There's Not A Lawyer On The Planet.

Who believes America is inaugrating a President today.

The US held it's Election back in November 2020. Like the rest of 2020 this was dominated by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Where others saw misery US Democrats saw an opportunity.

The Democrats are now a party that has become so consumed by hate that they have absolutely nothing to offer. Other than their self-belief in their own Divine Right to rule.

They attempted to rig the 2016 Election. By following the playbook set out by South Korea's Liberty Korea Party in its rigging of it's 2012 election.

Where the Liberty Korea party succeeded though the US Democrats failed.

So the Democrats simply set about trying to overthrow the lawfully elected government of the United States. First by persisting with the big lie of Foreign Interference. Through the Mueller investigation.

For the Democrats the wheels came off that big lie in April 2019. When the Mueller Report was finally published. Unable show any Foreign Interference in the 2016 Election, let alone Russian interference.

So the Democrats immediately just moved on to another big lie. Attempting to impeach President Trump for cutting off military aid to Ukraine. 

A policy goal which President Trump was legally obligated to pursue. By restrictions placed on the supply of military aid to Ukraine by Congress in September 2019.

The wheels came off that in February 2020. So the Democrats immediately grasped onto the emergence of COVID-19 as their next big lie.

As always with lies, big or small. It was just a matter of time before the wheels came off the Democrats latest one.

It was particularly easy to predict when the wheels would come off the Democrats COVID-19 lies. Respiratory diseases always recede in the summer months while flourishing in the winter months.

Something which only highlights just how devoid of fact the Democrats claims have been. Such as attacking President Trump for claiming that COVID-19 can be killed by dry-heat.

Despite the fact that the World Health Organisation (W.H.O). Along with any medical professional know. That as a droplet-borne virus COVID-19 begins to die once the temperature raises beyond 8C (46F).

As a result the Democrats election strategy was entirely dependent on one thing. Tricking people into voting early, before November's election day. Before the wheels started to come off their latest big lie.

The Democrats achieved this by encouraging the use of Absentee/Postal ballots. Claiming they had the right to change election law at the State level. Under Article 1, Section 4 of the US Constitution.

Article 1, Section 4 of the US Constitution does give States the right to set election law. However the Constitution then continues with other articles and amendments. Most of which restrict State's rights to set election law.

Really the most crucial is the 14th Amendment.

This added to the Constitution after the US Civil War. So covers a range of issues, across four sub-clauses.

However, in this context, the most important element is that establishes the terms of US citizenship. Giving all Americans dual citizenship. Of both the State in which they reside and of the Federal nation.

Which is really why you have State driving licenses but Federal passports.

Importantly the 14th Amendment clearly states that the Federal citizenship is the superior citizenship. No State can take away a Federal right. Such as those enshrined in the Constitution.

The use of Absentee/Postal ballots removes the secrecy of the ballot. By requiring things like the signature of the voter it allows them to be indentified. This opens the door to discrimination.

One area of discrimination which has long affected the US electoral system is that of sex/gender. Between 1807 and 1920 women were systematically denied the right to vote completely.

This ended with the passing of the 19th Amendment. Which explictly states that;

"The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex."

Not only do Absentee/Postal ballots remove the secrecy of the ballot. They also shift the casting of each vote. Away from the public sphere of a polling station, with staff and oversight measures. Into the privacy of the home.

For many women in America the home is not a safe place.

I could provide you with mountains of statistics and evidence. Showing how Domestic Violence disproportionally affects women in America.

Along with a similar mountain of statistics and evidence. Showing how Domestic Violence has been made worse by the lockdowns and stay-at-home orders brought about by COVID-19.

However this gender discrimination within Domestic Violence is already well established within US law. To the point there is a dedicated Federal Agency - Office on Violence Against Women - to combat it.

This was established by the 1994 Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). Although, for the life of me, I just can't seem to remember the name of the Senator who sponsored that legislation.

