@irishking

Just going to repeat a monster reply I made to you previously, regarding a similar post made about Bernie supposedly not speaking out, in that case about the destruction in Yemen.

Well, oddly enough, the corporate media doesn't seem to be carrying anything on it.

The following's a darned good article, containing a refreshing dose of sanity and the realization that there really are actual conservatives still out there, as what's being termed as such in politics is evident pathology and certainly not the conserving conservatism my parents once supported at all. I'd suggest reading this in full at source, if only for that reassurance.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/sanders-speaks-on-foreign...

Sanders Speaks on Foreign Policy
By Daniel Larison • September 21, 2017

Bernie Sanders delivered a fairly wide-ranging foreign policy speech at Westminster College in Fulton, MO earlier today. He outlined in broad strokes his views for what U.S. foreign policy includes and what it should do. Among other things, he also spoke directly against U.S. support for the Saudi-led war on Yemen:

Unfortunately, today we still have examples of the United States supporting policies that I believe will come back to haunt us. One is the ongoing Saudi war in Yemen. ...

...Sanders also gave an interview to The Intercept this week, and based on the excerpts published so far he is going beyond criticizing the Saudi-led war on Yemen to questioning the relationship with Saudi Arabia itself:

Sanders issued a scathing denunciation of the Gulf kingdom, which has recently embarked on a new round of domestic repression.

“I consider [Saudi Arabia] to be an undemocratic country that has supported terrorism around the world, it has funded terrorism. … They are not an ally of the United States.”

The Vermont senator accused the “incredibly anti-democratic” Saudis of “continuing to fund madrasas” and spreading “an extremely radical Wahhabi doctrine in many countries around the world.”

It will take a long time to break American politicians and analysts of the habit of referring to the Saudis as an ally, but Sanders is taking a necessary first step in explicitly denying that claim. Once we start to recognize that the Saudis are not an ally in any sense, the relationship may be changed accordingly.

Sanders went on to say other important things in his speech. Here he made a valuable observation:

We must rethink the old Washington mindset that judges “seriousness” according to the willingness to use force. One of the key misapprehensions of this mindset is the idea that military force is decisive in a way that diplomacy is not.

Yes, military force is sometimes necessary, but always — always — as the last resort. And blustery threats of force, while they might make a few columnists happy, can often signal weakness as much as strength, diminishing US deterrence, credibility and security in the process. ...

Unfortunately, there is also the obligatory Opposite Day anti-Russian propaganda in there... but, to continue from the article:

...Here Sanders directly challenges the bias in our foreign policy debates in favor of “doing something” in which “something” is almost always some military option. We frequently hear a policy derided as “bystanderism” or “standing idly by” if it doesn’t involve bombing or arming someone, and rejecting that mindset is at least as important as any specific policy recommendations Sanders might make. Sanders illustrates his point with a very constructive and timely contrast between the Iraq war and the nuclear deal with Iran:

Today it is now broadly acknowledged that the war in Iraq, which I opposed, was a foreign policy blunder of enormous magnitude.

In addition to the many thousands killed, it created a cascade of instability around the region that we are still dealing with today in Syria and elsewhere, and will be for many years to come. Indeed, had it not been for the Iraq War, ISIS would almost certainly not exist.

The Iraq war, as I said before, had unintended consequences. It was intended as a demonstration of the extent of American power. It ended up demonstrating only its limits.

In contrast, the Iran nuclear deal advanced the security of the US and its partners, and it did this at a cost of no blood and zero treasure. ...

That part is pure Sanders, and the article is an example and reminder of what conservatism actually is, in a time when psychopaths achieving power warp language and concepts to reframe and pollute everything they touch in an effort to turn it all into gold for themselves and dross* for all others.

*Doubt this is required here, but just in case, search definition at top of page reads:

dross (drŏs, drôs)►

n.
Waste or impure matter: discarded the dross after recycling the wood pulp.
n.
The scum that forms on the surface of molten metal as a result of oxidation.
n.
Worthless, commonplace, or trivial matter: "He was wide-awake and his mind worked clearly, purged of all dross” ( Vladimir Nabokov).

