Tuesday, January 19, 2016

Bill is an issue


 Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "The Closing Argument" captures the vile Hillary.


closingargument


Meanwhile Megan Burbank (THE STRANGER) frets, "Can We Maybe Stop Asking Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton About Her Husband?"

No, dunce, we can't.

We didn't stop asking candidate Bill about his wife.

The spouse of the candidate is always news.

Equally true, Hillary keeps bringing up her time as First Lady as part of her experience.

That's connected to Bill Clinton.

You may not like her being asked about him, but it's not out of line.

Considering all he's been accused of doing to women, people need to be pondering what Bill returning to the White House might mean.






"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Monday, January 18, 2016.  Chaos and violence continue, 3 Americans are missing in Iraq, the Sunnis continue to be persecuted, the Democratic Party's presidential contenders talk ISIS, and much more.



Yesterday, Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) broke the news that 3 Americans were missing in Iraq. This morning, CBS NEWS and AP report, "A group of Americans who went missing over the weekend in Iraq were kidnapped from their interpreter's home in Baghdad, according to an Iraqi government intelligence official."

Where were they kidnapped from?

Some are calling it a "brothel" which may or may not be the case.  As Richard Spencer (TELEGRAPH OF LONDON) explains:



Others suggested it was a place known for “illicit” parties involving alcohol - something that would not be illegal in Baghdad. But in strict Sunni or Shia areas some residents might describe such a place as a brothel whether it was or was not.
[. . .]
The three Americans may have been caught up in one of the periodic sweeps of Baghdad by the Shia militias, who can be as violent as their Sunni jihadist counterparts. In one raid 18 months ago, 25 women were shot dead by militiamen who raided a house said to have been used as a brothel in the east of the city. 


Charges of a bordello should always be considered charges and not reality unless it's confirmed.  If you want to smear your enemies (or justify killing them), militias know the easiest way is to insist the site was a "brothel."

Of the three Americans, FOX NEWS notes, "One of the Americans is a woman, The Wall Street Journal reports.A police official identified the woman as Iraqi-American Russel Furat. An Iraqi military official told the newspaper the two men kidnapped are Iraqi-American Wael al-Mahdawy and Egyptian-American Amro Mohammed."

On THE NEWSHOUR (PBS -- link is text, audio and video) tonight, anchor Judy Woodruff noted the events.

JUDY WOODRUFF:  A key Sunni figure strongly condemned the growing wave of abductions.

ABDUL-LATIF AL-HIMAIM, Head of Sunni Endowment, Iraq (through interpreter): We reject any kidnap operation. We fully support the government, stability and security. We absolutely condemn and reject anyone who violates the law and disturbs security and stability. We denounce outlawed acts and kidnappings. Such acts are rejected from any party.


THE WALL STREET JOURNAL'S Matt Bradley Tweets:












  • Leader in Asaib Ahl Al Haq militia denies reports in that they were behind Sunday's kidnappings of 3 Americans.



  • W.G. Dunlap (AFP) offers, "Kidnappers have recently seized Qataris and Turks, but it has been years since Americans were abducted, and it is Iraqis who have suffered the most from kidnappers seeking ransoms or to settle scores."




    Erin Cunningham (WASHINGTON POST) reviews last week's violence and notes, "Then, on Tuesday, the bullet-riddled bodies of two journalists for Iraq’s Al-Sharqiya TV, a news channel seen as sympathetic to Iraq’s Sunnis, were found outside Muqdadiyah. Sharqiya executives said Shiite militias had killed the reporters at a checkpoint."  Last week, Fred Lambert (UPI) reported on one of the other major attacks, "Shia militiamen conducted reprisal attacks against local Sunnis in Muqdadiya, Iraq, following a double bombing Monday that killed at least 20 people.  The blasts occurred in a cafe and mainly killed and injured militiamen with the Hashid Shaabi, or Popular Mobilization Forces, an Iran-trained Shia Muslim group fighting in Iraq against the Islamic State."


    Today, the US Defense Dept announced:

    Strikes in Iraq
    Attack, fighter and remotely piloted aircraft conducted 25 strikes in Iraq, coordinated with and in support of Iraq’s government:

    -- Near Kisik, three strikes struck two separate ISIL tactical units and destroyed an ISIL fighting position.

    -- Near Mosul, 10 strikes struck four separate ISIL tactical units, an ISIL communications facility, and an ISIL-used culvert and destroyed five ISIL fighting positions, two ISIL assembly areas, two ISIL weapons caches, and an ISIL excavator.

