But, from its first steps, the trip has been one of a people-to-government mission. The trip was made possible by an invitation of president Ahmadinejad, an invitation solicited by Code Pink in a September meeting between Ahmadinejad and a group of American peace activists. Having arrived in Iran, at least from their own reports (available on their blog), it seems that most of the people they are meeting are government people, or people whom the government has arranged for them to meet.
Another shortcoming is this: how about bringing some news of solidarity and hope to the people who most deserve and need it, those who are persecuted by the Iranian government? That would be a real people-to-people (social activist-to-social activist, that is) meeting of minds. Thousands of political prisoners languish in Iranian prisons without having committed any crime whatsoever, other than holding certain political beliefs at variance with the theocratic setup. The only reason they are in prison is related to those ideas; i.e., for activities such as speaking up against injustices practiced routinely in Iran. Does Code Pink, or any other U.S. leftists, feel any obligation to reach out to these people?
Code Pink has created a situation in which they are going along with a policy of no-arguments with a theocratic dictatorship, no criticisms and no explanations asked. It's an odious form of 'Don't ask, don't tell'.
Reza Fiyouzat nails willing dupes/puppets beautifully in "Code Pink in Iran" (Dissident Voice). The above was one of two truests nominations for Fiyouzat; however, it was noted that Jodie Evans replied to Fiyouzat's article.
Jodie, the Saint of Community Property, climbs up on the cross. The sainted one is in bold, we reply in regular type.
Reza, we did meet with many of the women who had been in jail and heard more of the horrors we had already known about.
Many? If you were told of horrors, we'd think you'd have a number, Jodie. Horror stories would need to be documented and passed on to human rights organizations like Amnesty so, again, we'd assume you could offer some specific numbers here. (We don't think she met with any.)
I had taken a previous trip where I met mostly with reformists and those who had spent many years in prison.
Reza was writing of your current trip. No one's interested in your credits, Jodie. What have you done lately?
Tho object of this trip was to create more opportunity for citizen diplomacy.
Then you would need to be meeting with -- pay attention, Jodie -- citizens. Not members of governments. You'd need to meet with the very people Reza said you should.
An important tool for change. This trip was to listen to many conversations from as many sectors of Iran as we could on a Gov't visa….one of the few ever issued.
Oh, how amazing, "one of the few ever issued." Generally, those sort of exceptions come with strings and dictates attached. Why don't you write about that aspect? If only to assure that there were none, we can't believe you refused to address that.
Of course Iran is under a repressive fundamentalist regime, we don’t need to meet with people to know how horrific that is. We have enough people we meet in the states who have told us those stories. The idea was to create more opportunities for connection.
With the government?
And with the ruling regime that needs to be done delicately.
Appears so.
Medea and I had both been denied a visa for just the reason you stated, we asked too many questions and confront the powers that be. So to even be allowed to enter was a success.
The Laverne and Shirley of the peace movement have been denied a visa for asking tough questions? Ha. But, here's the thing, Jodie. A number of us know the rude things Medea said when a woman from the Bay Area passed away in Iraq. How is what that woman was doing (which Medea attacked her for) different from what you and Medea are doing?
To say that CODEPINK is supportive of Obama is a misreading, while in Iran I was quoted in Politico about the Hillary Clinton appointment. One of the few people on the left to be speaking out.
Jodie, with the above you ensured that the ill-will towards your alleged peace group will harden. Lying in public? You personally contributed to Barack's run, you have attempted to establish a relationship with him and you used CODEPINK in so many ways to ensure his 'victory' in the Democratic Party primary. We are aware of that. Go lie elsewhere.
As for being "one fo the few people on the left to be speaking out" -- lying from the cross you climbed up on. You truly are a sick piece of work and a damn long way from the Jerry Brown presidential campaign. If the rumors are true that you've got to watch your money closely for the near future, we're overjoyed.
The suppression of rights, especially those of women, the horrific death penalty, the fundamentalist responses to life by the ruling regime of Iran are obviously something we would like to affect.
Again, Medea attacked a woman who died in Iraq -- after the woman's death -- and the woman's motives were very similar to the ones you give for "we". Is Medea planning to issue a public retraction of her previous verbal attack?
We met with many who are doing what they can within Iran. But they asked that it be from within that change happens. What we can do as Americans is create change within our own country and government, which is what was requested from us at every meeting.
Gee, Jodie, then why the hell don't you stop visiting Iran? Why don't you stop meddling? Why don't you stop putting these alleged citizens at risk -- the ones you claim to have met with?
We must work from where we are and from where we have the most leverage.
Working "from where we are" might require you to ask, "Where am I?"
Think on it.
There is much work to do.
Our goal is peace,
Maybe once upon a time. On kind days, we can think that. But the reality is all CODEPINK is now is your vanity trip. What did you do to end the illegal war in Iraq lately?
Oh, that's right. Just like CODEPINK let it fall off the radar in the summer of 2006 to grasshop over to Lebanon and then couldn't talk about anything else well through the fall of 2006, there's not much being done on Iraq now, is there?
You think those public outbursts at hearings -- one a Congressional hearing! -- accomplish anything? They're only ticking off former supporters (members of Congress). Instead of globe trotting and thinking you're the Red Cross, you might try picking one cause to focus on and we'd urge that to be the ACTUAL ONGOING ILLEGAL WAR. Until then, don't pretend your goal is peace.
And people are urged to read paola on the thread. Had we, we wouldn't have wasted so much time explaining Jodie's lies above, we would have just quoted him or her. Paola, we thank you for getting the truth out there. Wonderfully done.
Sunday, December 07, 2008
'Iraq deal will not end occupation' (Socialist Worker)
Last Tuesday, Great Britain's Socialist Worker published the following:
Iraq deal will not end occupation
The Iraqi parliament has approved the Status of Forces Agreement that sets a date for the withdrawal of US combat troops from the country by 31 December 2011.
The deal is being presented as an end to the US misadventure in Iraq.
But it does not mark the end of the occupation.
The US has had to back down on a series of Iraqi demands, including ending the immunity of the mercenaries who spread terror throughout the country, and giving Iraqis greater control over military operations.
The Iraqis were also able to set a timetable for withdrawal despite the objections of the neo-cons.
But although the deal gives the US an exit route from Iraq, thousands of US soldiers will remain in "advisory roles", and combat troops could return if the country was threatened by "internal revolt" or external threat.
It is no wonder that George Bush is said to be happy with the pact.
Both the Sunni resistance organisations, headed by the Association of Muslim Scholars, and Shia Muslim supporters of rebel cleric Moqtada al-Sadr have denounced the deal as "legitimising the occupation".
» email article » comment on article » printable version
© Copyright Socialist Worker (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original and leave this notice in place.
