#Paul Kagan

[undergroundrockpress]

Country Joe and the Fish calendar - 1966 Photos by Paul Kagan / Design by Tom Weller

[anotherpapercut]

I'm never ever ever gonna get over the way white feminists act(ed) about Ruth Bader Ginsburg. I was listening to a podcast about a supreme court case involving Native land rights and the podcast host felt the need to do a whole "as a woman I'm grateful for the many things she did to advance women's rights" speech before she could talk about her terrible record when it comes to the rights of Native Americans. you still can't talk about her ridiculously selfish decision not to retire without people making up reasons to absolve her of wrong doing

[carsonsweebabyturtles]

Dr Beckett, Your Bad Practice/Dodgy Ethics Is Showing!!!!  (2/?) -  Do you have x-ray vision Doc? Can you see through all those dressings? No? Then perhaps removing them so you can see wtf you’re doing would be a good idea. 

1

In danger of poking more holes in that poor Marine because you can’t see what you’re prodding in about? 13/10

[talonabraxas]

Yab-Yum 1968 YAB YUM Poster Paul Kagan

[mappingthemoon]

Movies/TV Watched 2023

The Postman Always Rings Twice / Bob Rafelson (1981)

Secretary* / Steven Shainberg (2002)

Spirited Away* / Hayao Miyazaki (2001)

Watcher / Chloe Okuno (2022)

The Talented Mr. Ripley / Anthony Minghella (1999)

Pride & Prejudice / Joe Wright (2005)

Moonage Daydream / Brett Morgan (2022)

Volver / Pedro Almodóvar (2006)

Belfast / Kenneth Branagh (2021)

The Last Picture Show / Peter Bogdanovich (1971)

I, Tonya / Craig Gillespie (2017)

The Postman Always Rings Twice / Tay Garnett (1946)

Rocketman / Dexter Fletcher (2019)

The Unholy / Evan Spiliotopoulos (2021)

Mara / Clive Tonge (2018)

Frogs / George McCowan (1972)

Prometheus / Ridley Scott (2012)

Men / Alex Garland (2022)

All the Right Moves / Michael Chapman (1983)

Poseidon / Wolfgang Petersen (2006)

Saint Maud / Rose Glass (2019)

Monstrous / Chris Sivertson (2022)

Wander Darkly / Tara Miele (2020)

Howl’s Moving Castle / Hayao Miyazaki (2004)

Iris / Albert Maysles (2014)

Lamb / Valdimar Jóhannsson (2021)

In Fabric / Peter Strickland (2018)

The Elephant 6 Recording Co. / C.B. Stockfleth (2022)

The Visitor / Justin P. Lange (2022)

Smile / Parker Finn (2022)

Yellowjackets [szn 1-2] (2021-2022)

It Comes at Night / Trey Edward Shults (2017)

Everything Everywhere All at Once / Daniel Kwan, Daniel Scheinert (2022)

Black Bear / Lawrence Michael Levine (2020)

mother! / Darren Aronofsky (2017)

Weird: The Al Yankovic Story / Eric Appel (2022)

X / Ti West (2022)

I Heart Huckabees* / David O. Russell (2004)

The Right Stuff / Philip Kaufman (1983)

Goliath Awaits / Kevin Connor (1981)

Poltergeist* / Tobe Hooper (1982)

Doctor Who [TV Movie]* / Geoffrey Sax (1996)

Earthstorm / Terry Cunningham (2006)

Lake Eerie / Chris Majors (2016)

Fantastic Planet* / René Laloux (1973)

Synecdoche, New York* / Charlie Kaufman (2008)

Flight of the Navigator* / Randal Kleiser (1986)

NOPE / Jordan Peele (2022)

Women Talking / Sarah Polley (2022)

Striking Distance / Rowdy Herrington (1993)

Vivarium / Lorcan Finnegan (2019)

Saw* / James Wan (2004)

A Peculiar Noise / Jorge Torres-Torres (2016)

In the Earth / Ben Wheatley (2021)

Cats 2 / Jake Jones (2023)