That old saying is sooooo descriptive, since they get our share of wealth as well as their own and we get the worst effects of the 'cost-saving' pollution - on a global basis.

I like this writer and will just include this link from another of his (older) articles:

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/obviously-iran-would-reta...

Obviously, Iran Would Retaliate Against U.S. Attacks
By Daniel Larison • June 14, 2010

This typifies the outlook of those conservatives who should be in politics, (even if the right of countries/people to defend themselves against attack does not appear to have been taken into consideration, focusing on political expediency, perhaps because that's what the neocons might understand) had not the ruthless lust for endless increase of personal wealth and power over others been permitted by the pathologically greedy and psychopathic having already attained public office/political influence to allow the complete takeover of government by a blatantly psychopathic corporate culture introduced by Nazi sympathizers as well as the Nazis brought in by them following WW2.

But to get back to whether Bernie's been speaking out on this:

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2017/06/17/un-calls-saudi-yemen-cease...

UN Calls for Saudi-Yemen Ceasefire to Stop Cholera and Famine
Published on
Saturday, June 17, 2017
by
Common Dreams
UN Calls for Saudi-Yemen Ceasefire to Stop Cholera and Famine

"U.S. participation in the Saudi war in Yemen has never been authorized by Congress," Naiman writes
by
Robert Naiman

...On June 13, using the Arms Export Control Act to force a floor vote, the U.S. Senate narrowly failed to block an arms deal with Saudi Arabia. Senators opposed to the deal stressed the need to end the humanitarian crisis in Yemen rather than escalate it.

"The Saudi-led war in Yemen has created a humanitarian disaster," Senator Bernie Sanders said. "Millions are at the risk of starvation...the chaos in Yemen has also been strategically disastrous for the United States, providing fertile ground for the extremist groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS...it is long past time that we begin to take a very hard look at our relationship with Saudi Arabia...it is important that we begin to discuss...the decades long effort by Saudi Arabia to export an ultra-reactionary form of Islam throughout the world." ...

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/nov/24/bernie-s/...

Bernie Sanders is right: Saudi Arabia is more focused on the conflict in Yemen than fighting ISIS

By Linda Qiu on Tuesday, November 24th, 2015

But I suspect that Bernie's media access and ability to keep the notion of government working for, rather than against, the public interest alive in the corporate-media-restricted public mind is contingent on his appearing to support to such as the 'RUSSIA' nonsense', rather than being directly silenced by the powers and puppets which have infiltrated the US government and agencies and who are responsible for what they describe - and denounce - others as doing and being. Underground Resistance fighters/sympathizers able to gain access to the working of the fascist machinery had to do the same, to fight from within and do what they could for their people, during the last fascist attempt at global take-over. My take, anyway.

Might be a trapped-in-the-bubble-believer issue, but at least Bernie, given evidence, will admit when he's wrong, if so.

And I hope that when he speaks of fighting Russian authoritarianism, mass murders and brutality, etc., in his heart, he means those actually exerting/enacting such over the American people and the world, in the knowledge that those already informed will never fall for the Big Lies he, once silenced, could not hope to eradicate while under their rule. The people must rise in their own defence, themselves form their own parties of, by and for the people, and pacifically take back their government by one means or another, (trying both replacement by progressive candidates within and a new progressive party from without The Two-Party Trap,) demanding fair elections and fair voting systems en masse and, importantly, refusing to passively accept suspicious electoral results as 'a done deal' ever again, rather than expecting a Super-Hero to appear to take care of this for them.

The following consists mainly of Bernie quotes, as he works within the limitations of the authoritarianism imposed within America by The Psychopaths and Parasites That Be :

https://www.thenation.com/article/bernie-sanders-just-gave-one-of-the-fi...