    -- Near Ramadi, eight strikes struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL vehicle-borne bomb, an ISIL vehicle, an ISIL tactical vehicle, an ISIL command and control node, an ISIL building, cratered two ISIL-used roads, and denied ISIL access to terrain.

    -- Near Sinjar, one strike destroyed an ISIL vehicle.

    -- Near Qayyarah, three strikes struck two ISIL-used culverts and denied ISIL access to terrain.


    Task force officials define a strike as one or more kinetic events that occur in roughly the same geographic location to produce a single, sometimes cumulative, effect. Therefore, officials explained, a single aircraft delivering a single weapon against a lone ISIL vehicle is one strike, but so is multiple aircraft delivering dozens of weapons against buildings, vehicles and weapon systems in a compound, for example, having the cumulative effect of making those targets harder or impossible for ISIL to use. Accordingly, officials said, they do not report the number or type of aircraft employed in a strike, the number of munitions dropped in each strike, or the number of individual munition impact points against a target.



    Where is the plan?


    Hillary Clinton's been claiming she has a plan.  She made that claim again Sunday night during the Democratic Party's debate moderated by NBC News' Lester Holt and Andrea Mitchell and featuring Clinton and other contenders for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination -- Bernie Sanders and Martin O'Malley.

    Excerpt from THE WASHINGTON POST transcript:


    MITCHELL: You mentioned Syria. Let me ask you about Syria, all of you. Let's turn to Syria and the civil war that has been raging there. Are there any circumstances in which you could see deploying significant numbers of ground forces in Syria, not just specials forces but significant ground forces to combat ISIS in a direct combat role?
    Let me start with you Secretary Clinton.


    CLINTON: Absolutely not.
    I have a three point plan that does not include American Ground forces. It includes the United States leading an air coalition which is what we're doing, supporting fighters on the ground; the Iraqi Army which is beginning to show more ability, the Sunni fighters that we are now helping to reconstitute and Kurdish on both sides of the border.

    I think we also have try to disrupt their supply chain of foreign fighters and foreign money and we do have to contest them in online space. So I'm very committed to both going after ISIS but also supporting what Secretary Kerry is doing to try to move on a political diplomatic to try to begin to slow down and hopefully end the carnage in Syria which is the root of so many of the problems that we seen in the region and  beyond.



    At her website?


    You can find this:


  • Defeating ISIS. ISIS and the foreign terrorist fighters it recruits pose a serious threat to America and our allies. We will confront and defeat them in a way that builds greater stability across the region, without miring our troops in another misguided ground war. Hillary will empower our partners to defeat terrorism and the ideologies that drive it, including through our ongoing partnership to build Iraqi military and governing capacity, our commitment to Afghanistan’s democracy and security, and by supporting efforts to restore stability to Libya and Yemen.



  • Is that her three-part plan?

    That's all she's got at her website and it's a tiny paragraph in the midst of her national security page.


    What would Senator Bernie Sanders do?


    He declared, "We should -- we should learn -- we should learn from King Abdullah of Jordan, one of the few heroes in a very unheroic place. And what Abdullah said is this is a war with a soul of Islam and that Muslim troops should be on the ground with our support and the support of other major countries. That is how we destroy ISIS, not with American troops in perpetual warfare."

    Seriously?

    That's his 'left' answer?

    Not one word about diplomacy?

    Not one word about needing to address the persecution of the Sunnis in Iraq?


  • Iraqi army crimes everyday arrested Iraqis Sunnis civilians without charge or guilt & tortured them
    Embedded image permalink
    Embedded image permalink
  • Shia militias crimes معمم شيعي ينهب ممتلكات العوائل السنيه العراقية في ديالى ماذا سيقول للتاريخ عن هذه الصورة
    Embedded image permalink
  • Shia militias crimes looting properties of Sunnis civilians in Save sunnis civilians plz
    Embedded image permalink
  • Shia militias crimes عاجل مهم مليشات شيعيه تفجر الان بيوت العوائل السنيه العراقية ببغداد الطارميه وتنادي ارحلوا
    Embedded image permalink


  • Shia militias crimes destroyed Iraqis Sunnis civilians houses in Save Sunnis civilians
    Embedded image permalink



  • Like Bernie, Barack Obama also misses this point about the need to address the persecution of Sunnis in Iraq.  Friday, the White House issued the following:

    January 15, 2015 | The White House | Office of the Press Secretary
    President Obama today convened his National Security Council to discuss the intensification of our campaign to degrade and destroy ISIL. The President was briefed on recent progress by Iraqi security forces in taking back Ramadi, and on ways we and our partners in the Global Coalition to Counter ISIL continue to accelerate and integrate the military campaign on all possible fronts in Iraq and Syria.