The Patriarchal beliefs which lead to gender-based Domestic Violence are often tied to religious beliefs. Particularly within the Abrahamic religions; Christianity, Islam and Judaism.

The 1st Amendment forbids the discrimination on the basis of religious belief. Explictly stating; 

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Saying that someone only has the right to vote. If they forgo their religious belief and turn their backs on their families. That is exactly the type of discrimination forbidden by the 1st Amendment.

Another area where there has been huge discrimination in US electoral system is that of race.

From its inception the Democrat Party has believed that it has the right to own Black people as property.

Not only that. The Democrat Party has believed it has the right to cast votes on behalf of the human property that it owns.

In 1787 the Republican Party started to put restrictions. On the Democrat Party abhorrent beliefs. Through the so-called; "Three-fifths Compromise."

This does not state that Black man - at this point we are talking only of men - are worth only three-fifths of White men. It states that the Democrat Party can only cast votes on behalf of three-fifths of the Black men they own as property.

In 1861 the Republican Party pushed back even harder. Fighting a Civil War to end the Democrat Party's belief that it could own Black people as property. Let alone cast votes on their behalf.

Such is the Democrat Party's belief that they have the right to own Black people as property. That this civil war lasted for four, long years. Claiming the lives of roughly 1 in every 50 people alive in the country at the time.

Eventually the Republican Party were successful. Issuing the Emancipation Proclomation. Ending, in law at least, the Democrat Party's belief that it had the right to own Black people as property.

The Republican Party went futher. Passing the 15th Amendment. This not only gives Black Americans the right to vote for themselves. It also explictly states;

"The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude."

Unfortunatley this; "Reconstruction Era" was brought to an end in 1877.

When the Republican President Rutherford B. Hayes was forced to withdraw Federal oversight of  Democrat controlled States. In order to stop the Democrat Party from whining on about how their Presidential candidate won the popular vote.

In the absence of Federal oversight the Democrat Party immediately went back to its old ways.

Casting votes on behalf of Black people they still considered to be their property. While discouraging Black people from daring to vote Republican. Often through the use of violence.

It wasn't until the 1960's that further attempts were made to protect Black Americans right to vote. Through the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

The passage of which caused a massive and violent split within the Democrat Party. Such was the depth of their opposition to the idea that Black Americans have the right to vote.

This culture of discouragement and intimidation. Of Black Americans who would dare to vote Republican continues to this day. With a general perception that Black people are only allowed to vote Democrat.

Particularly in 2020 this culture that Black people may only vote Democrat was enforced with violence. During a summer which saw violent gangs tear through predominately Black neighbourhoods.

All to 'remind' the residents to vote Democrat in November.

Alongside those Constitutional protections. There is also the so-called; "Equal Protection Clause" of the 14th Amendment. Which states, with emphasis added;

"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Granting Federal protection to all people. Beyond those groups given specific, named protection. Such as victims of Domestic Violence who are in same-sex relationships.

So widespread, sustained and intense was the political violence unleashed by the Democrat Party throughout the summer of 2020. It constituted a State of Insurrection. Similar to that seen in 1861 and threatened in 1877.

In a State of Insurrection US States lose all of their independence. Having to defer to the Federal government on any matter of the Federal government's choosing. The Federal government is empowered to enforce that deference with military force, if need be.

Much has been made over whether the Insurrection Act of 1807 was invoked ahead of the 2020 Election. However that relates only to the use of military force to suppress an insurrection. It is seperate from a declaration of insurrection itself.

That came when Federal Law Enforcement were deployed to States, such as Washington. To enforce Federal law and suppress insurrectionist forces.

US Democrats were certainly aware of this declaration of insurrection. Commenting on it widely and loudly. However the Democrats declined to raise any legal objection or challenge to it.

Obviously you cannot infer from that the Democrat States supporting their deference to the Federal government. However they certainly consented to it.

If any State attempts to alter its election laws. In any way which even raises to the possibility of any of the above mentioned rights being violated.

