Down through history people have used
music to express their emotions. It has been an outlet for love,
anger, protest, and at times sadness. This year the Nobel prize for
literature went, not to an author of books, but to a singer/writer of
songs, Bob Dylan. A rather unique circumstance, but then he is a
rather unique individual. He rose to fame during a period in US
history that was aflame with war and protest. His songs followed a
generation through the turbulence of the Vietnam War and growing up.
Probably my favorite Bob Dylan song.
.
Last week there was an article in my
newspaper about a musician who was going to be playing at the Walker
Art Center, Amir ElSaffar.
It caught my attention because I
remember listening to some maqam over at Zeyad's site, so I thought I
would check it out.
I found that I enjoyed his blending of
jazz and maqam.
What Amir ElSaffar and Bob Dylan have
in common is not just musical talent but an artistic ability to
create a new form of expression with their music. In our fast paced
electronic world stopping and taking a moment to listen is well
worth the time.
88 comments:
First.
Amir was my music teacher in NYC many years ago.
A talented man. :)
Lynnnette:
"A talented man. :)"
Very much so indeed. But deserving a Nobel price with all the great authors out there? I'm not so sure.
Still, way better than giving the Nobel Peace Price to an untried Obama based on just a speach or two. THAT was a farce.
I was actually responding to IraqiMaqam's comment.
But I do think Bob Dylan is talented. I know there are those who question his winning the Nobel, but I do not. While I do not care for all of his stuff I do appreciate his unique place in our history. He spoke through his poetry and music to many during a time of great change and turmoil. A bit like today, in fact. He expressed what many were thinking in a way that they could relate to. He wasn't a one hit wonder, but has been prolific in his work. I think he has paid his dues and deserves recognition. I am sure there are many great authors out there, and hopefully their time will come as well to have that same recognition of their work.
I agree with you about Obama. I don't think he was deserving of that prize. He hadn't been around long enough. There were others more deserving.
Tonight at 9:00 Frontline has a special on Channel 2 on "Terror in Europe".
Fell asleep. *sigh*
Two more Americans being held for ransom in Iran
Iranian-Americans Baquer Namazi and his son Siamak have been sentenced to 10 years in prison and fined $4.8 million, according to Iran's official news channel IRINN.
Trump is bringing Barack Obama's Kenyan half-brother to tonight's debate as his special guest. This isn't about beating Hillary anymore--Trump's given up on that. This is about playing to his base. He's intending to not go away after he loses the election. Rumor is he's getting ready to launch a media conglomerate and play to the radical right, right-wing of where FoxNews has been willing to go, out there with Radio-Right-Wing. Everybody else has been trying to pick up the leftie news constituency, figuring FoxNews had the right-wingers sewn up, but looks like our boy Trump's got a different plan.
He's gonna go to the right of FoxNews on the theory that they've created a bunch of real crazies for him pick up because they won't quite go far enough out into the crazy zone to suit the clientel that they and Radio-Right-Wing have jointly created. (And, he's now working with Roger Ayles, recently purged co-founder of FoxNews.) Typical Trump move, slap his brand on something somebody else has built.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Maybe oughta mention something Marcus said earlier (last thread) so he knows we at least read it:
"… and Hillary being the ultimate Washington insider is not an option
for them. So with Trump they are stuck."
There are some who think they're ‘stuck’ with Trump, and there are various reasons--more than just Hillary being the ‘ultimate insider’. (I'll gloss lightly over those other reasons.) There are quite a few who are voting for Trump with enthusiasm. I've been working out in my head how the hell that could be, and finally figured it out. Think of the black folks who riot and burn down their own commercial districts--only place they got to shop and they burn the damn thing down.
This is angry white folks ready to burn the whole damn thing down. They got no clue how good they got things.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
And I think the reason they gave that Noble Prize to Obama was to reward him for not bein’ Dubya. I know they said it was for a couple of idealistic speeches, but I think it was just a reward for not being Dubya. They's pretty much down on all things Dubya.
@ Lynnette,
That Frontline piece on Terrorism in Europe was worth the hour. If you get a chance to look at it later--take the hour it takes; it's worth it.
The after-Trump analyses have already begun.
