ADDED: I am not John Stauber but I wish I had many of his traits. No, he is not perfect -- none of us are -- but he reminds me daily on his Twitter feed just how important of a voice he is. He calls out anyone who needs to be called out and we need him on the left desperately. Just one Tweet that reminds me again of how important he is (and how thankful I am that he is around):
Galling maybe, but typical. In 2007 @SpeakerPelosi gave Bush all the $ he wanted and more for war in #Iraq. Then @TheDemocrats ran against the war, and thank God #Obama the Nobel man of peace ended it or we’d still be there! 
C.I. also gave him a shout out in "2019: The Year For Dummies."
I love John Stauber. There are a lot of people I complain about here -- and for good reason -- but I agree with C.I., we have a better world because John Stauber's in it. I think I'm going to cry typing this and thinking of all he's done. His books with Sheldon Rampton are must reads -- my personal favorite is The Best War Ever: Lies, Damned Lies and the Mess in Iraq.
If we gave out MVP or Lifetime achievement awards on the left, I'd argue it should go to John Stauber.
Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"
Friday, January 10, 2020. The crazy in the media coverage continues and
we all need to take responsibility for our part in it (that includes me
-- I cut off my own piece of the blame pie with regards to a failure to
draw a clear line between Democrats and the left, for example).
Starting in the US. Senator Tammy Duckworth is an Iraq War veteran. Yesterday, she was on CNN. Zach Budryk (THE HILL) reports:
Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), a former Army lieutenant colonel who lost both her legs in Iraq, ripped Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.) Thursday for comments he made the day before that Democrats are "in love with terrorists."
"I'm not going to dignify that with a response. I left parts of my body in Iraq fighting terrorists. I don't need to justify myself to anyone," Duckworth said on "CNN Right Now."
Collins made the remark on Fox Business's "Lou Dobbs Tonight" Wednesday, in response to Democratic criticism of Trump's handling of the killing of Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad.
That's not an accurate report. Collins did make those remarks but the climate he made them in is what we should be discussing.
Tammy is center-right Democrat. I believe that's understood on the left. On the right? Aren't we all just Socialists? That is the way it's portrayed, every last one of us. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with being a Socialist. I am saying we should remember the world we live in.
On the right, media critics have been taking on Chris Matthews, Andrea Mitchell and many others over their remarks about the terrorist who was killed -- including their failure to call him a terrorist.
Corporate media was aping the loudest voices on the left. Too many abdicated on the left and too many others drank the crazy juice. I have no idea why Max Blumenthal feels the need to identify with a terrorist. I don't. And he's going to have a hissy fit that I said that. I like Max. I'm glad he took the hint here and finally noted the dead contractor had been named (Nawres Hamid). His feeds were full of people, egged on by him, insisting no one had died and that's why we didn't know the name of the contractor. That's only one example.
Max and Aaron Mate and others are slobbering over Adl Abdul Mahdi's claim that the terrorist was there in Iraq at that time to help Mahdi broker peace with another country.
Neither man -- nor any of the others -- have known one damn thing about the dead terrorist and they certainly don't know anything about Mahdi. Madhi has lied repeatedly. He fooled the CIA but anyone paying attention -- and we had to -- could tell he was working both sides. (Added: I'm referring to before he was prime minister. He regularly met with the dead terrorist and they would plot against Shi'ite cleric and movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr. He would then go tell the US military about those meetings.) The US State Dept had a stronger and more accurate portrait of Mahdi even before Barack was president.
Reading Max and Aaron and similar Tweet geniuses, you are left with the impression that Madhi's an honest broker and the prime minister of Iraq. He's neither, really. He is the outgoing prime minister of Iraq -- though there's an effort to change that. Why is he outgoing? Because the Iraqi people have rejected him. The protesters brought that about.
But this is a man that Max and Aaron rush to quote and trust with no skepticism?
Who calls that journalism?
I don't.
They also accept the claim of the Iranian government that the missile strike on the US base this week was a strike that they never intended to kill anyone in. Really? They're that gifted and knowing that they knew no one would step over a foot or two?
Fact: They launched a missile strike on the base.
Everything else is conjecture.
They live in a world of duality, an either-or world. In that world, if the US government says it, it's a lie. And by there either-or practice, that means the Iranian government or any other foreign government is telling the truth.
No.
As I.F. Stone observed years ago: All governments lie.
Holding the US government accountable is an important task -- it's even patriotic. But there's a huge difference between accountability and propaganda.
It's not necessary for you to glorify an oppressive government (Iran's) in order to call out the US actions.
