First Bernie, then Trump, next up Gabbard.
I hate to be a muckracker, and an outlier at this site, but I'll say the same things I said about Gabbard as I said about Sanders.
Those that were here first know what I'm talking about with that, not necessarily why I'm saying it relative to Gabbard. I think if you listen carefully, you'll hear something else, like with Bernie.
@Big Althis LP had so many grooves, a lot of turntable needles needed replacing.
peace
Edited to remove any subtlety: at 2:45 "this is a war against terrorists who've declared war on America, and it's a war we must win." NO, no more wars! Especially not religious wars, she said Jihad not me.
The Initiation LP really did require new needles, there was a warning that came with it, grooves were very narrow so ruined with a worn needle.
Posting Eastern Intrigue was attempt at witty song reply, ker-plunk! hmph
Some words:
As the sun rises in the east
As the wind blows the fog across the sea
As the hand of Man creeps across the face of the world
Caught in a web of glamours
Persian perfume and oriental eyes
Yogi in knots and Sufi wise
Master sublime and swami high
Through in some Voodoo on the side
And a dash of the old Kung Fu
Lord you got me strung out on eastern intrigue
Chapter six and verse eleven
If you want to get to heaven
You've got to ask the Man who owns the Property
Ya gotta dance your dance
And do your act
And get His Big Attention that's a natural born fact
I'm on my knees, one question please
Will the real God please stand up?
First Bernie, then Trump, next up Gabbard.
I hate to be a muckracker, and an outlier at this site, but I'll say the same things I said about Gabbard as I said about Sanders.
Those that were here first know what I'm talking about with that, not necessarily why I'm saying it relative to Gabbard. I think if you listen carefully, you'll hear something else, like with Bernie.
@Big Al@Big Al@Big Al
(redacted half of this comment, because ...)
as the mud in the swamp. People speak insider EB-style Chinese to me and I don't understand Chinese, nor will I try to learn it.
I think Gabbard speaks plainly and clearly. I think Sanders spoke plainly and clearly. And to try to find reasons why they both might have been corrupted or undermined, sounds like .... never mind.
First Bernie, then Trump, next up Gabbard.
I hate to be a muckracker, and an outlier at this site, but I'll say the same things I said about Gabbard as I said about Sanders.
Those that were here first know what I'm talking about with that, not necessarily why I'm saying it relative to Gabbard. I think if you listen carefully, you'll hear something else, like with Bernie.
If we troop faithfully back into the Democratic party because Tulsi and Nina are there....well.
In that case, we might as well abandon any notion that we are activists of any kind, much less left-wing ones.
First Bernie, then Trump, next up Gabbard.
I hate to be a muckracker, and an outlier at this site, but I'll say the same things I said about Gabbard as I said about Sanders.
Those that were here first know what I'm talking about with that, not necessarily why I'm saying it relative to Gabbard. I think if you listen carefully, you'll hear something else, like with Bernie.
up
0 users have voted.
—
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Big Al
like fighting it as a law enforcement action rather than how it's
being waged now? fighting it with the help of the countries where it
is being waged, maybe if we globalized this fight with the rest of the
world behind us instead of basically doing this unilaterally, have China
Russia, Iran, Israel, SA, gulf states all involved in stopping the madness?
First Bernie, then Trump, next up Gabbard.
I hate to be a muckracker, and an outlier at this site, but I'll say the same things I said about Gabbard as I said about Sanders.
Those that were here first know what I'm talking about with that, not necessarily why I'm saying it relative to Gabbard. I think if you listen carefully, you'll hear something else, like with Bernie.
up
0 users have voted.
—
I never knew that the term "Never Again" only pertained to
those born Jewish
"Antisemite used to be someone who didn't like Jews
now it's someone who Jews don't like"
@ggersh
The 9/11 attack definitely should have been handled as a law enforcement operation (which should have included looking at our own government's involvement). But it was clearly used as justification to wages wars in the M.E., North Africa and beyond. They've never had any intention of winning this war OF terror, it's always been a cover for other imperialist actions and for Israel. Our government and others fund, train, arm, supply, organize, provide intelligence, coordinate with and actually work with these "terrorists", most of which are simply paid mercenaries. Reports have indicated up to 90% don't even know what's in the Koran, let alone practice radical islam.
It strains credulity that after over 15 years, the U.S. and allies still have not "won" this war against maybe 20-50K fighters to the point that Trump is making it the centerpiece of his foreign policy and justification for greatly rebuilding the military.
Gabbard knows all this, like Bernie does, and yet they will not confront it and in effect support this fake war OF terror as cover for U.S. imperialism and U.S. hegemony over the planet.
#1 like fighting it as a law enforcement action rather than how it's
being waged now? fighting it with the help of the countries where it
is being waged, maybe if we globalized this fight with the rest of the
world behind us instead of basically doing this unilaterally, have China
Russia, Iran, Israel, SA, gulf states all involved in stopping the madness?
@Big Al
I wrote "win" and shoulda wrote "fight" but otherwise I fully agree with you.
#1.4 The 9/11 attack definitely should have been handled as a law enforcement operation (which should have included looking at our own government's involvement). But it was clearly used as justification to wages wars in the M.E., North Africa and beyond. They've never had any intention of winning this war OF terror, it's always been a cover for other imperialist actions and for Israel. Our government and others fund, train, arm, supply, organize, provide intelligence, coordinate with and actually work with these "terrorists", most of which are simply paid mercenaries. Reports have indicated up to 90% don't even know what's in the Koran, let alone practice radical islam.
It strains credulity that after over 15 years, the U.S. and allies still have not "won" this war against maybe 20-50K fighters to the point that Trump is making it the centerpiece of his foreign policy and justification for greatly rebuilding the military.
Gabbard knows all this, like Bernie does, and yet they will not confront it and in effect support this fake war OF terror as cover for U.S. imperialism and U.S. hegemony over the planet.
up
0 users have voted.
—
I never knew that the term "Never Again" only pertained to
those born Jewish
"Antisemite used to be someone who didn't like Jews
now it's someone who Jews don't like"
@Big Al
I'd love to see the evidence of corruption you have on her. I believe I've heard she's ex military, and something else I seriously can't remember. Spill it, Al; and help me recall.
First Bernie, then Trump, next up Gabbard.
I hate to be a muckracker, and an outlier at this site, but I'll say the same things I said about Gabbard as I said about Sanders.
Those that were here first know what I'm talking about with that, not necessarily why I'm saying it relative to Gabbard. I think if you listen carefully, you'll hear something else, like with Bernie.
The majority of her speech was good, but the qualifier about the war on terrorism is a war we must win negates much of the rest of the speech. The war on terrorism is exactly why we have terrorism along with the fact that the United States and its allies in the Middle East are sponsors of terrorism and terrorist groups.
Gabbard does go a long way in denouncing much of US foreign policy, but I wish just one politician had the courage to actually say it out loud that fighting terrorism is not a war we can or should win when we are the main promoters of terrorism ourselves.
up
0 users have voted.
—
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
@gulfgal98@gulfgal98
isn't going to change to a quote like you wished to hear, ie "fighting terrorism is not a war we can or should win".
How many livelihoods and jobs are dependent on working in any way or fashion for the corporations and government agencies and armed forces who are related to the task of "fighting terrorism", be it in the CIA, NSA, FBI, Armed Forces, Corporations, who produce weapons and IT technology and maintain the wwww technoloty etc.
The only solution to this dilemma is for all people, whose jobs indirectly or directly are related to activities that facilitate wars against terrorism, to become independent farmers. But they don't own land. The government and corporational overlords own the land. Seems to me that is the end of the story.
I think, it's unrealistic that any politician will utter the words "fighting terrorism is not a war we can or should win" and I am not that willing to jump on the bandwagon to blame Gabbard for that "conditional sentence" she used. She tries and Sanders tried. What help is it to blame them for trying?
And just think about how many 'little people' listen to Gabbard's speech anyhow. The little people might miss Gabbards words, but they won't miss, if they lose their jobs, gigs, contracts, homes etc.
The 99 (or at least 2/3 of the 99) percent are already enslaved. They don't and can't determine in what kind of terroristic wars their government, military and corporations are engaged in. How to get out of that enslavement is THE question for each individual citizen. I haven't found or read an answer to that question. Do you?
PS. Since when did we have a war on terrorism in the US? Or when became that war part of the public's conscience? Before 9/11 or after?
The majority of her speech was good, but the qualifier about the war on terrorism is a war we must win negates much of the rest of the speech. The war on terrorism is exactly why we have terrorism along with the fact that the United States and its allies in the Middle East are sponsors of terrorism and terrorist groups.
Gabbard does go a long way in denouncing much of US foreign policy, but I wish just one politician had the courage to actually say it out loud that fighting terrorism is not a war we can or should win when we are the main promoters of terrorism ourselves.
@mimi
"Since when did we have a war on terrorism in the US?" The list goes back a long way probably. This is TV coverage from the first trade center bombing, talks about Waco too. Come all without, come all within. Sheesh. Anyway, it was Eisenhower that warned first about the Military Industrial Complex - that I think is what drives the War of Terror - so five decades at least. 1993 World Trade Center bombing Good Morning America coverage 3/1/93
#2#2
isn't going to change to a quote like you wished to hear, ie "fighting terrorism is not a war we can or should win".
How many livelihoods and jobs are dependent on working in any way or fashion for the corporations and government agencies and armed forces who are related to the task of "fighting terrorism", be it in the CIA, NSA, FBI, Armed Forces, Corporations, who produce weapons and IT technology and maintain the wwww technoloty etc.
The only solution to this dilemma is for all people, whose jobs indirectly or directly are related to activities that facilitate wars against terrorism, to become independent farmers. But they don't own land. The government and corporational overlords own the land. Seems to me that is the end of the story.
I think, it's unrealistic that any politician will utter the words "fighting terrorism is not a war we can or should win" and I am not that willing to jump on the bandwagon to blame Gabbard for that "conditional sentence" she used. She tries and Sanders tried. What help is it to blame them for trying?