"…[C]razy theories can come from non-crazy people, and it’s unlikely
that 40 percent of Americans are lunatics. We’re seeing something
else…."
Vanity Fair
To paraphrase something I read at Vox…
"The angry old white folks who're now voting for Trump by the hordes
were surprised and alarmed to learn that Obama could win reelection
with [virtually zero] support from [white] people like them,
and have reacted with the…primal scream that has turned into the
Donald Trump campaign."
Unfortunately, these preliminary analyses are all coming from non-Trumpkins. The Republicans haven't yet begun to try to figure out what's gone wrong with their Party, and I'm not sure they'll have time to figure on it once the election's over and the bloodletting begins.
And one debate left. What will The Donald do tonight?
Ahhh...it's almost time..I've got my popcorn (actually chocolate chip cookies tonight) ready. :)
That Frontline piece on Terrorism in Europe was worth the hour. If you get a chance to look at it later--take the hour it takes; it's worth it.
As soon as I get the chance, I'm going to.
Roughly half-way into the debate, not quite half-way yet, but almost, and what I'm mostly struck with is that somebody's gotten to Trump about his facial gestures. He looks like he's swallowed a lemon most of the time; it's a fixed expression that he's apparently learned to hold sometime during the last ten days.
Well, I no sooner said that than Trump went au-natural and started in with the lip pursing and head gestures again.
Trump never did get his sucked-lemon face frozen back on the front of his head. I don't think that matters much.
I also thought that Chris Wallace made some ‘factually challenged’ assumptions in some of his questions along the way. And, he kinda let the debate get away from him at times, especially towards the middle of the debate (maybe he didn't have much choice--both of them looking at this as their last direct shot at the other).
And it seemed to me that Trump was slowly turning from orange-faced to red-faced during the debate. At about the 70 minute mark I was beginning to wonder if he was gonna be able to finish the debate. That red face had me worried for him. But, he made it to the end.
Very little light shed during this debate though. Trump needed to break out tonight, Hillary just needed to tread water. Trump did not break out; Hillary successfully treaded water. I was surprised at how cautious a performance she turned in. She dangled a couple of pieces of bait for him, but he's learned not to jump at every bit of bait that swings by on a hook. When he didn't take the bait, she pulled back and played it cautious (mostly). She slapped him around a little bit at times, but only a little bit; nothing that'll make any of his 40% abandon him.
Clinton won on points, of course. But, Trump's graded on the curve, and that curve sets a real low bar for him, but even taking that into consideration, Clinton won on points, and looked like the winner doing it. Trump ended it up doing his interruptions and snide asides, which do not help him with audiences he needs to pull in.
Clinton wins playing it safe; Trump loses ‘cause he needed a game changer and didn't even get close to that; hell, Hillary won on points; that's not how Trump needed it to end.
Clinton wins playing it safe; Trump loses ‘cause he needed a game changer and didn't even get close to that; hell, Hillary won on points; that's not how Trump needed it to end.
I agree. There was nothing that would change the minds of those who have already decided.
The talking heads have been discussing Trump's saying he may not accept the election results. Personally I find Trump's attitude regarding the election process to be nothing more than sour grapes or the behavior of a soar loser. Which is odd because the election hasn't even been held yet. It's like he's being preemptive.
The after debate polling gives Hillary the win with 52% for Hillary and 39% for Trump.
"and 39% for Trump."
I'm not sure who was polled, but I'm surprised it was that close. Hillary clearly won on points. (Of course, some people score debates on style and optics rather than substance.) But, that makes three in a row that Clinton won and most folks know it. I'm not really much worried ‘bout Trump's ranting on and on ‘bout this being a ‘rigged’ election. I think his people know he's blown it. Even the die-hard Trumpkins don't expect him to win. The part that worries me is that they may still have some of that ‘burn the whole damn thing down’ attitude left in them when the curtain drops on this show.
I'm wondering though… In the aftermath of all this… How are the Eurolefties and other Wikileaks fans gettin’ on with Wikileaks so clearly going full-tilt in support of the election of Donald Trump?
