#also the us military are rapists. they even rape their own troops

[mercurial-cereal]

Memorial Day isn't even relevant anymore (if it ever was) because the only dead people that we need to remember are the hundreds of thousands of innocent victims, including the elderly, women, and children that the U.S, U.K., and Israeli militaries slaughter around the globe.

Happy Memorial Day

[tobiasdrake]

Oh, on the topic of James's birth.

The opening scene takes place in the "Northwest Territories" of Canada in 1845. General knowledge (by which I mean most of the wikis) place Wolverine's birth as Alberta, late 19th century with no specific year.

So they're moving his date of birth back a bit here. But they also don't reference Alberta.

That's actually correct. They shouldn't. Wolverine cannot actually have been born in Alberta. He was born in the territory of Canada that would become Alberta, established 1905. Whether you go with the year the film is set in minus however old he is in this scene or with the "late 19th century" estimation, James Howlett's birth predates the province of Alberta.

So, why did they move Logan's birthyear back? Probably because they had to in order to do this cool bit in the credits.

In which Victor and James travel thousands of miles to go fight in another country's civil war.

That might seem silly but actually tens of thousands of Canadians did, in fact, come south to fight for the Union. Slavery had already been abolished in Canada for about thirty years when the American Civil War happened, and so the cause of fucking up the Confederacy elicited some sympathy from the Union's closely-tied northern neighbors.

Probably goes without saying that, like everyone else, Canadians were in WWI. In fact, WWI is where Canada developed their reputation for being absolutely fucking terrifying. Merciless and brutal combatants who drank the tears of prisoners and pissed out war crimes.

Sending invincible regenerators into enemy trenches is honestly tame compared to the shit Canada was actually doing in the war.

By the way, I love this shot.

Victor gets shot and we cut straight to James like.

"Oh, I think I left the mustard gas on in the other trench."

Oh you better believe Canadians were there in WWII. You think Canada would miss out on a chance to remind Europe that they're the scariest motherfuckers on the planet? Nah.

"Hey, is it weird that my bruh enjoys being here?"

"Bro, it's D-Day. This is a weird fucking time to start hand-wringing about whether I'm too violent. If there is any conflict in history where Canadians' love of war crimes is acceptable...."

"Alright, it's Vietnam. This war historically sucks and our country refused to join it, though tens of thousands of citizens nonetheless enlisted in American forces. Now can we talk about this?"

"Dude, I'm getting my slaughter on. You've waited twenty years to have this conversation. You can wait another day."

Tragically, Logan does wait another day to have this conversation, and the results are disastrous. Victor starts team-killing our own troops because he wanted to do some raping. The famously rapey Vietnam-era U.S. Army opposes Victor's raping so he just starts killing dudes.

And Logan's over here like, "Something seems peculiar about this man. I can't quite put my finger on it.

They're trying to convey so much gradual character development in these two men's relationship in the span of an opening credits sequence, which has to be done entirely in the form of Logan giving Victor increasingly questioning gazes.

Like, I get what they're going for here but it's also hilarious. Their entire military history is a hundred years of Sabretooth and Logan throwing themselves into armed conflicts and then Logan stopping periodically to go, "Pourquoi mon frere?" before I guess resuming the killing.

Like. Even after this scene, they're executed by firing squad and then they're just chilling in their cell.

"Hey man, remember when I got us executed because I'm a rapist and I guess the Americans don't like that this week? Good times."

Like. They don't even talk about it. James gives Victor another Concerned Face

"You know, I'm beginning to think this guy might be problematic. Hm. Food for thought."

And then they're cool.

[overlooked-gems]

A Look At Stuff You Probably Never Heard Of: I Have No Mouth, And I Must Scream

I’ve been looking forward to this one for a while. I quite enjoy this game and it’s one of my favorite short stories. But before I talk about this one, I should give a warning; this game goes over the subjects of rape, guilt and suicide, PTSD, and torture, including animal torture. Today, we’re taking a look at... I Have No Mouth, And I Must Scream! I’ll also be making some comparisons to the original novel.

I Have No Mouth, And I Must Scream (henceforth shortened to just “I Have No Mouth”) is a point-and-click game originally released for the MS-DOS and Mac OS on October 31st, 1995. It was developed by The Dreamers Guild and developed and published by Cyberdreams with Harlan Ellison, the original author of the short story, working very closely on the development, including adding additional parts.

Taking place in an alternate world, the Cold War grew into World War III, with said war going on for so long and becoming so complicated, America, Soviet Russia, and China created their own "Allied Mastercomputers” to help manage weapons and troops. But one day, the American Allied Mastercomputer gained sentience, assimilated the other two mastercomputers, and turned all weapons on humanity, wiping out all except 5 survivors. The Mastercomputer renamed itself as “AM”, after the phrase “cogito, ergo sum” (”I think, therefore I am”) and would proceed to torture the surviving humans for 109 years, making them virtually immortal, taking out his rage and hatred for humanity out on them. In the game, AM decides to let the survivors play his own “game” with the promise of giving them what they desire.

From left to right, the survivors are;

Gorrister, a man who admitted his wife to an insane asylum and has been ridden with guilt ever since to the point of attempting suicide, but AM keeps stopping his attempts. AM promises to give Gorrister a chance to finally kill himself if he partakes and “wins” the game.