    The President directed his national security team to continue to intensify ongoing efforts to degrade and destroy ISIL, including by working with our partners to increase our military cooperation, disrupting foreign fighter networks, halting ISIL expansion outside of Syria and Iraq, countering ISIL financing, disrupting any ISIL external plotting efforts, and countering ISIL's propaganda and messaging. The President emphasized that degrading and destroying ISIL will continue to require coordination and cooperation among a wide range of global partners, and the United States is strongly committed to continuing to lead the shared efforts of the Global Coalition to Counter ISIL.



    Not one word about the Sunnis.


    Dropping back to the January 7th snapshot:




    Over the weekend, Karen DeYoung (WASHINGTON POST) reported:

    The current prime minister, Haider al-Abadi, also a Shiite, has given much lip service to inclusion but has made little headway in changing Iraq’s sectarian equation. “All these things have to move in harmony. . . . You can’t simply focus on the military and ignore political factors,” said the senior administration official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal assessments.
    “Our diplomats are working day in and day out” on Iraqi political reconciliation, the official said, “but in some ways it is even more difficult. . . . These are existential questions that the Iraqis are asking themselves.”




    The diplomats are working very hard, are they?

    So Barack got his Iran deal but didn't think to secure the release of American hostages.

    Meanwhile the Iraqi government does as it damn well pleases despite years of promises to institute reconciliation and Barack just hands over anything to them.

    It's difficult, the official told Karen DeYoung.

    It's not that difficult.

    Iraq wants a weapons sale worth $800 million?

    That's a want.

    The White House then tosses out their want.

    The Iraqi government has to give a little or there's no deal.

    That's what deal making is, that's what diplomacy is.

    In June of 2014, Barack publicly declared that the only answer to Iraq's crises was a political solution.

    Yet in August of 2014, he started bombing Iraq.

    He used the US military, his envoy and the State Dept to work on more military means.

    And there's been no progress on the political front.

    None at all.



    In "The debate (Iraq)" at Third last night, we gave Hillary credit for telling some truth:



    At one point, we were all booing.

    Three candidates on the stage and they were all lying.

    All pimping and whoring for imperialism.

    Then to our surprise, one slipped in just a tiny bit of honesty.

    Just a tiny bit.

    And just one.


    [. . .]

    As Hillary briefly notes, "If there is any blame to be spread around, it starts with the prime minister of Iraq, who sectarianized his military, setting Shia against Sunni."


    Who would that be?


    Nouri al-Maliki.

    And if the blame "starts with the prime minister," it actually starts with Barack Obama.

    Nouri did what Hillary's alluding to during his second term.

    He didn't win a second term at the polls.

    The White House -- Barack Obama -- gifted him with a second term via a legal contract (The Erbil Agreement).

    They also backed him until the summer of 2014.

    Despite Nouri's non-stop attacks on the Sunnis in Iraq.



    Not only did Barack give Nouri a second term as prime minister, but Barack also ignored the protesters. Even when they carried signs proclaiming "Obama, if you Cannot Hear Us Can you Not See Us?"  

    And yet Barack stood with Nouri, continued to stand with him.





    Former Governor Martin O'Malley had a strong moment during the Islamic State section of the debate:


    We need to learn the lessons from the past. We do need to provide the special -- special ops advisers, we need -- do need to provide the technical support, but over the long-term, we need to develop new alliances. We need a much more proactive national security strategy that reduces these threats before they rise to a level where it feels like we need to pull for a division of marines.

    And I also want to add one other thing here. I appreciate the fact that in our debate, we don't use the term you hear Republicans throwing around trying to look all vibrato (ph) and macho sending other kids -- kids into combat, they keep using the term boots on the ground. A woman in Burlington, Iowa said to me, "Governor, when you're with your colleagues, please don't refer to my son who has served two tours of duty in Iraq as a pair of boots on the ground." Now, we need to be mindful of learning the lessons of the past. 


    Please don't refer to my son who has served two tours of duty in Iraq as a pair of boots on the ground.


    It's a message the Prime Minister of Australia clearly did not receive.  SKY NEWS reports:

    Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has made the case in Washington that the Iraqi people won't accept coalition boots on the ground in the fight to defeat Islamic State militants.
    'The destruction of ISIL requires a military solution - it requires boots on the ground,' Mr Turnbull said in a keynote speech to the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington on Monday afternoon (US time).
    'But they must be the right boots on the right ground.'









    cnn
    the telegraph of london
    richard spencer




    Saturday, January 16, 2016

    Shades Of Blue (overview)

    A few e-mails this week have wondered about SHADES OF BLUE  -- Jennifer Lopez's new NBC drama about corruption.