And, Trump is doing his 3:00 am tweets again. This time he's bragging on online ‘polls’ which show him winning the debate, sometimes by as much as 96%-4%. It seems The Donald has a plan for the rest of the week; it's called self-delusion.
I'm not sure what's his plan for the week-end.
Lee: "I'm not really much worried ‘bout Trump's ranting on and on ‘bout this being a ‘rigged’ election. I think his people know he's blown it. Even the die-hard Trumpkins don't expect him to win. The part that worries me is that they may still have some of that ‘burn the whole damn thing down’ attitude left in them when the curtain drops on this show."
I would say that's about 100% certain. If he loses. First he's gotta lose. And I believe even at the voting booth you'll have lots of people not really believeing in Trump but still wanting to "burn it all down".
People thinking: "What fucking option did you give me? Hillary? Not only more of the same but more of the same in double speed? F-ck that, I might as well vote Trump to spite y'all."
There may be quite a few of them people.
I a not saying Trump will win. But I do think he brings in the spite-vote almost completely.
"What fucking option did you give me? Hillary?"
Yeah, but not everybody is is all that leary of Hillary. Maybe you wanna look at that Vox article I mentioned earlier. The New Majority It's not that long.
And, another point I might not have been clear about: I'm not worried about what's gonna happen ‘at the voting booth’; I'm thinking the resistance will more likely be heard from after the votes are counted.
Anyway, last debate's in the cannisters now. Maybe we'll be let alone to deflate for a couple of weeks. The only thing that could upset the apple cart now would be a major important Wikileaks reveal (not bloody likely; if they'd had it they'd have used it by now), or Trump could conceivably tweet something way over the top outrageous (but, given what he's said in public to date, what could that be?)
So, we can probably turn our attention to other things for a couple of weeks.
Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has announce a "separation" from the United States. I think he means it as an actual divorce, but his grasp of English may not include the intricacies of the legal import of these terms. (He's been bad-mouthing Obama for months, and threatened a ‘separation’ from the United Nations as well.)
Listening to The Donald speak at the New York charity dinner.
It's on cable I take it?
(Trump's supposed to speak first. It'll be interesting to find out how far he'll go.)
He started out okay, and had a few good jokes, but all in all I understand why he was getting booed. He came across as mean spirited, rather than funny.
Hillary was the class act in that room.
Stratfor's take on Mosul; beware the Turks.
"…I understand why he was getting booed."
He got booed? I'm guessing that didn't make him happy.
It's on cable I take it?
Yup.
(Trump's supposed to speak first. It'll be interesting to find out how far he'll go.)
Far enough to get booed.
I'm guessing that didn't make him happy.
He was attacking her in the guise of joking and just shrugged off the boos as going for either him or her.
She did some attacking as well, but not quite so mean spirited as him. He seemed to go more for the jugular.
It's bee on YouTube I'm sure so I'll try to find some links.
"It's bee" should be "It'll be"
"He…just shrugged off the boos…"
Audience was ‘rigged’ no doubt.
— just because the noise is on your side doesn’t mean the votes are.
Words to remember.
Audience was ‘rigged’ no doubt.
lol! Someone did incorporate that into one of the jokes.
Hillary mentioned taking time out of her nap schedule to attend, and Trump talked about the admiration for the speech that Michelle Obama gave and not understanding why when Melania gave the exact same speech she didn't get the same accolade. Some of the better jokes.
One of Trump's boo worthy jokes was about Hillary attending the dinner and pretending not to hate catholics.
I'll have to read the Mosul piece when I'm more awake.
"Far enough to get booed."
Yes, critic of his presentation seems to have made the morning news.
I guess that would be spelled ‘critique’. (I have my coffee now.)
Might offer a couple of ideas in closing out Trump's run for the Presidency. (Which is over absent Hillary has a heart attack--and she might win anyway if she did--it's happened before, just not at the Presidential level.)
One: In spite of the many people who've observed how lousy a candidate Hillary supposedly is, she put The Donald away in fairly convincing fashion--even before his self-immolation after the ‘locker-room-talk’ tapes. He was already losing to her by a convincing margin, which is why the Republican establishment felt comfortable denouncing him and rescinding their support and endorsements. Sixteen Republican challengers couldn't put him away, but she did it pretty much without breaking a sweat.