If you found this article useful please help us maintain SW by » making a donation.
top of page
Iraq deal will not end occupation
The Iraqi parliament has approved the Status of Forces Agreement that sets a date for the withdrawal of US combat troops from the country by 31 December 2011.
The deal is being presented as an end to the US misadventure in Iraq.
But it does not mark the end of the occupation.
The US has had to back down on a series of Iraqi demands, including ending the immunity of the mercenaries who spread terror throughout the country, and giving Iraqis greater control over military operations.
The Iraqis were also able to set a timetable for withdrawal despite the objections of the neo-cons.
But although the deal gives the US an exit route from Iraq, thousands of US soldiers will remain in "advisory roles", and combat troops could return if the country was threatened by "internal revolt" or external threat.
It is no wonder that George Bush is said to be happy with the pact.
Both the Sunni resistance organisations, headed by the Association of Muslim Scholars, and Shia Muslim supporters of rebel cleric Moqtada al-Sadr have denounced the deal as "legitimising the occupation".
» email article » comment on article » printable version
© Copyright Socialist Worker (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original and leave this notice in place.
If you found this article useful please help us maintain SW by » making a donation.
top of page
Highlights
This piece is written by Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude, Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix, Kat of Kat's Korner, Betty of Thomas Friedman is a Great Man, Mike of Mikey Likes It!, Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz, Ruth of Ruth's Report, Marcia of SICKOFITRADLZ, Stan of Oh Boy It Never Ends and Wally of The Daily Jot. Unless otherwise noted, we picked all highlights.
"I Hate The War" -- Jim's still attempting to talk Ava and C.I. into turning portions of this Thursday entry by C.I. into an essay here. They (Ava and C.I.) are exhausted and have completed one article and are trying to complete another one. We don't think Jim's getting his wish, but maybe after all of us go to bed, he'll find a way to convince them ("that they need to do their part and everyone else's?" asks Elaine).
"The word is bi-racial" -- Betty takes on the issue she's been at the forefront on for two years now. She and C.I. did pitch the story topic she writes about here and, though they had to pitch it five to six different ways, they finally sold Jim and Dona on it.
"Baked Acorn Squash in the Kitchen" -- Trina. She's covering the economy and cooking and she's just asked, "Is there time to do the feature?" She and C.I. had an idea for something here but her granddaughter got sick and Trina wasn't able to participate last night.
"the juice" -- Rebecca covers O.J. Seriously. And that's fine. Someone dropping by for O.J. is going to find the snapshot attached. That's why we all repost the snapshot. (And we happen to love this post by Rebecca.)
"Jenny Matsui leaves a comment" and "Stupid Dissident Voice and Jenny Matsui" -- Marcia and her stalker Jenny Matsui.
"The LemonDrop Kid" -- Stan's Friday movie post. A pleasure to read. Don't miss it. (Cedric adds, "Don't miss The LemonDrop Kid either! Very funny movie. That was one of three movies we had on videotape when my grandparents got a VCR finally. I watched it over and it was a good year before there were any more purchases though there were rentals during that time.")
"It's not that easy, Alex" -- Elaine makes no secret of the fact that when C.I. lets The Common Ills go dark, Elaine's out of here. She's ready to quit blogging. She's not a good blogger (in her opinion) and blah, blah, blah. But she only has to do one piece like this to remind us why we all rate her so much higher than she does herself. And this is one of two superior posts she had this week.
"Musical thoughts" -- Kat writing a little about her CD reviews last week ("Kat's Korner: Break Up The Ass Kiss" and "Kat's Korner: Labelle's neither 'back' nor 'now'").
"Iraq, Chuck" and "heroes" -- As noted in this week's mailbag, Mike covers Chuck, Rebecca covers Heroes. Those are their shows, the ones they try not to miss. Their own private shows. :D (A joke about how Elaine -- she and Mike live together -- is stuck watching both. Heroes because Rebecca needs someone to discuss it with and Chuck because Mike's always saying, "Come watch it with me.")
"THIS JUST IN! PAT BUCHANAN WANTS TO BE DR. PHIL!" &" "Patrick Buchanan's envy problems" -- We're getting real sick of this pathological Hillary hatred. It's old, it's tired. And who the hell on the left is listening to Patty Buchanan anyway? Why is he being posted at left sites to begin with? When did he become a 'trusted' voice for the left?
"Mark the calendar, New York Times provides some truths" -- C.I.'s Thursday morning entry was so important and popular, Jeremy Scahill had to rewrite it the following day for CounterPunch. As the old Robert Wagner show advised us, It Takes a Thief.
"the liar tina fey" -- Rebecca's very popular post. It was the second most requested highlight here after C.I.'s "I Hate The War."
"Jeb plans for his future (not ours)" -- Ruth breaks it down. Seriously, if you are worried about Jeb continuing the dynasty, you need to start getting the word out now. Not when he's running for president.
"A game marketed too late" -- Kat's post about a bored game ("Bored" used intentionally) that's about ten years too late.
"Kwame hits the fan again!" -- Kwame can't even stick to his plea bargain.
"She rocks" & "THIS JUST IN! YEAH, SHE IS A ROCK STAR!" and "Sarah Palin" -- Cedric, Wally and Marcia note Sarah Palin's drawing power and impact.
"Sheehan," "Warnings, Cindy Sheehan, etc." and "Mark the calendar, New York Times provides some truths" -- Elaine, Mike and C.I. offer that if you refused to call out Barack while allowing your sick Hillary Hatred to run wild, you really need to take some accountability and treating Hillary (a Sec of State nominee) as though she were president in your current writings is more evidence of just how sick your hatred is.
"Paul Street, Katrina vanden Heuvel, Isaiah" -- Ruth was exhausted (and depressed) the night she blogged. Marcia told her to do something easy. Rebecca heard about it and called and suggested comics. We like this post. And, no, they don't all have to be essays.
"Too little too late from Matty?" -- Yes, Stan knows he wrote this. He's gotten several e-mails asking if he forgot he needs to answer. He's still attempting to decide whether it's too late for Matthew Rothschild. He'll try to pick it up next week.
