With a birthday in July and a love of tropical beaches, I am feeling the loss of solar-powered personal energy today, although I know we here in wine country need the rain. It’s just that in higher elevations this water from heaven should be snow, arctic seas that should be frozen over are not, and Alaska has sustained its warmest weather ever in 2019. In Australia, their summer bushfires have pushed the air quality in Sydney to 12 times above “hazardous.” The area burned in “Oz” is three times what was lost in Brazil’s Amazon fires this year—record-breaking itself, in quantity, devastation and toxic pollution.

I have been moved by the many thousands of activists from all over the world, especially the young people of Extinction Rebellion and indigenous leaders, who have converged outside and around the U.N. Climate Summit in Madrid for the past two weeks. Time Magazine has named 16-year-old Greta Thunberg of Sweden its “Person of the Year,” while Brazil’s president calls her a “brat” and the U.S. president tells her to “go to the movies” and dismisses her urging “a course in anger management.”

I’m quoting below Greta’s insightful plenary address at the climate conference, where she speaks very frankly. (It is a longer than usual post) I always find it wonderful to hear her voice, and hope you will link to Democracy Now and watch/listen. In fact, I recommend this entire week of on-site programming by the Democracy Now team headed by Amy Goodman. Their climate issues coverage is second to none, on this occasion and always.

GRETA THUNBERG: “A year and a half ago, I didn’t speak to anyone unless I really had to. But then I found a reason to speak. Since then, I have given many speeches and learned that when you talk in public, you should start with something personal or emotional to get everyone’s attention, say things like, “Our house is on fire,” “I want you to panic,” or “How dare you!” But today I will not do that, because then those phrases are all that people focus on. They don’t remember the facts, the very reason why I say those things in the first place. We no longer have time to leave out the science.

“For about a year, I have been constantly talking about our rapidly declining carbon budgets, over and over again. But since that is still being ignored, I will just keep repeating it. In chapter two, on page 108 in the SR 1.5 IPCC report that came out last year, it says that if we are to have a 67% chance of limiting the global temperature rise to below 1.5 degrees Celsius, we had, on January 1st, 2018, 420 gigatons of CO2 left to emit in that budget.

“And, of course, that number is much lower today as we emit about 42 gigatons of CO2 every year, including land use. With today’s emissions levels, that remaining budget will be gone within about eight years. These numbers aren’t anyone’s opinions or political views. This is the current best available science. Though many scientists suggest these figures are too moderate, these are the ones that have been accepted through the IPCC.

“And please note that these figures are global, and therefore do not say anything about the aspect of equity, which is absolutely essential to make the Paris Agreement work on a global scale. That means that richer countries need to do their fair share and get down to real zero emissions much faster and then help poorer countries do the same, so people in less fortunate parts of the world can raise their living standards. . . .

“And why is it so important to stay below 1.5 degrees? Because even at 1 degree, people are dying from the climate crisis. Because that is what the united science calls for to avoid destabilizing the climate, so that we have the best possible chance to avoid setting off irreversible chain reactions, such as melting glaciers, polar ice and thawing Arctic permafrost. Every fraction of a degree matters.

“This is my message. This is what I want you to focus on. So please tell me: How do you react to these numbers without feeling at least some level of panic? How do you respond to the fact that basically nothing is being done about this, without feeling the slightest bit of anger? And how do you communicate this without sounding alarmist? I would really like to know.

S”ince the Paris Agreement, global banks have invested 1.9 trillion U.S. dollars in fossil fuels. One hundred companies are responsible for 71% of global emissions. The G20 countries account for almost 80% of total emissions. The richest 10% of the world’s population produce half of our CO2 emissions, while the poorest 50% account for just one-tenth. We indeed have some work to do, but some more than others.

“Recently, a handful of rich countries pledged to reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases by so-and-so many percent by this or that date, or to become climate-neutral or net zero in so-and-so many years. This may sound impressive at first glance, but even though the intentions may be good, this is not leadership. This is not leading. This is misleading, because most of these pledges do not include aviation, shipping, and imported and exported goods and consumption. They do, however, include the possibility of countries to offset their emissions elsewhere. . .

“Without seeing the full picture, we will not solve this crisis. Finding holistic solutions is what the COP should be all about. But instead, it seems to have turned into some kind of opportunity for countries to negotiate loopholes and to avoid raising their ambition. Countries are finding clever ways around having to take real action, like double counting emissions reductions and moving their emissions overseas and walking back on their promises to increase ambition or refusing to pay for solutions or loss and damage. This has to stop. What we need is real, drastic emission cuts at the source.

“But, of course, just reducing emissions is not enough. Our greenhouse gas emissions have to stop. To stay below 1.5 degrees, we need to keep the carbon in the ground. Only setting up distant dates and saying things which give the impression of that action is underway will most likely do more harm than good, because the changes required are still nowhere in sight. The politics needed does not exist today, despite what you might hear from world leaders.

“And I still believe that the biggest danger is not inaction. The real danger is when politicians and CEOs are making it look like real action is happening when in fact almost nothing is being done apart from clever accounting and creative PR.