Two: He was running against Hillary in the general election and not in the closed Republican Primaries. The Republicans have, as an institution and organization, gone batshit crazy. The general American population, not so much. Different audience.
Poor editing; correction as:
"((Which is over absent Hillary has a fatal heart attack--
and she might win anyway if she did--it's happened before, just not
at the Presidential level.)
Potential post-election problems…
"Among Republican and Republican-leaning likely voters, 45 percent
said they might not accept the election as legitimate if their candidate
doesn't win, including 18 percent who said they would definitely not
accept the outcome. A majority of Republicans—53 percent—said they
would accept the results of the election if their candidate loses."
NBCNews
It's from an NBC/SurveyMonkey poll.
Fareed Zacharia in The Washington Post, essay on the end-game in Mosul come the victory over Da’esh. (With an opening aside on how it is that Trump's fulla shit, clear to overflowing.) Zacharia's main point is that retaking Mosul isn't the problem; it's governing the place afterwards that's gonna be the challenge.
And we have another Beware the Turks warning on the Mosul issue. (by Zalmay Khalilzad, ex-American Ambassador to Iraq)
Here is a video of the charity dinner speeches. If you scroll to about 27:52 you will cut out some of the chatter and roasts of various people in the room and get to the intro for Trump. Hillary spoke last.
Haven't gotten to Hillary's stuff yet, but Trump obviously doesn't know when to back off and can't take a hint.
Hillary got in some shots too, and she got booed too--considerably less than Trump, only once that I caught (apparently she can take a hint), but it did happen.
Reading some more analyses of the campaigns; I won't bother with links, but they did raise a question in my mind…
I don't suppose we'll ever know, but I am curious as to when Trump accepted that it was over for his brief Presidential hopes, and decided to go to go for a scorched earth ending instead.
Our government has been darkly hinting that they're going to retaliate against the Russians for the Russian efforts to interfere in our elections. It seems the Russians (or some folks on their behalf) have decided to try to warn us off that idea first. American commercial systems got hit again today.
WaPo hints at the Beware the Turks problem with a liberated Mosul, with maps.
In response to the pending loss of Mosul, Da’esh has launched some suicide teams inside Kirkuk. WaPo (They've been doing veggie bombings and the like in Baghdad for several weeks now.)
Hillary got in some shots too, and she got booed too--considerably less than Trump, only once that I caught (apparently she can take a hint), but it did happen.
Actually, I didn't hear the boos, but I did notice Rudy Giuliani's rather unhappy reception of her joke on him. Of course, it was one of the more stinging attacks she made.
Our government has been darkly hinting that they're going to retaliate against the Russians for the Russian efforts to interfere in our elections. It seems the Russians (or some folks on their behalf) have decided to try to warn us off that idea first. American commercial systems got hit again today.
That did seem rather heavy handed. It has Putin written all over it. I did hear they arrested one Russian hacker, but for an earlier incident, I believe. Hopefully, if we retaliate, we will be more clever.
Zacharia's main point is that retaking Mosul isn't the problem; it's governing the place afterwards that's gonna be the challenge.
He is right. That has always been the point, even after we left Iraq. If the Iraqis choose to lean on anyone in the neighborhood, such as Iran or Saudi Arabia, for support they risk alienating one segment or the other of the Iraqi population. As hard as it is for people to admit, they need a relatively neutral third party for balance. They have choices of the US, the Russians or perhaps they can interest the Chinese. And when I say support I do not necessarily mean military. There are many economic aspects that can aid in reconstruction and reconciliation. But even that has the caveat of not just pouring money into the place to be squandered on bribes.
In response to the pending loss of Mosul, Da’esh has launched some suicide teams inside Kirkuk.
The article I was reading the other day talked about what would happen as Daesh is pushed out of Mosul. There would be a scattering, like the splashing of a grease fire, and the start of guerrilla warfare.
"I did notice Rudy Giuliani's rather unhappy reception of her joke on
him."
Yeah, he was not being a good sport about it. Not even a little bit.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"… and the start of guerrilla warfare."