Then the procedure laid out in the 1965 Voting Rights Act must be followed.

In the first instance the State must seek pre-clearance from the Federal Department of Justice (DoJ). 

A process which will look at whether any Federal, superior, law is being violated. Along with any enhanced monitoring procedures that can be introduced to prevent illegal discrimination created by such a change.

If the DoJ does not grant pre-clearance for any change. Then the State can, in effect, appeal to the First Disctrict Court of D.C to obtain pre-clearance. 

Again a process which will look at whether any Federal, superior, law is being violated. Along with any enhanced monitoring procedures that can be introduced to prevent illegal discrimination created by such a change.

Either of these avenues will produce a clear, paper certificate of pre-clearance.

If such a certificate cannot be produced. Then US Courts have, not only the power, but an obligation to nulify any election result obtained under illegal election rules. Something they have done on numerous occasions.

There is no record of any US State which changed its election rules prior to the November 2020 vote. Having sought, let alone, obtained pre-clearence. From either the DoJ or the D.C Court.

If these pre-clearance certificates have been obtained, in secret. I think it's highly unlikely that, particularly the Democrats, would be continuing to keep them hidden from the public.

Without those certificates we cannot declare the election to be; "Fair." 

We have no way of knowing that votes were cast by the individual with the right to cast that vote.

Nor can we declare the election to be; "Free."

We have a way of knowing that when a vote has been cast by an individual with the right to do so. Hidden away in the private, rather than public sphere. 

That it has been cast through their own free will. Rather than through coercion, fear or duress.

In fact there is only one way to describe election results obtained with such complete disregard for election law.

Fraudulent.

12:40 on 20/1/21 (UK date).
 

Eurovision 2019: ASIE: Israel/Palestine Conflict Pt.4.

A direct continuation of; https://watchitdie.blogspot.com/2021/01/eurovision-2018-asie-israelpalestine.html 

As I said Hatari's main motif was; "BDSM Sex Party."

So their live performances not only contained a lot of nudity. But a lot of sexualised nudity.

Well, strictly speaking. It featured a lot of flesh coloured body-stockings. Which gave the illusion of sexualised nudity.

2015 saw Europe engulfed in the start of the Migrant Crisis. So the 2016 Song Contest was dominated by a single topic. How to absorb and assimilate a large number of Muslim immigrants.

Due to the nature of the discussion this focused heavily on Muslim modesty standards. Particularly those expected of women. Something which is easy to provide a visual metaphor for. Through on-stage costumes.

With that fresh in everyone's memories I think there would have been a lot of concern. Over how Hatari's performance would be recieved by Israel's large Muslim population. Whether they identify as Israeli Arabs or Palestinians.

I think people would be less concerned with how Hatari's performance would be recieved by large sections of Israel's Jewish population. That's because few people seem to realise that Judaism also has strict modesty standards.

As within Islam. Judaism has a sort of sliding scale of modesty standards.

At one extreme they have the Haredi. They believe that when out in public women must be covered from head-to-toe in a sheet. A Burqa in all but name. Mixing of unmarried men and women outside of the immediate family is strictly forbidden.

Then you have the Ultra-Orthodox. They believe that when out in public both men and women may wear conventional dress. Yet they are only allowed to show the skin on their hands and faces.

The Ultra-Orthodox believe both genders must cover their hair with a hat or headscarf. Although, curiously, in some interpretations women are allowed to cover their hair with a wig. Which is identical to their hair.

Again the mixing of unmarried men and women outside of their immediate families is strictly forbidden. As with the Haredi even whilst having sex a married couple must keep a sheet between them.

You then have the Orthodox. They believe that men and women can dress conventionally. However they must do so modestly. Which for women generally means no exposed shoulders, arms or legs. They do not forbid but strongly discourage the mixing of unmarried men and women.