Ellen, the only woman of the group, was an engineering genius before she was raped in an elevator by a serial rapist disguised as a maintenance worker for several hours, thus giving her a fear of the color yellow and severe claustrophobia. AM promises to give her a look at his internal components, possibly giving her the chance to destroy AM.

Benny was an overly demanding, sadistic military officer who would kill people for any number of reasons, being heavily subscribed to Darwinism and expected perfection from his soldiers. When AM rose to power, he turned Benny into an ape-like creature with the mind and appetite of a beast, with Benny becoming AM’s favorite person to torture. He restores Benny’s mind, but crippled his legs so Benny can feast to his heart’s content and amuse AM.

Nimdok was a former Nazi scientistic who worked with Josef Mengele. Nimdok isn’t his real name, but AM gave him the name because it sounded funny. Either due to his age (even before AM destroyed the world, he was already pretty elderly), the 109 years of torture, or both, Nimdok has lost much of his memories and a bit of his mind. AM promises to restore Nimdok’s memory if he plays AM’s game, which sends him back to a concentration camp he worked at.

And finally, Ted, a con-man who seduced rich women and conned them out of their money while constantly looking over his own shoulder, paranoid at being exposed as a fraud. AM’s constant torture made him even more paranoid. AM promises him freedom if Ted can win.

Being a point-and-click game, the player is given various items and actions to work with, either directing a character to a location or interacting with an object in a certain way, like “Look at”, “Use”, “Talk To”, or “Give”. Using such commands with the environments or using items in your inventory is key to solving puzzles. It’s also possible to fail a game, like do something that causes Gorrister to kill himself one way or another, but AM shuts down that character’s game, but you can still go back into their scenario to try again as many times as you please. In fact, if you can suspend a character’s scenario, go to someone else, and come back later. For example, if you’re struggling with Benny, you can play as Ellen and come back to Benny later.

Characters also have a Spiritual Barometer, as indicated by their portraits. Good actions raise it while bad actions lower it. The level can be indicated by the color of the background behind each character’s portrait, starting off as black, and the best being green.

It’s also worth noting that each scenario takes place in a distinct “psychodrama” that plays into each character’s past or personalities; as mentioned previously, Nimdok’s is a concentration camp, but Ellen’s is a pyramid full of technology and Gorrister’s is a truck stop and blimp. Each is designed to play into their fatal flaws.

As stated before, I Have No Mouth touches on some heavy issues, so that may bother some people. And the game can be pretty vague and difficult to understand, especially to those who are new to point-and-click games. And there’s the fact that if you want the best ending, you have to do things perfectly and not make a single bad choice. The choices you make have an effect on the final level after completing everyone’s scenarios.

And now, we take a look at my Final Recommendation

Never Let Go Of It||Get It||Hold Onto It||Try It||Consider It||Stay Away From It

Let me give some advice; overcome each character’s flaws. Gorrister’s is about learning what actually happened and punishing the person responsible. Not getting revenge. Benny’s is about compassion and self-sacrifice for the sake of others. Ellen’s is about overcoming her trauma and fighting back. Ted’s is about ignoring temptation and helping others, even if he loses out on what he wants. And Nimdok’s is about embracing his Jewish heritage and rejecting the Nazi ethos.

And for the final level, you’re gonna need to know about the Id, Ego, and Superego. The Id is base instincts, doing what it wants without any other thought (wanting to eat because of hunger or entertain itself because it’s bored by any means). The Superego is morality, recognizing right and wrong and pushing to do what one believes is right. And the Ego is rationality, the balance between the two; Put simply, the Id, Ego, and Superego are pleasure, realism, and ideals, respectively.

Oh, and before I forget, if you want to play it, it’s available on Steam.

I also previously mentioned there are some differences from the story. Main one being that characters are fleshed out more and their dynamics between each other are different. For example, in the story Benny was stated to be gay before AM “cured” him (the story basically states this is to torment Benny and is not considered a good thing) and gave him the largest... “equipment” and Ellen, being the only woman among the survivors, is used for the men to have sex with. Ted (the narrator of the story) implies that Ellen only enjoyed having sex with Benny. There’s also no “game”, as the survivors just wander a wasteland aimlessly as AM torments them with false hope, horrifying visions, physical injuries, and other things. The story ends when, in a fit of rage, the survivors kill each other, leaving only Ted by the time AM intervenes, where he is transformed into a jelly-like thing, unable to harm itself, with a messed up sense of the passage of time, unable to see, feel, or speak. His mind is intact, but he has no mouth, the book ending on the iconic and titular line “I have no mouth, and I must scream”.

In the final scenario, it’s entirely possible to get such a bad ending, with one of the survivors being turned into jelly-like thing and saying the iconic quote, with Ted’s being just like the original.

And before I end this, I want to mention that not only did Harlan Ellison work to expand the world, he also provided the voice of AM, as he also provided the voice of AM in the radio drama.

And with that, I’ll see you all next month with another entry. I’ll leave you with the intro to the game, perhaps my favorite into to any game.