Bernie Sanders Just Gave One of the Finest Speeches of His Career
Outlining a vision of an America on the side of peace and justice, the senator shredded Trump’s brutish foreign policies.
By John NicholsTwitter
September 21, 2017

...“When we talk about foreign policy it is clear that there are some who believe that the United States would be best served by withdrawing from the global community. I disagree. As the wealthiest and most powerful nation on earth, we have got to help lead the struggle to defend and expand a rules-based international order in which law, not might, makes right,” Sanders declared in a critical section of his address. He explained that

We must offer people a vision that one day, maybe not in our lifetimes, but one day in the future, human beings on this planet will live in a world where international conflicts will be resolved peacefully, not by mass murder.

How tragic it is that today, while hundreds of millions of people live in abysmal poverty, the arms merchants of the world grow increasingly rich as governments spend trillions of dollars on weapons of destruction.

I am not naive or unmindful of history. Many of the conflicts that plague our world are longstanding and complex. But we must never lose our vision of a world in which, to quote the Prophet Isaiah, “they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.” ...

...The speech that Sanders delivered at Westminster College touched on many issues of the moment—President Trump’s “incredibly foolish and short-sighted” abandonment of the Paris agreement and efforts to address climate change, the failure of “free trade” schemes such as NAFTA and the danger of flawed proposals such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership deal, and his fury over United States “support for Saudi Arabia’s destructive intervention in Yemen, which has killed many thousands of civilians and created a humanitarian crisis in one of the region’s poorest countries.” He decried “a rise in authoritarianism and right-wing extremism–both domestic and foreign—which further weakens this order by exploiting and amplifying resentments, stoking intolerance and fanning ethnic and racial hatreds among those in our societies who are struggling.” ...

... But the speech that Sanders gave was much more than a response to the headlines and challenges of the moment. It was a deeply thoughtful and deeply historic address, which recognized the significance of the fact that he was appearing on the stage where in 1946 former British prime minister Winston Churchill outlined a post–World War II vision of how to shield future generations from “the two giant marauders, war and tyranny.”

What distinguished this address by the senator — who was criticized for not speaking enough foreign policy during his 2016 campaign — was the reminder it provided that, over almost four decades in elective office, Sanders has always been deeply engaged with global issues. ...

In Fulton, where so many world leaders have outlined their visions, Sanders gave a speech that was on the side of peace and diplomacy. But it was a speech infused with an understanding that peace must be underpinned by justice. And that justice cannot thrive amid oligarchy or authoritarianism.

“Another challenge that we and the entire world face is growing wealth and income inequality, and the movement toward international oligarchy—a system in which a small number of billionaires and corporate interests have control over our economic life, our political life, and our media,” began the senator, in the most vital argument of what will be remembered as one of his finest speeches. Employing language that drew from the best traditions of Franklin Roosevelt, Eleanor Roosevelt, Wendell Willkie, and Dwight Eisenhower, Bernie Sanders explained that:

This movement toward oligarchy is not just an American issue. It is an international issue. Globally, the top 1 percent now owns more wealth than the bottom 99 percent of the world’s population.

In other words, while the very, very rich become much richer, thousands of children die every week in poor countries around the world from easily prevented diseases, and hundreds of millions live in incredible squalor.

Inequality, corruption, oligarchy, and authoritarianism are inseparable. They must be understood as part of the same system, and fought in the same way. Around the world we have witnessed the rise of demagogues who once in power use their positions to loot the state of its resources. These kleptocrats, like Putin in Russia, use divisiveness and abuse as a tool for enriching themselves and those loyal to them.

But economic inequality is not the only form of inequality that we must face. As we seek to renew America’s commitment to promote human rights and human dignity around the world, we must be a living example here at home. We must reject the divisive attacks based on a person’s religion, race, gender, sexual orientation or identity, country of origin, or class. And when we see demonstrations of neo-Nazism and white supremacism as we recently did in Charlottesville, Virginia, we must be unequivocal in our condemnation, as our president, shamefully, was not.

And as we saw here so clearly in St. Louis in the past week, we need serious reforms in policing and the criminal-justice system so that the life of every person is equally valued and protected. We cannot speak with the moral authority the world needs if we do not struggle to achieve the ideal we are holding out for others.