And just think about how many 'little people' listen to Gabbard's speech anyhow. The little people might miss Gabbards words, but they won't miss, if they lose their jobs, gigs, contracts, homes etc.
The 99 (or at least 2/3 of the 99) percent are already enslaved. They don't and can't determine in what kind of terroristic wars their government, military and corporations are engaged in. How to get out of that enslavement is THE question for each individual citizen. I haven't found or read an answer to that question. Do you?
PS. Since when did we have a war on terrorism in the US? Or when became that war part of the public's conscience? Before 9/11 or after?
@eyo
nutcase idiots. Not an attack that caused the US to go overseas and start a war on foreign territory, because they had proven that the terrorists were foreign nationals, brownish, muslim or other foreign people "evil doers" from overseas.
I am too lazy, I remember WACO, I don't remember the first Trade Center attack that well and don't know who was the supposed terrorist attacker.
Don't think all this compared to the situations between 2001 to 2016.
#2.1 "Since when did we have a war on terrorism in the US?" The list goes back a long way probably. This is TV coverage from the first trade center bombing, talks about Waco too. Come all without, come all within. Sheesh. Anyway, it was Eisenhower that warned first about the Military Industrial Complex - that I think is what drives the War of Terror - so five decades at least. 1993 World Trade Center bombing Good Morning America coverage 3/1/93
Omar Abdel-Rahman, the Muslim cleric known as "the blind sheikh" who was convicted of conspiracy in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and of planning a broader "war of urban terrorism" in the United States, died on Saturday in a North Carolina prison, authorities said.
Abdel-Rahman, 78, died of natural causes at 9:40 a.m. (1440 GMT) at a medical center at a federal prison compound in Butner, North Carolina, according to Greg Norton, a spokesman.
The cleric, who had diabetes and coronary artery disease, had been incarcerated at the complex for nearly 10 years, Norton said.
peace
#2.1.1
nutcase idiots. Not an attack that caused the US to go overseas and start a war on foreign territory, because they had proven that the terrorists were foreign nationals, brownish, muslim or other foreign people "evil doers" from overseas.
I am too lazy, I remember WACO, I don't remember the first Trade Center attack that well and don't know who was the supposed terrorist attacker.
Don't think all this compared to the situations between 2001 to 2016.
@eyo@eyo
(edited for a rather funny mistake, added the word NOT)
the first signs of dementia, otherwise called unexpected memory lapses. I guess I am just NOT up to the task. My only critique was meant to say that I don't believe that for the little people outside the US the first attack on the WW center is much ingrained in their memory or understood for the beginning of the war on terror. I see little people here in Germany. They wouldn't be able to follow most of the discussions here. I try, but get tired of it. Why is it important to rate the Presidents?
Omar Abdel-Rahman, the Muslim cleric known as "the blind sheikh" who was convicted of conspiracy in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and of planning a broader "war of urban terrorism" in the United States, died on Saturday in a North Carolina prison, authorities said.
Abdel-Rahman, 78, died of natural causes at 9:40 a.m. (1440 GMT) at a medical center at a federal prison compound in Butner, North Carolina, according to Greg Norton, a spokesman.
The cleric, who had diabetes and coronary artery disease, had been incarcerated at the complex for nearly 10 years, Norton said.
@mimi
My comment is not pie in the sky, but is grounded in the reality of identifying the root cause of terrorism. You cannot solve a problem until you actually identify what IS the problem. All we have to do is look at our (the West's) history in the Middle East to see why there is so much resentment toward the West.
Going in and destroying countries and killing their citizens (up to one million civilians in Iraq alone) is not going to stop terrorism. It breeds terrorism instead. Yes, the MIC has a huge investment in keeping these wars going. As for jobs for all those who work in the MIC industry, there is a very good solution. A massive infrastructure program here in the US, particularly looking a shift off fossil fuels to clear renewable energy sources would provide more than enough jobs for those currently working in the armaments industry.
The problem is not jobs, but is the outrageous profits that these companies earn off of killing people. They keep it flowing by lining the pockets of our elected and appointed officials. It is corruption and we need to start calling it that.
Most Americans have no idea of how horrible our foreign policy is toward people in the Middle East nor the costs associated with that policy. I learned this first hand in my four and a half years with the Peace vigil. The vast majority were shocked when I told them of the real costs of these wars and how many innocent people are being slaughtered in these wars. The American people need a huge wake up call.
So let them all become farmers and it still does not solve the problem because the real problem has been wrongly identified to them. And yes, all of this angers me to no end, so I apologize in advance if I am offending anyone here. I did not spend four and a half years in a Peace vigil not to take a hard stand against these illegal wars.
#2#2
isn't going to change to a quote like you wished to hear, ie "fighting terrorism is not a war we can or should win".
How many livelihoods and jobs are dependent on working in any way or fashion for the corporations and government agencies and armed forces who are related to the task of "fighting terrorism", be it in the CIA, NSA, FBI, Armed Forces, Corporations, who produce weapons and IT technology and maintain the wwww technoloty etc.
The only solution to this dilemma is for all people, whose jobs indirectly or directly are related to activities that facilitate wars against terrorism, to become independent farmers. But they don't own land. The government and corporational overlords own the land. Seems to me that is the end of the story.
I think, it's unrealistic that any politician will utter the words "fighting terrorism is not a war we can or should win" and I am not that willing to jump on the bandwagon to blame Gabbard for that "conditional sentence" she used. She tries and Sanders tried. What help is it to blame them for trying?
And just think about how many 'little people' listen to Gabbard's speech anyhow. The little people might miss Gabbards words, but they won't miss, if they lose their jobs, gigs, contracts, homes etc.
The 99 (or at least 2/3 of the 99) percent are already enslaved. They don't and can't determine in what kind of terroristic wars their government, military and corporations are engaged in. How to get out of that enslavement is THE question for each individual citizen. I haven't found or read an answer to that question. Do you?
PS. Since when did we have a war on terrorism in the US? Or when became that war part of the public's conscience? Before 9/11 or after?
up
0 users have voted.
—
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
@gulfgal98
since I came here (and that's quite a while ago) and my comment was not directed against you. I think that readers, here at least, know by now the root causes of terrorism. It's basically explained here several times a day.
Please accept my apologies if you felt offended by my comment. It was just a sign of frustration of listening to blaming people I think have not deserved it the most. Gabbard to me has not deserved that critique, even if your argument is logic and her sentence you quote is in your opinion reason enough to say it "wipes out everything else she said".
I will not blame Sanders, Gabbard and Nina Turner for what they are saying or have said in the past. I remember that way back I was amazed at Chris Hedges clear criticism of Sanders to run with the Democrats. I didn't understand it back then, but do now. The educational mission to let people know they have been betrayed by the democratic party and its leaders and with it personal blame going towards individual politicians isn't as necessary for me than may be for others. The discussions of the internal split in the democratic party, how one can push back, either externally of the democratic party with movements or third party creations or internally is hard for me to stay focussed on. It doesn't help me to find solutions. That's what caused my frustration.
I read here every day. It's impossible even for the most closed-minded people to not understand your words and be in full agreement with them. What I am tired of is that there is not the next step, leaving the look back and hindsight blame behind, and looking for plans to change the structural system that allows a small elitist oligarchy to run your country's policies and allows them to finance the war on terror in foreign countries on foreign territory with your own soldiers and your own money. They (the soldiers) have the trauma to live with their own memories of having to kill people they don't want to kill. I am getting mad to see my own country's (German) politicians now having to discuss if they should "shoot too", as that seems to be what the Americans want them to do as NATO members or US allies.
We don't disagree at all. I am just more tired than most. I can look from the outside and have less capabilities to look like you from the inside. I have neither history knowledge nor much memory of the Clinton Presidency aside from the tabloid trash reporting.
Do you remember the interview mentioned in the latest EB of Glen Greenwald by Charles Tucker? If you listen carefully to the end, you will hear those feelings I have reflected between TC 4:15 to the end. Last sentence of Tucker at 4:59: "May be you have to travel all to Rio de Janeiro to see that clearly". I thought the way I remember Charles Tucker that was an amazing or amusing way to end his interview. Made even Glen Greenwald chuckling. May be Tucker will be Glen Greenwald's neighbor soon, if he keeps asking people like Greenwald questions that are revealing some truth. /s (I am joking, Charles Tucker is not my kind of guy...)
I am sorry that you couldn't imagine that I agree with your thoughts and arguments, but was just tired of hitting Gabbard for her "contradictory sentences". She is a politician. That's all. I don't blame a politician to be a politician. What would that help?
Ok, I am taking a break. It was not my intention to offend you at all. If I have I apologize for it.
#2.1 My comment is not pie in the sky, but is grounded in the reality of identifying the root cause of terrorism. You cannot solve a problem until you actually identify what IS the problem. All we have to do is look at our (the West's) history in the Middle East to see why there is so much resentment toward the West.
Going in and destroying countries and killing their citizens (up to one million civilians in Iraq alone) is not going to stop terrorism. It breeds terrorism instead. Yes, the MIC has a huge investment in keeping these wars going. As for jobs for all those who work in the MIC industry, there is a very good solution. A massive infrastructure program here in the US, particularly looking a shift off fossil fuels to clear renewable energy sources would provide more than enough jobs for those currently working in the armaments industry.
The problem is not jobs, but is the outrageous profits that these companies earn off of killing people. They keep it flowing by lining the pockets of our elected and appointed officials. It is corruption and we need to start calling it that.
Most Americans have no idea of how horrible our foreign policy is toward people in the Middle East nor the costs associated with that policy. I learned this first hand in my four and a half years with the Peace vigil. The vast majority were shocked when I told them of the real costs of these wars and how many innocent people are being slaughtered in these wars. The American people need a huge wake up call.
So let them all become farmers and it still does not solve the problem because the real problem has been wrongly identified to them. And yes, all of this angers me to no end, so I apologize in advance if I am offending anyone here. I did not spend four and a half years in a Peace vigil not to take a hard stand against these illegal wars.