Bringing Out the Dead* / Martin Scorsese (1999)

The Last Blockbuster / Taylor Morden (2020)

The Dance of Reality / Alejandro Jodorowsky (2013)

In the Mouth of Madness / John Carpenter (1994)

The Chamber / Ben Parker (2016)

Tenet / Christopher Nolan (2020)

Synchronic / Justin Benson, Aaron Moorhead (2019)

Paprika / Satoshi Kon (2006)

The Menu / Mark Mylod (2022)

Sunshine / Danny Boyle (2007)

Devil’s Island / Sean King, Taylor King (2021)

Benedetta / Paul Verhoeven (2021)

Scotland, PA* / Billy Morrissette (2001)

The Cook, the Thief, His Wife & Her Lover / Peter Greenaway (1989)

The Color of Pomegranates* / Sergei Parajanov (1969)

Face/Off* / John Woo (1997)

E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial / Steven Spielberg (1982)

The Gilded Age (PBS American Experience) / Sarah Colt (2018)

Aniara / Pella Kågerman, Hugo Lilja (2018)

How the Grinch Stole Christmas* / Chuck Jones, Ben Washam (1966)

The Quake / John Andreas Andersen (2018)

The Guilty / Gustav Möller (2018)

The Muppet Christmas Carol* [VHS] / Brian Henson (1992)

M3GAN / Gerard Johnstone (2022)

Caught / Jamie Patterson (2017)

Shot / Jeremy Kagan (2017)

A Charlie Brown Christmas* / Bill Melendez (1965)

Body at Brighton Rock / Roxanne Benjamin (2019)

Trancers / Charles Band (1984)

Higher Power / Matthew Charles Santoro (2018)

*Asterisk = rewatch

Favorites first watched in 2023: Men, In Fabric, Yellowjackets, Everything Everywhere All at Once, mother!, NOPE, The Dance of Reality. (ETA: Vivarium and Aniara, which I wouldn't necessarily call "favorites" but they've stuck with me.)

Favorite rewatches: Secretary, I Heart Huckabees, Poltergeist, Bringing Out the Dead

[ladyvaderpixetc]

Corporations Have Been Salivating Over This SCOTUS Decision | Robert Reich

“Professor and former Labor Secretary Robert Reich and I collaborated on a video, together with the folks at Inequality Media, for which I co-wrote the script. Our hope in these videos is to distill complicated legal and political matters and make them more accessible to ordinary citizens.

The subject matter of this video is a pair of cases that came before the Supreme Court yesterday challenging the so-called “Chevron Doctrine.” 

It’s admittedly a fairly wonky concept, but it has been the baseline for federal administrative law for 40 years. I learned about Chevron back in law school in the early 1990s. It is still taught today as established precedent, and there are over 17,000 cases that have relied upon it, including 70 Supreme Court cases.

The weight of precedent is, of course, not a bar to this extremist, activist Court. Based on yesterday’s oral argument, the conservative majority on the Supreme Court appears ready to overturn Chevron. Such a move would likely be one of the most consequential of this Court’s term, and that is saying something...

...Back in 1984, Justice John Paul Stevens, in a unanimous decision (albeit with three justices recusing), wrote, “Judges are not experts in the field, and are not part of either political branch of the government.” Stevens later said of the opinion that it was “simply a restatement of existing law”—though the decision was by far his most consequential.

Conservatives back then (remember, this was during the Reagan years) believed that giving agencies instead of courts the power to interpret and implement ambiguous laws would be a good thing. Judges were too activist, they believed, and Reagan’s EPA had major regulatory dismantling to do. Those pesky liberal judges were thwarting many of their efforts. Forcing the courts to defer to the discretion of agencies handed more power to the White House, so they were fine with that.

But now that Republican presidents consistently have been losing popular elections, the shoe is on the other foot. Republicans might hold sway at the Supreme Court, but liberals control the “deep state” with all their fancy experts and experienced civil servants. So in the minds of conservative activists, it’s time for the courts to take back the power they once ceded.