It's a sad state of affairs where a potential President was to be regarded with suspicion and rejected because his focus is always on addressing issues essential to the long-drained-and-neglected people and country and where 'foreign policy' (involving a global corporate/military take-over, not diplomacy) is placed above the urgent need to stop the destructive but lucrative-for-some draining and 'cost-effective' industrial poisoning of the citizens and country for this and other means of further enrichment and empowering of the wealthiest and most powerful in all ways, at citizen and environmental cost, as a national priority.

And even sadder when the old 'accuse them of what you do yourself tactic' is used to present him as a warmonger and a 'politician just like the others', ignoring his life-long record and character, just as planned by those repeating the same-old, same-old tactics we've been falling for all along.

Note: I have noticed that various 'politically sensitive' search terms are now, in some cases, returning - rather than millions of results - a few (those showing typically slanted) or even none, as with one among some of the recent internet searches conducted for articles I'd seen previously on Bernie's taxes, over which much Opposite Day PR concern has been raised not only during but, tellingly, since the election.

It's sometimes unfortunate that Bernie simply shrugs off clearly ludicrous personal attacks along with anything else deflecting from the issues essential to alleviating misery inflicted upon the vulnerable among the 99% by the top fraction of the 1%, although this unswerveable laser-focus is what's enabled him to achieve things thought impossible, such as community health centres and veteran medical care improvements - and getting his points out on the corporate media and in debate without being side-tracked or pushed into defensive positions when he's there to raise awareness among the propagandized American public and to attempt to get something done on their behalf.

And the good achieved for the vulnerable due to this characteristic far outweighs that possible to any done to his reputation by his wasting time and attention on disproving a steady flood of desperate smears which might work on those unaware of his character and record.

This internet search issue may be specific to my circumstances, as I can hope, but there has been a lot of internet censorship already conducted and underway at increasing rates, so we must gather remaining information while we can.

Not too big on Move On anymore, but they did try here:

https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/house-back-un-call-for?r_by=1135580

Force House Vote on Saudi War in Yemen to Stop Cholera & Famine

Petition by Robert Naiman

To be delivered to The United States House of Representatives
Use the War Powers Resolution to force a House vote on U.S. participation in the Saudi-UAE war and blockade in Yemen.
There are currently 12,346 signatures. NEW goal - We need 15,000 signatures!

Petition Background
On June 15, the UN Security Council unanimously called for a cease-fire in the conflict between the Saudi-UAE coalition and the Houthi-Saleh forces in Yemen. "The U.N. Security Council urged the warring parties in Yemen on Thursday to immediately agree on a cease-fire and keep all ports open for humanitarian aid to confront the threat of famine and the rapid spread of cholera," AP reported. [1] On June 13, the U.S. Senate narrowly failed to block an arms deal with Saudi Arabia. Senators opposed to the deal stressed the need to end the humanitarian crisis in Yemen rather than escalate it. [2]

"The Saudi-led war in Yemen has created a humanitarian disaster," Senator Bernie Sanders said. "Millions are at the risk of starvation...chaos in Yemen has also been strategically disastrous for the United States, providing fertile ground for the extremist groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS...it is long past time that we begin to take a very hard look at our relationship with Saudi Arabia...it is important that we begin to discuss...the decades long effort by Saudi Arabia to export an ultra-reactionary form of Islam throughout the world." [3] "The human rights and humanitarian concerns have been well documented and are important,” Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said. “Of equal concern to me is that the Saudi government continues to aid and abet terrorism via its relationship with Wahhabism and the funding of schools that spread extremist propaganda throughout the world." [4]

But the Trump Administration plans to escalate U.S. participation in the Saudi bombing of Yemen, with U.S. military advisers in the Saudi air operations control center in Riyadh. [5] U.S. participation in the Saudi war in Yemen has never been authorized by Congress. [6] House Members can challenge U.S. participation in the war with amendments on the National Defense Authorization Act and the Department of Defense Appropriation. In addition, a single House Member can invoke Congressional war powers force to a debate and vote on withdrawing U.S. participation from the Saudi war in Yemen - which the UN Security Council has unanimously said should stop immediately to save Yemen from cholera and famine. The last time the House voted on any aspect of U.S. participation in the Saudi war was June 2016, when the House narrowly failed to prohibit the transfer of cluster bombs to Saudi Arabia. [7]

Urge your Representative to force a House vote to withdraw U.S. backing from the Saudi war and blockade in Yemen by signing our petition.