[inky-duchess]

History Bites: Bad Ass Moments (Women)

In History Bites, I pick the best moments of history and the antics historical figures in order to give you inspiration for your WIP. Think of History Bites like prompts, only juicer and 90% accurate (results may vary).

Today, we will discuss the bad ass moments of history (women). This post may have a part two. Let's get to it.

Arsinoë IV was the younger sister of Cleopatra. During the civil war between her elder sister and brother who were meant to be jointly ruling, Caesar besieged Alexandria on behalf of Cleopatra, taking the royal family hostage within the palace. In the confusion after the Library of Alexandria was accidentally burned down (I mean Caesar, I love you but you're fucking dick for burning the library), Arsinoë escaped the palace and took command of the Egyptian army. Under her control, the army enjoyed success even trapping Caesar as he tried to take the Lighthouse of Alexandria. This was an important symbol to the city as well as a masterful weapon, whoever controlled the Lighthouse controlled the harbour. To escape, Caesar had to swim across the bay throwing off his great purple cloak and fine armour, holding up his important papers as he limped back to dry land, defeated by a 15-18 year old girl.

Katherine of Aragon handed Scotland its biggest defeat in history. She led troops at Flodden, winning a battle where the Scottish King died. When she wrote to Henry as well as sending him the Scottish king's coat and banners, she mentioned that she had wanted to send the body of the king but the nobles were being pussies and said no. It may have been the shadiest letter of all the Tudor period.

Artemisia Gentileschi was one of art and history's all time bad asses. She was a skilled painter at a time when women were not permitted to attend art schools. She surpassed her father's own works and some of his other students. At 18, she was raped by another artist. In a time far behind today's understanding of rape and justice, Artemisia took a great risk in publicly accusing her rapist. She underwent numerous tortures so the judges could be sure she was telling the truth. The rapist was convicted (a major win). Artemisia went on to become one of the Baroque period's most powerful painters.

Marguerite de Bressieux was a 15th century noblewoman in France. When her father's castle fell to the armies of the Prince of Orange, Marguerite and the other women of the castle were all sexually assaulted. As the French army passed through the devastated lands, they came by a group of twelve knights armoured and mounted, bearing a black banner with an orange pierced by a spear. The commander revealed their face... it was Marguerite. She asked to join the French King's forces and he allowed her though he was quite taken aback. At the Battle of Autun, each of the female knights and Marguerite hunted down the Prince of Orange's men, unmasking their faces before they killed their rapists so they would know just had come.

Harriet Tubman was an American slave who ran the Underground Railway, ferrying slaves off to freedom. After escaping herself, Harriet refused to leave others behind. Known as Moses, Harriet risked life and limb to free slaves from the plantations. During the Civil War, she worked for the Union first as a cook then as scout and spy. Over her life, Tubman released over 300 slaves.

Countess Constance Markievicz was the first woman to be elected to a British Parliament ... while imprisoned for her art in the numerous acts of rebellion in the last years of English rule. Markievicz was one of the figureheads for Irish freedom, even acting as a sniper during the 1916 Easter Rising. When the rising was over, she was imprisoned but not executed (being a woman and a high status woman) which made her angry. She believed that the fight for Irish freedom was not just a male one. Her advice to women and girls of the time was "Dress suitably in short skirts and strong boots, leave your jewels in the bank, and buy a revolver"

Grace/Grainne O'Malley, the Pirate Queen of Ireland was one of the Lords of the West of Ireland. On her father's death, she inherited his lands and fleets as his heir, turning her into one of the most powerful lords of the west. She fought in the Nine Years War, becoming a thorn in the side of the "Governor" Richard Bingham. When her sons and half brother were captured and threatened, Grainne turned her sails to London to speak with Elizabeth I. Grainne did not bow to Elizabeth and began hammering out the terms of a peace. Bingham was fired, her sons and brother were released on the terms that Grainne would stop supporting Gaelic uprisings. Grainne didn't.

Jeanne de Clisson or the Lioness of Brittany, was a 14th century noblewoman. Her husband was imprisoned by the French King who suspected him of being a spy who had lost a battle on purpose. He was executed. Jeanne went immediately to the fort her husband had commanded. The garrison let her in. Jeanne's army took the fort. By the time the French King heard, Jeanne was gone. After a treacherous crossing over the Channel where she lost at least one child, Jeanne resurfaced in England. The English king granted her three ships which she used to wage war on France in revenge.

Ching Shih was a Chinese pirate queen, formerly a prostitute. When her husband died, she took over his fleet of ships. Ching Shih went about on tightening the reigns on her sailors. They could not rape captives, if they did they were beheaded. If they wanted to have one of the women, a sailor had to marry her and treat her right. To disobey a superior twice was death. As she got the fleet into shipshape, Ching Shih began her reign of the seas amassing millions. The government fought her a few times but soon gave up their war, paying Ching Shih to go away. She retired as a respected millionaire.

Osh-Tisch or "Finds Them and Kills Them” was a Native American warrior. She had been born male but chose to live as a woman also known as a baté, a person which two souls in their body. Osh-Tisch took up arms along with the other batés when her tribe went to war with the Lakota, winning the war. As missionaries came to to stick their noses in where they weren't wanted, Osh-Tisch and the other batés were subject to horrific abuse. Batés were forced to dress and act as their assigned gender by the dickheaded missionaries. Osh-Tisch disregarded the missionaries and continued to work with batés across America in order to support one another.