I don't think US President Donald Trump (yes, I'm aware a member of Congress has picked up Occupant of the White House from this site -- I'm not offended, I wasn't offended when Claire McCaskill took our criticism of AOC onto CNN and passed it off as her own) should have used a drone strike to take out the terrorist. I think he should have been taken into custody and put on trial. You know, the way the US government had planned to deal with the terrorist organization the Leauge of Righteousness -- up until Barack decided to make a deal with the group so that they'd release some corpses?
Huh? Confused because you are a self-declared journalist but somehow never pay attention to Iraq? Let's again drop back to the June 9, 2009 snapshot:
This morning the New York Times' Alissa J. Rubin and Michael Gordon offered "U.S. Frees Suspect in Killing of 5 G.I.'s." Martin Chulov (Guardian) covered the same story, Kim Gamel (AP) reported on it, BBC offered "Kidnap hope after Shia's handover" and Deborah Haynes contributed "Hope for British hostages in Iraq after release of Shia militant" (Times of London). The basics of the story are this. 5 British citizens have been hostages since May 29, 2007. The US military had in their custody Laith al-Khazali. He is a member of Asa'ib al-Haq. He is also accused of murdering five US troops. The US military released him and allegedly did so because his organization was not going to release any of the five British hostages until he was released. This is a big story and the US military is attempting to state this is just diplomacy, has nothing to do with the British hostages and, besides, they just released him to Iraq. Sami al-askari told the New York Times, "This is a very sensitive topic because you know the position that the Iraqi government, the U.S. and British governments, and all the governments do not accept the idea of exchanging hostages for prisoners. So we put it in another format, and we told them that if they want to participate in the political process they cannot do so while they are holding hostages. And we mentioned to the American side that they cannot join the political process and release their hostages while their leaders are behind bars or imprisoned." In other words, a prisoner was traded for hostages and they attempted to not only make the trade but to lie to people about it. At the US State Dept, the tired and bored reporters were unable to even broach the subject. Poor declawed tabbies. Pentagon reporters did press the issue and got the standard line from the department's spokesperson, Bryan Whitman, that the US handed the prisoner to Iraq, the US didn't hand him over to any organization -- terrorist or otherwise. What Iraq did, Whitman wanted the press to know, was what Iraq did. A complete lie that really insults the intelligence of the American people. CNN reminds the five US soldiers killed "were: Capt. Brian S. Freeman, 31, of Temecula, California; 1st Lt. Jacob N. Fritz, 25, of Verdon, Nebraska; Spc. Johnathan B. Chism, 22, of Gonzales, Louisiana; Pfc. Shawn P. Falter, 25, of Cortland, New York; and Pfc. Johnathon M. Millican, 20, of Trafford, Alabama." Those are the five from January 2007 that al-Khazali and his brother Qais al-Khazali are supposed to be responsible for the deaths of. Qassim Abdul-Zahra and Robert H. Reid (AP) states that Jonathan B. Chism's father Danny Chism is outraged over the release and has declared, "They freed them? The American military did? Somebody needs to answer for it."
The man killed last week was a terrorist. He took part in ethnic cleansing in Iraq, he also took part in terrorizing the LGBTQ community in Iraq (and any straight person suspected of being LGBTQ), he terrorized women in Iraq.
But you've promoted him -- because Donald killed him? -- as a poet and a leader and everything but a terrorist.
And you're loud -- obnoxious as well, but loud -- and your hollering and squealing did influence the way weak minds like Andrea Mitchell chose to cover this in the real media.
You were out of control and beyond stupid.
That especially includes Margaret Kimberley. Stan's "Unlike Margaret Kimberley, I don't hate members of the US military" rightly called out her nonsense. (ADDED: Betty reminded me that
Ruth's "F**k March On The Pentagon" also called it out and that Ruth doesn't swear online so that's how ticked she was.)
If you missed it, this is what Margaret reTweeted.
"We honor the memory of General Soleimani and the many sacrifices he made fighting US-led or fomented terrorism in the Middle East."
That is outrageous. It's outrageous to the Iraqis who were terrorized by him. It is outrageous to US troops who were hurt by him. He was instrumental in roadside bombings, for example, in Iraq.
He's a terrorist. But, over here on the left, so many weren't able to say that and, worse, so many others were insisting he was a hero.
He was a thug.
He has been terrorizing protesters in Iraq for months. Over 600 are dead because of that thug. And that's who Max, Margaret and so many others are glorifying.
The following went up here yesterday:
Cantwell Blasts Trump Rollback of Bedrock Environm...
Senator Hassan Cosponsors Renewable Energy Extensi...
Cortez Masto Introduces Bill to Promote Smart Tran...
Harris, Lawmakers Introduce No War Against Iran Ac...