As of yesterday’s arguments, it seemed pretty clear that there are least four conservative justices—Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh—who are prepared to end 40 years of established administrative law and seize the power to interpret laws back from federal agencies. Two other conservatives, Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett, asked questions of both sides, but it would only take one of them to go along with overruling Chevron to undo 40 years of caselaw... 

...Justice Kagan cut to the heart of the problem in her remarks. “Agencies know things that courts do not,” she said, “and that’s the basis of Chevron.”

She wondered who should decide whether something is a drug or a dietary supplement, the courts who have no expertise in this or an expert agency?  

“It’s best to defer to people who do know, who have had long experience on the ground, who have seen a thousand of these kinds of situations,” Kagan said. “And, you know, judges should know what they don’t know.”

Justice Jackson built upon this in her remarks. “And my concern,” Jackson said, “is that if we take away something like Chevron, the court will then suddenly become a policymaker.” “

Jay Kuo (The Status Kuo - https://statuskuo.substack.com)

[cyarikah]

Wait is Kagan canonically from Iowa or did you just do him incredibly dirty by headcanonig it? Djdndjdhdh

(finally a worthy oponent for Mr Aldo from Tennessee)

Hello hello! Kagan is canonically from Illinois, but my European pea-brain had been confusing Illinois and Iowa, seeing as the actor that plays Kagan (Paul Rust) is from Iowa… and, well, I’m too far in now!

[beardedmrbean]

Washington — Justice Amy Coney Barrett indicated Monday that she is in favor of the Supreme Court adopting a code of conduct, saying she believes doing so would be a "good idea" and show the public what is taking place at the nation's highest court.

With her support, Barrett joins several of her colleagues who have publicly backed a set of formal ethics rules for the Supreme Court amid pressure from Congress for the court to lay out a binding set of policies.

"I think it would be a good idea for us to do it, particularly so that we can communicate to the public exactly what it is that we're doing in a clearer way than perhaps we have been able to do so far," Barrett said during an event at the University of Minnesota Law School when asked whether she favors an ethics code.

Barrett continued: "There is unanimity among all nine justices that we should and do hold ourselves to the highest standards, highest ethical standards possible."

Scrutiny of Supreme Court ethics

The Supreme Court has faced scrutiny from the Senate over its lack of a code of conduct following a series of reports about lavish trips Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito accepted, and questions about participation by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Neil Gorsuch in cases involving their book publishers.

The news outlet ProPublica published a series of reports this summer about the relationship between Justice Clarence Thomas and GOP mega-donor Harlan Crow and found the justice accepted trips aboard Crow's private jet and yacht, and vacationed with the Texas real estate developer, but did not disclose the travel. ProPublica also found Alito flew aboard a private jet provided by hedge fund billionaire Paul Singer to Alaska for a luxury fishing trip. 

Both justices said they were not required to disclose the trips. However, in his financial disclosure report for 2022, Thomas included details about a real estate transaction with Crow for three Georgia properties he purchased from Thomas and his family in 2014. Thomas' report also listed travel aboard Crow's private plane and a stay at his property in the Adirondacks last year. The new disclosures, made public in late August, came after the Judicial Conference adopted new guidelines for what is considered personal hospitality. 

In response to the revelations, the Senate Judiciary Committee advanced legislation that would require the Supreme Court to adopt a code of conduct for the justices and implement procedures to handle complaints of judicial misconduct. Committee Chairman Dick Durbin also requested Chief Justice John Roberts answer questions before the panel about ethics principles, though he declined the invitation.

Roberts instead provided the Senate with a three page "Statement of Ethics Principles and Practices" signed by the nine sitting justices, which he said they all follow.

Amid the growing calls for the Supreme Court to put in place a conduct code, Roberts in May said there is more the high court can do to "adhere to the highest standards" of ethical conduct and said the justices "are continuing to look at the things we can do to give practical effect to that commitment."

Justice Elena Kagan in August said she supports the Supreme Court taking action to adopt formal ethics rules and noted the justices have been discussing the matter. But she said there are a "variety of views" among the nine members. 

