• Some people on here have said that the CIA might have helped ISIS with Foley’s death. I think that’s nonsense.
    But there is a possibility that he may have been a “stringer” of sorts, for them. And there’s a stronger possibility that ISIS thought he was, which may have contributed to his death.

    At this point, practically every american who’s in close proximity to conflict in the mid-east, and some of them who aren’t in close proximity, has to know that they may be a target of kidnapping. I sympathize with Foley and his family, but he surely knew what the risks were, of being in the middle of the bloody chaos of Syria.

  • tanbark commented on the blog post Obama Defenders Will Never Let the Filibuster Myth Die

    2014-08-26 13:10:32View | Delete

    Good on you, Jon, for re-visiting this particular piece of bullshit by Obama’s defenders, for his sellout.

    He completely lost me when he had Pelosi stuff the effort by some House dems to strip the HMO’s of their exemption from our antitrust laws. At that time, he had a 79 seat majority in the House, AND, he badly needed a legislative win, with so many good progressives already asking “WTF???” for his licking of John Boehner’s ass. It would have been a piece of cake to bring that bill up and force the repubs to take a stand on it. He could have gotten in the pulpit and racked conservative ass up one side and down the other.

    Instead, he had Pelosi bury the bill, and that was that.

    I’m not interested in hearing the apologists poor-mouth about not being able to deal with a filibuster. If they HAD gone to that, he could have flayed the hide off them. He just doesn’t want to confront the assholes. As a friend says, we should have saved some of LBJ’s DNA and injected Obama with it. If Johnson had had the smarts to not jump into Vietnam with both feet, he could have been on Mount Rushmore. Sighhh…..

  • Flacking for these bloody shits has always been lucrative, but after Bush’s (AND Blair’s) “freeing” of Iraq, it’s become a full-on get-rich-quick “job”.

  • tanbark commented on the blog post The Weekend Roundup for August 23-24th, 2014

    2014-08-25 07:51:03View | Delete

    I don’t think the Ukrainian government shot down the plane. I think it was very likely that the separatists did it, thinking they were firing on a Ukrainian military jet. Horrible, even if it was an “accident’, but in the context of what was going on at the time, the claims from the government that they knew it was a civilian plane, are more highly useful agit-prop.

    In the halls of the Ukrainian government, you could probably have cut the schadenfreude with a knife.

  • tanbark commented on the blog post The Weekend Roundup for August 23-24th, 2014

    2014-08-25 07:41:28View | Delete

    About a week ago there was a PRI (Public Radio International) interview with an american journalist (I think she was american…) who is fluent in Russian. She was one of the first journalists to visit the MH17 site, and she was astounded at how few people there were there. No cordoned-off areas, no yellow tape…just a few people wandering around looking at the wreckage and the bodies, which were spread out over a large area. The reason for how few people there were at the site at that time is that the Ukraine had been regularly bombing the area…to the extent that most of the people who lived there had left. The point is, that if it was the separatists who shot down MH17, using Russian missiles, they were probably responding to what they though was another bombing mission by the Ukrainian government. It doesn’t make the incident any less tragic, but, as with so much of the sanctimonious teeth-gnashing by the government side, about innocent lives lost, the whole truth needs to be out, not just the part that supports the IMF and the EU, etc., as they try to dragoon the eastern Ukraine into dog-eat-dog corporatism.
    I’ve also read that the Ukrainian government possesses some of the same BUK missiles which are supposed to have been used to shoot down the airliner, courtesy of Russia, when the country had a government which was more sympathetic to Russia.

    It’s worth repeating that Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, is on the board of the largest private Natural Gas company in the Ukraine. No time wasted there…

    And speaking of sanctimony, the US shreiks of outrage need to be put in the context of those dirty little words: “USS Vincennes”. I won’t repeat all of the shit we pulled to try exculpate the deaths of those 290-odd
    Iranians, but if you’d like to get your hair raised a little, just google it.