Rosen Delivers Opening Remarks at U.S. Commission ...
Amid Nationwide Addiction Crisis, Senators Gillibr...
Senators Warren and Brown Raise Alarms Over IRS’s ...
Gillibrand Statement On Iran Crisis And Recent Mis...
U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin Cosponsors War Powers R...
Gillibrand Statement On Unauthorized Military Acti...
Hirono Introduces Bill to Protect Endangered and T...
Rep. Susan Davis Statement on Killing of Qasem Sol...
Hirono Statement on U.S. Airstrikes in Iraq and th...
Following Attack on U.S. Forces in Iraq, Senator M...
Rep. Bass Responds To Attack At Manda Bay Airfield...
Murray Statement on Death of Qasem Soleimani in U....
Why?
Most Thursdays we highlight women in Congress. It's usually US House Reps Karen Bass and Susan Davis and US Senators Patty Murray, Tammy Baldwin, Mazie Hirono and Kirsten Gillibrand. At one point, I attempted to highlight AOC only to discover that, though she has much to say to the press and on Twitter, she really didn't seem to have an office staff that issued press releases.
At this site, we'll highlight anything from a member of Congress and have. If they send it to us, we'll note it. I don't care if they're Republican or Democrat or independent. If they're making a public statement, it is news. Doesn't mean I agree with it, does mean we should all know about it.
And we highlight a great deal that comes into the public e-mail account. But please note that this is mainly men. Men have no problem seeking attention or promoting themselves. David Swanson, is only one example.
And I didn't come online to be a part of more-of-the-same. We note women here. We bring them into every conversation. If we're making a pop culture reference or noting a song, notice that we are promoting women. Long overdue.
PUMA started with promise in 2008 and I will applaud some of their work. But within two months of their creation, they lost any admiration from me. "Five movies to watch" and other posts. I wasn't upset that they were covering entertainment. I was upset that they were noting the same White male dominated films. If we're not going to stand up for inclusion, who is?
So the point is, this site was getting way too male dominated and I didn't want that. So Thursdays became a way to bring in female voices. And as the impeachment frenzy began in 2017, it was also a way to note that women in Congress (just Democrats, sorry) were working. It wasn't impeachment 24-7. Women in Congress were working on real issues, on farm issues, on issues effecting mothers and children, on issues of war and peace, on issues of saving the environment, etc.
Thursday last week, we didn't highlight because Wednesday had been New Year's and there were no statements. On Friday, that changed.
The ones we highlighted last night included Friday the 3rd statements where various women in Congress noted that the terrorist was a terrorist.
My apologies to Tammy Duckworth and I mean that sincerely. It was insulting what she was confronted with and wasn't true. I wish I had noted the statements from Democrats sooner. (We did note, last Friday, the statement by a Republican member of Congress whose office sent that in last Friday. In that statement, he was clear that the terrorist killed was a terrorist -- "Greg Pence Statement on Death of Qasem Soleimani".) I was making an argument for the left and that is the bulk of our audience. The left sometimes includes the Democratic Party (sometimes? Joe Lieberman wasn't a rarity, sadly) and sometimes it doesn't. But to America at large, if Michael Moore's speaking, he's speaking for the Democratic Party.
As a feminist, I've long called out the sexist pig Michael Moore. Never assume he speaks for me.
But the climate was created where the left was seen as portraying a terrorist as a poet and person of peace. And to the bulk of Americans -- and casual news observers -- the left is the same as the Democratic Party.
I have defended Tammy when Nancy Pelosi was attacking her -- and attacking the rights of pregnant women in the work force. Other than that? We're miles apart politically. We don't have the same core beliefs. But I will say, "Tammy Duckworth, you did not deserve to have that false accusations hurled at you. And I'm sorry that it happened and I will take the blame for my part in that because I was not trying to draw a line between the left -- especially our crazy brothers and sisters -- and the Democratic Party."
I will own my blame. It's a shame that Margaret Kimberley won't do the same. Or Max or Aaron. Or any number of them.
They have glorified a killer.
And crazy Medea Benjamin, let's not forget that idiot. (See THIRD's "ATTENTION WHORE season 35, episode four" which still makes me laugh -- and, yes, I helped right it.) I was very clear here that I had no problem with A.N.S.W.E.R. and I didn't and don't. But I'm not promoting actions that crazy Medea's part of. She promoted the event last weekend as saving Iran. Thank goodness for A.N.S.W.E.R. and their insistence upon framing it as two-fold: No war on Iran and US troops out of Iraq.
