Monday, October 23, 2017

What we need

Tyler Durden (ICH) reports:

In a lengthy interview with The New York Times recently, 93-year-old former President Jimmy Carter cut loose on some painful establishment 'facts'.
As's Joseph Curl reports, The Times decided to play up the fact that Carter would love to go over to North Korea as an envoy. But the Times is steadily proving how out of touch it is -- and how it no longer seems to actually "get" what real news is.
Here are some major highlights from the interview:
1. The Russians didn't steal the 2016 election.
Carter was asked "Did the Russians purloin the election from Hillary?"

"I don’t think there’s any evidence that what the Russians did changed enough votes — or any votes," Carter said. 
So the hard-left former president doesn't think the Russians stole the election? Take note, Capitol Hill Democrats.
2. We didn't vote for Hillary.
Carter and his wife, Roselyn, disagreed on the Russia question. In the interview, she "looked over archly [and said] 'They obviously did'" purloin the election. 
“Rosie and I have a difference of opinion on that,” Carter said.
Rosalynn then said, “The drip-drip-drip about Hillary.” 
Which prompted Carter to note that during the primary, they didn't vote for Hillary Clinton. "We voted for Sanders.”
3. Obama fell far short of his promises.
Barack Obama whooshed into office on pledges of delivering "hope and change" to the country, spilt by partisan politics. 
He didn't. In fact, he made it worse. 
"He made some very wonderful statements, in my opinion, when he first got in office, and then he reneged on that," he said about Obama's action on the Middle East.

Good for Jimmy Carter, we need some truth telling.

This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot" for today:

Monday, October 23, 2017.

We'll start with this Tweet.

The General Retweeted Ana Navarro
No, you are disgusting, politicizing his death.Under Obama,75%of total deaths in Iraq & Afghanistan happened,how much attention did they get
The General added,

I have no idea about the percentages cited but I do know that Ana Navarro is full of it.

Ana Navarro is playing political with death.  She doesn’t care about the dead she cites and, in fact, only cites him to continue her war on Donald Trump.

She’s had nothing to say about Alex Missildine, not one Tweet.

  1. Specialist Alexander W. Missildine's journey home is complete. He was laid to final rest Monday in Tyler:

  2. ICYMI: Tyler welcomes home fallen soldier, Spc. Alexander Missildine.

And yet she wants to present herself as on the side of the fallen.

Oh go do another fundraiser for the Contras, fake ass Ana..

Alex didn't mean a damn thing to Ana.  She's a fake ass.  And it's interesting to watch the fake asses line up and pretend like they care.

Take the laughable jerk at THE GUARDIAN who Tweeted this b.s.:

This is a notable detail. Missildine was from Tyler, in Smith County, Texas - solidly Republican.

Solidly Republican?

Tyler has a Democrat for a mayor.

For decades, they had a Democrat in Congress.  That stopped in 2004.  But not because they stopped for their incumbent -- their incumbent switched parties in 2004.

Here's another little detail, Charles Arthur.  The local media?  It covers up for Republicans.  There was a short Republican (he always stood on a box for TV).  He was in the midst of a re-election campaign.  He was cheating on his wife.  His wife found out.  She filed for a divorce.  Over a month ahead of the election.  The media knew the story and ignored it.  Anywhere else, that would be huge.

So maybe the results have something to do with the media -- imagine that.

More to the point, WTF does it matter?

Alex Missildine is dead.  His government sent him to Iraq.  He was killed in an ongoing war -- a war the media began ignoring after the November 2008 election.  They began withdrawing.  Remember, ABC announced they'd 'cover' it by airing reports from the BBC.  You got fly over journalism at best from the network news.

The death of Alex is a scandal.  This war was supposed to be over.  But it's not.

And little prisses -- little lying prisses -- like Ana Navarro and Charles Arthur ignore Alex's death because he doesn't fit their agenda -- destroying Donald Trump.

It's an agenda Americans see.

I have an agenda here.  I want the war to end.  I want the Iraqi people to be able to determine their own future.

It's been my agenda all these years the site's been around and, in fact, since February 2003 when I first began speaking publicly against the impending -- and illegal -- war.