@mimi
We must feel free to criticize our politicians, even those we may like. And I do like Tulsi Gabbard for her taking a stand against regime change and marching to her own drummer in support of Bernie during the primaries. However, by saying we must win the war on terror, she is falling into the trap of back handed support of continued wars under the guise of fighting terrorism. As I posted above, I liked everything else she said, but that one qualifier ends up being a gaping hole through which a Mack truck could be driven.
I am not insulted or angry about your comment to which I responded, but I am very passionate about being anti-war and felt I needed to correct what I perceived as being erroneous. My strong anti-war stance is not personal as if I know or knew someone killed in these wars, but it is something that is a part of my own personal moral code. We are killing far too many innocent people under the guise of fighting terrorism and these innocent people, including children, are simply considered collateral damage. They are not collateral damage, but were real living, breathing human beings just like you and me. They deserve the same human rights that we supposedly enjoy, including the right to life.
I am rarely on in the evenings, but I had already seen the interview of Glenn Greenwald by Tucker Carlson. Glenn is totally correct that the Democrats offered zero reason for people to vote FOR them. This has been going on a long time and not even the mid term blood bath of 2014 made them assess what they were doing wrong. They can't because they are too addicted to big money, so they have been relying on identity politics. It no longer works when the majority of this country is struggling to keep their heads above water.
#2.1.2
since I came here (and that's quite a while ago) and my comment was not directed against you. I think that readers, here at least, know by now the root causes of terrorism. It's basically explained here several times a day.
Please accept my apologies if you felt offended by my comment. It was just a sign of frustration of listening to blaming people I think have not deserved it the most. Gabbard to me has not deserved that critique, even if your argument is logic and her sentence you quote is in your opinion reason enough to say it "wipes out everything else she said".
I will not blame Sanders, Gabbard and Nina Turner for what they are saying or have said in the past. I remember that way back I was amazed at Chris Hedges clear criticism of Sanders to run with the Democrats. I didn't understand it back then, but do now. The educational mission to let people know they have been betrayed by the democratic party and its leaders and with it personal blame going towards individual politicians isn't as necessary for me than may be for others. The discussions of the internal split in the democratic party, how one can push back, either externally of the democratic party with movements or third party creations or internally is hard for me to stay focussed on. It doesn't help me to find solutions. That's what caused my frustration.
I read here every day. It's impossible even for the most closed-minded people to not understand your words and be in full agreement with them. What I am tired of is that there is not the next step, leaving the look back and hindsight blame behind, and looking for plans to change the structural system that allows a small elitist oligarchy to run your country's policies and allows them to finance the war on terror in foreign countries on foreign territory with your own soldiers and your own money. They (the soldiers) have the trauma to live with their own memories of having to kill people they don't want to kill. I am getting mad to see my own country's (German) politicians now having to discuss if they should "shoot too", as that seems to be what the Americans want them to do as NATO members or US allies.
We don't disagree at all. I am just more tired than most. I can look from the outside and have less capabilities to look like you from the inside. I have neither history knowledge nor much memory of the Clinton Presidency aside from the tabloid trash reporting.
Do you remember the interview mentioned in the latest EB of Glen Greenwald by Charles Tucker? If you listen carefully to the end, you will hear those feelings I have reflected between TC 4:15 to the end. Last sentence of Tucker at 4:59: "May be you have to travel all to Rio de Janeiro to see that clearly". I thought the way I remember Charles Tucker that was an amazing or amusing way to end his interview. Made even Glen Greenwald chuckling. May be Tucker will be Glen Greenwald's neighbor soon, if he keeps asking people like Greenwald questions that are revealing some truth. /s (I am joking, Charles Tucker is not my kind of guy...)
I am sorry that you couldn't imagine that I agree with your thoughts and arguments, but was just tired of hitting Gabbard for her "contradictory sentences". She is a politician. That's all. I don't blame a politician to be a politician. What would that help?
Ok, I am taking a break. It was not my intention to offend you at all. If I have I apologize for it.
up
0 users have voted.
—
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
@gulfgal98
I have nothing that I could add to that. Unfortunately. I wished I had more to say and could express it as eloquently as you do. What I will do so, is listening closely to Gabbard. I hadn't so far and this exchange certainly gives me incentives to "look out for her".
#2.1.2.1 We must feel free to criticize our politicians, even those we may like. And I do like Tulsi Gabbard for her taking a stand against regime change and marching to her own drummer in support of Bernie during the primaries. However, by saying we must win the war on terror, she is falling into the trap of back handed support of continued wars under the guise of fighting terrorism. As I posted above, I liked everything else she said, but that one qualifier ends up being a gaping hole through which a Mack truck could be driven.
I am not insulted or angry about your comment to which I responded, but I am very passionate about being anti-war and felt I needed to correct what I perceived as being erroneous. My strong anti-war stance is not personal as if I know or knew someone killed in these wars, but it is something that is a part of my own personal moral code. We are killing far too many innocent people under the guise of fighting terrorism and these innocent people, including children, are simply considered collateral damage. They are not collateral damage, but were real living, breathing human beings just like you and me. They deserve the same human rights that we supposedly enjoy, including the right to life.
I am rarely on in the evenings, but I had already seen the interview of Glenn Greenwald by Tucker Carlson. Glenn is totally correct that the Democrats offered zero reason for people to vote FOR them. This has been going on a long time and not even the mid term blood bath of 2014 made them assess what they were doing wrong. They can't because they are too addicted to big money, so they have been relying on identity politics. It no longer works when the majority of this country is struggling to keep their heads above water.
@mimi
Please realize it not a case of I cannot trust her so I am throwing her under the bus, in my own mind. It is more that we all should pay close attention to what our elected officials say and be mindful that they are products of our political process which is allowing less and less leeway for independent thinking. If Gabbard or anyone else strays too far from the party line, they will try to oust her.
#2.1.2.1.1
I have nothing that I could add to that. Unfortunately. I wished I had more to say and could express it as eloquently as you do. What I will do so, is listening closely to Gabbard. I hadn't so far and this exchange certainly gives me incentives to "look out for her".
up
0 users have voted.
—
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
@gulfgal98
tooth and nails for the attempts to oust her. She will have to show her true colors and I believe she will.
#2.1.2.1.1.1 Please realize it not a case of I cannot trust her so I am throwing her under the bus, in my own mind. It is more that we all should pay close attention to what our elected officials say and be mindful that they are products of our political process which is allowing less and less leeway for independent thinking. If Gabbard or anyone else strays too far from the party line, they will try to oust her.
... What I am tired of is that there is not the next step, leaving the look back and hindsight blame behind, and looking for plans to change the structural system that allows a small elitist oligarchy to run your country's policies and allows them to finance the war on terror in foreign countries on foreign territory with your own soldiers and your own money. ...
I think what's involved in that includes the complete lack of accountability or of even publicity granted the criminals responsible so that they can worsen every time, secure in the knowledge that they'll be considered 'above the law'.
That and the fact that they need to be identified and held accountable at long last in order to clean them out of the system and public policy, which includes foreign policy - now corrupted into a hostile corporate global take-over using public lives and other public resources.
This part is difficult because all branches of government, including the Supreme Court and many local politically appointed judges and civil employees (including police departments) have been corrupted and there are few, if any, officials to actually bring them to justice, so that citizen outrage must carry the day, if there is to be any chance, not only of introducing real democracy to America at long last, but of maintaining the chances of the survival of life on the planet even through this century.
#2.1.2
since I came here (and that's quite a while ago) and my comment was not directed against you. I think that readers, here at least, know by now the root causes of terrorism. It's basically explained here several times a day.
Please accept my apologies if you felt offended by my comment. It was just a sign of frustration of listening to blaming people I think have not deserved it the most. Gabbard to me has not deserved that critique, even if your argument is logic and her sentence you quote is in your opinion reason enough to say it "wipes out everything else she said".
I will not blame Sanders, Gabbard and Nina Turner for what they are saying or have said in the past. I remember that way back I was amazed at Chris Hedges clear criticism of Sanders to run with the Democrats. I didn't understand it back then, but do now. The educational mission to let people know they have been betrayed by the democratic party and its leaders and with it personal blame going towards individual politicians isn't as necessary for me than may be for others. The discussions of the internal split in the democratic party, how one can push back, either externally of the democratic party with movements or third party creations or internally is hard for me to stay focussed on. It doesn't help me to find solutions. That's what caused my frustration.
I read here every day. It's impossible even for the most closed-minded people to not understand your words and be in full agreement with them. What I am tired of is that there is not the next step, leaving the look back and hindsight blame behind, and looking for plans to change the structural system that allows a small elitist oligarchy to run your country's policies and allows them to finance the war on terror in foreign countries on foreign territory with your own soldiers and your own money. They (the soldiers) have the trauma to live with their own memories of having to kill people they don't want to kill. I am getting mad to see my own country's (German) politicians now having to discuss if they should "shoot too", as that seems to be what the Americans want them to do as NATO members or US allies.
We don't disagree at all. I am just more tired than most. I can look from the outside and have less capabilities to look like you from the inside. I have neither history knowledge nor much memory of the Clinton Presidency aside from the tabloid trash reporting.
Do you remember the interview mentioned in the latest EB of Glen Greenwald by Charles Tucker? If you listen carefully to the end, you will hear those feelings I have reflected between TC 4:15 to the end. Last sentence of Tucker at 4:59: "May be you have to travel all to Rio de Janeiro to see that clearly". I thought the way I remember Charles Tucker that was an amazing or amusing way to end his interview. Made even Glen Greenwald chuckling. May be Tucker will be Glen Greenwald's neighbor soon, if he keeps asking people like Greenwald questions that are revealing some truth. /s (I am joking, Charles Tucker is not my kind of guy...)
I am sorry that you couldn't imagine that I agree with your thoughts and arguments, but was just tired of hitting Gabbard for her "contradictory sentences". She is a politician. That's all. I don't blame a politician to be a politician. What would that help?