A good example of Orthodox Jewish modesty standards is the; "Amy Farrah-Fowler" character from the US TV show; "The Big Bang Theory." Mayim Bialik who plays the character is Orthodox Jewish. Bordering on the rabidly Zionist Ultra-Orthodox.

Mayim Bialik first became famous as a child in the TV show; "Blossom." Which ran from 1991 to 1995. She then disappeared from our screens before returning in The Big Bang Theory in 2010.

Part of the reason is that she went off to become an actual doctor of neuroscience. However it is also because she felt the costumes of characters she was being offered would not allow her to maintain the modesty standards of her Jewish faith.

The costumes worn by the Amy Farrah-Fowler character were specifically designed to accomodate those modesty standards.

Chuck Lorre, the Executive Producer of The Big Bang Theory is Jewish but not Orthodox. As are many of the writers for the show.

So many of the jokes spoken by other characters. About Amy Farrah-Fowler's fashion sense. They definitely have an edge to them.

I appreciate that trying to directly compare two different religions. Particularly in an area when those two religions have a long history of conflict. Could border on the massively offensive.

However I think people will just about let me get away with saying;

You can think of Haredi Jews as like the Muslim Taliban. When it comes to modesty standards.

Ultra-Orthodox Jews are similar to the Muslim modesty standards you find in Gulf Arab states. Where women are expected to wear the Niqab, Abiyah combination.

Orthodox Jews are similar to the Muslim modesty standards in many western nations. Where women are only expected to wear the Hijab along with conventional clothes which don't expose too much flesh.

You then have really every other Jew. Who don't let their religion influence their style of dress in any way. They are similar to Sufi Muslims who, for example, do not require women to wear any sort of hair covering.

That comparison raises quite complex questions. About how, as westerners, we think of what is a typical Jew. Compared with how we think of what is a typical Muslim.

If you ask most people what a Muslim looks like. Most will probably start describing a woman in a Hijab.

However if you ask most people what a Jew looks like. They're unlikely to be able to give you an answer. 

They certainly wouldn't start describing an Orthodox woman and all the jokes about Mayiam Bialik's costumes.

Of course there are some negative sterotypes of men in big hats with hook noses. However outside of blatant anti-Semitism I don't think people associate Judaism with clothing in any way.

I actually shared a house with a British Jewish guy for about a year. As often happens with houseshares this involved me meeting various members of his family. Parents, siblings, cousins etc.

In all that time I don't remember Jewish clothing coming up in conversation even once. Not even something like;

"Ugh. My mother wants me to go to Temple and I can't find my Yarmulke anywhere!"

This was the complex question of extremism and integration that Hatari were attempting to pose. Through all their sexualised nudity.

Why is it that when we think of the 'Normal Muslim' we immediately think of what is actually quite an extreme interpretation of Islam?

Yet when we think of the 'Normal Jew' we don't immediately think of a similarly extreme intepretation of Judaism?

One event that really highlighted this for me was the January 2015 March For Unity in Paris, France. Which immediately followed the Charlie Hebdo attacks.

Here the British Sky News anchor Kay Burley made something of a name for herself. By interviewing a dog. Claiming that; "You could see the sadness in his eyes."

That wasn't even the worst interview Kay Burley gave that day.

Later on she pulled a brown skinned French woman from the crowd. Asking her; "Are you a Muslim?"

To which the woman replied; "Yes. I'm a Sufi."

Somewhat shocked Kay Burley then asked; "But you're not wearing a headscarf."

At which point the woman shot her a look. Which wherever you are in the World, whatever language you speak. You instantly know means;

"Do your own research, hag!"

It turns out the Muslim world is actually made up of around 1.7bn individuals. Not just your one Muslim friend.

So I know, from experience. This debate over what is the; 'Normal Muslim' is one that rages consantly. Not just within nations but within families and friendship groups.

For example. As it emerged from the Ottoman Empire Turkey granted women the right to vote in 1934. Literally the first thing these Muslim women voted for was to the ban the Hijab.