"I hope that we will make some progress in this area of the kind that the chief justice talked about and maybe put the question of what can Congress do or what can Congress not do, maybe take that out of play," Kagan said, referring to Roberts' comments months earlier and pushback over whether lawmakers have the authority to require the court to adopt ethics policies.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh said last month that he is "hopeful" the Supreme Court will soon take concrete steps to address the ethics issues it is facing, and echoed that the justices are "continuing to work on those issues."

"To the extent that we can increase confidence, we're working on that," he said.

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Steve Brodner

* * * *

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

June 21, 2023

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

JUN 22, 2023

Just before midnight yesterday, ProPublica reporters ​​Justin Elliott, Joshua Kaplan, and Alex Mierjeski published a story reporting that Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito in 2008 flew on a private jet to a luxury fishing vacation in Alaska thanks to the hospitality of hedge fund billionaire Paul Singer, whose business was based on hard-hitting litigation. Since that trip, Singer has had that litigation before the Supreme Court at least ten times. Alito neither disclosed the gift of the flight on the private jet nor recused himself from ruling on those cases.

In the last decade, according to the authors, Singer has donated more than $80 million to Republican political groups. While in Alaska, Alito stayed as a guest at the lodge of another wealthy Republican donor, who had, in the past, entertained former Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. Lodging there cost $1000 a night.

This revelation adds to the many recently-revealed ties between the court’s right-wing justices and wealthy donors. In April, ProPublica, which is a nonprofit newsroom that focuses on abuses of power, began a series revealing that Justice Clarence Thomas had accepted lavish gifts from Texas billionaire and Republican megadonor Harlan Crow, as well as private school tuition for a relative and real estate deals. Thomas did not disclose those gifts. 

Then it turned out that the wife of Chief Justice John Roberts made more than $10 million in commissions over 8 years as she matched top lawyers with top law firms, including some that brought cases before the court. Roberts misleadingly disclosed the money as “salary” rather than commissions. Then news broke that nine days after Justice Neil Gorsuch was confirmed to the court, a property in which he held an interest sold after two years on the market. The buyer was the chief executive of Greenberg Traurig, a law firm that routinely practices before the court. Gorsuch did not disclose the buyer’s identity. 

Last night’s story got weirder, though, because Alito waded into it to attack ProPublica for their reporting. The reporters had reached out to the justice last week to get his side of the story. Yesterday, Alito’s office told the authors he had no comment and then several hours later—before the ProPublica story dropped—Alito published in the Wall Street Journal an op-ed “prebuttal” of what was to come. It was titled: “ProPublica Misleads Its Readers.” 

Alito didn’t deny that he had accepted the gifts, but claimed that he didn’t need to disclose the valuable flight because it was a “facility” and that the vacation did not involve $1,000 bottles of wine (remember that no one had yet read the ProPublica story, which quoted one of the lodge’s fishing guides as saying that a member of Alito’s party said the wine they were drinking cost $1,000 a bottle). He also said he did not know Singer was associated with the cases before the court. 

Today Leonard Leo, the person who organized the 2008 fishing trip, also jumped in. In 2008, Leo was the head of the Federalist Society, which came together in 1982 to roll back the business regulations and the civil rights legislation of the post–World War II era by remaking the courts with judges who stood against what they called “judicial activism.” (Leo is now in charge of Marble Freedom Trust, a nonprofit organized in May 2020 with a $1.6 billion donation from donor Barre Seid to push right-wing politics at every level.) 

Leo released a statement supporting Alito and warning: “We all should wonder whether this recent rash of ProPublica stories questioning the integrity of only conservative Supreme Court Justices is bait for reeling in more dark money from woke billionaires who want to damage this Supreme Court and remake it into one that will disregard the law by rubber stamping their disordered and highly unpopular cultural preferences.” (Justice Elena Kagan, one of the justices Leo suggests is being unfairly given a pass by ProPublica, reportedly declined to accept a basket of bagels and lox from her high-school classmates out of concern about the ethics of accepting gifts.)

Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo observed that Leo seems to have used his extensive network to set up relationships between judges and donors in a reinforcing ecosystem.  