Ok, I am taking a break. It was not my intention to offend you at all. If I have I apologize for it.
up
0 users have voted.
—
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
position, against the Bush/Clinton PNAC insanity. She's not aiming to stop the endless war paradigm, she's not pushing back against the War on Terror. What she's doing is presenting the saner version of Establishment foreign policy. In other words, she knows that the desire to upend civilizations and make them into failed states, big craters that spawn terrorist movements and refugees fleeing them (and us), is, well, crazy, and could lead to a hot war with Russia and apocalypse. Even if it doesn't, the benefits accrued by the few are not worth the chaos and destruction engendered by the incessant racking up of more and more failed states.
The good side of this is that it will be fewer people dead, and it will also back us off from World War III. (Though I'd be interested to see what she thinks about Crimea).
The bad side is that it won't stop the killing for money, which is basically what our wars are about now: filling some already-rich guys' pockets.
up
0 users have voted.
—
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal
Thank you stating what I tried to say in much clearer terms. Wars will not end if we simply shift from "regime change" to simply "fighting terrorism." Terrorism is a direct result of our long standing policies in the Middle East dictated by oligarchs who stand to gain financially from them.
position, against the Bush/Clinton PNAC insanity. She's not aiming to stop the endless war paradigm, she's not pushing back against the War on Terror. What she's doing is presenting the saner version of Establishment foreign policy. In other words, she knows that the desire to upend civilizations and make them into failed states, big craters that spawn terrorist movements and refugees fleeing them (and us), is, well, crazy, and could lead to a hot war with Russia and apocalypse. Even if it doesn't, the benefits accrued by the few are not worth the chaos and destruction engendered by the incessant racking up of more and more failed states.
The good side of this is that it will be fewer people dead, and it will also back us off from World War III. (Though I'd be interested to see what she thinks about Crimea).
The bad side is that it won't stop the killing for money, which is basically what our wars are about now: filling some already-rich guys' pockets.
up
0 users have voted.
—
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
#3 Thank you stating what I tried to say in much clearer terms. Wars will not end if we simply shift from "regime change" to simply "fighting terrorism." Terrorism is a direct result of our long standing policies in the Middle East dictated by oligarchs who stand to gain financially from them.
up
0 users have voted.
—
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
#3 Thank you stating what I tried to say in much clearer terms. Wars will not end if we simply shift from "regime change" to simply "fighting terrorism." Terrorism is a direct result of our long standing policies in the Middle East dictated by oligarchs who stand to gain financially from them.
@irishking
or as Big Al more correctly calls it, the War OF Terrorism.
It is war on an idea which means that there is no real defined enemy or state, only a moving target of an idea that requires we kill people who might adopt that idea. It is a self perpetuating cycle of bloodshed and killing with no end. It is a horrible state that our country has put us and the world in and it needs to stop. Only we can stop.
The stupidity of this conception boggles my mind.
WHAT is the enemy? Terror as a tool? Please. Let's have a war on bad weather.
Do something useful,YOU EVILF**KS.
"But Oceania has always been at war with TERRORISTS and their ISM.
We will win! It's just a matter of..."
aarrghh.
up
0 users have voted.
—
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
I don't have time right now, but I'll try to locate and repost my EB blurb on Gabbard. My concern about her relates to her past stances on a couple of social justice/economic issues, since I don't closely follow issues relating to the MIC.
If Gabbard doesn't denounce the City Ordinance that she put forth and got passed, which the ACLU characterized as criminalizing homelessness, I would have a hard time lending her my support. Then again, I've pretty much given up on the Dem Party as a whole.
I do, however, respect the right of others to continue to work within the Dem Party. As they say,'To each, his own.'
Mollie
"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went."--Will Rogers
up
0 users have voted.
—
Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.
@Unabashed Liberal
congressional district means that you disturb the precious tourists from spending their money in HI.
If you can write about those city ordonances I would be grateful. On top of that I doubt very much that tourists from Europe are interested in the investments of rich inverstors from NY, West Coast and Canada in shopping malls American style on the islands of Hawaii. They destroy everything what people search for in the nature of Hawaii's landscapes and parks. Tragic and annoying. Hawaii is one of the worst states to survive and not falling into poverty to become a homeless person. I like to hear suggestions, if Gabbard is criticized, of how to solve the problems of homelessness in Hawaii.
I don't have time right now, but I'll try to locate and repost my EB blurb on Gabbard. My concern about her relates to her past stances on a couple of social justice/economic issues, since I don't closely follow issues relating to the MIC.
If Gabbard doesn't denounce the City Ordinance that she put forth and got passed, which the ACLU characterized as criminalizing homelessness, I would have a hard time lending her my support. Then again, I've pretty much given up on the Dem Party as a whole.
I do, however, respect the right of others to continue to work within the Dem Party. As they say,'To each, his own.'
Mollie
"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went."--Will Rogers
Oh, boy... any support of criminalizing homelessness really is a deadly strike against her, indicative of actual pathology. Now wondering if she's allowed to say what she does as a false-hope dead end to nullify progressive efforts by redirection...
I don't have time right now, but I'll try to locate and repost my EB blurb on Gabbard. My concern about her relates to her past stances on a couple of social justice/economic issues, since I don't closely follow issues relating to the MIC.
If Gabbard doesn't denounce the City Ordinance that she put forth and got passed, which the ACLU characterized as criminalizing homelessness, I would have a hard time lending her my support. Then again, I've pretty much given up on the Dem Party as a whole.
I do, however, respect the right of others to continue to work within the Dem Party. As they say,'To each, his own.'
Mollie
"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went."--Will Rogers
up
0 users have voted.
—
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
is the obvious one, I suppose--increase funding to provide temporary and/or permanent housing for the homeless. Since I don't live there, I have no detailed or specific insight into the situation; but, I agree with the notion that 'tourism' was probably the impetus for the bill.
Here's an excerpt from Gabbard's Wikipedia bio,
Tenure[edit]
In her capacity as committee chair, Gabbard took the lead on many issues such as medical waste, Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), dengue fever, and creating new economic opportunities through Honolulu's first Sister City Summit.[citation needed] As a councilmember, she introduced a measure to help food truck vendors by loosening parking restrictions.[25]
Gabbard also introduced Bill 54, a measure that authorized city workers to confiscate personal belongings stored on public property.[26][27] The measure overcame opposition from the ACLU[28] and Occupy Hawai'i,[29] and a potential conflict with Hawaii's constitutional law, Kānāwai Māmalahoe, which protects "those who sleep by the roadside". Bill 54 passed[29] and became City Ordinance 1129. . . .
Mollie
"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went."--Will Rogers
“When the narrative at the heart of a system of rule falls apart, when the flow of history runs counter to the story told by those in power, then we know the entire edifice is crumbling under the weight of its own contradictions.
The political crisis arrives when the people sense that the prevailing order is built on a foundation of oppressions and lies.
The rulers panic, scrambling to reweave the matrix of fables and myths that justify their waning supremacy. At such points in history, the truth is up for grabs – and a change of regime is in the offing.” ____Glen Ford, Black Agenda Report
@Unabashed Liberal
thank you, because you made me read the whole Wikipedia entry for Tulsi Gabbard and I have to say after reading all about it, I am even more convinced that she didn't deserve the criticism she got.
I don't think it's my role as a non-citizen of the US to opine about her here, but so far from what I read in that bio, the criticism voiced here hasn't convinced me. She has a very interesting bio and considering her young age, she has shown way more courage than many to speak up with an independent mind. The only paragraph that made me want to throw up and throw eggs at Mr. Bannon was this:
Gabbard did not join the 169 congressional Democrats who signed a letter of opposition to Stephen Bannon's appointment as Trump's chief strategist.[157] Bannon has described himself as a "big fan" of Gabbard.[140] According to one source, "He loves Tulsi Gabbard,” and another source said that he “wants to work with her on everything."[158]
Well, I hope she works with him in ways he deserves it. Let's just see who is the real American warrior of the two and who represents the Hawaiian little people (including the homeless ones) better.
The homeless in HI have to live somewhere. There is very little land mass. To build more ugly buildings to house the poor destroys much of HI's beauty. I doubt a homeless person would accept to live inside an ugly shelter, as mother nature and some of the Hawaiian laws allow them to live outside on public beaches and river banks and parks. Of course, if rich mainland investors wouldn't buy up all the land, increase land prices to the sky and laws were in place to prevent them from doing so, it would help. If you want to get the homeless out of sight, you can't just shuffle them into the Pacific or chase them away like you can do on the mainland. So, I don't see the in the city ordinance more than a method to try to keep those, who live on the public land and beaches, from littering with their belonging too much in the open and try to keep them somewhat orderly.
There is nowhere to go for those who can't pay the rental prices for an apartment in HI. Climate allows those who are therefore homeless to sleep in their cars or live outside. Sleeping in your car is not allowed and it causes the homeless to just move more away from the police and public eye and hide deeper in the woods and coves. I am sure Tulsi Gabbard is aware of that and tries to find a balance that satisfy the homeless, existing laws for native hawaiians and the tourist industry.
In any case, I don't know why people pick on her. I think it's petty.
is the obvious one, I suppose--increase funding to provide temporary and/or permanent housing for the homeless. Since I don't live there, I have no detailed or specific insight into the situation; but, I agree with the notion that 'tourism' was probably the impetus for the bill.
Here's an excerpt from Gabbard's Wikipedia bio,
Tenure[edit]
In her capacity as committee chair, Gabbard took the lead on many issues such as medical waste, Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), dengue fever, and creating new economic opportunities through Honolulu's first Sister City Summit.[citation needed] As a councilmember, she introduced a measure to help food truck vendors by loosening parking restrictions.[25]
Gabbard also introduced Bill 54, a measure that authorized city workers to confiscate personal belongings stored on public property.[26][27] The measure overcame opposition from the ACLU[28] and Occupy Hawai'i,[29] and a potential conflict with Hawaii's constitutional law, Kānāwai Māmalahoe, which protects "those who sleep by the roadside". Bill 54 passed[29] and became City Ordinance 1129. . . .