The question Iceland seemed to be posing was;

Whether in our naivety are we worsening radicalisation and undermining our security? 

By accepting rather than challenging what are often actually extreme forms of Islam?

The large, global example of this would be the conflict in Syria.

There the former Biden regime in the US pointed at the likes of the Islamic State of the Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). 

Along with the Al Qaeda group the Turkistan Islamist Party (TiP) and the Al Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra/Al-Nusra Front. Declaring them to be;

"The legitimate aspirations of the Syrian (Muslim) People!"

At which point almost the entire rest of the Muslim world turned round and went;

"Er, no. They're crazy."

Likewise how if you ask a Jew to explain the Haredi. It almost always begins in the same way; 

*long sigh* "Basically they're nuts."

I notice that France has now begun to formally address these issues. Through the draft laws introduced in response to the Islamist terror attack which killed teacher Samuel Paty.

Unfortunately all this happened in France. While I reside in Britain. In the final stages of the Brexit negotiations. Which did have an air of Britain v France about them.

So I think I might need something of a refresher on all that.

However the tone I've heard is of President Macron declaring war on the extremists.

It is almost impossible to achieve cohesion and cooperation through aggression. Which, almost inevitably, only leads to more aggression.

So I would be thinking more in terms of empowering moderates. Rather than trying to tear down extremists.

Such as if you're seeking a Muslim perspective on something. Don't just grab the first woman in Hijab who comes along.

Iceland were also taking a bit of a swipe at the Song Contest's large gay, male fanbase.

The Song Contest has a long and proud history. Of being something of a beacon for gay-rights on a continent which hasn't always been so tolerant.

Unfortunately, in recent years, this has led to the Song Contest being seen only as a gay event.

Which can get quite frustrating. Whenever you try to discuss literally any other topic.

As with the Spandau Ballet song; "Musclebound." If you've looked at Iceland's entry and seen only a celebration of Gay BDSM sex.

Well, then you've clearly missed out on a lot of life.

 

16:00 on 18/1/21 (UK date).
 

Eurovision 2019: ASIE: Israel/Palestine Conflict. Pt.3.

A delayed continuation of; https://watchitdie.blogspot.com/2019/12/eurovision-2019-asie-israelpalestine_23.html

Iceland: They were represented by "Hatari" with the song; "Hatiro Mun Sigra (Hate Will Prevail)."

This entry was inspired by the song; "Musclebound" by the British Post-Punk/New Romantic band; "Spandau Ballet."

The band's name is a direct reference to the Nazi Holocaust.

A Spandau Ballet being a term used to describe the way the bodies of, particularly Jews, contorted. As they were being killed by the Nerve Agent; "Zyklon B" in gas chambers disguised as shower blocks. At the Spandau and other death camps.

The song "Musclebound" revels in this connection.

Making reference to books being burned (by Nazis), rising 'steam' (in the gas chambers) and fires being built to last into morning (crematoria). Whilst invoking the style of Verdi's; "Chorus of the Hebrew Slaves" from; "Nabucco." As it is often mistaken for "Anvil Chorus" from Verdi's; "Il Trovatore."

So Iceland began the process of choosing their 2019 Eurovision Song Contest entry by asking themselves one simple question;

"What's THE most offensive thing we could do?!"

A fitting tribute to the hosts. Hebrew continues to be a language that still has no words to describe the concept of; "Too Far."

On the surface though the song "Musclebound" seems to be invoking images of a gay men's nightclub. With lots of reference to musclebound men. Getting all sweaty amid lots of leather and whips.

Iceland's entry builds on that theme. Making Bondage, Domination, Submission and Masochism (BDSM) the main motif of the performance.

BDSM is actually a combination of two sexual fetishes.

People who get pleasure from tying up and dominating other people. Along with people who get pleasure from being tied up and submitting to the domination of others.

Traditionally those who enjoy the BD element are known as; "Masters." While those who enjoy the SM element are known as; "Slaves."