Although he never forgets the for-profit/power/pathology humanitarian crises created at home:

https://berniesanders.com/press-release/sanders-statement-on-detrimental...

Press Release
Sanders Statement on Detrimental Effect Flint Humanitarian Crisis is Having on Aspiring Americans
February 6, 2016

MANCHESTER, N.H. – U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders on Saturday released the following statement after it was reported that undocumented immigrants in Flint cannot obtain clean water because of their immigration status:

“It is outrageous and totally unacceptable that aspiring Americans and others in Flint cannot get the clean drinking water they desperately need because they don’t have the proper identification. This is a humanitarian crisis. No one should live in fear of being deported for getting a bottle of water for their family. All people, including immigrants, should have access to clean and drinkable water, regardless of immigration status or lack of identification.

“The state of Michigan and the National Guard should provide all emergency services to the approximately 1,000 aspiring Americans that reside in Flint and provide comprehensive bilingual information on the dangers of drinking this poisonous water.

“The federal government must also halt all immigration raids immediately. These inhumane raids are having a chilling effect across the country, especially in Flint, preventing some of the most vulnerable people in this country from stepping out of their homes, let alone seeking clean water for their families.”

One thing bringing a faint glimmer of hope, should such as this be demanded in enough (and united in this area) countries:

http://www.yemenpress.org/ticker/amnesty-international-reveals-weapons-s...

Amnesty International reveals weapons sources that kill Yemenis; calls to bring perpetrators to trial

Sep 23, 2017

...“We can now categorically assert that the bomb that killed Buthaina’s parents and brothers and other civilians is a US-made bomb,” said Lynn Maalouf, director of research at Amnesty International’s Beirut regional office.

“There is no explanation that the United States and other countries such as Britain and France can provide to justify the continued flow of arms into the Saudi-led coalition for use in the conflict in Yemen,” said Lynn Maalouf. Gross violations of international law, including war crimes, over the past 30 months, which have had devastating consequences for the civilian population. ”

The organization called for “the immediate implementation of a comprehensive ban on the entry of any weapon to Yemen,” and called for “an impartial investigation quickly and bring those responsible for crimes in Yemen to trial.”

My searches in 'sensitive areas tend to not want to provide me with current information on such subjects, but I'm guessing that this sort of thing wasn't and hasn't been much reported upon in the corporate media?

#8.1.2.1

voters can understand a trillion dollars down a hole.
some might even prefer to get the blood off their hands.

it seems to be a matter of "owning the media".
this is why a person like Sanders is important.

if Sanders laid out the case to end the wars, it would be tough to bury the story.
this makes his failure to speak out disappointing & very damaging.

"whining"
me? are you talking to me? hhahahaha.

@irishking
Mostly everyone here but a few of us. Whenever I hear or read "foreign policy" my eyes start to roll back to the back of my head assuming a comatose state. I agree that spending a $Trillion on Safety Net items from a $Trillion targeted for the M.E. war(s) is a good idea. A goal, in fact! But that don't happen without a Dem House and Dem prez.
And, I believe should Bernie be elected prez his "foreign policy" would change. Not that I'm expecting a Bernie presidency will happen in 2020 or beyond. Just that his "foreign policy" is nothing I'm concerned about. Bernie didn't run on his foreign policy, crowds didn't gather to hear about Bernie's foreign policy.

#8.1.2.1

voters can understand a trillion dollars down a hole.
some might even prefer to get the blood off their hands.

it seems to be a matter of "owning the media".
this is why a person like Sanders is important.

if Sanders laid out the case to end the wars, it would be tough to bury the story.
this makes his failure to speak out disappointing & very damaging.

"whining"
me? are you talking to me? hhahahaha.

@on the cusp

supreme court also suspended him & he resigned rather than be disbarred.
it is not cool to lie under oath. not even for Slick Willie.