Mollie
"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went."--Will Rogers
“When the narrative at the heart of a system of rule falls apart, when the flow of history runs counter to the story told by those in power, then we know the entire edifice is crumbling under the weight of its own contradictions.
The political crisis arrives when the people sense that the prevailing order is built on a foundation of oppressions and lies.
The rulers panic, scrambling to reweave the matrix of fables and myths that justify their waning supremacy. At such points in history, the truth is up for grabs – and a change of regime is in the offing.” ____Glen Ford, Black Agenda Report
... Gabbard also introduced Bill 54, a measure that authorized city workers to confiscate personal belongings stored on public property.[26][27] The measure overcame opposition from the ACLU[28] and Occupy Hawai'i,[29] and a potential conflict with Hawaii's constitutional law, Kānāwai Māmalahoe, which protects "those who sleep by the roadside". Bill 54 passed[29] and became City Ordinance 1129. . . . ...
So no respect either for the sufferings of her fellow-citizens or for their Constitution? That does it for me.
is the obvious one, I suppose--increase funding to provide temporary and/or permanent housing for the homeless. Since I don't live there, I have no detailed or specific insight into the situation; but, I agree with the notion that 'tourism' was probably the impetus for the bill.
Here's an excerpt from Gabbard's Wikipedia bio,
Tenure[edit]
In her capacity as committee chair, Gabbard took the lead on many issues such as medical waste, Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), dengue fever, and creating new economic opportunities through Honolulu's first Sister City Summit.[citation needed] As a councilmember, she introduced a measure to help food truck vendors by loosening parking restrictions.[25]
Gabbard also introduced Bill 54, a measure that authorized city workers to confiscate personal belongings stored on public property.[26][27] The measure overcame opposition from the ACLU[28] and Occupy Hawai'i,[29] and a potential conflict with Hawaii's constitutional law, Kānāwai Māmalahoe, which protects "those who sleep by the roadside". Bill 54 passed[29] and became City Ordinance 1129. . . .
Mollie
"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went."--Will Rogers
“When the narrative at the heart of a system of rule falls apart, when the flow of history runs counter to the story told by those in power, then we know the entire edifice is crumbling under the weight of its own contradictions.
The political crisis arrives when the people sense that the prevailing order is built on a foundation of oppressions and lies.
The rulers panic, scrambling to reweave the matrix of fables and myths that justify their waning supremacy. At such points in history, the truth is up for grabs – and a change of regime is in the offing.” ____Glen Ford, Black Agenda Report
I agree with so much of what has been said here. I am a Very Angry Pacifist. There has not been a day in my life in which I have not believed war is the greatest crime on earth.
But when the war my country is raging on the world has led us to the brink of World War III, when our most recent Secretary of Defense has proposed making nuclear weapons "more useable," I take great hope when a military leader, or a veteran of this war who is in Congress, speaks out against the madness, the illegality, the failure to bring peace, the failure to bring democracy, the failure to improve ANYTHING, the failure to even destroy the enemy.
I support Gabbard especially for making the point that Democrats have been drawn into support for this war by descriptions of Assad's inhumanity, while our war has led to incalculably more human suffering.
I don't expect Michael Flynn, a career military professional, or Tulsi Gabbard, a veteran of the insane war we're running, to abandon their belief in war. But when they strongly criticize it, I am very grateful.
… Michael Flynn: [TALKING OVER] Yeah. I think that we have invested in, in more conflict instead of actually investing in solutions. So, and when I say that, what I mean is that we invest in more drones, we invest in more bombs, we invest in more weapons, we invest in more ammunition, we invest in more guys to go out and kill more guys. That's investing in conflict, instead of really taking a serious look and say, "What … what are the big excuses that these guys are using?" And if it's lack of, you know, if it's poor economic conditions, if it's poor social conditions, then let's fix those.
to deal with it. Do people think we can just say 'oops' and walk away from all our psuedo-wars, weapons deals, and dronings? We can't just pick up our toys and go home. Not only have we destroyed and destabilized OTHER countries with all of our 'regime' changes, we have put this country in an extremely dangerous position as well. So even if we leave the Middle East we're still in the precarious position of having to defend ourselves from those THAT WANT TO GET EVEN for what we've been doing since we decided that we have the right to take down any sovereign government we want anywhere we want.
ISIS/ISIL/Daesh (whatever) is our enemy. So is al Quadea (even though the Obama decided to use them by giving them more bombs in bullets in his proxy war against Assad). They pose a grave threat to the West. Maybe they can't take it over, but they sure as hell can try to destroy as much of it as they can. Regardless of what some crazed Repubbie says about smuggling nukes in a bale of pot, the threat of being hit with a dirty bomb planted by these people is out there and it's real.
If people don't like the words 'war on terror' how about 'self-defense from those want to destroy the West'? How about plain old 'self-defense'? Or should we just say "well we deserve it, we started it"?
up
0 users have voted.
—
I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks
Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa
So, instead of arming and training terrorists and sending in armies/planes/drones to slaughter citizens, suppose America trains and supplies funding for dislocated/bombed-homeless civilians to start building replacement low-cost housing and small businesses in these countries? They could do this at home, too, couldn't they?
to deal with it. Do people think we can just say 'oops' and walk away from all our psuedo-wars, weapons deals, and dronings? We can't just pick up our toys and go home. Not only have we destroyed and destabilized OTHER countries with all of our 'regime' changes, we have put this country in an extremely dangerous position as well. So even if we leave the Middle East we're still in the precarious position of having to defend ourselves from those THAT WANT TO GET EVEN for what we've been doing since we decided that we have the right to take down any sovereign government we want anywhere we want.
ISIS/ISIL/Daesh (whatever) is our enemy. So is al Quadea (even though the Obama decided to use them by giving them more bombs in bullets in his proxy war against Assad). They pose a grave threat to the West. Maybe they can't take it over, but they sure as hell can try to destroy as much of it as they can. Regardless of what some crazed Repubbie says about smuggling nukes in a bale of pot, the threat of being hit with a dirty bomb planted by these people is out there and it's real.
If people don't like the words 'war on terror' how about 'self-defense from those want to destroy the West'? How about plain old 'self-defense'? Or should we just say "well we deserve it, we started it"?
up
0 users have voted.
—
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
@Ellen North
just be thrilled to kiss and make up with the people that destroyed their country. And since we don't control fuck all over there, we'll just give them imaginary places to live and fake jobs. In their own homelands. Control of which started this mess in the first place. That should pacify the people that despise us.
Tell me, even if it were practical or possible, do you think their mindset is "So what you killed my family? Not a big thing. Thanks for a house and a job."
So, instead of arming and training terrorists and sending in armies/planes/drones to slaughter citizens, suppose America trains and supplies funding for dislocated/bombed-homeless civilians to start building replacement low-cost housing and small businesses in these countries? They could do this at home, too, couldn't they?
up
0 users have voted.
—
I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks
Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa
Gotta agree with you, but not arming and training these terrorists would be a start, as would be not - as in Syria - killing forces there legitimately fighting terrorists, not attacking wedding parties, funerals, coffee-shops, hospitals, journalists and civilians. You know, all the stuff that got those illegally attacked-for-corporate-profiteering all riled up in the first place.
And some reparation for the affected people wouldn't hurt.
This wasn't about kissing and making up; this was about starting to do a little of the right thing here and there, for a change.
Edit: and I was thinking along the lines of individuals given aid with which to start small businesses, not bottom-level corporate jobs, if you'd derived that impression.
If in areas with arable land and water, market-gardens might be an idea, food being a nice thing for people to have.
There are so many corporate-proxy 'wars' in different places, specifics would clearly vary from one place to another. Not that I know anything about about it. I only know that the right thing to do involves stopping the attacks-for-profit termed 'wars' and providing some reparation directly to and for the people harmed. And for the long-drained and abused American people and country.
#8.1
just be thrilled to kiss and make up with the people that destroyed their country. And since we don't control fuck all over there, we'll just give them imaginary places to live and fake jobs. In their own homelands. Control of which started this mess in the first place. That should pacify the people that despise us.
Tell me, even if it were practical or possible, do you think their mindset is "So what you killed my family? Not a big thing. Thanks for a house and a job."
up
0 users have voted.
—
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
@Ellen North
And common sense says we should NEVER have been funding ANY terrorists in Syria or anyplace else. We hardly care who dies in our proxy wars anymore. No matter who we kill, they're ALL terrorists when the official press statement is read.
We are stuck in an endless 'war on terror' of our own making. We're not going to be able to buy our way out of this one. This isn't like Vietnam where once we left the country and peace was declared, it was over and done. We've made enemies in the Middle East that teach their children that the way to heaven is the killing of the 'infidel'. Hate, revenge, and religion are forces that no amount of 'reparations' is going to stifle. I don't know what we can do to solve this situation, but waving a few bucks in front of the faces of these people that we've bombed and terrorized for so long, and who swear eternal hatred toward us, probably isn't going fix the situation we find ourselves in. But it might make us feel better about our barbarity and greed.
Gotta agree with you, but not arming and training these terrorists would be a start, as would be not - as in Syria - killing forces there legitimately fighting terrorists, not attacking wedding parties, funerals, coffee-shops, hospitals, journalists and civilians. You know, all the stuff that got those illegally attacked-for-corporate-profiteering all riled up in the first place.
And some reparation for the affected people wouldn't hurt.
This wasn't about kissing and making up; this was about starting to do a little of the right thing here and there, for a change.
Edit: and I was thinking along the lines of individuals given aid with which to start small businesses, not bottom-level corporate jobs, if you'd derived that impression.
If in areas with arable land and water, market-gardens might be an idea, food being a nice thing for people to have.
There are so many corporate-proxy 'wars' in different places, specifics would clearly vary from one place to another. Not that I know anything about about it. I only know that the right thing to do involves stopping the attacks-for-profit termed 'wars' and providing some reparation directly to and for the people harmed. And for the long-drained and abused American people and country.
up
0 users have voted.
