Peace Message From Damascus.

By Jerry Alatalo

P1000889-1Alphabet United States representative to Congress Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii traveled to Syria recently along with former member of Congress (and candidate for President) Dennis Kucinich of Ohio. The current and former U.S. politicians went on a fact-finding four-day mission, visiting and discussing the tragic situation there with Syrians from all walks of life – including a personal meeting with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

The four young Syrian women Ms. Gabbard met in Damascus recorded in the video below were in the 12-14 year age range when the tragic violence, killing and destruction of their home nation began nearly (6) six years ago. Given the seemingly inestimable, endless levels of reconstruction which is going to become necessary once peace finally returns to the country, it is somewhat remarkable – a supreme irony, certainly – that two of the young women are studying architecture while another studies civil engineering.

One becomes hesitant to comment further for fear of detracting to any extent from the powerful message delivered by four kind and pleasant young Syrian women to the American people. Their heart-felt unanimous message clearly comes through loud and clear, leaving nothing else necessary to say…

“Peace”.

(Thank you to Vanessa Beeley at YouTube)

Helen Purcell’s Arizona “Mea Culpa.”

By Jerry Alatalo

cumberland 3-1Alphabet Maricopa County in Arizona – where voters waited for hours in lines stretching for city blocks to cast their ballots Tuesday, March 22 – reduced the quantity of polling places from 211 in 2012 to 60 in 2016. Maricopa County is Arizona’s most highly populated county with residents numbering in the millions, and one of the most highly populated in the United States. Helen Purcell is in charge of Maricopa elections as recorder, and she is the person most responsible for reducing polling places by 70% – while record turnouts experienced in earlier states were also expected in Arizona.

Arizona was one of many states with a history of voting discrimination constrained from discriminatory practices and/or actions by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. That is, until the United States Supreme Court decimated protections for voters in 2013 by eliminating Section 5. If the Supreme Court hadn’t taken the action, Helen Purcell would have had to prove the appropriateness to federal election authorities of any proposed reduction in polling places. After the 2013 decision, she had no legal requirement to justify reducing polling places in Maricopa County, and this is one “factor” that thus far Ms. Purcell hasn’t attributed to the long lines of voters.

It’s very difficult to imagine Ms. Purcell not becoming aware of the record voter turnouts in states holding elections before Arizona, so one’s suspicions over her severe narrowing of opportunities for Arizona voters to easily move through the process are legitimate. It’s simply impossible that Helen Purcell is the sole exception of all Americans who know and feel the massive participation and excitement being generated by the 2016 presidential election.

After Ms. Purcell in the following interview gets asked by a local reporter “Who’s to blame?” for the exasperating long lines, she starts by saying “Well, the voters for getting in line…”, then, in her sole interview reference to the small number of polling places, “…maybe us for not having enough polling places, or as many as we usually have”. It seems an honest response would have been, “We made a huge mistake by cutting polling places from 211 (2012 election) to 60”. But, she didn’t admit the obvious source of the problem, and that is the source of concern.

The interview moves on, and she states that another “factor” was the hype surrounding the election that had grown in the “last week to 10 days”, suggesting perhaps Ms. Purcell was, indeed, the only American who hadn’t been observing the election; the record turnout in many states during the weeks and months before Arizona. The reporter asks her, “What could be done differently going forward?”, and Ms. Purcell responded with: “Well, we will certainly look at this, and see if we need to do, um, something different”.

Again, she avoids any mention of the much smaller number of polling places – the 10,000 pound gorilla in the room – but instead that “…we’ll have to look at all these issues”. In a somewhat desperate manner to divert attention, she points out that “We got people out to vote”, as if it was Helen Purcell’s efforts to motivate voters which resulted in the record turnout, and not the real genesis, the 2016 election’s nation-wide electrifying nature.

One can assume attorneys for the Sanders campaign are looking very closely at Helen Purcell, when she decided on dropping from 211 to 60 polling places in Maricopa County, the reasons for doing so, and who may have “influenced” her into taking that action. Or, perhaps Helen Purcell has somehow allowed the power of her office – greatly increased and let off the legal chain after the 2013 Supreme Court decision, in the first presidential election since – to transform her into an extreme, secretly masochistic human being who’s great fetish is seeing thousands of men and women standing in lines.