I been reading the same sort of stuff; they're prepping to go guerrilla.
Well, this guy's pessimistic, rather more pessimistic than I am even.
"One thing you can safely predict is that the Republican Party’s
leaders will try to establish their bona fides, and hold on to the Trump
crowd, by stomping on Clinton from the moment she declares victory.
There is talk of blocking all Supreme Court nominees until the
court withers down to a seven-person bench with a conservative
majority.
Joe Klein in Time.com (emphasis added)
And, just in case anybody other than me follows these things…
Now that String Theory, the ‘gee-whiz’ theory of a decade ago, is getting looked at askance by today's theoretical physicists, and the data suggesting there simply has to be a whole bunch of dark matter out there somewhere has been publicly called into question, now it's deemed acceptable to publish a new analysis which calls into question the very existance of ‘dark energy’ that thing which is supposedly causing the acceleration of the expansion of the universe, and which supposedly constitutes about 73% of all mass and energy in the universe. (With the known, visible universe supposedly making up only about 4% of the total.)
These guys have concluded that the universe isn't accelerating after all, so there's no need to imagine up an invisible, unfindable type of energy to explain that which isn't actually happening anyway.
Daesh has put up much more of a fight than it was believed to do, in the fight over Mosul. The Pesh Merga took 4 willages East of Mosul early this week and pulled troops from Kirkuk to do so. Daesh countered by unleashing hell in Kirkuk via sleeper cells and also took all 4 of those villages back in heavy fighting. Only to melt away and give those villages up once again. Whether they're now tapped out in Kirkuk or have other sleeper cells is anyone's guess.
In any case the fighting has been severe and no anti-Daesh troops have even entered Mosul yet.
The Pesh Merga is said to particulary fear Daesh suicide car bombers, one of which took out over 30 Pesh Merga troops as they were advancing to Mosul.
"Daesh has put up much more of a fight than it was believed to do, in the fight over Mosul."
The guys who got left behind probably have nowhere to go. They show up in Da’esh controlled territory, they're likely in trouble for abandoning their posts in Mosul.
I've just started that Frontline piece that I missed the other day. I am out of time for tonight but will try to finish it soon. It may have relevance to what is happening now.
In any case the fighting has been severe and no anti-Daesh troops have even entered Mosul yet.
We make the assumption that Daesh will be pushed out of Mosul because they are basically cut off from reinforcement. But I don't think that anyone thought it would be a pushover. I think that they have planned for a long campaign.
Aren't we about due for another appearance from Petes tellin’ us again what a moron Hillary is and how it is that Trump's gonna win? Been better than a week now I think.
Last I heard he was engaging in another project, so I don't know when he'll check in again.
It's always been my thought that you haven't really liberated an area if you haven't secured it.
ISIS executed about 40 people celebrating the "liberation" of their village by Iraqi forces, a Mosul official said
We're freed from the Trumpkins then. (Marcus has given it up.)
Free for now, but you might get a nasty surprise come election day. Most precise polling institute in recent elections has Trump as front runner by 43 to 41:
http://www.investors.com/politics/ibd-tipp-presidential-election-poll/
I've said it before: I don't trust most polls and candidates/choices that are un-PC/anti-establishment will perform poorly in many of them, only to surprise at the actual elections. Brexit, the FARC-referendum in Colombia, many European elections, there are so many examples where the "establishment" thought it had the election locked in but got a nasty surprise once the people had their say. I'd say Trump fits that mold pretty well.
Saturday Night Live on the 3rd Debate; Tom Hanks plays Chris Wallace. (In spite of Tom Hanks they've never actually matched that first one.)
"…but you might get a nasty surprise come election day."
Not gonna happen. The only question left to answer is whether it's gonna be a major ass-kickin’ or a full on landslide for Hillary.
"It's always been my thought that you haven't really liberated an
area if you haven't secured it."
I don't know ‘bout that. I think one has ‘liberated’ an area, according to the common military definition, when one has driven the previous governing body out of the area. However, if they're staging as many as 40 public ‘executions’ then, obviously, they've not been driven out of the area.
"Not gonna happen. The only question left to answer is…[etc.]"