—
I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks
Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa
the people ISIS and Al Qaeda are killing, torturing, and beheading are not just American infidels or U.S. contractors. Most of the people they're slaughtering are their own countrymen who refuse to join them in the slaughter.
It's an armed fight between heavily funded jihadists against peaceful protesters for democracy, in a sense, against the poor and against women and children, against shopkeepers and farmers dealing with drought. In a word, it's a slaughter of the Kurds, because the Kurds have tried to move in the direction of democracy, women's rights, and human progress.
ISIS is the U.S. and Saudi Arabia's answer to the Arab Spring, the peaceful protest for democracy. That's how I see it. The individuals within ISIS may be anything from foreign mercenaries to impoverished zealots. But their power comes from Langley.
#8.1.1.1
And common sense says we should NEVER have been funding ANY terrorists in Syria or anyplace else. We hardly care who dies in our proxy wars anymore. No matter who we kill, they're ALL terrorists when the official press statement is read.
We are stuck in an endless 'war on terror' of our own making. We're not going to be able to buy our way out of this one. This isn't like Vietnam where once we left the country and peace was declared, it was over and done. We've made enemies in the Middle East that teach their children that the way to heaven is the killing of the 'infidel'. Hate, revenge, and religion are forces that no amount of 'reparations' is going to stifle. I don't know what we can do to solve this situation, but waving a few bucks in front of the faces of these people that we've bombed and terrorized for so long, and who swear eternal hatred toward us, probably isn't going fix the situation we find ourselves in. But it might make us feel better about our barbarity and greed.
the people ISIS and Al Qaeda are killing, torturing, and beheading are not just American infidels or U.S. contractors. Most of the people they're slaughtering are their own countrymen who refuse to join them in the slaughter.
It's an armed fight between heavily funded jihadists against peaceful protesters for democracy, in a sense, against the poor and against women and children, against shopkeepers and farmers dealing with drought. In a word, it's a slaughter of the Kurds, because the Kurds have tried to move in the direction of democracy, women's rights, and human progress.
ISIS is the U.S. and Saudi Arabia's answer to the Arab Spring, the peaceful protest for democracy. That's how I see it. The individuals within ISIS may be anything from foreign mercenaries to impoverished zealots. But their power comes from Langley.
up
0 users have voted.
—
I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks
Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa
and in particular Saudi Arabia, with armaments and cover, and here are links to the DIA report on policy, to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's email describing Saudi support, and to Vice President Biden's remarks about the same problem. Thanks for your patience. I hope to do more linkage here on this.
2012 Defense Intelligence Agency document: West will facilitate rise of Islamic State “in order to isolate the Syrian regime”
May 19, 2015 by Brad Hoff
… The DIA report, formerly classified “SECRET//NOFORN” and dated August 12, 2012, was circulated widely among various government agencies, including CENTCOM, the CIA, FBI, DHS, NGA, State Dept., and many others.
The document shows that as early as 2012, U.S. intelligence predicted the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL or ISIS), but instead of clearly delineating the group as an enemy, the report envisions the terror group as a U.S. strategic asset.
… this is the highest level internal U.S. intelligence confirmation of the theory that western governments fundamentally see ISIS as their own tool for regime change in Syria. The document matter-of-factly states just that scenario.
Forensic evidence, video evidence, as well as recent admissions of high-level officials involved… have since proven the State Department and CIA’s material support of ISIS terrorists on the Syrian battlefield going back to at least 2012 and 2013 (for a clear example of “forensic evidence”: see UK-based Conflict Armament Research’s report which traced the origins of Croatian anti-tank rockets recovered from ISIS fighters back to a Saudi/CIA joint program via identifiable serial numbers).
On Aug 17, 2014 3:50 PM, "H" wrote:
Note: Sources include Western intelligence, US intelligence and sources in the region.
… While this military/para-military operation is moving forward, we need to use our diplomatic and more traditional intelligence assets to bring pressure on the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to ISIL and other radical Sunni groups in the region...
… Referring to Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, Biden said,
“They were so determined to take down Assad and essentially have a proxy Sunni-Shia war, what did they do? They poured hundreds of millions of dollars and tens, thousands of tons of weapons into anyone who would fight against Assad—except that the people who were being supplied were al Nusra and al Qaeda and the extremist elements of jihadis coming from other parts of the world.”
… Whatever the level of “intentionality” involved, ISIS was the recipient of the US-supported arms aid to the Syrian rebels, routed by the CIA through Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Turkey and other Mideast client states. The State Department and CIA were well aware that the Syrian rebels included many Islamic militants, including those linked to al-Qaeda, because it had previously employed many of these fighters in the overthrow of the Gaddafi regime in Libya in 2011.
Originally established as Al Qaeda in Iraq during the eight years of warfare that followed the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, the group only took the name ISIS in April 2013, long after it had built up significant strength in Syria as part of the US-backed rebel forces fighting the Assad regime.
#8.1.1.1.1.1
al Quada and it's rebel army fighting Assad I know about. I didn't know we were financing and arming ISIS/ISIL.
Got a link so I can read up on that? I'm not saying you're wrong. I just would like to see how it works.
Comments
This should be interesting.
First Bernie, then Trump, next up Gabbard.
I hate to be a muckracker, and an outlier at this site, but I'll say the same things I said about Gabbard as I said about Sanders.
Those that were here first know what I'm talking about with that, not necessarily why I'm saying it relative to Gabbard. I think if you listen carefully, you'll hear something else, like with Bernie.
"a war we must win" ? BOHICA
this LP had so many grooves, a lot of turntable needles needed replacing.
peace
Edited to remove any subtlety: at 2:45 "this is a war against terrorists who've declared war on America, and it's a war we must win." NO, no more wars! Especially not religious wars, she said Jihad not me.
The Initiation LP really did require new needles, there was a warning that came with it, grooves were very narrow so ruined with a worn needle.
Posting Eastern Intrigue was attempt at witty song reply, ker-plunk! hmph
Some words:
You know, Al, you are as clear in your wording
(redacted half of this comment, because ...)
as the mud in the swamp. People speak insider EB-style Chinese to me and I don't understand Chinese, nor will I try to learn it.
I think Gabbard speaks plainly and clearly. I think Sanders spoke plainly and clearly. And to try to find reasons why they both might have been corrupted or undermined, sounds like .... never mind.
@Big Al No more Democrats. No
No more Democrats. No more Republicans.
If we troop faithfully back into the Democratic party because Tulsi and Nina are there....well.
In that case, we might as well abandon any notion that we are activists of any kind, much less left-wing ones.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
would it make any difference as to how we win it?
like fighting it as a law enforcement action rather than how it's
being waged now? fighting it with the help of the countries where it
is being waged, maybe if we globalized this fight with the rest of the
world behind us instead of basically doing this unilaterally, have China
Russia, Iran, Israel, SA, gulf states all involved in stopping the madness?
I never knew that the term "Never Again" only pertained to
those born Jewish
"Antisemite used to be someone who didn't like Jews
now it's someone who Jews don't like"
Heard from Margaret Kimberley
I think "winning" it is the wrong way to look at it.
The 9/11 attack definitely should have been handled as a law enforcement operation (which should have included looking at our own government's involvement). But it was clearly used as justification to wages wars in the M.E., North Africa and beyond. They've never had any intention of winning this war OF terror, it's always been a cover for other imperialist actions and for Israel. Our government and others fund, train, arm, supply, organize, provide intelligence, coordinate with and actually work with these "terrorists", most of which are simply paid mercenaries. Reports have indicated up to 90% don't even know what's in the Koran, let alone practice radical islam.
It strains credulity that after over 15 years, the U.S. and allies still have not "won" this war against maybe 20-50K fighters to the point that Trump is making it the centerpiece of his foreign policy and justification for greatly rebuilding the military.
Gabbard knows all this, like Bernie does, and yet they will not confront it and in effect support this fake war OF terror as cover for U.S. imperialism and U.S. hegemony over the planet.
OK
I wrote "win" and shoulda wrote "fight" but otherwise I fully agree with you.
I never knew that the term "Never Again" only pertained to
those born Jewish
"Antisemite used to be someone who didn't like Jews
now it's someone who Jews don't like"
Heard from Margaret Kimberley
No problem,
I was more referring to Gabbard saying "winning".
Muckraker? Do tell
I'd love to see the evidence of corruption you have on her. I believe I've heard she's ex military, and something else I seriously can't remember. Spill it, Al; and help me recall.
The majority of her speech
The majority of her speech was good, but the qualifier about the war on terrorism is a war we must win negates much of the rest of the speech. The war on terrorism is exactly why we have terrorism along with the fact that the United States and its allies in the Middle East are sponsors of terrorism and terrorist groups.
Gabbard does go a long way in denouncing much of US foreign policy, but I wish just one politician had the courage to actually say it out loud that fighting terrorism is not a war we can or should win when we are the main promoters of terrorism ourselves.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
why "the war on terrorism is a war we must win"
isn't going to change to a quote like you wished to hear, ie "fighting terrorism is not a war we can or should win".
How many livelihoods and jobs are dependent on working in any way or fashion for the corporations and government agencies and armed forces who are related to the task of "fighting terrorism", be it in the CIA, NSA, FBI, Armed Forces, Corporations, who produce weapons and IT technology and maintain the wwww technoloty etc.
The only solution to this dilemma is for all people, whose jobs indirectly or directly are related to activities that facilitate wars against terrorism, to become independent farmers. But they don't own land. The government and corporational overlords own the land. Seems to me that is the end of the story.
I think, it's unrealistic that any politician will utter the words "fighting terrorism is not a war we can or should win" and I am not that willing to jump on the bandwagon to blame Gabbard for that "conditional sentence" she used. She tries and Sanders tried. What help is it to blame them for trying?
And just think about how many 'little people' listen to Gabbard's speech anyhow. The little people might miss Gabbards words, but they won't miss, if they lose their jobs, gigs, contracts, homes etc.