While the Aaron Mates and Max Blumethals were ignoring Iraq, we didn't have that luxury. War on Iran? We had to refute Michael Gordon constantly as his reports or 'reports' for THE NEW YORK TIMES argued that the actions of the Quds Force required war. That was his framing. So while the terrorist was an unknown to so many who try to play informed now, we've been aware of him for years and years.
And we're also aware of the reality that a war that continues and continues is a war that will likely spread. Especially when you have Michael Gordons (plural) reporting things that argue for it to spread. And maybe Michael was right in his reporting (after the war started, before he was wrong)? Could be. I don't know. I know that we were here arguing that the US didn't need to expand the war into Iran.
And Medea?
She lost interest in Iraq, didn't she? She had already bailed.
Added: Do you know how much I would love to bail? I'm here every day talking about the Iraq War. Every day since this site started in November of 2004. Not one damn day off. That's over 5100 days with no day off. I'd love to bail and walk away. I'd love to even have just one day off. But everyone else has already bailed on Iraq (ANTIWAR.COM is the only US exception and even when the men at the site ignore Iraq, you still have Margaret Griffis covering it at ANTIWAR.COM -- and there's also Joel Wing, I'm not fond of him but he is in there at least 5 days a week on Iraq) so I keep trying to do this site for another month, just one more month . . . I can't. I'm sick of being online but I can't walk away from the Iraqi people. They've been betrayed enough. So I'm still here and still noting their struggle because (a) they're a great people and (b) they didn't deserve my country going to war with them (a war of lies).
Now that the war might spread to Iran, she wants to stand up and scream "No war on Iran!" And some fools are impressed with her. Reality: Had she spent the last years fighting for all US troops out of Iraq, we wouldn't be where we are now. But she dropped the ball.
'No war on Iran' is nothing, for Medea, but a new toy to play with as she pretends to be about peace.
You don't ignore the suffering of the Iraqi people for years -- as she has -- and convince the world you are a person who believes in peace.
Medea is "The Waitress."
-- "The Waitress," written by Tori Amos, first appears on her UNDER THE PINK
We've arrived at very sad point in our discourse where Tammy Duckworth is accused of loving or enabling terrorism. We should all look at what part we played in that.
We should also ask why these people determined to soften a terrorist and glorify the outgoing prime minister of Iraq -- Aaron, Margaret, Max, so many of you -- ignore the protesters?
Starting in the US. Senator Tammy Duckworth is an Iraq War veteran. Yesterday, she was on CNN. Zach Budryk (THE HILL) reports:
Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), a former Army lieutenant colonel who lost both her legs in Iraq, ripped Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.) Thursday for comments he made the day before that Democrats are "in love with terrorists."
"I'm not going to dignify that with a response. I left parts of my body in Iraq fighting terrorists. I don't need to justify myself to anyone," Duckworth said on "CNN Right Now."
Collins made the remark on Fox Business's "Lou Dobbs Tonight" Wednesday, in response to Democratic criticism of Trump's handling of the killing of Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad.
That's not an accurate report. Collins did make those remarks but the climate he made them in is what we should be discussing.
Tammy is center-right Democrat. I believe that's understood on the left. On the right? Aren't we all just Socialists? That is the way it's portrayed, every last one of us. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with being a Socialist. I am saying we should remember the world we live in.
On the right, media critics have been taking on Chris Matthews, Andrea Mitchell and many others over their remarks about the terrorist who was killed -- including their failure to call him a terrorist.
Corporate media was aping the loudest voices on the left. Too many abdicated on the left and too many others drank the crazy juice. I have no idea why Max Blumenthal feels the need to identify with a terrorist. I don't. And he's going to have a hissy fit that I said that. I like Max. I'm glad he took the hint here and finally noted the dead contractor had been named (Nawres Hamid). His feeds were full of people, egged on by him, insisting no one had died and that's why we didn't know the name of the contractor. That's only one example.
Max and Aaron Mate and others are slobbering over Adl Abdul Mahdi's claim that the terrorist was there in Iraq at that time to help Mahdi broker peace with another country.
Neither man -- nor any of the others -- have known one damn thing about the dead terrorist and they certainly don't know anything about Mahdi. Madhi has lied repeatedly. He fooled the CIA but anyone paying attention -- and we had to -- could tell he was working both sides. (Added: I'm referring to before he was prime minister. He regularly met with the dead terrorist and they would plot against Shi'ite cleric and movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr. He would then go tell the US military about those meetings.) The US State Dept had a stronger and more accurate portrait of Mahdi even before Barack was president.
Reading Max and Aaron and similar Tweet geniuses, you are left with the impression that Madhi's an honest broker and the prime minister of Iraq. He's neither, really. He is the outgoing prime minister of Iraq -- though there's an effort to change that. Why is he outgoing? Because the Iraqi people have rejected him. The protesters brought that about.