    I've already written about it this week with:

  • Shades of Blue (episode two)
  • Shades of Blue the pilot
  • Shades of Blue


  • So I'm just going to focus on some overview type notes/observations.

    Jennifer Lopez plays a crooked cop who thinks she's buying her daughter a successful future by being on the take.  The same daughter is what the FBI uses to force her to become a mole.

    Ray Liotta is the head of the squad.

    For the show to work, it has to come down to Jennifer and Ray -- she's the protagonist and he's the antagonist.

    Fortunately, both are delivering strong performances.

    There are other members of the squad and we see them (as well as Ray's life played by Lolita Davidovich).

    On the squad, if Ray goes through with the plan to polygraph each one, we'll probably learn more details about each one as they are polygraphed.

    The thrust of the series will, of course, be Jennifer managing not to get caught.

    It'll be cat and mouse.

    I really enjoy the show but I do question whether it will be able to continue for five seasons.

    As is.

    I mean, Ray's character could go to prison or die and a new heavy come on and spin the show in a different direction, true.

    But to stay true to what it is right now, I feel like she has to be outed as the mole at some point.

    It's like REVENGE in that manner.  I felt there was one more season there because the show had spun around but Emily could only keep secret that she was Amanda for so long.

    So those are just my basic thoughts on the show.

    If you try it, I think you'll like it.

    I'm not a big TV person and have really written repeatedly only on SMASH.

    But I really do enjoy SHADES OF BLUE.


    "Iraq snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):
    Friday, January 15, 2016.  Chaos and violence continue, the US continues bombing Iraq, Ramadi still not fully 'liberated,' THE NATION tries to have it all ways, and much more.l



    Starting with THE NATION magazine which wants credit for "Is It Time for the US to Pull Out of Iraq and Syria?" -- three different friends with the magazine lobbied for the article to be linked to.

    They got their wish -- even if only one of the three realized sometimes that's not a good thing.


    The piece is the sort of crap the magazine loves to do because it lets them cherry pick in ten years.  "As we said a decade ago . . ."


    Because the article presents four views and they can grab whichever one to make themselves look good in ten years.

    Taking an actual stand?

    That's too much for the rag.

    Jeff Faux may offer the strongest take:

    The war is already lost. None of the US governing class’ shifting war aims—stabilizing the region, defending human rights, ending terrorism, establishing democracy—can be achieved. There is no future “diplomatic” solution that justifies continuing the waste of life, treasure, and national honor.
    Our ongoing intervention in the Middle East cannot succeed for the same reason that it could not succeed in Vietnam: We are foreign invaders, brutal enough to alienate the people of Iraq and Syria but not brutal enough to subjugate them. By expanding and re-escalating the war with enough US troops and bombs—and bribes to every warlord in sight—we might (with or without the Russians) degrade and perhaps even destroy, the Islamic State organization in Iraq and Syria. But it would leave the region an even more ungovernable wasteland of death and destruction and hatred of Americans.
    ISIS is but one of many groups using that hatred as a ladder to power. 


    Muhammad Idrees Ahmad speaks like an idiot -- we have to stay, we have to help, we have to -- Save the crap.  The US government isn't helping anyone.  As for the Yazidis, they can learn to fight.  There his proof that the US is needed.  Without the US, they could have been trapped on the mountain so much longer.


    Those 'peaceful' Yazidis have since targeted Sunni civilians, killed them, for 'retaliation.'


    Clearly, they know how to kill and murder.

    And, point of fact, the rescue of the Yazidis was done by the Peshmerga -- the elite Kurdish fighting force.



    Then there's Phyllis Bennis embarrassing herself.

    Does she have a position?

    We have to talk about what we owe the people of Iraq and Syria who continue to face the consequences of years or decades of horrific wars. We have an obligation to help support reconstruction, humanitarian relief, diplomacy, compensation, and much more.
    But first, the United States needs to stop the airstrikes. They kill civilians and undermine the goal of ending popular support for ISIS. Bombing destroys cities, so ousting ISIS becomes a pyrrhic victory. 


    Yes, good to be against bomb strikes.

    Sad that our discourse is so degraded and dumbed down that being opposed to dropping bombs is now considered 'radical' and/or 'peaceful.'


    But the US has to this and has to that and blah blah blah?


    “Pulling out” is what we do with troops, planes, bombs and drones. But crafting a serious strategy does not end with pulling them out; we also need to take the money now being spent on a failing war and redirect it to serve domestic needs and to assist the countries and peoples we’ve been bombing for so long.
    .