  • I’m argued out for the day. Here’s a little something to lighten everybody’s load. It sure lighten’s mine. :o)

    Steve Sparkman, Ralph’s banjo player, with “Clinch Mountain Backstep”:


  • No, Jed, I’m gonna stay right here. And you’re going to have to deal with the fact that our help for the Iraqis is crucial to their stopping the evils of ISIS. It’s already happening. If you don’t think so, then you aren’t paying attention.

  • Yep. I think that’s true.

    But he heeded them when they were telling him that the Cubans were chafing at the bit to get rid of Castro and all that was needed was a determined armed group and the people would rally to them.

    It was, of course, all bullshit.

    Later, he lamented: “How could I have listened to them?”

    And, Onitgoes is right: No good answers.

  • Just to make things worse, there’s been an attack on a Sunni mosque during prayers, by Shiite “militias”, which killed at least 64 people.


    Abadi has his work cut out for him.

  • Onitgoes:

    “What would I do? Let this thing play out.”

    You mean, leave ISIS in control of all that Mosul dam water, and the power that goes with it?

    Leave them to rout more of the Peshmerga, and then take Irbil?

    Would you have left the Yazidis’ marooned on that mountaintop?

    Sorry, I don’t think those are very good options, especially not for the people who have come under their control.

  • Well, here’s some more to laugh at:

    The fuckup of the Bay of Pigs?

    CIA, down the line. Are you saying they covered their tracks for that? If you are, then put on your foil hat and go sit in the corner.

    In Daddy bush’s invasion of Iraq, the CIA warned all and sundry that Iraq had hardware that was nearly invincible. In the event, those Russian T-72′s proved to be highly flammable. Same thing with their wonderful artillery and how highly motivated were the Iraqi grunts…which turned out to be not very high.

    CIA involvement with the mob, to try to assassinate Castro? An absolute given, now.

    The CIA has been caught out, again and again. But I guess that doesn’t square with your worldview.

  • “Right now that Kabul govenment looks pretty good.

    No. Shit.

    And what was amazing was how long it survived, after the Russians pulled out.

    Of course, we missed the boat when we didn’t support Massoud, rest his bones. He was, by far, the best bet for a warlord who just might have been able to pick up the pieces, or most of them, and hold them together.

  • Tuezday, you’re probably right, and Grayson is so unabashedly liberal that I think he’d start with two strikes against him.

    It’s just that he cuts through the rightwing bullshit, when he talks, and says the things that Obama should have been saying from day one of his presidency.

  • BTW, On it:

    I think it’s…contrary…to say that we’re supplying arms and money to ISIS, at the same time Obama is ordering air strikes against them, and expending political capital, which he hordes until it’s rotted to dust, to do it.

    I think it’s contrary to say that the US is complicit in the of murder Jim Foley….or, that we are also involved in the slaughter of those Yazidi men who wouldn’t convert to Islam.

    The level of conspiracy that you’re positing would involve so many people that sooner or later, some of them would “out” what had happened, and the blowback would be ruinous to anyone involved.

  • Jed, I was going to take the time to reply, one-by-one, but I got to the end of the post, and read:

    “A nation of morons ruled by the CIA.”

    And I just think that you’re at a level of conspiracy theory that won’t register anything I say.

    Some of the people in the CIA are murderous bastards, but imbuing them with satanic genius is, I think, demonstrably wrong. As often as not, they could fuck up a two car funeral, but they don’t rule us. If they did, FDL wouldn’t be rolling right along. :o)

  • Onit, I don’t know what to say. If you think that we’re giving money and arms to ISIS, then, I’d like to see the “dots” that you’re talking about.

    I think the only way they got anything from us, was as a spin-off back when the crazy-quilt of the Syrian resistance still seemed to have a chance overthrow Assad, and calling that “support for ISIS”, or using it to say that we created ISIS, makes no sense at all.

    You say you think that we MIGHT have had something to do with ISIS’s murder of Foley. Can you talk about that?

    Did we furnish them info as to where they might capture he and the other three journalists?