This is, of course, precisely why there is pressure on the Supreme Court to adopt ethics reform. In April, Senators Angus King (I-ME) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) introduced the Supreme Court Code of Conduct Act, which would simply ask the court to develop its own code of conduct and oversight, a system that, unlike every other state and federal court, it does not currently have. That measure remains in committee.

But the day had just begun. John Durham, appointed as special counsel by Trump attorney general William Barr on October 19, 2020, to investigate the behavior of federal investigators who examined the ties between the 2016 Trump campaign and Russian operatives, testified for over six hours today before the House Judiciary Committee. While Trump and his loyalists repeatedly predicted Durham would find damning evidence against the investigators, in fact his 306-page report, released on May 15 after a four-year, $6.5 million investigation, simply said the FBI should have launched a preliminary investigation rather than a full investigation (a 2019 report by the Justice Department’s inspector general concluded the opposite).

There was little new information presented in the hearing, although Durham did answer a question from Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) about the report that when Durham and Barr had asked Italian officials for evidence in favor of Trump, they had instead passed on information that implicated Trump in financial crimes. Durham responded, “The question’s outside the scope of what I think I’m authorized to talk about—it’s not part of the report,” but added: “I can tell you this. That investigative steps were taken, grand jury subpoenas were issued and it came to nothing.”

The hearing served mostly to keep the Russia investigation in front of the public, which appears to be important to the former president and his allies as they continue to attack the FBI and the Justice Department. But Democrats on the committee pressed Durham on the facts of the Russia investigation itself, and he, seemingly somewhat reluctantly, agreed under oath in response to questions by Representative Adam Schiff (D-CA) that the facts of the Mueller report and the Senate Intelligence Committee report were correct: Russia interfered in the 2016 election for the benefit of Trump, Trump’s campaign welcomed the help and shared information and secret meetings with Russian operatives, and the FBI was justified in investigating that interference. 

Also significant in the hearing was the prominence of Schiff, who was the House manager for Trump’s first impeachment trial. That effort earned him Trump’s fury, and Trump loyalists today demanded a vote on the motion by Representative Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) to censure Schiff. 

Notwithstanding Durham’s sworn testimony, House Resolution 521 began: “Whereas the allegation that President Donald Trump colluded with Russia to interfere in the 2016 Presidential election has been revealed as false by numerous in-depth investigations, including the recent report by Special Counsel John Durham….” 

The resolution was a red-meat pro-Trump document, insisting that the Trump campaign did not work with the Russians, that Schiff “misled the public” over Trump’s call asking for a “favor” from Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelensky, and that, as then-chair of the Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff must be censured “for misleading the American public and for conduct unbecoming of an elected Member of the House of Representatives.” It also requires the Ethics Committee to “conduct an investigation into…Schiff’s falsehoods, misrepresentations, and abuses of sensitive information.” 

On social media, Trump had called for primary challengers against any Republican who voted against the censure. The Republicans fell into line. During the debate, former House speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said: “The other side has turned this chamber...into a puppet show. A puppet show, and you know what? The puppeteer, Donald Trump, is shining a light on the strings. You look miserable. Miserable.” The final vote was 213 to 209, with 6 representatives voting present. When the motion passed, the House Democrats erupted into chants of “Shame” and “Disgrace.” 

Owen Tucker-Smith of the Los Angeles Times noted that in the past 40 years, the House has censured just five people: Paul Gosar (R-AZ) in 2021 for tweeting a video showing a character with his face killing Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and attacking President Biden, Charles Rangel (D-NY) in 2010 for finance violations, Gerry Studds (D-MA) and Dan Crane (R-IL) in 1983 for sexual misconduct with House pages, and now Schiff. 

Earlier today, Schiff had his own take on his censure: “To my Republican colleagues who introduced this resolution, I thank you,’ he said. “You honor me with your enmity. You flatter me with this falsehood. You, who are the authors of a big lie about the last election, must condemn the truth-tellers and I stand proudly before you. Your words tell me that I have been effective in the defense of our democracy and I am grateful.”