The 99 (or at least 2/3 of the 99) percent are already enslaved. They don't and can't determine in what kind of terroristic wars their government, military and corporations are engaged in. How to get out of that enslavement is THE question for each individual citizen. I haven't found or read an answer to that question. Do you?
PS. Since when did we have a war on terrorism in the US? Or when became that war part of the public's conscience? Before 9/11 or after?
Before 9/11, 1993 World Trade Center. Bill Clinton
"Since when did we have a war on terrorism in the US?" The list goes back a long way probably. This is TV coverage from the first trade center bombing, talks about Waco too. Come all without, come all within. Sheesh. Anyway, it was Eisenhower that warned first about the Military Industrial Complex - that I think is what drives the War of Terror - so five decades at least.
1993 World Trade Center bombing Good Morning America coverage 3/1/93
yes, but those were your own
nutcase idiots. Not an attack that caused the US to go overseas and start a war on foreign territory, because they had proven that the terrorists were foreign nationals, brownish, muslim or other foreign people "evil doers" from overseas.
I am too lazy, I remember WACO, I don't remember the first Trade Center attack that well and don't know who was the supposed terrorist attacker.
Don't think all this compared to the situations between 2001 to 2016.
"who was the supposed terrorist attacker" he's dead
this happened a few weeks ago, if you were serious. I'm not trying to pick a fight or be contrary. Just for your information: 'Blind sheikh' convicted in 1993 World Trade bombing dies in U.S. prison
peace
oh, yes, now I remember, sorry for having
(edited for a rather funny mistake, added the word NOT)
the first signs of dementia, otherwise called unexpected memory lapses. I guess I am just NOT up to the task. My only critique was meant to say that I don't believe that for the little people outside the US the first attack on the WW center is much ingrained in their memory or understood for the beginning of the war on terror. I see little people here in Germany. They wouldn't be able to follow most of the discussions here. I try, but get tired of it. Why is it important to rate the Presidents?
My comment
My comment is not pie in the sky, but is grounded in the reality of identifying the root cause of terrorism. You cannot solve a problem until you actually identify what IS the problem. All we have to do is look at our (the West's) history in the Middle East to see why there is so much resentment toward the West.
Going in and destroying countries and killing their citizens (up to one million civilians in Iraq alone) is not going to stop terrorism. It breeds terrorism instead. Yes, the MIC has a huge investment in keeping these wars going. As for jobs for all those who work in the MIC industry, there is a very good solution. A massive infrastructure program here in the US, particularly looking a shift off fossil fuels to clear renewable energy sources would provide more than enough jobs for those currently working in the armaments industry.
The problem is not jobs, but is the outrageous profits that these companies earn off of killing people. They keep it flowing by lining the pockets of our elected and appointed officials. It is corruption and we need to start calling it that.
Most Americans have no idea of how horrible our foreign policy is toward people in the Middle East nor the costs associated with that policy. I learned this first hand in my four and a half years with the Peace vigil. The vast majority were shocked when I told them of the real costs of these wars and how many innocent people are being slaughtered in these wars. The American people need a huge wake up call.
So let them all become farmers and it still does not solve the problem because the real problem has been wrongly identified to them. And yes, all of this angers me to no end, so I apologize in advance if I am offending anyone here. I did not spend four and a half years in a Peace vigil not to take a hard stand against these illegal wars.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
dear gulfgal98, I read your excellent comments
since I came here (and that's quite a while ago) and my comment was not directed against you. I think that readers, here at least, know by now the root causes of terrorism. It's basically explained here several times a day.
Please accept my apologies if you felt offended by my comment. It was just a sign of frustration of listening to blaming people I think have not deserved it the most. Gabbard to me has not deserved that critique, even if your argument is logic and her sentence you quote is in your opinion reason enough to say it "wipes out everything else she said".
I will not blame Sanders, Gabbard and Nina Turner for what they are saying or have said in the past. I remember that way back I was amazed at Chris Hedges clear criticism of Sanders to run with the Democrats. I didn't understand it back then, but do now. The educational mission to let people know they have been betrayed by the democratic party and its leaders and with it personal blame going towards individual politicians isn't as necessary for me than may be for others. The discussions of the internal split in the democratic party, how one can push back, either externally of the democratic party with movements or third party creations or internally is hard for me to stay focussed on. It doesn't help me to find solutions. That's what caused my frustration.
I read here every day. It's impossible even for the most closed-minded people to not understand your words and be in full agreement with them. What I am tired of is that there is not the next step, leaving the look back and hindsight blame behind, and looking for plans to change the structural system that allows a small elitist oligarchy to run your country's policies and allows them to finance the war on terror in foreign countries on foreign territory with your own soldiers and your own money. They (the soldiers) have the trauma to live with their own memories of having to kill people they don't want to kill. I am getting mad to see my own country's (German) politicians now having to discuss if they should "shoot too", as that seems to be what the Americans want them to do as NATO members or US allies.
We don't disagree at all. I am just more tired than most. I can look from the outside and have less capabilities to look like you from the inside. I have neither history knowledge nor much memory of the Clinton Presidency aside from the tabloid trash reporting.
Do you remember the interview mentioned in the latest EB of Glen Greenwald by Charles Tucker? If you listen carefully to the end, you will hear those feelings I have reflected between TC 4:15 to the end. Last sentence of Tucker at 4:59: "May be you have to travel all to Rio de Janeiro to see that clearly". I thought the way I remember Charles Tucker that was an amazing or amusing way to end his interview. Made even Glen Greenwald chuckling. May be Tucker will be Glen Greenwald's neighbor soon, if he keeps asking people like Greenwald questions that are revealing some truth. /s (I am joking, Charles Tucker is not my kind of guy...)
I am sorry that you couldn't imagine that I agree with your thoughts and arguments, but was just tired of hitting Gabbard for her "contradictory sentences". She is a politician. That's all. I don't blame a politician to be a politician. What would that help?
Ok, I am taking a break. It was not my intention to offend you at all. If I have I apologize for it.
We must feel free to criticize
We must feel free to criticize our politicians, even those we may like. And I do like Tulsi Gabbard for her taking a stand against regime change and marching to her own drummer in support of Bernie during the primaries. However, by saying we must win the war on terror, she is falling into the trap of back handed support of continued wars under the guise of fighting terrorism. As I posted above, I liked everything else she said, but that one qualifier ends up being a gaping hole through which a Mack truck could be driven.
I am not insulted or angry about your comment to which I responded, but I am very passionate about being anti-war and felt I needed to correct what I perceived as being erroneous. My strong anti-war stance is not personal as if I know or knew someone killed in these wars, but it is something that is a part of my own personal moral code. We are killing far too many innocent people under the guise of fighting terrorism and these innocent people, including children, are simply considered collateral damage. They are not collateral damage, but were real living, breathing human beings just like you and me. They deserve the same human rights that we supposedly enjoy, including the right to life.
I am rarely on in the evenings, but I had already seen the interview of Glenn Greenwald by Tucker Carlson. Glenn is totally correct that the Democrats offered zero reason for people to vote FOR them. This has been going on a long time and not even the mid term blood bath of 2014 made them assess what they were doing wrong. They can't because they are too addicted to big money, so they have been relying on identity politics. It no longer works when the majority of this country is struggling to keep their heads above water.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
gulfgal98, thank you for this kind and thorough response
I have nothing that I could add to that. Unfortunately. I wished I had more to say and could express it as eloquently as you do. What I will do so, is listening closely to Gabbard. I hadn't so far and this exchange certainly gives me incentives to "look out for her".
I still like Gabbard
Please realize it not a case of I cannot trust her so I am throwing her under the bus, in my own mind. It is more that we all should pay close attention to what our elected officials say and be mindful that they are products of our political process which is allowing less and less leeway for independent thinking. If Gabbard or anyone else strays too far from the party line, they will try to oust her.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
,,,and I expect her to fight them
tooth and nails for the attempts to oust her. She will have to show her true colors and I believe she will.
@mimi
I think what's involved in that includes the complete lack of accountability or of even publicity granted the criminals responsible so that they can worsen every time, secure in the knowledge that they'll be considered 'above the law'.
That and the fact that they need to be identified and held accountable at long last in order to clean them out of the system and public policy, which includes foreign policy - now corrupted into a hostile corporate global take-over using public lives and other public resources.
This part is difficult because all branches of government, including the Supreme Court and many local politically appointed judges and civil employees (including police departments) have been corrupted and there are few, if any, officials to actually bring them to justice, so that citizen outrage must carry the day, if there is to be any chance, not only of introducing real democracy to America at long last, but of maintaining the chances of the survival of life on the planet even through this century.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
She's speaking for what I think is the actual Obama/Kerry
position, against the Bush/Clinton PNAC insanity. She's not aiming to stop the endless war paradigm, she's not pushing back against the War on Terror. What she's doing is presenting the saner version of Establishment foreign policy. In other words, she knows that the desire to upend civilizations and make them into failed states, big craters that spawn terrorist movements and refugees fleeing them (and us), is, well, crazy, and could lead to a hot war with Russia and apocalypse. Even if it doesn't, the benefits accrued by the few are not worth the chaos and destruction engendered by the incessant racking up of more and more failed states.
The good side of this is that it will be fewer people dead, and it will also back us off from World War III. (Though I'd be interested to see what she thinks about Crimea).
The bad side is that it won't stop the killing for money, which is basically what our wars are about now: filling some already-rich guys' pockets.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Thank you
Thank you stating what I tried to say in much clearer terms. Wars will not end if we simply shift from "regime change" to simply "fighting terrorism." Terrorism is a direct result of our long standing policies in the Middle East dictated by oligarchs who stand to gain financially from them.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
@gulfgal98 Right.
Right.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
right.
War on terrorism.
The stupidity of this conception boggles my mind.
WHAT is the enemy? Terror as a tool? Please. Let's have a war on bad weather.
Do something useful,YOU EVILF**KS.
"But Oceania has always been at war with TERRORISTS and their ISM.
We will win! It's just a matter of..."
aarrghh.
Soon we will graduate a high school class
for whom war has been the natural state of affairs.