However The Netherland's 2017 Eurovision entry invoked the spectacle of a US Democrat or "Confederate" at a (Libyan) Slave auction. Generation Snowflake could not cope with that at all.

So the 2019 Song Contest saw the term; "King" being used instead of "Master" to describe those who enjoy the BD element. While the term; "Queen" was used instead of the term; "Slave" to describe those who enjoy the SM element.

Through BD/SM sex Iceland set out to explore the Israel/Palestine Conflict.

In this metaphor the Israelis are obviously the BD loving Kings. Who seem to take a great deal of pleasure from keeping the Palestinians suffering in misery. 

While the Palestinians are obviously the Queens. Condemned to suffering in chains.

You could argue that is where the metaphor breaks down. 

While it may seem strange to outsiders the core elements of BDSM are consent and mutual respect. The Kings consent to participate because it gives them pleasure. While the Queens also consent to participate because it gives them pleasure.

The Israel/Palestine Conflict seems to be totally lacking in mutal respect. However the controversial question Iceland were asking is; "Do the Palestinians actually enjoy being treated the way that they are?"

One important resource in understand the Israel/Palestine Conflict is the 2012 documentary movie; "The Gatekeepers." 

This sees senior figures in Israel's security and political apparatus sit down and simply tell the camera. What they did in the Israel/Palestine Conflict.

One interview is with an Israeli negotiator during the 2000 Intifada (Uprising). He tells of an exchange with one of his Palestinian counterparts. 

In which he points to all the suffering that has been inflicted on both sides. Then asks the Palestinian what his strategy for victory is.

The Palestinian replies; "Our suffering is our victory."

This is widely taken to mean the so-called; "Martyrdom Mentality." 

A strategy amongst Palestinian, and other Arab militants. That if they can provoke their opponents - the Israelis -  into conducting percieved atrocities. Such as firing rockets from a UN school, forcing their opponents to bomb that school.

Then that will trigger international outrage. Which will put pressure on the Israelis to make concessions.

By suggesting that the Palestinians take an almost sexual pleasure from seeing their people suffer. Iceland can hardly be viewed as expressing support for this strategy.

Iceland's criticism though seems not to be directed at the Palestinians themselves. In fact it seems to be defending them.

The song's lyrics are all about suffering (being inflicted by the Israelis) turning into (Palestianian) despair. That despair then turning into hate. The hate that prevails.

Instead Iceland's criticism seems mainly directed at the Western Leftist Protesters.

The people who are either so stupid as to be taken in by this sort of atrocity propaganda. Or are so rabidly anti-Semitic they do get an almost sexual pleasure from seeing Palestinians suffer. As it gives them an excuse to rant about the Jews.

In their biography Hatari describe themselves not as a band. But as a; "Techno-Punk, Anti-Capitalist Performance Art Collective." Something which is very much in the language of western leftist protesters.

The type of art Hatari engage in is very much in the; "Situationist" school. Which involves taking an everyday situation and subverting slightly. In order to break the trance and force people to question and think about that everyday situation.

One of the most famous Situationist artists currently working is the British artist Banksy. One of his most famous works, particularly in Israel/Palestine, is his; "Walled Off Hotel."

This sits directly alongside the Seperation Barrier between Israel and the Palestinian West Bank. Which the artist describes as the; "Apartheid Wall." 

The fact that it is a luxury hotel built where no-one would want to visit, let alone live, is the subversion Banky is trying to bring to the situation. As a form of protest.

The Seperation Barrier/Apartheid Wall is a highly relevent example of the Palestinians role as Queens in the BDSM metaphor.

The Israelis officially describe it as a Seperation Barrier. A necessary security precaution. Needed to prevent Palestinian suicide bombers crossing from the West Bank to kill Israeli Jews.

Others describe it as an Apartheid Wall. Seeing it as nothing more than an excuse to further exclude Israeli Arabs from Israeli society. While stealing ever more of the land that should be used as part of a Palestinian State. Under; "The Two State Solution."

