Letters to the Editor
-
@Electro Robot
Cover Obama as if he is the Messiah.
I don't know if you're a long time reader of Glenn, but if you are you should remember that he's been accused of being a supporter of Ron Paul, Edwards, Dodd and Huckabee. They can't all be true...
Actually, GG's pretty consistent. He hates bogus journalism, so hit pieces that are petty and personality driven he'll call out, just like he'll call out a candidate's view being purposely ignored or distorted.
That he is saying the Obama coverage has now crossed into silly and petty is consistent.
-
Condi Rice and gender culture
Rice is one of the more fascinating actors in the whole drama. She participated in the whole fabricated premise, herself contributing "mushroom cloud." But, I do think that sexism helped shoulder her aside in favor of the evil-as-Nazis Cheney and Rumsfeld. (Nope, no apologies for the Nazi analogies. I wrote it and stand by it. Imagine where we'd be if the Iraq war was as succesful as Poland for the Germans.) When Rice did assert agency, the effect on the war was better--the push for a saner level of troop strength in order to hold the gains. Still, she's one of the bad ones, if not the evil ones.
There are a lot of gendered issues from top to the bottom in this conflict. I am frankly appalled by both Rice dumping the blame on Bush to Congress--but keeping her job, and by Clinton dumping the blame on, well,.whatever man is handy the day the question is asked.
-
Maybe the Media can help educate McSame?
Because the poor old man still seems confused... especially when it comes to those evil Shi'ites (i.e. Iran).
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/04/08/mccain-confused-about-al-qaeda-again-suggests-its-a-sect-of-shiites/
MCCAIN: Do you still view al Qaeda in Iraq as a major threat?
PETRAEUS: It is still a major threat, though it is certainly not as major a threat as it was say 15 months ago.
MCCAIN: Certainly not an obscure sect of the Shi’ites overall?
PETREAUS: No.
MCCAIN: Or Sunnis or anybody else.
Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran. It's cool though, McCain will fight endless wars and has the support of the Lobby, and even though Obama is throwing bones to the Zionists, doesn't have it:
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/giraldi.php?articleid=12647
Barack Obama has nevertheless been on the receiving end of more vitriol from the Israel Lobby than any other candidate, possibly because his middle name is Hussein and he lived in Indonesia. The Abe Foxmans of this world, sensitive to even the slightest whiff of disloyalty to Greater Israel, detect that Obama might not be completely faithful to the cause. On March 18, while delivering his highly praised speech on racism in America, Obama was forced to perform the ultimate obeisance, diverging wildly from his theme to condemn naysayers who see "the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam." Score a big one for stalwart ally Israel, whose subjugation and occupation of Arab Palestine apparently has nothing to do with anything.
...
One suspects, however, that Obama might well resent the way he has been treated by The Lobby and its friends, which has applied to him a litmus test on anti-Semitism that has not been applied to any other presidential candidate ever, not even Jesse Jackson.
While various people shed light on what really happened in Basra as Petraeus and Crocker bring their Dog and Pony show to Congress.
http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts04052008.html
Don't expect Congress to do anything except to egg on the attack [on Iran]. On April 3 the International Herald Tribune reported that senators and representatives have made millions of dollars from their investments in defense companies totaling $196 million. Rep. Ike Skelton, the Democrat chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, is already on board with the attack on Iran. The London Telegraph quotes Skelton: "Iran is the bull in the china shop. In all of this, they seem to have links to all of the Shi'ite groups, whether they be political or military."
...
Reporting from Tehran on April 4, Reuters quotes Mohsen Hakim, whose father, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, leads the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, an ally of the Maliki US puppetgovernment in Iraq: "Tehran, by using its positive influence on the Iraqi nation, paved the way for the return of peace to Iraq and the new situation is the result of Iran's efforts."
Instead of thanking Iran and working with Iran diplomatically to restore stability to Iraq, the Bush regime intends to expand the nightmare with a military attack on Iran. Ryan Crocker was quick to dispute Hakim's report that Iran had used its influence to end the fighting in Basra. Crocker alleged that Iran had started the fighting. The absurdity of Crocker's claim is obvious as even the neocon US media reported that the fighting in Basra was started by the US and Maliki in an effort to clear out the Shi'ite al-Sadr militias. Most experts saw the attack on al-Sadr for what it was: an effort to remove a potential threat to the US supply line from Kuwait in the event of a US attack on Iran.
...
The Bush regime will tell any lie and orchestrate any event in order to "finish the job" in the Middle East.
"Finishing the job" means to destroy the ability of Iraq, Iran, and Syria to provide support for the Palestinians and for Hezbollah in southern Lebanon against Israeli aggression. With Iraq and Iran in turmoil, Syria might simply give up and become another American client state. With Iraq and Iran in turmoil, Israel can steal the rest of the West Bank along with the water resources in southern Lebanon. That is what "the war on terror" is really about.
The continuing lie that the problems are due to imaginary "Special Groups" of secret Shi'ite terrorist splinter cells backed by Iran. I wonder if they have any tubes?
http://www.antiwar.com/porter/?articleid=12649
But the U.S. military's contention that "rogue elements" have been carrying out the resistance to coalition forces was refuted by Sadr himself in an interview with al-Jazeera aired March 29 in which he called for the release from U.S. detention of the individual previously identified by Petraeus as the head of the alleged breakaway faction.
The idea of Iranian-backed "rogue" Shi'ite militia groups undermining Sadr's efforts to pursue a more moderate course was introduced by the U.S. military command in early 2007. These alleged Iranian proxies were called "Special Groups" – a term that came not from Iran or the Shi'ites themselves but from the Bush administration.
In April, after U.S. forces captured a former spokesman for Sadr, Qais al-Khazali, Petraeus himself announced that they had detained "the head of the secret cell network, the extremist secret cells," he said. Petraeus referred to it as "the Khazali network."
U.S. military spokesman Brig. Gen. Kevin Bergner asserted in early July that Khazali's network was a "Special Group," which was financed, armed, and trained by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and in some instances was even "directed" by it. He said Iran was using a Hezbollah operative to organize such groups to do its bidding in Iran.
Looks like "Iranian WMD". Our potential future Leader of More Wars, the pic of McCain surrounded by Mossad agents is amusing to me:
http://judicial-inc.biz/83your_future_president.htm