—

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[ghoul-haunted]

Is there something you would recommend reading for someone with very basic knowledge of classical history bc I wanna feel the emotions you’re feeling but damn idk what you’re talking about

mshshsdhdhgh I also don't know what I'm talking about half the time, but yeah!

so my interest in the classics is driven largely by an interest in Themes, Tragedy, and the Renaissance, which makes it a little difficult to recommend things to read because I think that even tax records are FASCINATING if I can connect it to either a Theme or a Tragedy that has my attention at that moment

if there was anything specific that I've been yelling about on this blog that piqued your curiosity, let me know and I can recommend a starter kit for that in particular! I have no formal background in classical history, and a lot of my interest was reverse engineered from the Renaissance, so I have absolutely no idea what a baseline for classical history knowledge is at any level and I tend to just. assume that I'll either fill in the blanks as I read a book or dive into whatever it is I don't know later and let it fully consume my brain.

onwards!

if you're already familiar with tragedies and epics, thematic discussions (mostly Roman literature) with Ancient Greek history thrown in for Flavor™:

Statius and Virgil: The Thebaid and the Reinterpretation of the Aeneid, Randall T. Ganiban

Donald Kagan's writing on the Peloponnesian War

The Plague of War: Athens, Sparta, and the Struggle for Ancient Greece, Jennifer Roberts

Pestilence and the Body Politic in Latin Literature, Hunter H. Gardner

Conspiracy Narratives in Roman History, VE Pagan

Unspoken Rome: Absence in Latin Literature and its Reception, Tom Geue

Incest, Cannibalism, and The Gods: The Rise of the House of Atreus & The Gods Show Up Michael Kinnucan

Spartacus, Gladiators, Death and Spectacle:

Spectacles of Death in Ancient Rome, Donald G Kyle

The Game of Death in Ancient Rome: Arena Sport and Political Suicide, Paul Plass

Spartacus and the Slave Wars, Brent Shaw

The Spartacus War, Barry Strauss

the Spartacus episode of Barbarians Rising (content warning for sexual assault)

For the Late Roman Republic:

Robin Seager's translations of Plutarch's Lives

Julius Caesar, the Life and Times of the People's Dictator, Luciano Canfora

The Crowd in Rome in the Late Republic, Fergus Millar (this is for if you're interested in the transitional era between the Roman Republic and the Augustan Age regarding the decline in freedom of speech and political engagement as it turned into an autocracy)

Elizabeth Rawson and Ronald Syme's respective work on Roman history

Citizens of Discord, Rome: and its Civil Wars, Brian Breed, Cynthia Damon, Andreola Rossi

The Augustan Era:

The Lost Memoirs of Augustus: and the Development of the Roman Autobiography, Anton Powell, Christopher Smith

Empire and Memory: The Representation of the Roman Republic in Imperial Culture, Alain M Gowing

Augustan Memory and the Roman Republic, J. Farrell, D. Nelis

Other:

Emotional Trauma in Greece and Rome, Andromache Karanika, Vassiliki Panoussi

The Treatment of War Wounds in Graeco-Roman Antiquity, Christine F. Salazar

Media:

Honestly, like, HBO Rome is a really good time if you haven't seen it

my ask tag over on my other blog also has reading recommendations in it, along with this wall of text I wrote about Brutus and Cassius down in the citations

[thenamesofthings]

A Certain Political Development in the United States

…[T]he transition from an America bumbling its way into war and the current situation where wars are pursued as a matter of course coincides with a certain political development in the United States, which is the rise of neoconservatives as the foreign and national security policy makers in both major parties. This has developed together with the evolution of the view that the United States can do no wrong by definition, indeed, that it has a unique and God-given right to establish and police the globe through something that it invented, exploits and has dubbed the “rules based international order.”