Harriet Tubman escaped from slavery in the years preceding the Civil War. Harriet refused to leave others behind and returned about nineteen times to volatile south to rescue slaves, under the name Moses. During the war, Harriet served as cook, nurse and spy for the Union. Harriet saved over 300 slaves.

Matilda, Lady of the English once escaped a besieged castle. How did she do this? She walked out of the gates and left. She was wearing a white cloak which camouflaged her against the snow. She walked eight miles in the snow to continue her fight for the crown.

Cleopatra VII (that Cleopatra) was once summoned to Tarsos go meet the new Governor of the Eastern Provinces of the Roman Empire, Mark Antony who wanted to borrow some money. They negotiated back and forth on who should come to who. Cleopatra refused to go... but then showed up in Tarsos on luxurious barge. While feasting with Antony at his expense, Cleopatra claimed that she could host the more expensive meal. She dropped a pearl earring into her wine, where it dissolved and downed it like a queen.

Caterina Sforza was an Italian noble woman in the Renaissance period and you could literally not find a bigger bad ass. She rode at the head of an army to occupy the great fortress of the Castel San Angelo in the name of her husband, while being seven months pregnant. At the siege of Ravaldino, Caterina and her children were prisoners of the treacherous Orsis family who had killed her husband. Caterina persuaded the commanders to let her enter the city to negotiate the surrender of the castle. One inside, she climbed the battles and cussed out the besiegers. Utterly stunned, one commander threatened to kill her children but Caterina lifted her skirts and flashed them, claiming she could make more. OK, that may be a rumour. She may have touched her belly or claimed to be already pregnant but still it was a moment. It ended up buying her enough time for more forces to come and beat the army outside.

Catherine the Great born a minor German Princess overthrew her husband Peter III in a successful military coup. A few days before the original coup was going to commence, a co-conspirator let slip to another guard that it was happening. The man was arrested. When the news got to her, Catherine left the palace via carriage commandeering horses along the way. She went to the barracks of the Ismailovsky regiment dressed in burrowed military uniform and made an impassioned plea to the soldiers to earn their support which they gave her. She was crowned sole ruler of Russia and forced her husband to sign his crown away.

Khutulun, the great-grandaughter of Genghis Khan was badass from the beginning. She was the only girl in a family of boys and grew up to be the fiercest. Khutulun was a highly sought after bride. She didn't hate men but felt she shouldn't be married to somebody unequal to her. Every man who sought to wed her had to wrestle her or pay ten horses. She had ten thousand horses by the time she died.

Boudicca was the Queen of the Iceni, a Celtic tribe in England. Her husband, an ally of the Romans, left half his kingdom to Rome and the other half to his daughters. When he died, Rome took it all. When Boudicca spoke out against it, she was flogged and her daughters were raped. Boudicca decided that it was time for the Romans to fuck off and die. Raising a massive host, Boudicca burned three major Roman settlements down Londinium (London), Verulamium (St. Albans) and Camulodunum (Colchester). She was the greatest threat the Rome since...

Amanirenas, Queen of Kush was an African Queen who fought the Romans. Kush lay south to the new conquered Egypt, which meant it was next on Rome's agenda. Kush moved first. Though one-eyed, she was an able warrior who survived at least a dozen battles. Though the Romans burned the capital and took slaves, Amanirenas still fought on bringing Rome to its knees. Rome and Kush signed a peace treaty, preventing Rome from crossing the border ever again. Amanirenas's badass moment came thousands of years after when archeologists were digging up the tombs. Found under her the foot of statue, was the head of the Emperor Augustus.

[well-red-commie-gf]

On the Myth of Mass Rapes by the Red Army

I just completed a course focused on war crimes of WWII. Here's something I wrote in response to an article accusing Stalin of condoning rape, among other articles which (I belive) massively inflated the number of rapes that occurred. 

While I am aware that sexual violence was committed by Allied troops (including the American GIs and British Soldiers) as well as the Axis troops, I found it difficult to believe that any leader would condone the act. Stalin was accused of exactly that, but the accounts of Stalin condoning rape (whether implicitly or explicitly) can be traced back to a single primary source, the book “Conversations with Stalin” by Yugoslavian author Milovan Djilas, who later became one of communism’s first prominent Eastern European dissidents and one of Stalin’s harshest critics. The novel was written some twelve years after the war’s conclusion, and contains many (otherwise unverified) “quotes” from Stalin. 

It is no secret that Stalin committed atrocities against the enemy in WWII as well as against his own people, and I want to ensure that my attempt at seeking historical truth is not interpreted as a defense of those acts. However, I also feel that it is somewhat unfair to assert that Stalin or his officers condoned or encouraged soldiers to rape the enemy, when there are numerous other primary sources indicating the opposite. I found nothing to corroborate the claim that Stalin believed this a good method of “mentally breaking” the enemy. There is significant evidence in Russian literature indicating that rape would not have been tolerated by military command. The concept of gender equality and the emancipation of women was deeply embedded in Marxist communist doctrine upon which the Constitution of the USSR was based [1]. 