"Iraq snapshot" -- If we pick this up, Ty explained, it would help. There were many questions about this that he wanted to include in the mailbag. But the first question of that feature (as you'll see) resulted in C.I. answering. C.I. does not like to be the only one speaking. So Ty had to ditch several planned e-mail topics and questions. This was one. Rebecca, Wally and Kat are helping to write this feature and they were present for the writing of Friday's snapshot. (As were Ava and, of course C.I.) This is not C.I.'s replies. But they can offer their own perspective of what happened. In the snapshot (the best part, Wally and Cedric say and they wanted to highlight it but C.I. asked them not to), C.I. does a lengthy section on Moqtada al-Sadr and his status. The backstory. That wasn't planned for the snapshot. The first five sentences of that section were written after the last part. Here's what happened, the snapshot was being quickly dictated and C.I. was using the other ear for another cell while returning messages. A friend on Barack's transition team wanted C.I.'s opinion about al-Sadr's current political status. C.I. said, "Hold on." And returned the call. While C.I. was explaining it, Ava (who was holding the phone with C.I.'s friend on the other end) said into the phone, "Go ahead and write it down." She then held the phone up to C.I. who was talking into the other cell phone about al-Sadr. When that call was done, C.I. was informed a portion was in the snapshot, C.I. quickly dictated the first five sentences and changed some other words here and there. Some people e-mailing feel that C.I. is "worshipping" al-Sadr and some feel C.I. is not giving al-Sadr any credit. C.I. has no personal opinion of al-Sadr. Those comments are about the status al-Sadr holds. Don't read it as a personal endorsement of al-Sadr or some sort of slam against him.
"I Hate The War" -- Jim's still attempting to talk Ava and C.I. into turning portions of this Thursday entry by C.I. into an essay here. They (Ava and C.I.) are exhausted and have completed one article and are trying to complete another one. We don't think Jim's getting his wish, but maybe after all of us go to bed, he'll find a way to convince them ("that they need to do their part and everyone else's?" asks Elaine).
"The word is bi-racial" -- Betty takes on the issue she's been at the forefront on for two years now. She and C.I. did pitch the story topic she writes about here and, though they had to pitch it five to six different ways, they finally sold Jim and Dona on it.
"Baked Acorn Squash in the Kitchen" -- Trina. She's covering the economy and cooking and she's just asked, "Is there time to do the feature?" She and C.I. had an idea for something here but her granddaughter got sick and Trina wasn't able to participate last night.
"the juice" -- Rebecca covers O.J. Seriously. And that's fine. Someone dropping by for O.J. is going to find the snapshot attached. That's why we all repost the snapshot. (And we happen to love this post by Rebecca.)
"Jenny Matsui leaves a comment" and "Stupid Dissident Voice and Jenny Matsui" -- Marcia and her stalker Jenny Matsui.
"The LemonDrop Kid" -- Stan's Friday movie post. A pleasure to read. Don't miss it. (Cedric adds, "Don't miss The LemonDrop Kid either! Very funny movie. That was one of three movies we had on videotape when my grandparents got a VCR finally. I watched it over and it was a good year before there were any more purchases though there were rentals during that time.")
"It's not that easy, Alex" -- Elaine makes no secret of the fact that when C.I. lets The Common Ills go dark, Elaine's out of here. She's ready to quit blogging. She's not a good blogger (in her opinion) and blah, blah, blah. But she only has to do one piece like this to remind us why we all rate her so much higher than she does herself. And this is one of two superior posts she had this week.
"Musical thoughts" -- Kat writing a little about her CD reviews last week ("Kat's Korner: Break Up The Ass Kiss" and "Kat's Korner: Labelle's neither 'back' nor 'now'").
"Iraq, Chuck" and "heroes" -- As noted in this week's mailbag, Mike covers Chuck, Rebecca covers Heroes. Those are their shows, the ones they try not to miss. Their own private shows. :D (A joke about how Elaine -- she and Mike live together -- is stuck watching both. Heroes because Rebecca needs someone to discuss it with and Chuck because Mike's always saying, "Come watch it with me.")
"THIS JUST IN! PAT BUCHANAN WANTS TO BE DR. PHIL!" &" "Patrick Buchanan's envy problems" -- We're getting real sick of this pathological Hillary hatred. It's old, it's tired. And who the hell on the left is listening to Patty Buchanan anyway? Why is he being posted at left sites to begin with? When did he become a 'trusted' voice for the left?
"Mark the calendar, New York Times provides some truths" -- C.I.'s Thursday morning entry was so important and popular, Jeremy Scahill had to rewrite it the following day for CounterPunch. As the old Robert Wagner show advised us, It Takes a Thief.
"the liar tina fey" -- Rebecca's very popular post. It was the second most requested highlight here after C.I.'s "I Hate The War."
"Jeb plans for his future (not ours)" -- Ruth breaks it down. Seriously, if you are worried about Jeb continuing the dynasty, you need to start getting the word out now. Not when he's running for president.
"A game marketed too late" -- Kat's post about a bored game ("Bored" used intentionally) that's about ten years too late.
"Kwame hits the fan again!" -- Kwame can't even stick to his plea bargain.
"She rocks" & "THIS JUST IN! YEAH, SHE IS A ROCK STAR!" and "Sarah Palin" -- Cedric, Wally and Marcia note Sarah Palin's drawing power and impact.
"Sheehan," "Warnings, Cindy Sheehan, etc." and "Mark the calendar, New York Times provides some truths" -- Elaine, Mike and C.I. offer that if you refused to call out Barack while allowing your sick Hillary Hatred to run wild, you really need to take some accountability and treating Hillary (a Sec of State nominee) as though she were president in your current writings is more evidence of just how sick your hatred is.
"Paul Street, Katrina vanden Heuvel, Isaiah" -- Ruth was exhausted (and depressed) the night she blogged. Marcia told her to do something easy. Rebecca heard about it and called and suggested comics. We like this post. And, no, they don't all have to be essays.
"Too little too late from Matty?" -- Yes, Stan knows he wrote this. He's gotten several e-mails asking if he forgot he needs to answer. He's still attempting to decide whether it's too late for Matthew Rothschild. He'll try to pick it up next week.
"Iraq snapshot" -- If we pick this up, Ty explained, it would help. There were many questions about this that he wanted to include in the mailbag. But the first question of that feature (as you'll see) resulted in C.I. answering. C.I. does not like to be the only one speaking. So Ty had to ditch several planned e-mail topics and questions. This was one. Rebecca, Wally and Kat are helping to write this feature and they were present for the writing of Friday's snapshot. (As were Ava and, of course C.I.) This is not C.I.'s replies. But they can offer their own perspective of what happened. In the snapshot (the best part, Wally and Cedric say and they wanted to highlight it but C.I. asked them not to), C.I. does a lengthy section on Moqtada al-Sadr and his status. The backstory. That wasn't planned for the snapshot. The first five sentences of that section were written after the last part. Here's what happened, the snapshot was being quickly dictated and C.I. was using the other ear for another cell while returning messages. A friend on Barack's transition team wanted C.I.'s opinion about al-Sadr's current political status. C.I. said, "Hold on." And returned the call. While C.I. was explaining it, Ava (who was holding the phone with C.I.'s friend on the other end) said into the phone, "Go ahead and write it down." She then held the phone up to C.I. who was talking into the other cell phone about al-Sadr. When that call was done, C.I. was informed a portion was in the snapshot, C.I. quickly dictated the first five sentences and changed some other words here and there. Some people e-mailing feel that C.I. is "worshipping" al-Sadr and some feel C.I. is not giving al-Sadr any credit. C.I. has no personal opinion of al-Sadr. Those comments are about the status al-Sadr holds. Don't read it as a personal endorsement of al-Sadr or some sort of slam against him.