That was not a challenge. May have read that way, but wasn't intended that way. I get it--you don't believe the polls, not necessarily anyway.
Me, I got no worries--Trump's toast, been toast since he blew the second debate; that was his last chance to make a decent showing. (He wasn't ever gonna win.) I was just makin’ the point that I remain wholly unperturbed by your supposedly ‘Most precise polling institute’ and its predictions.
Lee: "Me, I got no worries--Trump's toast"
That's why you're in for a nasty surprise. Your whole world is about to be turned upside down.
"Your whole world is about to be turned upside down."
Fifteen days, thirteen and a half hours; just over two weeks. And then the returns start flooding in. I'll get back to ya after that ‘bout this ‘upside down’ thing…
I think this may be a first, there's finally a city newspaper endorsing Donal Trump (city newspaper, Podunkville Bi-Weekly Gazette don't count,). Los Vegas Review Journal This is an actual daily paper; I checked it out. It was purchased in December of 2015 by Sheldon Adelson (I'd read he'd purchased a Nevada newspaper, but I didn't recognize this as his recent purchase at first), but, even so, it still counts as a daily paper.
Der Spiegel reports that things are getting nasty in and around Mosul.
After Mosul
Syria’s army and Hezbollah and Iranian allies are preparing for a massive invasion by thousands of Isis fighters who will be driven out of Iraq when Mosul falls. The real purpose behind the much-trumpeted US-planned "liberation" of the Iraqi city, the Syrian military suspect, is to swamp Syria with the hordes of Isis fighters who will flee their Iraqi capital in favour of their "mini-capital" of Raqqa inside Syria itself.
*sigh* Some people always believe the worst.
Your whole world is about to be turned upside down.
Why do I get this strange feeling you are hoping for this?
(In spite of Tom Hanks they've never actually matched that first one.)
I agree, that one was classic.
"Some people always believe the worst."
I saw the name ‘Robert Fisk’ attached to that. He's infamous for always wanting to believe the worst. He knows where to find people with similar inclinations.
Title Who Will Rule Nineveh? By Hassan Mneimneh.
Short piece, worth the few minutes it takes to read.
I seems that someone is sending Russia a message.
An American vigilante hacker -- who calls himself "The Jester" -- has defaced the website of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs in retaliation for attacks on American targets.
It's getting to be a weird world. We now have small groups and even individuals going to war with nation-states. (Or, as in the case of al-Qaeda and Da’esh, larger groups going to war against entire continents and all the nation-states on them).
The disarray that has been inflicted on them may have muted the expression of their interests, but the price of ignoring these interests would be the seeding of certain future conflicts over Nineveh.
This has always been true of all of the various groups in Iraq. Until people actually accept this and realize they need to work together there will be no peace, even if Daesh is defeated.
But then who am I to talk? When we look at our political arena today it is hard to see any cooperation and willingness to compromise.
It's getting to be a weird world.
I think the connections provided by the internet has empowered many who would otherwise not be. We see that in Daesh propaganda, Anonymous, and various other hackers who now have access to possibly sensitive areas. Their reach is now global.
Btw, I finished that Frontline video on Terror in Europe last night. It was good, but covered things we already new. Despite that I am thinking about putting it in a post, rather than a link in the comments section, as it is of importance. I don't know if Marcus has already seen it.
"I don't know if Marcus has already seen it."
It's not real complementary towards European security measures (as compared to our own, which admittedly also have some holes). He may object to the comparison.
(Speaking of Marcus, he's runnin’ way late; our political world is already upside down. Sean Hannity is on the air right now, saying nice things about Julian Assange. Trump's still toast, but it's not necessary he win to have the political world disrupted--that happened when the Republicans went ahead with their fever swamp fantasies and actually nominated him.)
It's not real complementary towards European security measures (as compared to our own, which admittedly also have some holes)
We all have our problems. It doesn't hurt to compare notes.
Lynnette: "Why do I get this strange feeling you are hoping for this?"
I direct you to my last comment in the previous thread.
No, I am not HOPING for Trump to win. But I would feel some satisfaction if he did, because of the ones who would hate it the most. Then again, as I said, shadenfreude isn't a good enough reason.
Post a Comment