But this is a man that Max and Aaron rush to quote and trust with no skepticism?
Who calls that journalism?
I don't.
They also accept the claim of the Iranian government that the missile strike on the US base this week was a strike that they never intended to kill anyone in. Really? They're that gifted and knowing that they knew no one would step over a foot or two?
Fact: They launched a missile strike on the base.
Everything else is conjecture.
They live in a world of duality, an either-or world. In that world, if the US government says it, it's a lie. And by there either-or practice, that means the Iranian government or any other foreign government is telling the truth.
No.
As I.F. Stone observed years ago: All governments lie.
Holding the US government accountable is an important task -- it's even patriotic. But there's a huge difference between accountability and propaganda.
It's not necessary for you to glorify an oppressive government (Iran's) in order to call out the US actions.
I don't think US President Donald Trump (yes, I'm aware a member of Congress has picked up Occupant of the White House from this site -- I'm not offended, I wasn't offended when Claire McCaskill took our criticism of AOC onto CNN and passed it off as her own) should have used a drone strike to take out the terrorist. I think he should have been taken into custody and put on trial. You know, the way the US government had planned to deal with the terrorist organization the Leauge of Righteousness -- up until Barack decided to make a deal with the group so that they'd release some corpses?
Huh? Confused because you are a self-declared journalist but somehow never pay attention to Iraq? Let's again drop back to the June 9, 2009 snapshot:
This morning the New York Times' Alissa J. Rubin and Michael Gordon offered "U.S. Frees Suspect in Killing of 5 G.I.'s." Martin Chulov (Guardian) covered the same story, Kim Gamel (AP) reported on it, BBC offered "Kidnap hope after Shia's handover" and Deborah Haynes contributed "Hope for British hostages in Iraq after release of Shia militant" (Times of London). The basics of the story are this. 5 British citizens have been hostages since May 29, 2007. The US military had in their custody Laith al-Khazali. He is a member of Asa'ib al-Haq. He is also accused of murdering five US troops. The US military released him and allegedly did so because his organization was not going to release any of the five British hostages until he was released. This is a big story and the US military is attempting to state this is just diplomacy, has nothing to do with the British hostages and, besides, they just released him to Iraq. Sami al-askari told the New York Times, "This is a very sensitive topic because you know the position that the Iraqi government, the U.S. and British governments, and all the governments do not accept the idea of exchanging hostages for prisoners. So we put it in another format, and we told them that if they want to participate in the political process they cannot do so while they are holding hostages. And we mentioned to the American side that they cannot join the political process and release their hostages while their leaders are behind bars or imprisoned." In other words, a prisoner was traded for hostages and they attempted to not only make the trade but to lie to people about it. At the US State Dept, the tired and bored reporters were unable to even broach the subject. Poor declawed tabbies. Pentagon reporters did press the issue and got the standard line from the department's spokesperson, Bryan Whitman, that the US handed the prisoner to Iraq, the US didn't hand him over to any organization -- terrorist or otherwise. What Iraq did, Whitman wanted the press to know, was what Iraq did. A complete lie that really insults the intelligence of the American people. CNN reminds the five US soldiers killed "were: Capt. Brian S. Freeman, 31, of Temecula, California; 1st Lt. Jacob N. Fritz, 25, of Verdon, Nebraska; Spc. Johnathan B. Chism, 22, of Gonzales, Louisiana; Pfc. Shawn P. Falter, 25, of Cortland, New York; and Pfc. Johnathon M. Millican, 20, of Trafford, Alabama." Those are the five from January 2007 that al-Khazali and his brother Qais al-Khazali are supposed to be responsible for the deaths of. Qassim Abdul-Zahra and Robert H. Reid (AP) states that Jonathan B. Chism's father Danny Chism is outraged over the release and has declared, "They freed them? The American military did? Somebody needs to answer for it."
The man killed last week was a terrorist. He took part in ethnic cleansing in Iraq, he also took part in terrorizing the LGBTQ community in Iraq (and any straight person suspected of being LGBTQ), he terrorized women in Iraq.
But you've promoted him -- because Donald killed him? -- as a poet and a leader and everything but a terrorist.
And you're loud -- obnoxious as well, but loud -- and your hollering and squealing did influence the way weak minds like Andrea Mitchell chose to cover this in the real media.
You were out of control and beyond stupid.
That especially includes Margaret Kimberley. Stan's "Unlike Margaret Kimberley, I don't hate members of the US military" rightly called out her nonsense. (ADDED: Betty reminded me that
Ruth's "F**k March On The Pentagon" also called it out and that Ruth doesn't swear online so that's how ticked she was.)