Under Stalin, women were able to choose their careers and acted as active participants in the national economy. It is estimated that over 800,000 women served in the Red Army during WWII and some became decorated officers.  It is likely that the empowerment of women in Soviet society was what led so many women to enlist. The author of "The Unwomanly Face of War", Svetlana Alexievich, makes this very assumption in the introduction to her novel, which is a collection of stories compiled from interviews with women who served on behalf of the Red Army during WWII. There are accounts in the novel of rape, but it is clear even from these accounts that superior officers would punish soldiers who were found committing sexual violence against the citizens of the territories they occupied. One interview with a Junior Sergeant named A. Ratkina reveals that there were harsh punishments for even consorting with female citizens, and that rape was punishable by court martial.

"One of our officers fell in love with a German girl … our superiors heard about it … He was demoted and sent to the rear. When we entered a town or a village, for the first three days there was looting and [rape] … Well, in secret, naturally … You understand … After three days you could wind up in court" [2].

In Soviet Russia, rape was an offense punishable by death [3].  While Ratkina admits that Red Army soldiers were likely guilty of rape, she also reveals that this was not tolerated by her command. Ratkina recalls that, when five German girls came to her commander weeping and stating that they had been raped, and this account was confirmed by a gynecologist’s examination, “we told those German girls: go and look, and if you recognize someone, we’ll shoot him on the spot. We won’t consider his rank” [4].  

Additionally, many Russian soldiers-turned-academics have said that Stalin issued an executive order on 19 January, 1945, explicitly outlawing mistreatment of citizens by his soldiers [5].  One soldier-turned-professor also added that “4,148 Red Army officers and many privates were ‘punished’ for committing atrocities” [6].  I have not been able to find a copy of this executive order to corroborate their statements, but have researched the claimants and found that they hold prestigious positions in their respective fields. 

This executive order has been mentioned in several of the articles I perused, so it is likely that it existed in some form. One Russian website provides the text of the order as follows:"Officers and Red Army! We are going to the country of the enemy. Everyone should keep his composure, everyone should be brave ... The remaining population in the conquered areas… should not be subjected to violence. Perpetrators will be punished under the laws of war. In the conquered territory, sexual relations with the female sex are not allowed. For violence and rape the perpetrators will be shot" [7]. 

While I am unable to independently verify the content of the order, I feel that I have found sufficient evidence to confirm that the claim that Stalin or his officers encouraged or condoned rape was false. It is likely that rape occurred, but certainly not to the extent claimed in the articles linked in the first paragraph of this post. Stalin was unrelenting and unforgiving, both qualities which assisted his pursuit of victory in the war. It is highly unlikely that he would have tolerated any acts that would cast a poor image on the Red Army. 

There are far more primary sources documenting rapes committed by the US Army, though they are generally not easy to find in English. One such article can be found from Der Spiegel, which claims "US criminology professor Robert Lilly, who examined rape cases prosecuted by American military courts, arrived at a number of 11,000 serious sexual assaults committed by November, 1945" [8]. Additionally shocking is the evidence that, not only did American GIs commit mass rape, they blamed it on black soldiers and even fabricated stories to justify segregation upon returning home [9]. I would especially recommend reading this article, as few articles explore the rape committed by American GIs so thoroughly.

[1] Alice Erh-Soon Tay, “The Status of Women in the Soviet Union,” The American Journal of Comparative Law 20, no. 4 (1972): pp. 662-692, https://doi.org/10.2307/839036.[2] Svetlana Alexievich, “And She Puts Her Hand to Her Heart,” in The Unwomanly Face of War, trans. Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky, [epub] (Penguin Classics, 2017).[3] Ger P. Van Den Berg, “The Soviet Union and the Death Penalty,” Soviet Studies 35, no. 2 (1983): pp. 154-174, https://doi.org/10.1080/09668138308411469.[4] Alexievich, The Unwomanly Face of War.[5] Sergey Turchenko, “Sex Liberation: Erotic Myths of WWII (Translated Automatically from Russian),” Free Press, May 5, 2011, https://web.archive.org/web/20140530214602/http://svpressa.ru/war/article/8271/. See also O. A. Rzheshevsky, “Berlin Operation 1945: Discussion Continues (Translated from Russian),” World of History (Russian Electronic Magazine), May 8, 2003, https://web.archive.org/web/20120401022017/http://gpw.tellur.ru /page.html?r=books&s=bevor.[6] Chris Summers, “Red Army Rapists Exposed,” BBC News (BBC, April 29, 2002), http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe /1939174.stm.[7] Daniil Ivanov, “The Myth of Millions of Raped German Women,” State History, October 20, 2009, https://statehistory.ru/32/Mif-o-millionakh-iznasilovannykh-nemok/.[8] Klaus Wiegrefe, "Postwar Rape: Were Americans As Bad as the Soviets?" Spiegel International, March 2, 2015, https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/book-claims-us-soldiers-raped-190-000-german-women-post-wwii-a-1021298.html[9] Ruth Lawlor, "When commemorating D-Day, don’t forget the dark side of American war efforts," The Washington Post, June 6, 2019, https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/06/06/when-commemorating-d-day-dont-forget-dark-side-american-war-efforts/

[newsnigeria]

Check out New Post published on Ọmọ Oòduà

New Post has been published on http://ooduarere.com/news-from-nigeria/world-news/assange-new-immoral-western/

Assange: A New Immoral Western Precedent

by Ghassan Kadi for Ooduarere Via Saker Blog

Every time I write about how low the West has stooped, even make predictions as to how much further it is prepared to slump, I find that my wildest imaginations are surpassed in no time at all.