    We mounted an ops to try rescue them, in Syria. Do you think that was a big scam? Do you think that Obama played golf with someone whom he told: “Our Seals are coming after the journalist hostages. Tell ISIS to move them.” Did he tell someone at a CIA back-channel: “We need to fan the flames. Tell ISIS to do a video of the decapitation of Foley.”

    Your feel that Obama is directly under the control of the 1%. I have to take issue with that. I think that his entire presidency has been colored by the fact that the man just doesn’t like confrontations. I do think that he fears rocking the economic status quo boat, but I don’t think that the Fortune 500 cabal has a direct line to the White House to tell him when to sit and when to stand.

    I’m glad you didn’t want to hear the details of Foley’s death. I didn’t either, and I won’t watch the video.

    But I also think that the people on here who are so sure that it’s going to make a groundswell of support for re-occupying Iraq, are as wrong as can be. As horrific as was Foley’s execution, it was just one more death at the hands of these fanatics, and you, or someone, is going to have to come up with hard evidence that our government was complicit in it, to get me to change my mind.

    And we come back to; What would you do, now?

  • Onit; good words. I agree; the bloom is off the Hillary rose at FDL.

    I don’t see Warren as a savior. I was fairly outspoken about her when she stuck with Obama’s little thing of “Maybe I’ll push for that up-or-down vote, or maybe I won’t.” Which went on for a year or more.

    But she’s shown a clear willlingness to go after Wall Street. How much of that would she carry into the White House, IF she can win, is a good question, but to me, at this point, she’s the best of a sorry lot.

    My fantasy? Alan Grayson in the White House. He aint perfect, either, but he plainly ENJOYS racking republican ass. :o)

    Would that Obama had a few of those genes in his DNA.

  • “you have no evidence that this time would be different.”

    I beg to differ:

    The Yazidis, or most of them, are out of the hands of ISIS.

    The Mosul dam is back under the control of Iraqi troops.

    Irbil is not being threatened.

    The Sunnis are beginning to move against ISIS.

    In point of fact, the momentum they’ve had, is gone.

    As a “pro-interventionist” (I’m perfectly willing to answer your question) I plan to rely on the fact that Barack Obama, for all of his squandering of a great opportunity to begin to roll back the corporate power in the US, is not stupid enough to try to re-occupy Iraq. If he were, the opposition to it would be enormous.

    I appreciate that you’re honest enough to say that you don’t know what YOU would do, but your claim that the “false dilemma” of helping the Iraqis deal with ISIS serves only the interests of the 1% in the US, is nonsense on the face of it. It’s clearly slowing ISIS and their aggression and their atrocities. In fact, it’s beginning to roll back the power and influence they had gained.

  • I don’t think we’re funding ISIS. Where are you getting that?

    Do you seriously think that we support the threat that they’ve mounted against Iraq?

    That we wanted them to have control of that Mosul dam? And to threaten Irbil and the Kurds?

    That we support the slaughter of innocent people who refuse to convert to Islam?

    That we have a direct complicity in the murder of Jim Foley?

    Do you think that we’ve furnished the ISIS fighters in Iraq with money and arms? I mean, it’s entirely possible that some of the support we sent to the Syrian Resistance might have wound up in the hands of those people, but stretching that to “We support ISIS”, is nonsense.

    That’s so contrary and bizarre…

  • Well, Flat, at the very least, you come up with something. Lately, that just about puts you in a class by yourself. :o)

    Gotta ask for some details. How is Iran going to stop ISIS? Iranian troops or air support are out of the question. So, I think, are outright weapons shipments, and if anyone is going to give weapons to the Iraqis (again) then I think it should be us, not Iran. I just don’t see how Iran can have much effect on ISIS, now.

    Telling the Saudis: “You funded them, you deal with them.” would almost certainly mean that they wouldn’t get dealt with, unless it was by cutting their funds, which may have already happened. But at this point, I think that’s not enough to rein them in.

    I’m all for exposing anyone who’s supporting ISIS and their crimes…regardless of any “friendly” petro-deal toes that get stepped on.

  • Load More