If you missed it, this is what Margaret reTweeted.
Margaret Kimberley Retweeted
We honor the memory of General Soleimani and the many sacrifices he made fighting US-led or fomented terrorism in the Middle East.
"We honor the memory of General Soleimani and the many sacrifices he made fighting US-led or fomented terrorism in the Middle East."
That is outrageous. It's outrageous to the Iraqis who were terrorized by him. It is outrageous to US troops who were hurt by him. He was instrumental in roadside bombings, for example, in Iraq.
He's a terrorist. But, over here on the left, so many weren't able to say that and, worse, so many others were insisting he was a hero.
He was a thug.
He has been terrorizing protesters in Iraq for months. Over 600 are dead because of that thug. And that's who Max, Margaret and so many others are glorifying.
The following went up here yesterday:
Why?
Most Thursdays we highlight women in Congress. It's usually US House Reps Karen Bass and Susan Davis and US Senators Patty Murray, Tammy Baldwin, Mazie Hirono and Kirsten Gillibrand. At one point, I attempted to highlight AOC only to discover that, though she has much to say to the press and on Twitter, she really didn't seem to have an office staff that issued press releases.
At this site, we'll highlight anything from a member of Congress and have. If they send it to us, we'll note it. I don't care if they're Republican or Democrat or independent. If they're making a public statement, it is news. Doesn't mean I agree with it, does mean we should all know about it.
And we highlight a great deal that comes into the public e-mail account. But please note that this is mainly men. Men have no problem seeking attention or promoting themselves. David Swanson, is only one example.
And I didn't come online to be a part of more-of-the-same. We note women here. We bring them into every conversation. If we're making a pop culture reference or noting a song, notice that we are promoting women. Long overdue.
PUMA started with promise in 2008 and I will applaud some of their work. But within two months of their creation, they lost any admiration from me. "Five movies to watch" and other posts. I wasn't upset that they were covering entertainment. I was upset that they were noting the same White male dominated films. If we're not going to stand up for inclusion, who is?
So the point is, this site was getting way too male dominated and I didn't want that. So Thursdays became a way to bring in female voices. And as the impeachment frenzy began in 2017, it was also a way to note that women in Congress (just Democrats, sorry) were working. It wasn't impeachment 24-7. Women in Congress were working on real issues, on farm issues, on issues effecting mothers and children, on issues of war and peace, on issues of saving the environment, etc.
Thursday last week, we didn't highlight because Wednesday had been New Year's and there were no statements. On Friday, that changed.
The ones we highlighted last night included Friday the 3rd statements where various women in Congress noted that the terrorist was a terrorist.
My apologies to Tammy Duckworth and I mean that sincerely. It was insulting what she was confronted with and wasn't true. I wish I had noted the statements from Democrats sooner. (We did note, last Friday, the statement by a Republican member of Congress whose office sent that in last Friday. In that statement, he was clear that the terrorist killed was a terrorist -- "Greg Pence Statement on Death of Qasem Soleimani".) I was making an argument for the left and that is the bulk of our audience. The left sometimes includes the Democratic Party (sometimes? Joe Lieberman wasn't a rarity, sadly) and sometimes it doesn't. But to America at large, if Michael Moore's speaking, he's speaking for the Democratic Party.
As a feminist, I've long called out the sexist pig Michael Moore. Never assume he speaks for me.
But the climate was created where the left was seen as portraying a terrorist as a poet and person of peace. And to the bulk of Americans -- and casual news observers -- the left is the same as the Democratic Party.
I have defended Tammy when Nancy Pelosi was attacking her -- and attacking the rights of pregnant women in the work force. Other than that? We're miles apart politically. We don't have the same core beliefs. But I will say, "Tammy Duckworth, you did not deserve to have that false accusations hurled at you. And I'm sorry that it happened and I will take the blame for my part in that because I was not trying to draw a line between the left -- especially our crazy brothers and sisters -- and the Democratic Party."
I will own my blame. It's a shame that Margaret Kimberley won't do the same. Or Max or Aaron. Or any number of them.
They have glorified a killer.
And crazy Medea Benjamin, let's not forget that idiot. (See THIRD's "ATTENTION WHORE season 35, episode four" which still makes me laugh -- and, yes, I helped right it.) I was very clear here that I had no problem with A.N.S.W.E.R. and I didn't and don't. But I'm not promoting actions that crazy Medea's part of. She promoted the event last weekend as saving Iran. Thank goodness for A.N.S.W.E.R. and their insistence upon framing it as two-fold: No war on Iran and US troops out of Iraq.