My agenda isn't partisan.

But the efforts to destroy Donald Trump are.

Does the media really think the American people don’t notice this?

You don’t think Americans are noting this?

You don’t think the American people aren’t aware that after eight years of kissing Barack Obama’s ass they now attack Donald Trump every day.

Reality that the partisans don't get -- more and more Americans are not voting.

Your bitching and moaning and never delivering is why.

You are running off voters.

And this group of people, they really don't give a damn that you didn't get to climax at the end of the 2016 election because Hillary Clinton lost.

They know Hillary was a fraud and a War Hawk.

They watch your nonsense and do so with dismay.

All you're doing is building up good will for Trump.

And I warned about this several times during the 2016 election.

You people are working to give him a second term and you don't even grasp that.

A ridiculous segment on GOOD MORNING AMERICA today with a widow who’s unhappy with the way Donald Trump spoke?

To her?

Possibly to her uncle.  She had him put it on speaker phone.

The widow wants to know why her husband died.

I think we’d all like to know what US troops were doing in Niger.

She has nothing to say to Donald Trump (“No, I don’t have nothing to say to him.”)

Reality, any person in the world can be mad at any president because someone dies.

And they don’t have to explain why.

But if they make a spectacle of themselves – and this woman has – they invite comment.

We supported Cindy Sheehan and we supported Pat Stevens.  Both women were asking questions about their children’s deaths.

Their issue wasn’t over “tone” – as the widow insisted she found his “tone” offensive and felt that he stumbled over her husband’s name (La David Johnson).

Oh, I’m so sorry. 

I’m so sorry I can’t work up any sympathy for you that your husband’s name may have been mangled in the phone call.

There are serious problems.

I would agree that why her husband was in Niger was one of them.

I’m not really worried about tone or claims Donald stumbled over the name (which he has denied on Twitter).

I understand that she is bothered.

I understand that because she’s made us all a part of her family drama.

For days now.

You have a moment in the national spotlight.  Focus.  Make your presentation. 

Meandering bores us all.

Stop with the silly nonsense and make your issue an important one: Why was my husband in Niger?

Or if silly nonsense is your main thing go on about how your husband’s name was mispronounced or stumbled over and how you feel the tone was wrong and how you feel this and that and –

Notice the yawns from the audience.

Stevie Wonder once sang, “Love’s in need of love today.”  It’s equally true that patience is in short supply and once you’ve exhausted our patience, lots of luck getting it back.

Or as Joni Mitchell put it in “Dog Eat Dog:”

Land of snap decisions
Land of short attention span
Nothing is savored long enough
To really understand

When you go before the microphone, you can’t wing it.

You need to know what you want to accomplish and how you aim to do so.

Otherwise, you’re just floundering.

Right or wrong, that’s why late night talk shows do the pre-interviews today.

A smart person would have their target statements ready.

And if they wanted to be seen as petulant, they’d do what the widow did today.

If they wanted to accomplish anything, they’d present themselves as someone who is making a point to rise above politics.  That will always accomplish more than anything – regardless of who is in the Oval Office.

The widow’s comments are personal and sound like attacks.  This puts it with an attack that was launched by a Florida politician on this.

In America, citizens can attack anyone – we have no kings or queens.

And if that makes them feel better, great.

So if that’s all the widow is after, she’s a success and can be happy with what she’s achieved.

But it seemed like she wanted more.

Americans would have supported her in that.

But she's got partisans like Ann Navarro on her side so she's already suspect.

Is this for real or another way to pump up outrage against Donald Trump?

All these efforts at daily outrage are what we'll help Donald have a second term.

It's no secret that I do not like Donald Trump.  I personally loathe him and that's from my own encounters with him.  He's interested only in himself, he's always selling a product and that product is always the Trump brand.

It would be very easy (and, let's be honest, a lot of fun) to join in the pile on and trash him every day.

We're not doing that.

When we call him out -- here or at THIRD -- it's because of a real issue.

And hopefully that resonates because we are not doing the daily pile on.  Or acting like something typical and expected is some huge outrage.