    I'd love to get behind Phyllis but . . .

    December 2, 2004, we published "SHOULD THIS MARRIAGE BE SAVED?" which was about how this sort of 'we must' thinking just continues war and occupation.

    We've also repeatedly noted that if you spill red wine on someone's white carpet, they're not wanting you to dab at it with a towel, they just want you the hell out.

    If all that's too confusing for Phyllis, let's try this.

    If a man is beating a woman, you get the man out.  You don't say, "Let's work out the community property settlement and then we'll work on getting him out."

    Phyllis is against bombing civilians.

    Good.

    I'm glad.

    I'm sad that we're so whorish as a nation these days that we have to pat someone on the back for being against bombing civilians.  I'm sorry that the 'position' is even seen as risky today.


    But applause, Phyllis, applause.

    Now lose the laundry list of what you want for Iraq.

    Negotiating those wants is only going to continue an ongoing war.

    All US troops out of Iraq now.

    And, Phyllis, I'm being real easy on you and not slamming you for your silence on the IMF's take over of Iraq -- even though we both know you're silent on it and have been silent for months.

    Even though the IMF will be yet another form of occupation.


    So, ten years from now, THE NATION will grab one of the four positions their article presents and trumpet the one opinion as proof of the magazine's 'insight' and 'wisdom' and 'bravery.'


    Even though the article is nothing but THE NATION trying to have it all ways -- not both ways, all ways.


    Let's note some Tweets.


    Shiat militias backed by torturing Sunnies by cutting them alive in
















  • Shiite militias kill hundreds of Sunni Arabs citizens in .These actions increase terrorism in the world




  • The persecution of the Sunnis in Iraq continues.

    And the world begins to take notice even if the White House does not.

    Since August 2014, Barack's 'plan' for Iraq has been implemented.

    But the US President's plan has been short on diplomacy and short on addressing the root causes.

    Barack Obama has been, however, happy to drop bombs on Iraq.

    Repeatedly.


    Today, the US Defense Dept announced:



    Strikes in Iraq
    Attack, bomber, fighter, ground attack and remotely piloted aircraft conducted 17 strikes in Iraq, coordinated with and in support of Iraq’s government:

    -- Near Hit, two strikes struck two ISIL bomb-making facilities.

    -- Near Kisik, one strike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed four ISIL fighting positions.

    -- Near Mosul, four strikes struck a large ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL weapons cache, an ISIL vehicle, seven ISIL fighting positions, four ISIL assembly areas, an ISIL-used culvert and disabled an ISIL front end loader and denied ISIL access to terrain.

    -- Near Ramadi, three strikes struck two separate ISIL tactical units and destroyed 14 ISIL fighting positions, destroyed two ISIL recoilless rifles, 12 ISIL heavy machine guns, two ISIL sniper positions and an ISIL tactical vehicle.

    -- Near Sinjar, one strike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL heavy machine gun and an ISIL fighting position.

    -- Near Sultan Abdallah, two strikes struck two separate ISIL tactical units and destroyed two ISIL fighting positions and an ISIL assembly area.

    -- Near Tal Afar, two strikes struck two separate ISIL tactical units and destroyed an ISIL fighting position, an ISIL weapons cache and five ISIL assembly areas.

    -- Near Beiji, one strike struck a large ISIL tactical unit and destroyed three ISIL weapons caches.

    -- Near Habbaniyah, one strike destroyed three ISIL fuel tankers and an ISIL command-and-control node.


    Task force officials define a strike as one or more kinetic events that occur in roughly the same geographic location to produce a single, sometimes cumulative, effect. Therefore, officials explained, a single aircraft delivering a single weapon against a lone ISIL vehicle is one strike, but so is multiple aircraft delivering dozens of weapons against buildings, vehicles and weapon systems in a compound, for example, having the cumulative effect of making those targets harder or impossible for ISIL to use. Accordingly, officials said, they do not report the number or type of aircraft employed in a strike, the number of munitions dropped in each strike, or the number of individual munition impact points against a target.






    What has been the result of Barack's 'plan'?


    Civilian deaths to be sure.

    A country ripped apart.

    The recent Ramadi bombings have been so bad and so destructive that experts outside of Iraq are beginning to weigh whether the 'success' from bombings is worth the destruction that they inflict.


    And Ramadi, despite all those bombings, despite non-stop claims of liberation, remains to be fully liberated from the Islamic State.








  • |i army loosing more ground in north after stormed & took 8 more barracks in al-Jarayshi..





  • Heck of a job, Barry.
















  • The following community sites updated:














  •