Who would have thought that a bunch of Jewish student-activists, mostly leftists, originally conspiring in a corner of the cafeteria in the City College of New York would create a cult type following that now aspires to rule the world? The neocons became politically most active in the 1960s and eventually some of them attached themselves to the Republican Party under Ronald Reagan, declaring their evolution had come about because they were “liberals mugged by reality.” The neoconservative label was first used to describe their political philosophy in 1973. Since that time, they have diversified and succeeded in selling their view to a bipartisan audience that the US should embrace an aggressive interventionist foreign policy and must be the world hegemon.

To be sure their desire for overwhelming military power has been strongly shaped by their tribal cohesion which has fed a compulsion to have Washington serve as the eternal protector of Israel, but the hegemonistic approach has inevitably led to expanding conflict all over the world and a willingness to challenge, confront and defeat other existing great powers. Hence the support for a needless and pointless war in Ukraine to “weaken Russia” and a growing conflict with China over Taiwan to do the same in Asia. To make sure that the Republicans do not waver on that mission, leading neocon Bill Kristol has recently raised $2 million to do some heavy lobbying to make sure that they stay on track to confront the Kremlin in Europe.

One of the leading neocon families is the Kagans, who have successfully penetrated and come to dominate the establishment foreign policy centers in both the Republican and Democratic Parties. Victoria Nuland nee Nudelman, the wife of Robert Kagan, is entrenched at the State Department where she is now the Deputy Secretary, the number two position. Up until recently, she was one of the top three officials at State, all of whom were and are Jewish Zionists. Indeed, under Joe Biden Zionist Jews dominate the national security structure, to include the top level of the State Department, the head of Homeland Security, the Attorney General, the National Security Adviser, the Director of National Intelligence, the President’s Chief of Staff, and the Deputy Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. Nuland’s hawkish appeal is apparently bipartisan as she has served in senior positions under Bill Clinton, Dick Cheney, George W. Bush, Barack Obama and now Joe Biden. As adviser to Cheney, she was a leading advocate of war with Iraq, working with other Jewish neocons Doug Feith and Paul Wolfowitz at Defense and also Scooter Libby in the Vice President’s office. As there was no actual threat to the US from Saddam Hussein she and her colleagues invented one, the WMD that they sold to the media and to idiots like Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice…

—Philip Giraldi, 22 Aug 23

[potokguy]

"Danny/Reuven My Immortal (Band Version) AMV" and then I check the username and it's fucking Jeremy Paul Kagan.

[anth3045]

References

Arim, R., Findlay, L., & Kohen, D. (2020, August 27). The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on Canadian families of children with disabilities. Statistics Canada. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/45-28-0001/2020001/article/00066-eng.htm

Bellemare, A. (2020, May 1). Canadians who received copy of Epoch Times upset by claim that China was behind virus | CBC news. CBCnews. Retrieved from https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/epoch-times-coronavirus-bioweapon-1.5548217 

Chen, X. (2017). “Racism, Culture and Power in Children’s Literature” in The Sociology of Childhood and Youth in Canada. Toronto: Canadian Scholar’s Press. 

Chen, X., Rebecca, R., Patrizia, A. 2017.“Introduction: Taking Stock and Claiming Space for the Sociology of Childhood and Youth in Canada” in The Sociology of Childhood and Youth in Canada. Toronto: Canadian Scholar’s Press. 

Fallows, J. (2020, March 22). Trump and the 'Chinese Virus'. The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/03/2020-time-capsule-5-the-chinese-virus/622116/ 

Fleming, L. (2021, June 15). The difficulties of the Covid-19 pandemic for children with disabilities. Verywell Family. https://www.verywellfamily.com/pandemics-impact-on-children-with-disabilities-5185783

Humera, I. (2016, March 18). “Children’s friendships in super-diverse localities: Encounters with social and ethnic difference”. Sage Journals. https://doi-org.proxy.library.carleton.ca/10.1177/0907568216633741

Jiang, W. (2020, March 17). Trump knows better; it's an American virus that's killing Americans. Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund. Retrieved from https://www.aaldef.org/blog/emil-guillermo-trump-should-know-better-it-s-an-american-virus-that-s-killing-americans-an-american-virus/