Sunday, November 30, 2008
Truest statement of the week
I don't buy Barack Obama as the Messiah. I didn't vote for him (I voted for another Afro-American) and I haven't filed an application to join his regime. He ran a duplicitous, multi-million dollar campaign that masqueraded as a social movement and because it was a gimmick and a shuck, will thwart and demoralize the re-creation of real social movement for years to come.The suckers packed shoulder to shoulder in Grant Park on Election Night were not a movement. 40 years ago, the Left stood in that park and were burning American flags, not waving them -- although the reasons were equally specious. Back then, it was the denial of another false Messiah's rightful place on the Democratic Party ticket. We ran a pig for president to underscore our disdain for the electoral process and when Mayor Dailey's cops kidnapped and barbecued our candidate, we turned to yet another Afro-American who was also not the Messiah. In August 1968, the Mayor of Chicago, whose son is now Barack Obama's most trusted political advisor, sent in the real pigs to beat us into the Grant Park grass like so many baby harp seals.
Now that was a social movement…
-- John Ross, "Obama in Bedlam" (CounterPunch).
Now that was a social movement…
-- John Ross, "Obama in Bedlam" (CounterPunch).
Editorial: The Treaty
Thursday, the treaty masquerading as the Status Of Forces Agreement passed the Iraqi Parliament and some form of the treaty was also finally released to the American people. The next step in Iraq for the treaty is to go before the presidency council which will approve it or nix it.
While that awaits, the press continues their lying on the treaty and, as Ruth noted, the press is deliberately lying by going out of their way to ignore the same people they wouldn't have been jotting down stenography from mere months ago. They reveal themselves in their own reporting at times.
For example, how do you lie that the treaty means US troops out of Iraq by the end of 2011 and include that: ". . . the pact also allows the Iraqi government to negotiate with the United States to extend the presence of U.S. troops if conditions on the ground are not stable" or: "The pact allows for amendments if both sides agree to them. U.S. officials have indicated that they interpret that as permitting an extension, if security conditions in Iraq are deemed too shaky to leave Iraqi forces in charge. 'There is a provision for extension, by agreement of both sides,' one U.S. official said."
No, that is not TROOPS HOME BY THE END OF 2011!
As has been repeatedly explained at The Common Ills, the treaty is a one-year treaty with options to extend. As with the UN mandate that has been utilized so far to legalize the occupation of Iraq, the treaty only focuses on one year. 2009 is binding. Everything after that can be changed so there's no reason in the world for the press to reporting hypotheticals as if they were concrete, locked-in details.
From the version the White House released on Thursday, Article 30:
1) This Agreement shall be effective for a period of three years, unless terminated sooner by either Party pursuant to paragraph 3 of this Article.
What does paragraph three state? "This Agreement shall terminate one year after a Party provides written notification to the other Party to that effect." It is not a binding three-year contract. A binding three-year contract runs three years with no exceptions or modifcations. This is a one-year contract that may or may not be renewed for 2010 and, if renewed, may or may not be renewed for 2011.
Clause two of Article 30 explains how optional the 'three year' treaty is: "This Agreement shall be amended only with the official agrement of the Parties in writing and in accordance with the constitutional proceudures in effect in both countries."
The only year that is binding is 2009. After 2009, details can be changed or the entire treaty can be scrapped. That is reality. Reporting that the treaty guarantees all US troops out of Iraq by the end of 2011 is not reality. It does make for lying, however.
Barack Obama was the choice of Corporate America. Liars like Amy Goodman and Allan Nairn worked overtime to obscure and excuse that. Barack exists to put a big smile on imperialism and garbage like a one-year treaty passed off as "Troops Home!" exists to lull the American people into complacency the same way Tricky Dick Nixon's promise of a 'secret plan' to end the war always attempted to defuse objection to the earlier illegal war. Back then, people were either smarter or had a real independent media -- or possibly both: They didn't fall for the garbage.
Doubt how pathetic our 'independent' media today is?
The treaty got passed by al-Maliki's cabinet, then by the Parliament and now requires the approval of the presidency council. Despite the fact that the US Constitution demands treaties get Senate approval, the White House has no intention of sending it to Congress. American Freedom Campaign calls this the abuse of the week:
Iraq Parliament to vote on U.S.-Iraq agreement, while Congress has no input
During the Bush administration, the power of the executive branch has been greatly expanded. At times, President Bush has treated Congress like an inferior branch of government – and, to be honest, Congress has done very little to demonstrate it minds being treated that way.
Case in point: On November 17, the New York Times reported that the U.S. and Iraq had reached an agreement setting the terms of the U.S.'s presence in Iraq after the expiration of the UN mandate on December 31. Although the Bush administration is calling this agreement a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), a category of international agreement that does not require congressional approval, it is clear that the agreement goes well beyond a traditional SOFA. Not surprisingly, the Bush administration has no plans to seek congressional approval. What makes this even worse is that under the Iraqi constitution, this kind of agreement must be approved by the Iraqi Parliament. So we are left with a situation in which the Iraqi Parliament is voting on an agreement that will affect the lives of U.S. soldiers, but Congress has no voice at all in the process. And what is Congress doing about this? Very, very little so far…
While that awaits, the press continues their lying on the treaty and, as Ruth noted, the press is deliberately lying by going out of their way to ignore the same people they wouldn't have been jotting down stenography from mere months ago. They reveal themselves in their own reporting at times.
For example, how do you lie that the treaty means US troops out of Iraq by the end of 2011 and include that: ". . . the pact also allows the Iraqi government to negotiate with the United States to extend the presence of U.S. troops if conditions on the ground are not stable" or: "The pact allows for amendments if both sides agree to them. U.S. officials have indicated that they interpret that as permitting an extension, if security conditions in Iraq are deemed too shaky to leave Iraqi forces in charge. 'There is a provision for extension, by agreement of both sides,' one U.S. official said."
No, that is not TROOPS HOME BY THE END OF 2011!
As has been repeatedly explained at The Common Ills, the treaty is a one-year treaty with options to extend. As with the UN mandate that has been utilized so far to legalize the occupation of Iraq, the treaty only focuses on one year. 2009 is binding. Everything after that can be changed so there's no reason in the world for the press to reporting hypotheticals as if they were concrete, locked-in details.
From the version the White House released on Thursday, Article 30:
1) This Agreement shall be effective for a period of three years, unless terminated sooner by either Party pursuant to paragraph 3 of this Article.