"Good for you." - Clinton to G. Flowers after she lied under oath.

check the Pinochio nose on this guy.
sweet.

#10.1.1.1 that excuses the lie due to asking the wrong question.
I can't believe you have such a low regard for truth.

@on the cusp
"lie" was one Everyone would had said, including the judge and jury, which pretty much makes that charge - lying under oath - moot. Not that they couldn't bring the charge, just that bringing it was and is hypocritical.

#10.1.1.1 that excuses the lie due to asking the wrong question.
I can't believe you have such a low regard for truth.

@on the cusp

It's that I had contempt for the process in question. My assessment at the time is that it was a long, ongoing, political witch hunt which "ended at a blue dress". I did and still do think the whole thing was ridiculous. If it all happened again today and someone asked me, "Is this a good reason to impeach a President?" my answer would still be something like, "You're kidding, right?"

From my standpoint the entire process was political theater and that includes their questions and his lies.

#10.1.1.1 that excuses the lie due to asking the wrong question.
I can't believe you have such a low regard for truth.

@CS in AZ

he should have gone to prison, imo.

#10.1.1.1

People seem to forget, or don't know.

Clinton had previously been confronted with allegations of sexual misconduct during his time as Governor of Arkansas. Former Arkansas state employee Paula Jones filed a civil lawsuit against him; she alleged that he had sexually harassed her. Lewinsky's name surfaced during the discovery phase of Jones' case, when Jones' lawyers sought to show a pattern of behavior by Clinton that involved inappropriate sexual relationships with other government employees.

What makes Bill Clinton immune from having to answer questions about his behavior? I don't get that.

Monica Lewinsky has said many times that her relationship with him was consensual and that she actively pursued him. I see no reason to doubt her on that. Involving her in the coverup and lies and perjury was more wrong on his part than the affair, imo, but still her choices to go along with it.

But the bigger point now, to me, is not Monica or even his lying about her, the problem is the women he went after who didn't consent. The ones he did harass and assault and rape. And then the way that he, and his wife Hillary Clinton - champion of women - set out to destroy those women for coming forward about his actions.

The Clintons are liars and self-serving rich powerful assholes who get away with murder. Getting away with rape and sexual harassment and assault are not even the worst of their crimes by a long shot.

But as long as Hillary keeps running her mouth about feminism and championing women, she and her husband are fair game on this hypocrisy.

@on the cusp
but people have perfectly understandable motivations to remain circumspect about embarrassing or private matters.

#10.1.1.3 offense or not, simply starting from the position the act was not a crime, then there was no reason to lie about it.
Lying about it did more to lend credence to the sex being a criminal act than admitting it was consensual.

@CS in AZ
Though, I think 12 is way too late. Children should be taught that their bodies are theirs, and theirs alone. That's what I taught mine, after long before teaching them the proper names of their body parts.

I also taught them that they were most definitely allowed to tell any person, but especially adults, who were making them feel uncomfortable about their sexual parts (or exposing themselves), NO! And to tell someone, anyone, they trusted if anyone ever made them feel that way, even if I wasn't the one they told.

I also had the 'no means no' talk with them. Told my son that even if you're both naked and you have a raging hard on, she (or he) can say no, and he has to respect that. I even said if he got the tip in - no means no.

I have wonderful kids. So far, so good!

#10.1.1.4

And parents need to have a serious talk with their sons when they hit about 12.

"Hey there Winky, I know you're a growing boy with urges. But it's very important to treat other people with respect. Treat others as you want to be treated yourself. Do you want some guy putting his hands on you? Forcing a kiss on you? No? Well, that's why you always ask first, and you never force anything on anyone.

Do not be a rapist. Don't put your hands, or any other body part, into or on any other people without their permission and consent. Never stick your tounge down anyone's throat without consent, don't show them your penis, and don't jerk off in front of them. Always make sure any sexual acts are mutually wanted. If not, DO NOT DO IT. "

See, now is that really so difficult?

Please stop putting this on girls/women to protect themselves (and as has been pointed out and you continue to ignore, boys and men are also targets), and for gawd sake, stop excusing men for acting this way.