(Reality, La David is not the only person who is serving nor was he the only person killed.  In the real world, we're all aware that a president is using notes when speaking to families. That is not grounds for an outrage.)

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson remains in the news.  As we noted last night, he didn't seem to know what he was talking about when he ordered all Iranian militias out of Iraq.  Possibly, he meant Iranian-backed militias?  Or possibly he has information that most of us don't and Iranian militias have been participating in the attacks on the Kurds?

Tillerson demands Iranian militias leave Iraq

RUDAW explains:

The office of Iraqi prime minister said on Monday that US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson had no right to tell the Iraqis what do and that his call for the militia groups to disband and "go home" was wrong because they are Iraqi fighters and government command.

"The warriors of the Hashd al-Shaabi are patriotic Iraqis and paid with their lives in the defense of their country and the people of Iraq and they abide by the Iraqi command according to the law of the parliament," said a statement from PM Haider al-Abadi's office.

These words came in response to US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson who said in Riyadh on Sunday that Iranian-backed Shiite militias in Iraq must go home now that the war with ISIS was ending.

REUTERS offers:

Speaking after a meeting on Sunday with Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi and Saudi Arabia'sKing Salman, Tillerson said it was time for the Iraqi Popular Mobilisation forces and their Iranian advisers to "go home".

The US government sided with Baghdad.  They turned their backs on the Kurds.  And Tillerson is now being attacked by the Baghdad-based government.

. North of . The West betrays . But the demonstrate against Iranian and Iraqi occupation .

At TABLET, Bernard-Henri Levy writes:

The referendum having been conducted under conditions of such exemplary transparency that no doubt remains as to the popular will, the community of democratic nations, with the exception of Israel, rushes to condemn the blow to Iraq’s “unity,” “sovereignty,” and “stability.” As if Iraq were not instability in state form! As if the country of Saddam Hussein and of the Bushes’ wars, a country now under the thumb of Iran, were not already the theater of a nonstop civil war between rival communities and faiths, beginning with the Shias and the Sunnis!
With the Kurds putting out flags as far as Kirkuk (where a majority voted yes), the carrot yields quickly to the stick of thinly veiled threats: “Erdogan is unhappy (the Kurds are told); Bashar al-Assad is worried; Iran is showing its teeth; don’t forget that all three have Kurdish minorities that might be tempted by irredentism; if they should decide to punish you, we won’t be able to do anything about it.” And, in fact, I find myself in Erbil on the evening of Sept. 26, when the news arrives that Iraq will impose a terrestrial and aerial blockade if the results of the referendum are not “canceled” within three days. That night, I watch and listen as Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani makes calls to some Western capitals, where no one seems to be answering the phone…
And when, three weeks later, on Oct. 15, the head of Iraq’s government, Haider al-Abadi, who received the message loud and clear and did not have to be told twice, sends in his Shia “people’s militias,” led by Revolutionary Guards and backed up by Iraq’s 9th Armored Division, federal police, and American-trained counterterrorism units, not a murmur of protest is heard. Washington, whose satellites can detect the slightest ground movements and whose military advisers monitor Baghdad’s army, no doubt has given an implicit green light as the Abrams tanks and the Humvees begin to roll. And not a word is said as this all-powerful and spanking new armada bears down on the Peshmerga who, as everyone knows, received equipment at a trickle during the war against ISIS and now find themselves without heavy arms and anti-tank weapons.

It has been pointed out that the progress of the militias was greatly facilitated by discord in the Kurdish ranks and by the treason of several commanders with ties to the PUK, the party of Jalal Talabani, Barzani’s long-time rival, who died on Oct. 3. This is accurate. Moreover, it was quickly learned that surrenders, or refusals to fight, had been negotiated ahead of time by Talabani’s eldest son, Bafel, and the deputy of Gen. Qassem Souleimani, the Iranian proconsul, who reportedly was on the spot before, during, and after the attack.

And this is not 'past,' the attacks continue.

In the last 48 hrs, Iraq has continued to deploy tanks and artillery, as well as US equipment, incl Humvees and Armored Personnel Carriers.


iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq Iraq