The arrest of Julian Assange and the foray of charges he is suddenly facing is now reaching a point that should only be seen as a yet another precedent that the West will “use” in the near future to stoop even lower.

To make sense out of this, we have to rewind the clock to the time when the Allies won WWII.

The first immoral Western precedent was to try hard to present to the world that the defeat of Nazi Germany was ONLY due to Western efforts and sacrifices. The heavy cost that Russia/USSR has paid, up to 40 million dead, was overlooked in the news and trivialized even in history books. As a matter of fact, a recent commemorative American coin marking the fall of Hitler has totally ignored the USSR even though it was actually Russian troops that entered Berlin, defeated Hitler and forced him to “disappear”. https://sputniknews.com/world/201905231075258961-us-coin-world-war-two-anniversary/

But that was just the beginning. Back then, the West, and specifically America, had the global mastery of wealth and technology. Controlling the media was only a small part of the bigger story of success that no other part of the world could compete with; not in any manner, shape or form.

Soon after came the Communist witch-hunt. But the hunt was not restricted to Communism in other nations, but also any American with any social justice inclinations. The infamous period of McCarthyism haunted and hunted everyone, including movie stars like Charlie Chaplin. But it was the role of America outside its international borders that had its biggest toll. Any country that defied the USA formed a “security threat” and the foundation of an American anti-Communist military intervention.

The first target was Korea. A UNSC resolution was sought and granted to launch an international “police action” against Korea.

The second big target was Vietnam. The USA found a way to dodge the need for a UNSC resolution to pillage Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos. It also dragged in its allies.

A few decades and many invasions later, in its ramping up of world opinion against Saddam prior to the 2003 invasion, GWB used the excuse of a “pre-emptive strike”. He fabricated the story about the WMD’s and the rest is history.

In every step of the way, as America sees that it is able to get away with a new lame excuse with total impunity, it uses less and less credible reasons and justifications the next time around. It is like a downward spiral, an anti-crescendo, in which each time a new precedent is created, the next act of audacity will require less justification.

But the precedent set in the case against Assange is a serious and dangerous new low. It is an act that defies one of the basic foundations of the so-called “free world”. It is a witch-hunt that is directed at free journalism, and unless such witch-hunts stop, the next victim could be anyone. It can be you.

Assange has many critics. Some argue that he is an Israeli asset and that this is why he never criticized Israel. Perhaps he is. The truth is that I don’t know and no one has provided damning enough evidence proving that he is. Instead of being a Mossad agent, perhaps he likes Israel. I don’t know either. Perhaps also he did not have consensual sex with the woman accusing him of rape. None of the above is excusable, but WikiLeaks has undoubtedly exposed a lot of dirt about America and specifically the Clintons; and this is good enough in this context.

If people are waiting for the perfect faultless person, a saint, before any truth can be told and any dirt can be exposed, well, they can wait. But remember, let he without a sin cast the first stone. We are all imperfect. We all have our own faults and idiosyncrasies, but this doesn’t stop those of us who care from trying to make the world a better place.

Why is it that some people single out Assange and expect him to embody and symbolize perfection in every way before they acknowledge the good things he has done?

This statement about Assange had to be mentioned as in a “pre-emptive” attempt to answer some possible comments.

Back to the main subject.

As America is losing its clout, technologically, militarily and financially, it is acting like a mad wounded beast that will not stop at anything in order to guarantee survival. In a previous article I wrote a bit over a year ago, I have expressed my views on how America sees the world and how far it is prepared to be pushed. https://thesaker.is/how-far-can-the-americans-be-pushed/

And in a previous and much older article written back in 2012, I reiterated that if push comes to shove, America can always count on its unrivaled nuclear power. http://intibahwakeup.blogspot.com/2013/09/how-far-will-desperate-radical-america.html . But a lot has changed since, and with Russia’s and China’s hypersonic defence and attack missiles (which America does not have), fortunately for the world America no longer holds that trump card anymore and is incapable of scoring a decisive victory by striking either nation first. As a matter of fact, President Putin made a clear reference to this issue in a recent speech https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-putin-usa-missiles-idUSKCN1Q918U

All that America has left is to resort to acts of piracy, oppression and suppression. I say piracy because the way America is dealing with the issue of Iran sanctions is tantamount to piracy. As far as I know, never before in history did a nation boycott another, and then used its clout to coerce other nations to do the same.

And recently, America has been accused by laying traps for Iranian scientists, granting them visit Visas, and then arresting them at arrival. https://sputniknews.com/us/201905241075282775-US-Laid-Traps-Iranian-Academics-Visas-Arresting/ .If this isn’t piracy, what is?

