.)
And
An abbreviated Strafor fourth quarter forecast. (See 1a below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Iran Deal commentary and analysis. (See 2 below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Now for some classroom humor - out of the mouths of babes. (See 3 below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I just learned that some e mails are being rejected by my Yahoo Account because of mis-spelling. Yahoo Account should be brokerberko@Yahoo.com but better to use Gmail account anyway.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dick
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1) Turkey Poised To Roll IntoSyria
Stratfor Report
Weeks after Turkish forces started to deploy in large numbers along the border with Syria, adjacent to the province of Idlib, Ankara appears to be on the verge of launching yet another significant military operation into the war-torn country. Unlike Operation Euphrates Shield, which targeted lands occupied by the Islamic State, the upcoming operation into Idlib will be directed toward lands occupied by Syrian rebels. As befitting a convoluted conflict such as Syria, Turkey's advance into Idlib will be assisted by other Syrian rebel groups trained over time by Turkey in neighboring Aleppo province. And according to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's latest statements, they will be supported by Russian aviation.
Given that Turkey has for years directly supported rebel factions in Idlib in their fight against Russian- and Iranian-backed loyalist forces, the prospect of Turkish forces advancing into Syria under Russian air cover appears jarring at face value. The signs of a significant shift in direction by Turkey on Syria, however, have been visible for some time. The first indication was the Turkish abandonment of the rebel defense of Aleppo in favor of Operation Euphrates Shield in late 2016. This occurred amid steadily improving ties between Ankara and Moscow despite both sides maintaining opposite positions on the Syrian civil war, at least in principle. There were also increasing signs throughout 2017 of a significant drop in the flow of Turkish supplies to key rebel factions in northern Syria, particularly in Idlib. Turkey instead focused its resources on developing the capabilities of its Syrian rebel proxies that were directly under its management as part of Operation Euphrates Shield in northern Aleppo province.
The biggest shift in Turkey's stance, however, came through the Astana process, where Turkey negotiated at length with Russia and Iran in a number of negotiation rounds in the Kazakh capital on the setup of "de-escalation" zones in Syria. These talks enabled the establishment of a "de-escalation" zone in Idlib, on whose borders Turkish troops are now poised alongside their rebel allies from Operation Euphrates Shield.
Turkey's shifting position over the past 18 months that is now culminating with a military operation into rebel-held lands can be explained by three overarching factors. The first is the dawning realization in Ankara that the rebels it supported were on the losing end of a conflict with Iran- and Russia-backed loyalist forces. Every major loyalist victory that bolstered Syrian government control in northern Syria, in turn, diminished Turkey's ability to influence events in the country.
The second factor was the growing power of independently minded rebel groups such as Hayat Tahrir al-Sham in northern Syria, particularly in Idlib province. As rebel forces suffered successive defeats and despaired from ever receiving enough external support to match the level of direct backing Iran and Russia gave loyalist forces on the battlefield, they became increasingly prone to defect and turn to the better resourced and organized hardline groups such as the al Qaeda-linked Hayat Tahrir al-Sham. This trend has only accelerated in recent months with the end of the CIA program that supplied rebel groups in Syria with key weaponry such as anti-tank guided missiles. Unlike the Syrian groups supported by Turkey — and previously by the United States — in northern Syria, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham has no compunction in upholding its own interests over Ankara's. Indeed, in recent months, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham has even monopolized control over Idlib province by cracking down on Turkish-backed rebel groups. For Turkey, the rise of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham in Idlib threatens to entirely remove what little influence it has remaining in the province.