What does paragraph three state? "This Agreement shall terminate one year after a Party provides written notification to the other Party to that effect." It is not a binding three-year contract. A binding three-year contract runs three years with no exceptions or modifcations. This is a one-year contract that may or may not be renewed for 2010 and, if renewed, may or may not be renewed for 2011.
Clause two of Article 30 explains how optional the 'three year' treaty is: "This Agreement shall be amended only with the official agrement of the Parties in writing and in accordance with the constitutional proceudures in effect in both countries."
The only year that is binding is 2009. After 2009, details can be changed or the entire treaty can be scrapped. That is reality. Reporting that the treaty guarantees all US troops out of Iraq by the end of 2011 is not reality. It does make for lying, however.
Barack Obama was the choice of Corporate America. Liars like Amy Goodman and Allan Nairn worked overtime to obscure and excuse that. Barack exists to put a big smile on imperialism and garbage like a one-year treaty passed off as "Troops Home!" exists to lull the American people into complacency the same way Tricky Dick Nixon's promise of a 'secret plan' to end the war always attempted to defuse objection to the earlier illegal war. Back then, people were either smarter or had a real independent media -- or possibly both: They didn't fall for the garbage.
Doubt how pathetic our 'independent' media today is?
The treaty got passed by al-Maliki's cabinet, then by the Parliament and now requires the approval of the presidency council. Despite the fact that the US Constitution demands treaties get Senate approval, the White House has no intention of sending it to Congress. American Freedom Campaign calls this the abuse of the week:
Iraq Parliament to vote on U.S.-Iraq agreement, while Congress has no input
During the Bush administration, the power of the executive branch has been greatly expanded. At times, President Bush has treated Congress like an inferior branch of government – and, to be honest, Congress has done very little to demonstrate it minds being treated that way.
Case in point: On November 17, the New York Times reported that the U.S. and Iraq had reached an agreement setting the terms of the U.S.'s presence in Iraq after the expiration of the UN mandate on December 31. Although the Bush administration is calling this agreement a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), a category of international agreement that does not require congressional approval, it is clear that the agreement goes well beyond a traditional SOFA. Not surprisingly, the Bush administration has no plans to seek congressional approval. What makes this even worse is that under the Iraqi constitution, this kind of agreement must be approved by the Iraqi Parliament. So we are left with a situation in which the Iraqi Parliament is voting on an agreement that will affect the lives of U.S. soldiers, but Congress has no voice at all in the process. And what is Congress doing about this? Very, very little so far…
A note to our readers
Hey --
Sunday evening, finally done.
Holiday exists and entrances meant the smartest thing to do this morning was to put up the note saying we'd post this evening.
We thank everyone who helped. That includes Dallas and:
The Third Estate Sunday Review's Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess, and Ava,
Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude,
Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man,
C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review,
Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills),
Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix,
Mike of Mikey Likes It!,
Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz,
Ruth of Ruth's Report,
Wally of The Daily Jot,
Marcia of SICKOFITRDLZ
and Stan of Oh Boy It Never Ends.
And what did we come up with?
Truest statement of the week -- John Ross, the clear winner for the week.
Editorial: The Treaty -- The treaty passed off as a SOFA and passed off by the press as ending the illegal war. They keep saying irony died with Barack's election but we think it 'twas honest that died.
TV: Rosie and Other Bombs -- This is great. This was not what they had written. They were half-way done this morning -- Ava and C.I. -- when Dona and I (Jim) made the call that we'd put the edition on pause. I looked at what they'd written when I woke up and it was okay (same topic, by the way, they didn't change that) but it didn't really grab me. I wrote it off as everyone can have a bad week. When they woke up, they tore into this and completely rewrote it. This is incredible.
The E-Z Bake critics of Panhandle Media -- How to be an insta-critic? Trot out the same old CDS aimed at Hillary, get further and further from the truth and act like you're really doing something, like you're offering something new or brave.
Video On Demand? -- Technology article. We have several of these planned for the immediate future. We may do one on music next time or may stay with films.
Book discussion roundtable -- I love this. I'm not sure how everyone else will feel. If it weren't for C.I. it wouldn't be up. There's an entire paragraph that was left out of the transcript and C.I. said, "Hey, Jim, where is it?" It was C.I.'s statements. I went back to the notes and saw I had left it out, typed it in, hit publish and got an error message. I was going to retype it but C.I. said, "Screw it, if someone complains, they complain." It's a rush transcript. Book lovers have what they've been waiting for. That's why we hate doing book discussions. They take forever.
Simon Assaf's "Iraq deal does not end the war" -- Reprint from Great Britain's Socialist Worker. Why not "UK"? Community member Pru prefers "Great Britain." (Seriously.)
Then and Now -- Short feature! Dona was thrilled.
Greens and Marcelo -- January event.
Highlights -- Stan, Rebecca, Kat, Betty, Cedric, Ruth, Marcia, Wally, Elaine and Mike wrote this and selected all the highlights unless otherwise noted.
Note -- Heads up that we would be posting late.
And that's it. That's the edition. See you next week.
-- Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess, Ava and C.I.
Sunday evening, finally done.
Holiday exists and entrances meant the smartest thing to do this morning was to put up the note saying we'd post this evening.
We thank everyone who helped. That includes Dallas and:
The Third Estate Sunday Review's Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess, and Ava,
Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude,
Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man,
C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review,
Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills),
Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix,
Mike of Mikey Likes It!,
Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz,
Ruth of Ruth's Report,
Wally of The Daily Jot,
Marcia of SICKOFITRDLZ
and Stan of Oh Boy It Never Ends.
And what did we come up with?
Truest statement of the week -- John Ross, the clear winner for the week.
Editorial: The Treaty -- The treaty passed off as a SOFA and passed off by the press as ending the illegal war. They keep saying irony died with Barack's election but we think it 'twas honest that died.
TV: Rosie and Other Bombs -- This is great. This was not what they had written. They were half-way done this morning -- Ava and C.I. -- when Dona and I (Jim) made the call that we'd put the edition on pause. I looked at what they'd written when I woke up and it was okay (same topic, by the way, they didn't change that) but it didn't really grab me. I wrote it off as everyone can have a bad week. When they woke up, they tore into this and completely rewrote it. This is incredible.
The E-Z Bake critics of Panhandle Media -- How to be an insta-critic? Trot out the same old CDS aimed at Hillary, get further and further from the truth and act like you're really doing something, like you're offering something new or brave.
Video On Demand? -- Technology article. We have several of these planned for the immediate future. We may do one on music next time or may stay with films.
Book discussion roundtable -- I love this. I'm not sure how everyone else will feel. If it weren't for C.I. it wouldn't be up. There's an entire paragraph that was left out of the transcript and C.I. said, "Hey, Jim, where is it?" It was C.I.'s statements. I went back to the notes and saw I had left it out, typed it in, hit publish and got an error message. I was going to retype it but C.I. said, "Screw it, if someone complains, they complain." It's a rush transcript. Book lovers have what they've been waiting for. That's why we hate doing book discussions. They take forever.