Korbin, J. (2007, June). “Challenges and Opportunities in the Anthropology of Childhoods: An Introduction to “Children, Childhoods, and Childhood Studies””. Anthrosource Online Library. https://doi-org.proxy.library.carleton.ca/10.1525/aa.2007.109.2.241 

Lach, L., & Thomson, D. (2020, October 22). Children with disabilities disproportionately affected during Covid-19. Quoi. https://quoimedia.com/children-with-disabilities-disproportionately-affected-during-covid-19/

Reny, T. (2020, May 12). Xenophobia in the time of pandemic: Othering, anti-Asian attitudes, and covid-19. Taylor & Francis Online. Retrieved from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21565503.2020.1769693 

Said, E. (1978). Orientalism. Routledge & Kagan Paul. Retrieved from https://sites.evergreen.edu/politicalshakespeares/wp-content/uploads/sites/33/2014/12/Said_full.pdf 

Salvini, M., Tondo, L. (2020, February 24). Salvini attacks Italy PM over coronavirus and links to rescue ship The Guardian. Guardian News and Media. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/24/salvini-attacks-italy-pm-over-coronavirus-and-links-to-rescue-ship

Sebring, Ellen. (2015). Civilization & Barbarism: Cartoon Commentary & ‘the White Man's Burden’ (1898–1902). The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus. Retrieved from https://apjjf.org/2015/13/27/Ellen-Sebring/4339.html 

Fallows, J. (2020, March 22). Trump and the 'Chinese Virus'. The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/03/2020-time-capsule-5-the-chinese-virus/622116/ 

Jiang, W. (2020, March 17). Trump knows better; it's an American virus that's killing Americans. Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund. Retrieved from https://www.aaldef.org/blog/emil-guillermo-trump-should-know-better-it-s-an-american-virus-that-s-killing-americans-an-american-virus/

Shang, Z. (2022, July). Where is the meaningful response to anti-Asian hate? The Province . Retrieved from https://theprovince.com/opinion/zhida-shang-where-is-the-meaningful-response-to-anti-asian-hate

Whitley, J., Beauchamp, M., & Brown, C. (2021). The impact of COVID-19 on the learning and achievement of vulnerable Canadian children and youth. Facets.

Yesil, A., Sencan, B., Omercioglu, E., & Ozmert, E. (2021). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on children with special needs: A descriptive study. Sage Journals. https://doi.org/10.1177/00099228211050223

[mantra4ia]

SCOTUS poised to ease gun restrictions in NY with impending ruling | Vanity Fair

The court is due to hand down a ruling by the end of June, but many legal experts say the verdict is already clear, and the only question at this point is if the court’s conservatives will be giving a large gift to gun nuts or a colossal one. During oral arguments last November, the court’s conservative goon squad peppered attorneys with...hypotheticals, arguing that letting people carry a gun on, for instance, a crowded R train is not a public safety threat but an essential constitutional right. Brett Kavanaugh who, like Amy Coney Barrett, was nominated to the Supreme Court in part due to his firearms-friendly record as a judge—which the Giffords Law Center describes as “troubling” and “ideologically aligned with the gun lobby”—wanted to know why someone’s “proper cause” can’t just be “I want to be able to defend myself.” When plaintiff attorney Paul Clement charitably offered that the law could be struck down while still banning guns in “sensitive places,” but couldn’t answer Justice Elena Kagan’s question re: what, exactly, would constitute a sensitive place, Barrett, doing Clement’s job for him, asked, “Can’t we just say Times Square on New Year’s Eve is a sensitive place? Because now we’ve seen people are on top of each other, we’ve had experience with violence, so we’re making a judgment, it’s a sensitive place.” As Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern wrote at the time, “it’s pretty cold comfort if New York can only ban guns in one of the most crowded places in the world on its single busiest night.”

[psychedelic-sixties]

Jabberwock Presents

Robbie Basho/John Fahey, December 27-31 1966 & January 1 1967 - Art by Tom Weller Photo by Paul Kagan

[nomoreuniverse]

Vladimir Kagan chaise longue, 1950s, Paul Evans sideboard and Philip & Kelvin LaVerne floorlamps, 1970s