Finally, and most important, Turkey has consistently prioritized its goal of undermining and pushing back against Kurdish empowerment in Syria over its desire for regime change in Damascus. Before the United States started to provide significant support to the Kurdish-dominated Syrian Democratic Forces in 2015, and before the loyalists started to regain momentum in the conflict that same year, Turkey could undermine the Kurds and pursue regime change in Damascus through its support of rebel forces. However, as the U.S.-backed Kurdish forces spread their control over northern Syria and as the rebel hold was reduced through consecutive loyalist offensives, Turkey could no longer rely on weakened and distracted rebel forces to act as a bulwark against the Kurds, much less topple the regime of Syrian President Bashar al Assad. To that end, Ankara has increasingly prioritized an improved relationship with Moscow in the hopes that the influence leveraged through that relationship would allow it to counter the emboldened Kurds. For instance, Turkey still can hope to translate a cooperative mission in Idlib with the Russians into an opening for a subsequent operation against the Kurdish forces of the People's Protection Units (YPG) in Afrin canton, which are thus far insulated by a Russian presence.
A Turkish operation into Idlib province is nevertheless not without considerable risk. Indeed, there is even a possibility that it could backfire on Ankara. First, there is still no guarantee that such an operation would translate into increased Russian assistance against the YPG and predominantly Kurdish Syria Democratic Forces. Moscow, after all, has maintained its ties with the Syrian Kurds and has even blocked Turkish operations against the Kurds in the past. Further, Turkey and its local rebel allies may find themselves going up against very determined resistance from Hayat Tahrir al-Sham fighters, many of whom are locals, and operating in terrain that is geographically more challenging than that faced by Turkey and its proxies during Operation Euphrates Shield. Turkey, however, appears determined to tolerate the risks as it seeks to expand its presence and control in Syria in pursuit of its greater objectives.
1a)2017 Fourth-Quarter Forecast
2)
What Is — And Isn't — Covered By The Iranian Nuclear Deal
By Greg Myre
When the Iranian nuclear agreement was reached in 2015 there was a hope — and it was just a hope — that the deal would lead to a more moderate Iran.
As tough sanctions were lifted, Iran received billions of dollars in oil revenues that had been blocked. The country's international isolation eased, raising the possibility that Iran's friction with the U.S. and some Arab states might give way to greater engagement, at least in some areas.
No one is talking like that now.
"I believe President Obama's flawed nuclear deal was a gamble, a gamble that Iran would choose to become a responsible actor," California Republican Ed Royce, the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said at a hearing Wednesday. "The Tehran regime clearly still sees itself as a movement, one that uses ideology and violence to destabilize its neighbors."
But you don't need a critic of the Iran nuclear deal to get an earful about Iran's aggressive behavior.
Supporters of the nuclear deal offer similar complaints — beginning with Iran's ongoing ballistic missile tests. These missiles could potentially deliver a nuclear warhead, but they're not covered by the nuclear deal.
"The missile tests are very troubling, and particularly because they are done by the radicals in the most provocative manner possible," said Abbas Milani, the head of Iranian studies at Stanford University.
U.S. allies, international inspectors and the Trump administration itself have all said Iran is in compliance with the nuclear agreement. But when it comes to everything that's not covered by the nuclear deal — including missile testing — Iran often remains at odds with the U.S.
President Trump says the Iran nuclear agreement is an "embarrassment" and that he may declare Iran in violation. The White House says this week, he will announce his position on the deal — which the administration is required to do every 90 days — as well as his broader Iran policy.
Milani supports the nuclear deal but is critical of Iran on many other fronts — like in Syria, where Iranian fighters have helped ensure the survival of President Bashar Assad, who appears to be in his strongest position in years.
"I think Syria is a fairly foregone conclusion," Milani said. "I don't think there's much the world can do to change the outcome of this now-ravaged country."
And in Iraq, where the U.S. has been fighting for more than a decade in support of the government, Milani now believes that "Iran will have a virtual open hand to increase its influence."
Iran also supports a host of radical groups, including Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in the Palestinian territories and Houthi rebels in Yemen.
But all this activity falls outside the limited scope of the nuclear deal.
Iran, meanwhile, does not agree that it is the cause of the region's turmoil.
Writing in The Atlantic, Iran's foreign minister, Javad Zarif, argues, "The evidence for 'bad behavior' by Iran is nonexistent. Iranian 'aggression' is a myth, easily perpetuated by those willing to spend their dollars on American military equipment and public-relations firms, and by those promising to protect American interests rather than those of their own people. In the end, they serve neither."