“I have been fortunate enough to be able to travel around the world. And my experience is that the lack of awareness is the same everywhere, not the least amongst those elected to lead us. There is no sense of urgency whatsoever. Our leaders are not behaving as if we were in an emergency. In an emergency, you change your behavior. If there is a child standing in the middle of the road and cars are coming at full speed, you don’t look away because it’s too uncomfortable. You immediately run out and rescue that child. And without that sense of urgency, how can we, the people, understand that we are facing a real crisis? And if the people are not fully aware of what is going on, then they will not put pressure on the people in power to act. And without pressure from the people, our leaders can get away with basically not doing anything — which is where we are now.

“In just three weeks we will enter a new decade, a decade that will define our future. Right now we are desperate for any sign of hope. Well, I’m telling you there is hope. I have seen it. But it does not come from the governments or corporations. It comes from the people, the people who have been unaware but are now starting to wake up. And once we become aware, we change. People can change. People are ready for change. And that is the hope, because we have democracy. And democracy is happening all the time, not just on Election Day, but every second and every hour. It is public opinion that runs the free world. In fact, every great change throughout history has come from the people. We do not have to wait. We can start the change right now. We, the people.”

After listening to the first several hours of the impeachment inquiry public hearings, I continue to believe the Democrats’ choice to focus on the quid pro quo bribery of Ukraine is too limited and too easily attacked by current Republican congresspeople. Even arguments that what Trump wanted never came to pass does not mean it was not wrong to attempt it. And it also sidesteps the use of back channel foreign policy and corruption in our own government (witness Paul Manafort sitting in jail right now for his machinations in Ukraine.)

There are so many OTHER high crimes and misdemeanors, I wonder how the supporters of President Trump could refute them all. I’ve taken the list below from https://impeachdonaldtrumpnow.org/case-for-impeachment/

“From the moment he took office Donald Trump’s refusal to divest from his business interests has placed him in direct violation of the US Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause and Domestic Emoluments Clause. Since then, his corruption and abuse of power have only increased.”

1. Obstruction of justice; (documented the Mueller investigation/report)
2. Violations of the Foreign Emoluments Clause and Domestic Emoluments Clause of the United States Constitution; (Among other things: Trump hotel stays, including such domestic instances as use of Trump properties way out of the way of VP Pence’s visit to Scotland; Ivanka’s advantages for her business interests in China)
3. Conspiring with others to: (a) commit crimes against the United States involving the solicitation and intended receipt by the Donald J. Trump campaign of things of value from a foreign government and other foreign nationals; and (b) conceal those violations;
4. Advocating illegal violence, giving aid and comfort to white supremacists and neo-Nazis, and undermining constitutional protections of equal protection under the law;
5. Abusing the pardon power; (one example: Sheriff Joe Arpaio)
6. Recklessly threatening nuclear war against foreign nations, undermining and subverting the essential diplomatic functions and authority of federal agencies, including the United States Department of State, and engaging in other conduct that grossly and wantonly endangers the peace and security of the United States, its people and people of other nations;
7. Directing or endeavoring to direct law enforcement, including the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, to investigate and prosecute political adversaries and others, for improper purposes not justified by any lawful function of his office, thereby eroding the rule of law, undermining the independence of law enforcement from politics, and compromising the constitutional right to due process of law;
8. Undermining the freedom of the press;
9. Cruelly and unconstitutionally imprisoning children and their families; and
10. Making and directing illegal payments to influence the 2016 election.

These articles of impeachment don’t include all the allegations of rape and sexual assault by this president, even when he admitted he had a right to “grab them by the pussy.” See this running list of Trump’s accusers.

Nor do these articles include his documented 13,400 false or misleading statements over 928 days.

I’m still listening to the testimony, and it takes a lot of stomach to handle the voice tone and lack of dignity of the Trump defenders compared to the dignity of the witnesses. If these hearings don’t succeed in removing or fatally damaging Trump’s 2020 campaign or to convince the American people that our democracy is in danger, I believe it will be because of Nancy Pelosi’s caution. I know there are reasons, but just like the catastrophe of climate change, huge problems need huge remedies.

In conclusion, I’ll commend KPFA radio (94.1 FM) for its commitment to broadcasting the hearings in their entirety on Pacifica Network stations throughout the county. I urge considering a donation to this listener-sponsored 70-year-old station.

To distract from the glorification of gunshots, bombs and explosions that brought crowds to my South Park neighborhood (yes, I could view Sonoma County Fairgrounds 4th of July fireworks from my front porch), I watched the film Capernaum, which was on my list as a Golden Globe and Oscar nominee.

The Lebanese director Nadine Labaki made history for being the first female Arab director to win the Jury Prize at Cannes. The premiere screening of Capernaum during the film festival received a 15-minute standing ovation and when it was over I wanted to applaud as well. “Now that was art!” I said aloud.

The film featured first-time actor Zain al-Rafeea, a 14-year-old Syrian refugee (he looks much younger but his resourcefulness proves beyond his years) whose family was displaced from Syria in 2012. Labaki’s husband, Khaled Mouzanar, produced and composed the film. The haunting musical score, remarkably uncontrived feel, and brilliant performances by the entire cast had me mesmerized.