Simon Assaf's "Iraq deal does not end the war" -- Reprint from Great Britain's Socialist Worker. Why not "UK"? Community member Pru prefers "Great Britain." (Seriously.)
Then and Now -- Short feature! Dona was thrilled.
Greens and Marcelo -- January event.
Highlights -- Stan, Rebecca, Kat, Betty, Cedric, Ruth, Marcia, Wally, Elaine and Mike wrote this and selected all the highlights unless otherwise noted.
Note -- Heads up that we would be posting late.
And that's it. That's the edition. See you next week.
-- Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess, Ava and C.I.
TV: Rosie and Other Bombs
It's become something of a pattern that each year at this time we review the music specials. We marvel "What were they thinking?" (here, here and here) and note the few that actually worked (Faith Hill). Not this year and we had to wonder, "Did we kill off the musical special?"
If so, allow us to kill off another genre: The variety special.
Although, NBC appears to have already done that with Rosie O'Donnell as the assassin.
Wednesday night, the network offered Rosie Live, a 'variety' 'special' hosted by Rosie, the lone gun woman. We wanted to enjoy the special but were already having doubts two or three weeks ago when the promotional spots started airing.
You may have seen those. Rosie's standing before 'reporters' holding a press conference. They ask her about Tom Arnold and she explains Roseanne was married to him, not her. They go on to confuse her with both Oprah and Ellen. The promo wasn't funny. It needed to build and it never did. Ro went in with one energy level (lukewarm) and maintained it throughout.
The commercial needed zany not Rosie acting bewildered and sedated. Bewildered and sedated described the special. If anyone knows variety shows, it should have been Rosie so we have a hard time believing she didn't see the problems long before the live broadcast.
Problems? We expected some sort of set. Maybe a state of the art set or, more likely, a throw-back to the groovy sets of the sixties. We could see Rosie wanting some sort of plexi-glass set with multi-levels or maybe some homage to the set Dean Martin used on his old show. But, we knew, whatever the set was, it would scream Rosie!
It didn't. In fact, it didn't appear NBC even created a set for the special. It looked like they just threw her on a stage. On a stage that looked like your basic gymnasium. Hint to NBC, a 'special' needs to look like a special.
Somewhere around the time she and Alec Baldwin were all excited about the mystery guest that turned out to be Conan O'Brien -- who came out with about half the sparkle Joey Bishop might have offered -- if you studied Rosie's eyes, you could tell she was done with the special (which still had about 15 minutes of live TV to go).
Who could blame her? But the shapeless mess continued broadcasting (live in the Eastern and Central time zones).
A lot of the blame goes to NBC which insanely thought you dressed up a special by allowing it to open a night of normal programming. You build to a special, you don't burn it off. A lot of the blame goes to Rosie who was executive producer.
At some point, as one guest star after another walked across the stage, you may have grasped that she had populated her special with enough people to qualify as a small village -- a small village suffering from a humor shortage. The jokes (not funny to begin with) had to be 'rationed' apparently and the bulk went to Rosie which just struck us as rude manners and far from 'hostly.' Around the time, Rosie went into a Sarah Palin joke, we were reminded of Rosie's stand up in 2001, when she was calling Hillary the c-word and screaming (yes, screaming) on stage that she (Rosie) thought Hillary would have left Bill and the fact that Hillary didn't leave him after getting into the Senate meant Rosie had no use for Hillary.
It was an ugly bit, an infamous bit and, really, the end of Rosie's stand up. It was completely inappropriate and self-defeating. When you're the woman who lied to daytime viewers for a decade, pretending to have a crush daily on Tom Cruise, maybe after you finally come out of your big, old closet, you don't try to build an act around, "How dare she love that person!"
No one ever wanted political comedy from Rosie and, until this decade, she never tried to offer it. She can't do it, she doesn't have the flair but that she would even attempt it on a holiday special goes a long way towards explaining why no one wants to watch her on TV anymore. Did she think she was sitting in for the boys of Comedy Central? NBC isn't niche programming and the network was hoping for the largest audience possible. Rosie just wanted to rant and didn't give a damn which viewers she ran off.
Judging by the ratings, she ran off pretty much all of them.
And she can blame herself for that. The special offered Liza Minnelli early on in the only moment that worked. Liza, being Liza, came off like a full bodied person and an hour of the two of them singing and dancing, offering holiday memories, could have added up to something worth watching. That was not to be.
Instead, it was Rosie and her cast of thousands. Many of whom you didn't know, many of whom you forgot years ago, and many of whom you wouldn't open your door for today. While Liza is an actual living legend, Alanis Morissette is nothing but a failed performer. There are no tricks left in her Felix the Cat bag. She's already taken her one claim to fame -- the mid-90s Jagged Little Edge -- and redone all the songs acoustically for a CD sold at Starbucks. The only thing in her immediate future is the announcement that Warners is dropping her from the label. There was Alanis singing another one of the banal, twelve-step diary entries passed off as lyrics and bumming out the entire nation. In that regard, she actually fit on the special.
What it really reminded us of was those embarrassing webcasts Rosie does from time to time. She likes to think she's keeping it real as she rants and raves while looking like an institutionalized patient refusing their meds. And that takes us back to the promo as well as the special. Ro can't put on a little make up? The promo was her looking tired and that 'look' was captured in the special as well. But on her webcasts, she doesn't worry about hair and make up and apparently she believed that, with her TV special, she's pioneering a new wave, one that will have the average viewers saying, "Oh, look, it's Schleppy The Tired Clown! Quick, let's sit down and watch the performer who couldn't even bother to dress for the evening!"
At least the webcam offers a close up. Which brings us to the third problem, Alan Carter, alleged director. In May of 2005, we offered a warning:
While Rosie was was laying her nuclear egg, Brendan Blethyn and Jane Curtain stopped over at CBS for The New Adventures of Old Christine and Gary Unmarried. Blethyn, in this year's best episode, played Old Christine and Matthew's mother in an episode that was an instant classic and should be repeated each Thanksgiving while the show airs. The New Adventures of Old Christine has been on a winning streak for some time now and this episode took it even further.
If so, allow us to kill off another genre: The variety special.
Although, NBC appears to have already done that with Rosie O'Donnell as the assassin.
Wednesday night, the network offered Rosie Live, a 'variety' 'special' hosted by Rosie, the lone gun woman. We wanted to enjoy the special but were already having doubts two or three weeks ago when the promotional spots started airing.
You may have seen those. Rosie's standing before 'reporters' holding a press conference. They ask her about Tom Arnold and she explains Roseanne was married to him, not her. They go on to confuse her with both Oprah and Ellen. The promo wasn't funny. It needed to build and it never did. Ro went in with one energy level (lukewarm) and maintained it throughout.