This second camp includes many Israeli Jews. Who will loudly tell me, you, anyone who'll listen. Along with many who won't. All about how the fellow countrymen abuse the Palestinians and how the wall should be torn down.

The reason why that group of Israeli Jews lost the argument though was the 2000 Intifada.

There the Palestinians sent wave-after-wave of suicide bombers on what they term; "Martyrdom Operations." To kill as many Israeli Jews as possible within Israel. The June 1st 2001 (1/6/01) bombing of the Dolphinarium Nightclub in Tel Aviv particularly sticks in my memory.

As the deathtoll grew it became impossible to argue that something shouldn't be done to stop the carnage. So the Seperatation Barrier/Apartheid Wall was built in 2002. A decade after it was first proposed.

A clear example of the suffering of Palestinian Martyrs only bringing more suffering to the Palestinians. It doesn't look like victory to me.

The world of western leftist protesters can be broadly divided into two camps. The Fluffies and the Spikeys.

The Flufflies being the people who circulate petitions, hand out fliers and march peacefully. While the Spikeys are the ones who fight with police and smash windows.

Both Banksy and Hatari fit into the Spikey camp.

Banksy is of course very protective of his privacy. Refusing to allow his true identity, let alone his background, become public knowledge.

Hatari on the other hand are very open about who they are. Not only using their real names but also providing detailed biographies as part of their entry.

Those biographies reveal what wealthy and privileged backgrounds Hatari come from.

Klemens Nikulasson Hannigan is the son of the head of the Department of Trade at Iceland's Ministry of Foreign Affairs and a senior partner at LMB Mandat. The largest corporate law firm in Iceland.

Matthais Tryggvi Haraldson is the son of the head of LMB Mandat.

The guy with the giant cotton-bud drumstick is Elnar Hrafn Stefansson. The son of Iceland's Ambassador to Britain.

This type of wealthy and privileged background is extremely common amongst both Fluffies and Spikeys within western leftist protest circles.

Although, like Banksy, they prefer to keep it a secret. While spouting their guff about smashing capitalism and freeing the working classes from their chains.

So the situation Hatari were trying to subvert was Banksy's status as some sort of revolutionary Situationist artist.

Something Banksy seems to have since decided to take out on me.

Which I can only find amusing.

What with Banksy seriously believing that he was able to outsmart Israeli intelligence. To open a hotel right on one of the most heavily fortified borders on the planet.

Only to then lose his nerve. 

When the Waldorf Astoria hotel chain threaten to sue him for copyright infringement. Causing him to change the name of the piece from; "Walled Off Astoria" to "Walled Off Hotel."

So Banksy may or may not be a man. But he's certainly a dick.

It was in that spirit. That Hatari unfurled a scarf bearing the Palestinian flag. During the results section of the Grand Finale. In clear violation of the Song Contest's golden; "No Overt Politics" rule.

As Situationists Hatari were not doing this to protest Israel, in support of the Palestinians.

They were doing it to subvert and mock. The type of western leftist protesters who thought that's what they were doing.

The unfurling of that scarf was merely the final act. In what had been a two week long Situationist performance by Hatari.

One of the main elements of this performance was this carbonated Icelandic mineral water drink. "Soda Dream."

Claiming that it is the source of their talent. Hatari insisted on having bottles of Soda Dream with them at all times. Including at the official press conferences. It total defiance of the Song Contest's own corporate sponsors and sponsorship rules.

That could no doubt be viewed as striking a blow against Capitalism and the Corporations. By the sort of people who view Banksy as some sort of revolutionary Situationist artist.

However it was mainly a reference to a 2014 US Super Bowl commercial made by Scarlett Johansson. For the, then, Israeli owned SodaStream company.

Taking a very jokey tone this saw Scarlett Johansson declare that as a celebrity her real job was to change the world. Then highlighting how choosing SodaStream over Coke or Pepsi helps to reduce plastic waste and Green House Gas (ghg) emissions.