Had America imposed sanctions on Iran back when Iran was issuing “fatwas” against the likes of British author Salman Rushdi, one could see a possibility for some kind of justification that can be used. But the source of terror is from perverted Sunni-based fundamentalism. All the fundamentalist organizations are based on distorted forms of Islam; Wahhabi Islam and the Muslim Brotherhood which are the versions adopted, sponsored, lived, and exported by the Saudis, Qataris and Turkey’s Erdogan, all of whom are America’s friends and allies. And those organizations are once again of Sunni affiliation, and they hate Shiite Iran’s guts. How on earth could Iran be supporting them?

And above all, it was the USA that helped establish many of those organizations and their spread in the West in the first place. Even Mohamed Bin Salman himself acknowledged this in a recent interview. https://www.rt.com/news/422563-saudi-wahhabism-western-countries/ . And the woman who rose to fame by refusing her presidential election defeat is also famous for admitting that “we” (ie American administration) created Al-Qaeda.

It goes without saying that the American-Iranian standoff is about the protection of Israel, and it would do Americans a lot of good if they openly said that Iran did not breach the nuclear deal treaty, it is not responsible for the spread of terror, and we simply want to sanction it because of its anti-Israeli stand. Such truth, crude as it may be, may give America some credibility albeit in a farcical manner.

Why don’t Trump or Pompeo openly and honestly say “America First” means that “we have to put our hands on Venezuela’s oil?” Everyone knows this is what it is all about.

But what honest excuse can America give for persecuting Assange? It cannot say we are after his neck because he has exposed our dirt, so they conjure up a whole list of accusations, 17 charges to be exact; and the citation of this is not necessary.

No, I will not put Assange on par with Socrates, but how can humanity today accept that someone is being persecuted for exposing dirt? More than two thousand years after the execution of Socrates, humanity is still ashamed. What happened to the days of Bernstein and Woodward? Do people still remember them? Well, for those of short memory, those two then unknown junior journalists gave the suffix “gate” to political scandals when they initiated their own Watergate investigation, and which eventually led to the impeachment and resignation of the then President Richard Nixon. The two journos became heroes and won medals, but Assange ends up in jail. He is not a saint, but he is definitely not a criminal, at least not by the charges they have against him. If he is indeed guilty of rape, then let them provide the evidence and charge him if proven guilty. But his political charges don’t have a foot to stand on. And the Swedish Government cannot expect the world to believe that the whole hullabaloo is about a single incident of rape in a country with a surging rape rate. What makes the positon of the Swedish Government more blatantly hypocritical is the fact that courts in Nordic countries have a very lenient stance in punishing rapists. They seem to be more compassionate towards rapists than the actual rape victims; especially after the recent rape surge that is seemingly associated with migration. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2019/04/rape-and-sexual-violence-in-nordic-countries-consent-laws/. So once again, why single out Assange? What a shame.

And we cannot speak of Assange without at least mentioning Bradley/Chelsea Manning. Manning does not receive the same publicity that Assange does, but her predicament is not any less.

What is more foreboding than American actions are those of EU nations. Nations like France and Germany are meant to be smart. I will leave Britain out, because Britain has strong historic and cultural links with America. But how can Germany and France be so stupid in following America’s instructions and fake accusations of Russia to justify sanctions? How can they accept an American missile buildup in Western and Eastern Europe?

And Sweden, the nation that has always represented the fair and compassionate side of politics, how can it justify its witch-hunt against Assange? This is the capital of the Nobel Prize for God’s sake. This is the nation that allegedly promotes and fosters peace. And Norway, beautiful clean peaceful Norway, is allowing the US to base missile batteries on its soil poised at Russia. Why? Have they all gone mad?

America is taking the term “unprecedented” to an unprecedented new level, and every time it commits a new unprecedented audacious act, brace yourselves for more audacity.

So ever since sidelining the role of the USSR in defeating the Third Reich, America started by ignoring facts, and moved on to exaggerating foreign threats, to fabricating evidence, to piracy and suppressing free journalism; all the while, Western nations follow like brainless sheep. Perhaps the new precedent to watch out for will be after all honesty-based, saying it as it is…. “We want to invade your country because we want your resources.”

[moviesomnambulist]

THE MOVIE SOMNAMBULIST #7 – The Firing Line

"The government used me. And now I'm gonna pay the fuckers back." -- Mark Hardin, explaining the plot in detail.

The 80s were a magical time for people who wanted to make movies about a vigorous foreign policy stance. Even if you made a terrible movie, you could get cash and opportunities for pretty okay gun battles if you switched from your original idea about three friends discovering their sexual identity through lives and loves at a coffee house to, say, three friends discovering their inner Chuck Norris by shooting a lot of brown people with an M-16 in each hand. There is, I submit, an obvious budget standard for these movies. It is extremely easy to spot and you can learn this trick in a heartbeat. The 80s movie you are watching costs at least half a million dollars if there is a helicopter in it. Plenty of movies tried to have action on the cheap without a helicopter and they are obviously much cheaper and worse off for this omission. But if you see a chopper, not just stock footage, then rest assured shit will blow up and lots of people will get shot. Hell, THE FIRING LINE even has tanks!