The commercial needed zany not Rosie acting bewildered and sedated. Bewildered and sedated described the special. If anyone knows variety shows, it should have been Rosie so we have a hard time believing she didn't see the problems long before the live broadcast.
Problems? We expected some sort of set. Maybe a state of the art set or, more likely, a throw-back to the groovy sets of the sixties. We could see Rosie wanting some sort of plexi-glass set with multi-levels or maybe some homage to the set Dean Martin used on his old show. But, we knew, whatever the set was, it would scream Rosie!
It didn't. In fact, it didn't appear NBC even created a set for the special. It looked like they just threw her on a stage. On a stage that looked like your basic gymnasium. Hint to NBC, a 'special' needs to look like a special.
Somewhere around the time she and Alec Baldwin were all excited about the mystery guest that turned out to be Conan O'Brien -- who came out with about half the sparkle Joey Bishop might have offered -- if you studied Rosie's eyes, you could tell she was done with the special (which still had about 15 minutes of live TV to go).
Who could blame her? But the shapeless mess continued broadcasting (live in the Eastern and Central time zones).
A lot of the blame goes to NBC which insanely thought you dressed up a special by allowing it to open a night of normal programming. You build to a special, you don't burn it off. A lot of the blame goes to Rosie who was executive producer.
At some point, as one guest star after another walked across the stage, you may have grasped that she had populated her special with enough people to qualify as a small village -- a small village suffering from a humor shortage. The jokes (not funny to begin with) had to be 'rationed' apparently and the bulk went to Rosie which just struck us as rude manners and far from 'hostly.' Around the time, Rosie went into a Sarah Palin joke, we were reminded of Rosie's stand up in 2001, when she was calling Hillary the c-word and screaming (yes, screaming) on stage that she (Rosie) thought Hillary would have left Bill and the fact that Hillary didn't leave him after getting into the Senate meant Rosie had no use for Hillary.
It was an ugly bit, an infamous bit and, really, the end of Rosie's stand up. It was completely inappropriate and self-defeating. When you're the woman who lied to daytime viewers for a decade, pretending to have a crush daily on Tom Cruise, maybe after you finally come out of your big, old closet, you don't try to build an act around, "How dare she love that person!"
No one ever wanted political comedy from Rosie and, until this decade, she never tried to offer it. She can't do it, she doesn't have the flair but that she would even attempt it on a holiday special goes a long way towards explaining why no one wants to watch her on TV anymore. Did she think she was sitting in for the boys of Comedy Central? NBC isn't niche programming and the network was hoping for the largest audience possible. Rosie just wanted to rant and didn't give a damn which viewers she ran off.
Judging by the ratings, she ran off pretty much all of them.
And she can blame herself for that. The special offered Liza Minnelli early on in the only moment that worked. Liza, being Liza, came off like a full bodied person and an hour of the two of them singing and dancing, offering holiday memories, could have added up to something worth watching. That was not to be.
Instead, it was Rosie and her cast of thousands. Many of whom you didn't know, many of whom you forgot years ago, and many of whom you wouldn't open your door for today. While Liza is an actual living legend, Alanis Morissette is nothing but a failed performer. There are no tricks left in her Felix the Cat bag. She's already taken her one claim to fame -- the mid-90s Jagged Little Edge -- and redone all the songs acoustically for a CD sold at Starbucks. The only thing in her immediate future is the announcement that Warners is dropping her from the label. There was Alanis singing another one of the banal, twelve-step diary entries passed off as lyrics and bumming out the entire nation. In that regard, she actually fit on the special.
What it really reminded us of was those embarrassing webcasts Rosie does from time to time. She likes to think she's keeping it real as she rants and raves while looking like an institutionalized patient refusing their meds. And that takes us back to the promo as well as the special. Ro can't put on a little make up? The promo was her looking tired and that 'look' was captured in the special as well. But on her webcasts, she doesn't worry about hair and make up and apparently she believed that, with her TV special, she's pioneering a new wave, one that will have the average viewers saying, "Oh, look, it's Schleppy The Tired Clown! Quick, let's sit down and watch the performer who couldn't even bother to dress for the evening!"
At least the webcam offers a close up. Which brings us to the third problem, Alan Carter, alleged director. In May of 2005, we offered a warning:
The "creative geniuses" behind the camera included Alan Carter (director), Paul Flattery and Stephen Pouliot. Though some of you may not know the names, you need to learn them so that in the future when they flash on screen you'll know to either flip the channel or get the hell out of the living room. This trinity last teamed up for Nick & Jessica's Family Christmas. When you see those names, run, run for shelter and don't look back.
Our mistake was advising you to run when you saw those "names." You need not wait for all three to evacuate the premises, just one name is more than enough to have you sounding the disaster sirens. Alan Carter offered 'direction' in his usual manner: none at all. The huge stage NBC plopped Rosie on was apparently too much for Carter to navigate which was why the cameras were never where they needed to be and always arrived where they should have been about ten seconds late. If Rosie had some funny lines and some actual charm, Carter was no help in allowing viewers to find them.
While Rosie was was laying her nuclear egg, Brendan Blethyn and Jane Curtain stopped over at CBS for The New Adventures of Old Christine and Gary Unmarried. Blethyn, in this year's best episode, played Old Christine and Matthew's mother in an episode that was an instant classic and should be repeated each Thanksgiving while the show airs. The New Adventures of Old Christine has been on a winning streak for some time now and this episode took it even further.
Gary Unmarried was less successful and it may have been suffering from Rosie-itis -- attempting to pack too many guest stars into one broadcast. We're waiting to review Gary Unmarried but do recommend it. We do not, however, recommend Martin Mull coming back on the show ever.
One of the shows we always planned to review (but always had Jim asking us to grab something else) was Still Standing. Still Standing was actually a funny show and it got better each season. Early on, the biggest problem was Judy's parents which were nothing but the dorks from Yes Dear!'s parents with different names and faces. Oh, your stinky feet! Oh, your griping! It wasn't funny when Tim Conway and Vicki Lawrence were doing it and it wasn't funny when it migrated over to Still Standing. It was tired, it was boring. Still Standing wisely ditched the characters, Judy's father just vanished and her mother was now played by Swoosie Kurtz and written as something other than a 60s sitcom staple.
Jane Curtain was her usual amazing self Wednesday night on Gary Unmarried. Her lines were sub-standard fare but she made them seem so much more than they were, she zoomed in on co-stars, immediately establishing relationships not in the script. She's one of TV's best and most underrated actresses. Martin Mull is the parody actor who never has a character but always manages to be corny. As sad as it was to see the two of them paired, it was worse to grasp that we were back to Helen and Gene on Still Standing or Yes, Dear's Tom and Natalie with all the tired carping of don't eat/drink that and your feet don't go there and blah, blah, blah. That's not sparkling, that's not new, and it's not funny.