While the Aaron Mates and Max Blumethals were ignoring Iraq, we didn't have that luxury. War on Iran? We had to refute Michael Gordon constantly as his reports or 'reports' for THE NEW YORK TIMES argued that the actions of the Quds Force required war. That was his framing. So while the terrorist was an unknown to so many who try to play informed now, we've been aware of him for years and years.
And we're also aware of the reality that a war that continues and continues is a war that will likely spread. Especially when you have Michael Gordons (plural) reporting things that argue for it to spread. And maybe Michael was right in his reporting (after the war started, before he was wrong)? Could be. I don't know. I know that we were here arguing that the US didn't need to expand the war into Iran.
And Medea?
She lost interest in Iraq, didn't she? She had already bailed.
Added: Do you know how much I would love to bail? I'm here every day talking about the Iraq War. Every day since this site started in November of 2004. Not one damn day off. That's over 5100 days with no day off. I'd love to bail and walk away. I'd love to even have just one day off. But everyone else has already bailed on Iraq (ANTIWAR.COM is the only US exception and even when the men at the site ignore Iraq, you still have Margaret Griffis covering it at ANTIWAR.COM -- and there's also Joel Wing, I'm not fond of him but he is in there at least 5 days a week on Iraq) so I keep trying to do this site for another month, just one more month . . . I can't. I'm sick of being online but I can't walk away from the Iraqi people. They've been betrayed enough. So I'm still here and still noting their struggle because (a) they're a great people and (b) they didn't deserve my country going to war with them (a war of lies).
Now that the war might spread to Iran, she wants to stand up and scream "No war on Iran!" And some fools are impressed with her. Reality: Had she spent the last years fighting for all US troops out of Iraq, we wouldn't be where we are now. But she dropped the ball.
'No war on Iran' is nothing, for Medea, but a new toy to play with as she pretends to be about peace.
You don't ignore the suffering of the Iraqi people for years -- as she has -- and convince the world you are a person who believes in peace.
Medea is "The Waitress."
I want to kill this waitress
I can't believe this violence in mind
And is her power all in her club sandwich?
I can't believe this violence in mind
And is her power all in her club sandwich?
But I believe in peace
I believe in peace, bitch
I believe in peace
I believe in peace
I believe in peace, bitch
I believe in peace, bitch
I believe in peace
I believe in peace
I believe in peace, bitch
Boys all think she's living kindness
Ask a fellow waitress
Ask a fellow waitress
Ask a fellow waitress
Ask a fellow waitress
-- "The Waitress," written by Tori Amos, first appears on her UNDER THE PINK
We've arrived at very sad point in our discourse where Tammy Duckworth is accused of loving or enabling terrorism. We should all look at what part we played in that.
We should also ask why these people determined to soften a terrorist and glorify the outgoing prime minister of Iraq -- Aaron, Margaret, Max, so many of you -- ignore the protesters?
Iraqis protest against Iran in Baghdad Tahrir square.
After 100 days of nonstop #protests today's protest is going "to be or not to be" as millions of #Iraqis prepared for #January10th happening now #Iraq #Baghdad #USA #العراق #بغداد #ساحة_التحرير #الناصرية #ثورة_العراق #شهداء_العراق #العراق_ينتقض #Save_the_Iraqi_people
Thousands poured into #Baghdad's Tahrir Square and southern Iraqi cities to protest against government and corruption, chanting “No, no to America! No, no, to Iran!”
Look, it's the people you and Medea Benjamin abandoned. Are you going to continue to ignore them? They have shown bravery for months now. But you'd rather spend your time praising the man that they forced out of office (Mahdi) -- and pretend he's a truth teller -- than notice the people of Iraq.
Not all the ones protesting are present today. At least 600 have been killed. Close to 20,000 injured. And you didn't take to Twitter to glorify them. You didn't stand up for them. You didn't argue for them.
You're not the Democratic Party or necessarily Democrats. But you do self-present as peaceful. Strangely, there's little in your actual work to back up that claim.
What do you care about?
So Iran would shoot down a Ukrainian passenger jet while trying not to start a war? I don’t believe it. This incident must be investigated by a neutral nation.
#PS752 #NoWarOnIran
Okay, Margaret, you be an apologist for Iran. But don't pretend you're about peace. People who give a damn about peace -- or democracy or self-determination -- will note the ongoing protests.