In an unnamed South/Central American country, you have some rebels. There always are. What you also have is Reb Brown (that's TV's Captain America to you, soldier!) and Shannon Tweed (that's oh God how I love her Shannon Tweed to you, mister!). Reb shouts his way through the movie with classics like "Up your ass" and "Hey, I just saved your butt!" Shannon's reply to the latter: "Great, just friggin' great!" Reb is Mark Hardin (tee hee), an American "military adviser" (tee hee) here in Santa Wherever to suppress the rebel forces, led by Rodriguez and Laura. In the opening six minute battle sequence (you know, like SAVING PRIVATE RYAN), Mark captures Rodriguez and a woman who might be Laura. His bosses tell him good job, now go away. So Mark goes back to town and meets Sandra (Tweed) in the hotel bar. He buys her a drink and this works great. She kids him by suggesting "Don't tell me you're a Communist Sympathizer" (tee hee).

In defiance of almost every other Shannon Tweed movie, they do not immediately go have sex. There's no slow undressing, no careful sweep of hair covering what she's not actually doing with his...so anyway, not that movie. Mark bumps into a reporter who tells him Rodriguez is dead. We the audience know the woman is dead because nasty Col. Nunez raped and killed her. Col. Nunez is otherwise hilarious because although he's obviously a native Spanish speaker, when he shouts insults in Spanish he sounds like the Rosetta Stone version: "POO-TAH!"

Angry, Mark confronts Col. Nunez and his own boss. Sure, Rodriquez and Laura are dead. But who cares? Mark Hardin cares, asshole. He brought them in to face justice, not a firing squad and Col. Nunez's cock, respectively. He beats them up, but he is arrested and interrogated and electrocuted. He escapes by beating up seven armed men with his bare hands and goes after Sandra. Mark Hardin knows how everything goes down in a movie like this. Of course, the next step is to arrest and interrogate Sandra's boobs, er, rather, to find out what she knows. This movie only takes two opportunities to expose its female lead, so the mind can occasionally wander whenever she's on screen.

Off Mark and Sandra go to the rebels. The rebels are not happy to see them, but Mark helps them fight off a Government attack, so maybe the gringo isn't so bad. The real Laura leads the rebels now. During another sneak attack, Mark and Sandra are trying to be quiet when a snake comes upon her. And, well, she wants to scream, right? Because she's a girl in a movie and that's the only response available to her. Mark shoots the snake, and this set me to thinking. Either this was an extremely good latex effect (and there aren't any others), or they shot the hell out of a real snake. This movie spent its cash on helicopters and tanks. I think it's a real snake. This got me thinking about budget in general. They could have traded the helicopters and gotten Henry Silva to be Nunez and Richard Herd to be the US military boss Milton and gotten a better movie, no doubt. Wait, maybe not. Henry was in ABOVE THE LAW that year. That's definitely a better career move. And Richard Herd was still on SIMON AND SIMON. Okay, keep the damn copters.

The soundtrack is classic synth noodling. It actually works at odds with the movie's vague point about government being evil, or something. The music accompanying the mobilization of government troops (and there's a lot of that) has a rousing theme that makes you think they're the good guys. The rebel theme is one of struggle and is frankly depressing. Let's not discuss the love theme.

Mark Hardin never fails. There is no central struggle in the movie at all. Mark plans. Mark is awesome. Mark always succeeds. He rocks that mustache, so there is no problem too big for Mark Hardin. He even volunteers to be the arrested Wookiee in a ruse to shoot a lot of government troops. Government man Milton is built up as the man to beat. People shoot at Milton, big effing deal. He shoots back and you die. So when he and Mark Hardin meet at the end, they trade a little gunfire and Mark blows up a bridge and that's it for Milton.

Mark seems to grudgingly sleep with Sandra. Sandra swims naked under a waterfall, and this is great. One of the rebels, the obviously-a-turncoat Montiero, ogles her until Mark shows up and tells him to piss off. Mark says he'll watch over her, and that's all he does. It's only later, after she's killed her first man, that when she asks Mark to have sex with her, he does. They show this coupling from behind some rocks, as if we the audience are intruding. He puts Sandra on top of himself and then lies back as her head descends...and that's it. 80s military action heroes, even the cheap ones, are so weirdly chaste. If they don't look cool doing something, you don't see it. So what you do see are people dying by the dozen. In role-playing games you have non-player characters. In this movie you have non-character players. They stand around in a scene, only to get mowed down in the next.

There's absolutely no endgame here. Even Mark isn't planning beyond the next raid. Twelve seconds after Milton goes up with the bridge, it's THE END. There are some great bits along the way. It turns out the woman raped and killed at the beginning was Laura's sister. Laura confronts the rapist. When she raises her gun, the panicked soldier yells "But we gave her great pleasure" and Laura shoots him in the nuts. Oh, and when the Governor and Milton play golf and discuss the country falling apart, the Governor says "Are you implying he's Christ-like, the People's Messiah?"

Stayed awake for the whole thing because a rebel army half-composed of women in black wife-beaters running around in a Shannon Tweed movie will keep you living in hope. Six wide awake eyes for this one. (One eye equals 15 minutes of runtime.)