In Arizona, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump were the big winners, and Bernie Sanders’ campaign was left with the short end of the stick. Perhaps it’s just incompetence that led to the severe voting problems Arizonans experienced on Tuesday, March 22. Neither Clinton or Trump have any complaints whatsoever about the long lines – or the results –  in Arizona. None at all.

Notice Ms. Purcell’s near total avoidance of the polling place “factor”, and ask if there’s not more to this story.

(Thank you to #FilmTheCaucus at YouTube)

****

(Previously published section here was deleted on Sunday March 27, 2016)

To anyone able to provide information and clarify this identification issue – please do so in the comments. We are only seeking the truth, and any help in that direction is greatly appreciated. If there is no relation of Helen Purcell-Arkansas to Helen Purcell-Arizona, if they are different women, the second part of this article must come down, because it deals with rumor, coincidence, and false assertions. Again, any help is greatly appreciated in clearing up this matter.

Last addendum: A phone message was left at the Arkansas Lieutenant Governor’s Office strongly suggesting a public statement on the Helen Purcell identity and confusion issue.

Last, last (seriously) addendum: It seems Phoenix, Arizona City Attorney Joe R. Purcell is the late husband of Recorder Helen, and the Maricopa County official is not, repeat – is not, the widow of the late Arkansas Lieutenant Governor Joe Purcell. Two different Joe Purcells, two different Helen Purcells, two different states and the biggest damn set of coincidences ever.

Sanders-Clinton: America’s Moment Of Truth.

By Jerry Alatalo

aaa-38Alphabet The British politician and member of the Labor Party for 47 years, Tony Benn (1925-2014), once observed that corporate media owners used their powerful communication assets to produce apathy, hopelessness and resignation in the minds of those fighting for positive social change – such as the millions now supporting Senator Bernie Sanders for president.

If Tony Benn were alive today he would certainly have given a strong endorsement of Sanders for President of the United States, known full well the corporate media owners’ plans, and called them out beginning with Sanders’ announcement to run some 11 months ago in his home state of Vermont. Sadly, Tony Benn is no longer available to help the Sanders campaign as he passed away two years ago at the age of 88.

Perhaps the most astonishing and frustrating development in the 2016 election has been how efficiently media owners’ efforts have succeeded – producing the precise apathetic perceptions in citizens’ minds they sought when determining their course of action after Sanders’ announcement and subsequent growing popularity. Doubly astonishing and frustrating has been how men and women self-described progressives have also fallen for media manipulation of their perceptions into varying states of apathy.

When college student Bernie Sanders was arrested in Chicago protesting segregation during the 1960’s, Hillary Clinton was working for the presidential campaign of Republican Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater. Goldwater was a leading opponent of landmark civil rights legislation. Thus far in the 2016 election, for whatever reasons, Clinton gained substantially more delegates in deep southern states, with those delegates accounting for her lead today.

Fortunately for the Sanders campaign and its supporters, voting in southern states for the 2016 election determining the Democratic nominee is history and over, and the second half of the Sanders-Clinton battle in all polls promises strong gains, renewed momentum for Sanders. Now the major question becomes whether or not progressive men and women across America will allow themselves to continue being manipulated by the media – succumbing to apathy, “inevitability” and defeat – or wake from their slumber, unite, and fight the good fight. This has been throughout history, and will remain for all time, the stuff – the reality – of accomplishing any peaceful, genuine, positive political revolution.

With all due respect for fellow progressives who support Green Party candidate Jill Stein (this writer supports both Mr. Sanders and Ms. Stein) and/or have criticized Sanders during election 2016, think deeply about what it means for America and the world if Hillary Clinton becomes the 45th President of the United States. Is it not of paramount and foremost importance to act forcefully using all options available and necessary, accelerate the greatest united effort in American political history, and finally put an end to that potentiality?

Whether Sanders or Clinton wins the Democratic nomination, Jill Stein will still be there. Do progressives want to see debates between Sanders, Trump and Stein or Clinton, Trump and Stein? Think deeply about the different consequences for humanity which will manifest on Earth from those choices – the most likely (2) remaining outcomes for the 2016 presidential race.

A realistic current assessment of the 2016 presidential election leaves one with no other conclusion: the American people – in particular, those in the progressive movement – are now facing an unprecedented, historic, profoundly vital moment of truth.

(Thank you to Bernie 2016 at YouTube)