No days off! Ever.
The war on terrorism
or as Big Al more correctly calls it, the War OF Terrorism.
It is war on an idea which means that there is no real defined enemy or state, only a moving target of an idea that requires we kill people who might adopt that idea. It is a self perpetuating cycle of bloodshed and killing with no end. It is a horrible state that our country has put us and the world in and it needs to stop. Only we can stop.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
@irishking
Thank you!
Personally, I think it sounds like just more corporate killing-off of competition in some area they'd like to have as an exclusive monopoly...
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Hey, muckrake away, Al!
I don't have time right now, but I'll try to locate and repost my EB blurb on Gabbard. My concern about her relates to her past stances on a couple of social justice/economic issues, since I don't closely follow issues relating to the MIC.
If Gabbard doesn't denounce the City Ordinance that she put forth and got passed, which the ACLU characterized as criminalizing homelessness, I would have a hard time lending her my support. Then again, I've pretty much given up on the Dem Party as a whole.
I do, however, respect the right of others to continue to work within the Dem Party. As they say,'To each, his own.'
Mollie
"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went."--Will Rogers
Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.
Being homeless in Hawaii in Gabbards
congressional district means that you disturb the precious tourists from spending their money in HI.
If you can write about those city ordonances I would be grateful. On top of that I doubt very much that tourists from Europe are interested in the investments of rich inverstors from NY, West Coast and Canada in shopping malls American style on the islands of Hawaii. They destroy everything what people search for in the nature of Hawaii's landscapes and parks. Tragic and annoying. Hawaii is one of the worst states to survive and not falling into poverty to become a homeless person. I like to hear suggestions, if Gabbard is criticized, of how to solve the problems of homelessness in Hawaii.
@Unabashed Liberal
Oh, boy... any support of criminalizing homelessness really is a deadly strike against her, indicative of actual pathology. Now wondering if she's allowed to say what she does as a false-hope dead end to nullify progressive efforts by redirection...
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Hi, Mimi - my only recommendation
is the obvious one, I suppose--increase funding to provide temporary and/or permanent housing for the homeless. Since I don't live there, I have no detailed or specific insight into the situation; but, I agree with the notion that 'tourism' was probably the impetus for the bill.
Here's an excerpt from Gabbard's Wikipedia bio,
Mollie
"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went."--Will Rogers
[my boldface and re-paragraphing]
Taro
Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.
thx. unabashed liberal,
thank you, because you made me read the whole Wikipedia entry for Tulsi Gabbard and I have to say after reading all about it, I am even more convinced that she didn't deserve the criticism she got.
I don't think it's my role as a non-citizen of the US to opine about her here, but so far from what I read in that bio, the criticism voiced here hasn't convinced me. She has a very interesting bio and considering her young age, she has shown way more courage than many to speak up with an independent mind. The only paragraph that made me want to throw up and throw eggs at Mr. Bannon was this:
Well, I hope she works with him in ways he deserves it. Let's just see who is the real American warrior of the two and who represents the Hawaiian little people (including the homeless ones) better.
The homeless in HI have to live somewhere. There is very little land mass. To build more ugly buildings to house the poor destroys much of HI's beauty. I doubt a homeless person would accept to live inside an ugly shelter, as mother nature and some of the Hawaiian laws allow them to live outside on public beaches and river banks and parks. Of course, if rich mainland investors wouldn't buy up all the land, increase land prices to the sky and laws were in place to prevent them from doing so, it would help. If you want to get the homeless out of sight, you can't just shuffle them into the Pacific or chase them away like you can do on the mainland. So, I don't see the in the city ordinance more than a method to try to keep those, who live on the public land and beaches, from littering with their belonging too much in the open and try to keep them somewhat orderly.
There is nowhere to go for those who can't pay the rental prices for an apartment in HI. Climate allows those who are therefore homeless to sleep in their cars or live outside. Sleeping in your car is not allowed and it causes the homeless to just move more away from the police and public eye and hide deeper in the woods and coves. I am sure Tulsi Gabbard is aware of that and tries to find a balance that satisfy the homeless, existing laws for native hawaiians and the tourist industry.
In any case, I don't know why people pick on her. I think it's petty.
@Unabashed Liberal
So no respect either for the sufferings of her fellow-citizens or for their Constitution? That does it for me.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
I support Tulsi Gabbard.
I agree with so much of what has been said here. I am a Very Angry Pacifist. There has not been a day in my life in which I have not believed war is the greatest crime on earth.
But when the war my country is raging on the world has led us to the brink of World War III, when our most recent Secretary of Defense has proposed making nuclear weapons "more useable," I take great hope when a military leader, or a veteran of this war who is in Congress, speaks out against the madness, the illegality, the failure to bring peace, the failure to bring democracy, the failure to improve ANYTHING, the failure to even destroy the enemy.
I support Gabbard especially for making the point that Democrats have been drawn into support for this war by descriptions of Assad's inhumanity, while our war has led to incalculably more human suffering.
I don't expect Michael Flynn, a career military professional, or Tulsi Gabbard, a veteran of the insane war we're running, to abandon their belief in war. But when they strongly criticize it, I am very grateful.
This is a good sign:
The 'war on terror' is real. We started it and now we have
to deal with it. Do people think we can just say 'oops' and walk away from all our psuedo-wars, weapons deals, and dronings? We can't just pick up our toys and go home. Not only have we destroyed and destabilized OTHER countries with all of our 'regime' changes, we have put this country in an extremely dangerous position as well. So even if we leave the Middle East we're still in the precarious position of having to defend ourselves from those THAT WANT TO GET EVEN for what we've been doing since we decided that we have the right to take down any sovereign government we want anywhere we want.
ISIS/ISIL/Daesh (whatever) is our enemy. So is al Quadea (even though the Obama decided to use them by giving them more bombs in bullets in his proxy war against Assad). They pose a grave threat to the West. Maybe they can't take it over, but they sure as hell can try to destroy as much of it as they can. Regardless of what some crazed Repubbie says about smuggling nukes in a bale of pot, the threat of being hit with a dirty bomb planted by these people is out there and it's real.
If people don't like the words 'war on terror' how about 'self-defense from those want to destroy the West'? How about plain old 'self-defense'? Or should we just say "well we deserve it, we started it"?
I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks
Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa
@Amanda Matthews
So, instead of arming and training terrorists and sending in armies/planes/drones to slaughter citizens, suppose America trains and supplies funding for dislocated/bombed-homeless civilians to start building replacement low-cost housing and small businesses in these countries? They could do this at home, too, couldn't they?
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Sure. I imagine ISIS/ISIL and the remnants of al Quada would
just be thrilled to kiss and make up with the people that destroyed their country. And since we don't control fuck all over there, we'll just give them imaginary places to live and fake jobs. In their own homelands. Control of which started this mess in the first place. That should pacify the people that despise us.
Tell me, even if it were practical or possible, do you think their mindset is "So what you killed my family? Not a big thing. Thanks for a house and a job."
I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks
Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa
@Amanda Matthews
Gotta agree with you, but not arming and training these terrorists would be a start, as would be not - as in Syria - killing forces there legitimately fighting terrorists, not attacking wedding parties, funerals, coffee-shops, hospitals, journalists and civilians. You know, all the stuff that got those illegally attacked-for-corporate-profiteering all riled up in the first place.
And some reparation for the affected people wouldn't hurt.
This wasn't about kissing and making up; this was about starting to do a little of the right thing here and there, for a change.
Edit: and I was thinking along the lines of individuals given aid with which to start small businesses, not bottom-level corporate jobs, if you'd derived that impression.
If in areas with arable land and water, market-gardens might be an idea, food being a nice thing for people to have.
There are so many corporate-proxy 'wars' in different places, specifics would clearly vary from one place to another. Not that I know anything about about it. I only know that the right thing to do involves stopping the attacks-for-profit termed 'wars' and providing some reparation directly to and for the people harmed. And for the long-drained and abused American people and country.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Where in the world did this 'corporate jobs' thing come from?
And common sense says we should NEVER have been funding ANY terrorists in Syria or anyplace else. We hardly care who dies in our proxy wars anymore. No matter who we kill, they're ALL terrorists when the official press statement is read.
We are stuck in an endless 'war on terror' of our own making. We're not going to be able to buy our way out of this one. This isn't like Vietnam where once we left the country and peace was declared, it was over and done. We've made enemies in the Middle East that teach their children that the way to heaven is the killing of the 'infidel'. Hate, revenge, and religion are forces that no amount of 'reparations' is going to stifle. I don't know what we can do to solve this situation, but waving a few bucks in front of the faces of these people that we've bombed and terrorized for so long, and who swear eternal hatred toward us, probably isn't going fix the situation we find ourselves in. But it might make us feel better about our barbarity and greed.
I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks
Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa
The thing is,
the people ISIS and Al Qaeda are killing, torturing, and beheading are not just American infidels or U.S. contractors. Most of the people they're slaughtering are their own countrymen who refuse to join them in the slaughter.
It's an armed fight between heavily funded jihadists against peaceful protesters for democracy, in a sense, against the poor and against women and children, against shopkeepers and farmers dealing with drought. In a word, it's a slaughter of the Kurds, because the Kurds have tried to move in the direction of democracy, women's rights, and human progress.
ISIS is the U.S. and Saudi Arabia's answer to the Arab Spring, the peaceful protest for democracy. That's how I see it. The individuals within ISIS may be anything from foreign mercenaries to impoverished zealots. But their power comes from Langley.
So now we're behind ISIS/ISIL now? Really?
al Quada and it's rebel army fighting Assad I know about. I didn't know we were financing and arming ISIS/ISIL.
Got a link so I can read up on that? I'm not saying you're wrong. I just would like to see how it works.
I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks
Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa
We support the Gulf states,
and in particular Saudi Arabia, with armaments and cover, and here are links to the DIA report on policy, to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's email describing Saudi support, and to Vice President Biden's remarks about the same problem. Thanks for your patience. I hope to do more linkage here on this.