It's not like you haven't had time to note them, the protests have been going on for some time. September 28th, came the news that Iraq's Prime Minister Adil Abdul Mahdi had fired Lt Gen Abdul Wahab al-Saadi the previous day. The lieutenant general was considered key to defeating the Islamic State in Mosul. He was the commander of the Iraqi Counter-Terrosim Forces and his firing was seen as a move by Mahdi to appease the Iranian-backed militias. THE WASHINGTON POST's Liz Sly observed, "Iraq's Lt Gen Abdulwahab al-Saadi became a national hero during the ISIS war. Lots of speculation that he's been removed at the behest of Iran which sees him as a threat." MIDDLE EAST EYE noted, "Iraqis across the country - including in battered Mosul, where a statue of Saadi was erected but never unveiled due to divisions in the city - reacted with shock to the move. The hashtag 'We are all Abdulwahab al-Saadi' began trending on Twitter, with users sharing photographs of the general aiding civilians in Mosul and other cities." Despite an online outcry, Mahdi insisted, "The decision is irreversible." September 29th, a protest took place in Mosul, as journalist Mustafa Habib noted in real time. By October 1st, as we noted in that day's snapshot, protests had spread across Iraq and we pointed out, "It is at least the third major protest in the last seven days." we noted Lawk Ghafuri (RUDAW) reporting on the first protest of the last seven days which had taken place in Baghdad the previous Wednesday outside the Council of Ministers as Iraqis with various advanced degrees protested over corruption and unemployment and were met with water cannons (Lawk noted this video). On October 1st, Mohammed Rwanduzy (RUDAW) reports:
Hundreds of Iraqis protested in Baghdad’s Tahrir Square on Tuesday to express diverse, long-brewing grievances, including, a lack of basic services, rampant corruption, and unequal treatment within the Iraqi Army.
Civilian protestors expressed anger about the Friday dismissal of Iraqi Army commander Lt. Gen. Abdul Wahab al-Saadi, credited with the defeat of the Islamic State (ISIS) in Iraq, from the Iraqi Counter-Terrorism Services (ICTS). Civilian protestors holding pictures of al-Saadi disapproved of his subsequent transfer to the Ministry of Defense.
“We don't want this is corrupt government,” civilians chanted, while others extended their discontent to the parliament and presidency. “All are corrupt equally,” a protestor said.
Also on October 1st, Mustafa Habib observed, "All the world expected big protests in Iraq this summer bud did not happen because they want to give the govt a chance despite the continued poor services, but after the govt's decision to remove Saadi, the protests began today from Baghdad & may be the biggest." Somehow the western press that has followed has left out the firing of the lieutenant general and the fact that the protest started at the end of September." The protests over the firing of al-Saadi only reached Baghdad on October 1st but they were already taking place. And on October 1st, protests also took place in Basra and Missan. The Iraqi government set the pattern for their response that day: Violence. Margaret Griffis (ANTIWAR.COM) noted, "Protests across Iraq have left at least 10 dead and 286 wounded. [. . .] The fatalities occurred in Baghdad and Nasariya. At least 11 people were arrested in Basra. [. . . ] Security personnel at some point had turned to live ammunition to disperse the crowds. Demonstrations were also reported in Basra, Dhi Qar, Diwaniya, Karbala, Najaf, Nasariya and Wasit. Use of live ammo to clear protesters was also reported in Nasariya, where a fatality occurred. Among the complaints are lack of basic services, rampant corruption, and unequal treatment within the Iraqi Army."
By October 2nd, the Iraqi government had imposed a curfew. Ali Alzzawi pointed out that the government also "blocked the internet so they can do whatever they want to those peaceful protesters." ALJAZEERA's Imran Khan reported, "They are restricting live broadcasts from the protest scene, as well as social media platforms, like Facebook and Twitter." At that point, the death toll was at least 20. By Saturday, Hamdi Alkhshali, Mohammed Tawfeeq and Tamara Qiblawi (CNN) would report the death toll had reached 93. December 14th, the REUTERS death toll stood at 440. Today, Tallah Abdulrzaq (TRT WORLD) observed, "More than 500 Iraqi protesters have been killed by security services and militias with little indication that those responsible will be brought to justice."
If you're new to the protests, you should refer to Dirk Adriaensens' "Iraq: The October Revolution of 2019 and the Iran-US Conflict" (GLOBAL RESEARCH).
ADDED: I am not John Stauber but I wish I had many of his traits. No, he is not perfect -- none of us are -- but he reminds me daily on his Twitter feed just how important of a voice he is. He calls out anyone who needs to be called out and we need him on the left desperately. Just one Tweet that reminds me again of how important he is (and how thankful I am that he is around):
Galling maybe, but typical. In 2007 @SpeakerPelosi gave Bush all the $ he wanted and more for war in #Iraq. Then @TheDemocrats ran against the war, and thank God #Obama the Nobel man of peace ended it or we’d still be there!
The following sites updated:
No comments:
Post a Comment