It's the kind of cheap guffaws UPN was built on and we all know the pot of non-gold at the end of that rainbow. Gary Unmaried is having a real problem with casting. Two weeks ago it also brought on a nemesis for Allison, someone allegedly pretty, exciting and a real threat. The character was played by Jean Louisa Kelly -- forever the piss-pantied fish-wife Kim from Yes, Dear. She was no threat from the beginning and it was the worst casting of fall 2008 until Martin Mull showed up Wednesday. If it's not clear to CBS, they need another Yes, Dear about as much as NBC needs another Rosie Live. Translation, the turkey belongs on the table, not on the TV screen.
The E-Z Bake critics of Panhandle Media
If you were a supposed media critic or an alleged independent 'voice,' you might want to critique incoming president Barack Obama's cabinet. And if you were a useless gas bag who lacked both a spine and the ability to come up with an original thought, you'd naturally make it all about Hillary Clinton.
Hillary Clinton is mentioned as a nominee for Secretary of State and the toxic Panhandle Media has nothing to offer but the same crap the MSM does.
Why is that?
Because they allowed their inner psychos to be unleashed in the Democratic Party primaries when they attacked Hillary with smears, lies and trash. Yes, there is no difference between Rush Limbaugh and Barbara Ehrenreich (except Rush may be more photogenic). The pathetics on the left real problem with the pathetics on the right has apparently been about the fact that the bums on the right got funding. Unable to get work on their own or to actually work in real media, the losers have had many, many years of funding envy aimed at their equivalent on the right-wing spectrum.
So now the trash from the left has their Christ-child installed but are seen as the butt boys and girls they are, as the sycophants and liars, and they need to offer some lukewarm criticism of Barack in order to trick people into thinking they are 'independent.' So what to do?
Attack Hillary!
Yeah! She may be Secretary of State and we'll attack her! We'll make it all about her! We'll invent lies of how she's rolling all over Our Sweet Lord. We'll spread rumors and make it about how Barack's is still your basic loveable TV Dad but all these harpies out there will trick him! (No, a hapless TV Dad is not a good thing, but the left 'voices' are idiots.)
We're sick of your crap. We're tired of your 'just add water to an old piece on Hillary and insta-critique!'
Try doing something useful, you damn fools.
Try looking into the real war criminals.
As Betty noted last week, Dumb Ass Easy Bake Critic Carlos Fierro was lying that Hillary was "as hawkish a hawk there has ever been." Carlos needs to start licking while he's got his head stuck up his ass, it may prevent him from dying of starvation.
There is no basis for calling Hillary "as hawkish a hawk there has ever been." That's not just propaganda, it's dumb ass. It's beyond hyperbole. That CounterPunch elected to publish that crap just goes to how sick Alex Cockburn was and is.
Hillary Clinton didn't blow the military for her entire career. That would be Sarah Sewall aka Sarah Sewer who wouldn't have had a roof over her head if she hadn't been selling it for the hawks. Sarah Sewer is the one over the US military's 'counter-insurgency' (war on the native people) manual. Sarah Sewer declared less than 12 months ago on PBS that the Iraq War could not be declared a failure because, if that happened, it would prevent future 'interventions.'
While you bore us over and over with your lies about Hillary, don't think we're not noticing that you don't have the guts to call out Sewer or her gal-pal Sammy Power who, for the record, blurbbed that manual with praise.
Our Modern Day Carrie Nations wants troops on the ground in the Sudan. She wants more war. She lusts for war. (If you were married to Cass, you'd need to find something to turn you on as well.) She's a Bloody War Hawk and an embarrassment to her adopted country. But calling her out takes guts and it's so much easier to lie about Hillary.
No research required.
It is, after all, the Amy Goodman way.
Just don't mistake it for independent. Or an actual critique.
Hillary Clinton is mentioned as a nominee for Secretary of State and the toxic Panhandle Media has nothing to offer but the same crap the MSM does.
Why is that?
Because they allowed their inner psychos to be unleashed in the Democratic Party primaries when they attacked Hillary with smears, lies and trash. Yes, there is no difference between Rush Limbaugh and Barbara Ehrenreich (except Rush may be more photogenic). The pathetics on the left real problem with the pathetics on the right has apparently been about the fact that the bums on the right got funding. Unable to get work on their own or to actually work in real media, the losers have had many, many years of funding envy aimed at their equivalent on the right-wing spectrum.
So now the trash from the left has their Christ-child installed but are seen as the butt boys and girls they are, as the sycophants and liars, and they need to offer some lukewarm criticism of Barack in order to trick people into thinking they are 'independent.' So what to do?
Attack Hillary!
Yeah! She may be Secretary of State and we'll attack her! We'll make it all about her! We'll invent lies of how she's rolling all over Our Sweet Lord. We'll spread rumors and make it about how Barack's is still your basic loveable TV Dad but all these harpies out there will trick him! (No, a hapless TV Dad is not a good thing, but the left 'voices' are idiots.)
We're sick of your crap. We're tired of your 'just add water to an old piece on Hillary and insta-critique!'
Try doing something useful, you damn fools.
Try looking into the real war criminals.
As Betty noted last week, Dumb Ass Easy Bake Critic Carlos Fierro was lying that Hillary was "as hawkish a hawk there has ever been." Carlos needs to start licking while he's got his head stuck up his ass, it may prevent him from dying of starvation.
There is no basis for calling Hillary "as hawkish a hawk there has ever been." That's not just propaganda, it's dumb ass. It's beyond hyperbole. That CounterPunch elected to publish that crap just goes to how sick Alex Cockburn was and is.
Hillary Clinton didn't blow the military for her entire career. That would be Sarah Sewall aka Sarah Sewer who wouldn't have had a roof over her head if she hadn't been selling it for the hawks. Sarah Sewer is the one over the US military's 'counter-insurgency' (war on the native people) manual. Sarah Sewer declared less than 12 months ago on PBS that the Iraq War could not be declared a failure because, if that happened, it would prevent future 'interventions.'
While you bore us over and over with your lies about Hillary, don't think we're not noticing that you don't have the guts to call out Sewer or her gal-pal Sammy Power who, for the record, blurbbed that manual with praise.
Our Modern Day Carrie Nations wants troops on the ground in the Sudan. She wants more war. She lusts for war. (If you were married to Cass, you'd need to find something to turn you on as well.) She's a Bloody War Hawk and an embarrassment to her adopted country. But calling her out takes guts and it's so much easier to lie about Hillary.
No research required.
It is, after all, the Amy Goodman way.
Just don't mistake it for independent. Or an actual critique.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