(Read this interview with the director to learn more about the making of this narrative and the current life situation of its wonderful young star.)

The director noted that her child actors could not memorize lines. She just asked them to be who they are. She explained, “Usually the actor is at the service of the text. In this case, we were at their service. We had to be observant. There were takes that lasted hours and hours.”

What touched me most was how the film managed to incorporate the situation of migrants and refugees common the world over, but made it very real and specific. The universal story applies to children on the Mexican border, in the favelas in Brazil, in the entire middle east. “We’re talking about kids not receiving their most fundamental rights,” Labaki said.

When an interviewer noted, “Some critics may see the film as ‘poverty porn’,” the director replied, “Get real. Get out of your cafe where you’re writing your critique and go out into the world and see what’s happening around you. What you see in the film is nothing compared to reality. Children are suffering unbearably. I didn’t put rape scenes in the film, I didn’t put real abuse in the film — because I couldn’t.”

For that much, I am grateful.

See this film however you can, Netflix, Amazon Prime… Here are links to reviews in the New York Times and Al Jazeera.

A corollary film review: the 2016 documentary Fire at Sea features a physician on the Sicilian island of Lampedusa who treats rescued African refugees after their overloaded boats land at this way station enroute to Europe.  With beautiful cinematography and searing images, this film introduced me to the use of mylar blankets. The DVD extras interview with the compassionate doctor answers many of the objections of those who would refuse these refugees entrance.

My main references in this post are from radio interviews today, March 25, 2019, with John Nichols of The Nation, Ruth Coniff editor at large of The Progressive, and Jeff Cohen, journalism professor, founder of FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting) broadcast on the KPFA program Letters and Politics with Mitch Jeserich.

I agree with those journalists who say that the Democratic Party establishment’s strategy of “Waiting for Mueller” —like Samuel Beckett’s theater of the absurd characters Estragon and Vladimir—is bankrupt. Outside the narrow scope of Robert Mueller’s 2-year investigation, is a very long list of abuses by Donald Trump, in plain sight, documented, and proudly asserted by the so-called president himself. Just because the Republican-dominated Senate would not convict their corrupt, lying standard-bearer, does not mean that articles of impeachment should not be brought.

It would bring media attention back from the obsessive cable coverage of “Russiagate” to an ever-growing list of impeachable offenses and damage to our constitutional democracy. Below are the articles of Impeachment from RootsAction.org with links to an explanation of each. This information should be put before the American public night after night. It might help balance the flock of tweets emanating from the Oval Office or presidential bedroom each night.  (FAIR noted 5000% more airtime coverage on MSNBC regarding the Mueller investigation than on the U.S. complicity in the war on Yemen and humanitarian crisis there.)

Trump Articles of Impeachment
Violation of Constitution on Domestic Emoluments
Violation of Constitution on Foreign Emoluments
Incitement of Violence
Interference With Voting Rights
Discrimination Based On Religion
Illegal War
Illegal Threat of Nuclear War
Abuse of Pardon Power
Obstruction of Justice
Politicizing Prosecutions
Collusion Against the United States with a Foreign Government
Failure to Reasonably Prepare for or Respond to Hurricanes Harvey and Maria
Separating Children and Infants from Families
Illegally Attempting to Influence an Election
Tax Fraud and Public Misrepresentation
Assaulting Freedom of the Press
Supporting a Coup in Venezuela
Unconstitutional Declaration of Emergency

Both Pence and Trump lied today in their statements saying Trump was “completely exonerated” while even the 4-page summary noted that Mueller took no stand on the obstruction of justice charge against the president. Bernie is demanding release of “the whole damn report” instead of a cursory summary of two years of work by an Attorney General who had exhibited bias about it long before he was confirmed. What information might be there to add to congressional oversight hearings?

As noted by Common Cause president Karen Hobert Flynn:

“The [Mueller] investigation has already led to 199 criminal charges, 37 indictments or guilty pleas, and five prison sentences. Numerous additional investigations of possible criminal conduct uncovered by the Special Counsel have been spun off to other prosecutors. The string of crimes that have already been unearthed and made public is staggering and unprecedented in our nation’s history.”

Yes, sister. You got that right.

Below are links from a blog post on Amazon’s headquarters deal with New York that I never completed. Check them for background to the article I’m pointing out today from The Nation titled “New York Fights – and Amazon Flees.” Yes, the company with $11 billion in 2018 profits that has paid no income tax for the past two years and is, in fact, getting a $120 million Federal tax rebate, has picked up its marbles and gone elsewhere.

There are economic diversity issues for New York to consider, as the article points out at the end, but things could be done that would benefit the city more than Bezos and his helipad. Good work, citizens!

Here is the Press Democrat editorial that incited me to write about Amazon last Fall.

“Amazon and Bezos plays taxpayers and cities for suckers”

Also check out Richard Wolff ‘s “Economic Update” on the Amazon sweet deal from November 30, 2018.

WordPress has changed, so this is not exactly how I wanted my first post of 2019 to be, but I don’t have time for the tutorial now. Stay tuned as the old dog tries to learn new tricks.