Alireza Nader of the Rand Corp. advocates a two-track policy in dealing with Iran.
"It makes perfect sense to keep the nuclear agreement and push back against Iran in other ways," he said. "Iran is both susceptible to pressure and incentives."
He said the U.S. could use the carrot — engaging Iran over a shared opposition to the Islamic State — and the stick, a threat of new, nonnuclear sanctions.
Ali Vaez of the International Crisis Group notes that many Iranian policies, including strong support for Syria, date to long before the nuclear deal.
"I don't see any significant change in Iran's behavior before or after the nuclear deal," Vaez said.
He says U.S. decertification of the nuclear accord could easily backfire.
"I'm afraid by undermining the nuclear agreement, the administration could usher in what it says it's trying to prevent, which is greater Iranian assertiveness," Vaez said. Trump says Iran gained much more in sanctions relief and business deals than it gave up with its scaled-back nuclear program. He insists he'll put more pressure on Iran, though it's not clear what action he might take or whether Congress will impose additional sanctions.
Meanwhile, Royce, the Republican congressman, cautions against scrapping the agreement.
"As flawed as the deal is, I believe we must now enforce the hell out of it," Royce said at Wednesday's hearing.
Greg Myre is a national security correspondent. Follow him @gregmyre1.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3) A little girl was talking to her teacher about whales.
The teacher said it was physically impossible for a whale to swallow a human because even though it was a very large mammal its throat was very small.
The little girl stated that Jonah was swallowed by a whale.
Irritated, the teacher reiterated that a whale could not swallow a human; it was physically impossible.
The little girl said, 'When I get to heaven I will ask Jonah'.
The teacher asked, 'What if Jonah went to hell?'
The little girl replied, 'Then you ask him'.
The little girl stated that Jonah was swallowed by a whale.
Irritated, the teacher reiterated that a whale could not swallow a human; it was physically impossible.
The little girl said, 'When I get to heaven I will ask Jonah'.
The teacher asked, 'What if Jonah went to hell?'
The little girl replied, 'Then you ask him'.
A Kindergarten teacher was observing her classroom of children while they were drawing. She would occasionally walk around to see each child's work. As she got to one little girl who was working diligently, she asked what the drawing was.
The girl replied, 'I'm drawing God.'
The teacher paused and said, 'But no one knows what God looks like.'
Without missing a beat, or looking up from her drawing, the girl replied, 'They will in a minute.'
The girl replied, 'I'm drawing God.'
The teacher paused and said, 'But no one knows what God looks like.'
Without missing a beat, or looking up from her drawing, the girl replied, 'They will in a minute.'
A Sunday school teacher was discussing the Ten Commandments with her five and six year olds. After explaining the commandment to 'honour' thy Father and thy Mother, she asked, 'Is there a commandment that teaches us how to treat our brothers and sisters?' Without missing a beat one little boy (the oldest of a family) answered, 'Thou shall not kill.'
O ne day a little girl was sitting and watching her mother do the dishes at the kitchen sink. She suddenly noticed that her mother had several strands of white hair sticking out in contrast on her brunette head. She looked at her mother and inquisitively asked, 'Why are some of your hairs white, Mum?' Her mother replied, 'Well, every time that you do something wrong and make me cry or unhappy, one of my hairs turns white.' The little girl thought about this revelation for a while and then said, 'Mummy, how come ALL of grandma's hairs are white?'
T he children had all been photographed, and the teacher was trying to persuade them each to buy a copy of the group picture. 'Just think how nice it will be to look at it when you are all grown up and say, 'There's Jennifer, she's a lawyer,' or 'That's Michael, He's a doctor.'
A small voice at the back of the room rang out, 'And there's the teacher, she's dead.'
The children were lined up in the cafeteria of a Catholic elementary school for lunch. At the head of the table was a large pile of apples. The nun made a note, and posted it on the apple tray: 'Take only ONE. God is watching.' Moving further along the lunch line, at the other end of the table was a large pile of chocolate chip cookies.
A child had written a note, 'Take all you want. God is watching the apples.'
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No comments:
Post a Comment