The real intention though seemed to be to provoke discussion about SodaStream's role within the Israel/Palestine Conflict. Particularly it's Lehavim plant in the Israeli Occupied, Palestinian West Bank.

Honestly, I think most people's reaction was along the lines of; "*shrugs* Hmm. I didn't realise Scarlett Johansson was Jewish." Before moving on with their lives.

Amongst those familiar with the Israel/Palestine Conflict though. It certainly did provoke a lot of discussion.

The western leftists who unquestionly support the "Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS)" campaign group. They immediately condemned Scarlett Johansson. 

Launching ferocious attacks against her as Jew and as a woman. Rape threats and all the other usual Twitter pleasentaries.

Those with a more nuanced understanding of the Israel/Palestine Conflict attempted to defend her. Pointing out that while SodaStream's Lehavim plant was in an illegal Israeli settlement it was amongst the least of Israel's crimes.

It acted as something of a mechanism for peace through prosperity. Boosting the Palestinian economy by providing jobs in an area where they are scarce. 

Along with providing an environment where Israeli Jews and Palestinian Arabs worked together in peace. Helping to break down barriers and show both communities that the other isn't the sort of cartoon villian they're so often portrayed as. 

In the end the debate got so furious that the commercial was banned. Officially on the grounds that it violated the Super Bowl's corporate sponorship rules. Directly criticising the Super Bowl's main sponsor - Pepsi.

Pepsi then proceeded to buy SodaStream. Making one of it's first acts as owners to close the Lehavim plant. Putting 1,400 Palestinians out of work.

Not only did Hatari go to the trouble of having cases of this totally fake "Soda Dream" made. They also produced a marketing website for it; SodaDream.is

A website that looks legitimate at first glance. 

Until you start reading into the details of the claims. Which soon become more and more ridiculous. Such as Iceland producing more winners of the Miss Universe contest than any other nation. Entirely as the result of Soda Dream.

So just for that I think Hatari are going to go down in all time Eurovision legend. Simply for bringing a whole new level to the game. 

Part 4 to follow.

18:20 on 15/1/21 (UK date).

Edited at aroun 14:45 on 18/1/21 (UK date) to tidy.

And Speaking Of Apologies.

I'm told wine often works.

I've been what you might call an; "Early Adopter." Of the US popstar Pink.

I was fortunate enough to see part of her first press junket in the UK.

Certainly those in the Eurovision nations will be very familiar with this sort of thing.

When a celebrity has something to promote they're set up in a hotel room. Then a day long procession of journalists are paraded before them.

In their two minutes all the journalists ask the same questions. To which the celebrity gives the same answers. If anyone dare deviate from this an army of lawyers and public relations people immediately step in.

I think the part of Pink's press junket I saw must have been from towards the end of the day. Her eyes were suffering from the worst case I've ever seen of the; "Yeah. Really's."

As in her mouth would give an answer. Such as;

"I really like L.A Reid. He's a nice man who's really helped my career and passion for R&B music."

While her eyes would say;

"Yeah. Really(!)"

So I remember deciding there and then. To keep an eye on this one. It's clearly going to be a fun ride.

As a result I actually own all of her first three albums. Including the intensly personal second; M!ssundaztood." Along with the, frankly, offensive third; "Trouble."

Now when two thirds of the World Famous Thrupple. The two who often pretended to be brother and sister. In the interests of even numbers.

When they met the other third. She had the same shocking pink hair. Just adding to the embarrassment of how long it took to work it out.

Now obviously there were some comments. From the oh, so tolerant gay community.

However, close up, it was obvious that these are two completely different women.

Although looking at it from Pink's perspective now. Yep I see it;

"Weird Sex Game."

Obviously I could have just as easily posted this at this time last year.

But then she could just let her kids eat mud. Innit. 

18:10 on 13/1/21 (UK date).