Absolutely damning!- Hillary Clinton and the ISIS Mess

[pinebox]

This illustrates perfectly why we need Bernie for President!
#FeelTheBern

Hillary Clinton and the ISIS Mess
Hillary Clinton's speech on ISIS to the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) showed clearly what to expect in a Clinton presidency: more of the same. In her speech, Clinton doubled down on the existing, failed U.S. approach in the Middle East, the one she pursued as Secretary of State.
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2015/11/23/hillary-clinton-and-isis-mess

SNIP--

Clinton's speech shows that she and her advisors are good loyalists of the military-industrial-intelligence complex. Her speech included an impressive number of tactical elements: who should do the bombing and who should be the foot soldiers. Yet all of this tactical precision is nothing more than business as usual. Would Clinton ever have the courage and vision to push back against the U.S. security establishment, as did JFK, and thereby restore global diplomacy and reverse the upward spiral of war and terror?

SNIP--

Until today, Clinton has not acknowledged the roots of the conflict in the region, including the disastrous role that the U.S. has played, including under her watch as Secretary of State. She has not been a mastermind of it, but has been a loyal backer carried along by the CIA, the broader military-industrial-intelligence complex, and the conventional neocon thinking in DC. That's no doubt good for her national politics. It's hard to run for President as an opponent of the permanent U.S. security state. Being a card-carrying member of the U.S. security establishment is the mainstream media's definition of a "serious" candidate.

Martin O'Malley and Bernie Sanders are learning this for all their troubles. O'Malley and Sanders wisely and correctly support an America that works with other countries and with the UN Security Council to build peace in the Middle East rather than an America that continues to indulge in endless and failed CIA adventures of regime change and war. While Clinton arrogantly demands that other countries such as Russia and Iran fall squarely behind the U.S., O'Malley and Sanders recognize that it is through compromise in the UN Security Council that we can defeat ISIS and find lasting solutions in the Middle East.

Whether Clinton could ever break free of the military-industrial complex remains to be seen. If she does become president, our very survival will depend on her capacity to learn.

[seabeyond]

1. Damning, I tell you!!!

[pinebox]

4. Indeed! :)

But hey, you could care less I'm sure, right?

[polly7]

10. Because ISIS and the lying invasion of Iraq that allowed it are no biggies, right? nt.

[seabeyond]

13. Hi Polly7.

[polly7]

16. No biggie, right? Nothing to see here ......... just millions dead, maimed, homeless,

refugees trying desperately to escape the horror - drowning at sea, being treated like dogs in some places that finally allow them in - 3 y/o's lying dead on beaches.

But: hi seabeyond!. How's it goin', eh?!?

[peacebird]

19. Exactly, we cannot have change or peace if "we came, we saw, he died" is elected president

[peacebird]

18. I would change that to "the lying invasion that CREATED it"

But otherwise, great post!

[polly7]

23. Dang ......... that is a MUCH better term. Thank you. nt.

[lewebley3]

80. There is nothing Damming Hillary: She will do a great job with leading this country

[JoePhilly]

182. Damn you Hillary supporters!!!!

[seabeyond]

185. I hate the heat, hence wanting to move to the Northwest. Nt.

[leftofcool]

2. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[sibelian]

3. Oh, dear. Your natural state has reasserted itself.

Never mind.

[leftofcool]

6. What does that mean?

[sibelian]

8. You tell me.

Were there too many words?

[Buzz Clik]

63. tsk tsk. The thinly veiled insult but the lack of courage to admit it.

Come on! Step up and burn a Hide.

[leftofcool]

138. I'm pretty sure this has to do with my age and needing a bit more rest.

I let shit like this slide just by considering the source.

[reallygosh]

146. I really liked to do origami

and still do.

Perhaps. You should fold up and go home.

[reallygosh]

147. Oh....

.....forgot the crease.

[leftofcool]

154. Welcome back.

Nice try at baiting but you're not really all that good at it.

[peacebird]

21. LOL!

[Agschmid]

5. This just isn't factual.

Please review the stated positions of the candidates, they are much closer in alignment than this article or your OP suggest.

[Buzz Clik]

64. Indeed. Bernie has stated openly and clearly as much.

The only difference between Sanders and Clinton on this is that HRC wants the US to lead the effort, and Sanders wants the Muslim countries to lead.

[Fuddnik]

163. Stated positions and actual positions are two very different animals.

I used to tell people,don't listen to what Raygun says, watch what he does.

Same for Clinton...and Obama.

[randome]

7. So what IS the solution to ISIS?

It's easy to say something is a 'disaster' if it's not 100% perfect. But not so easy to propose an alternative.

And 'working with other countries' is not a proposal. It's part of the process now.

Or is it so simplistic as to 'build peace in the Middle East' as the article suggests.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

[tularetom]

11. The solution is NOT to keep doing the same things that led to the rise of ISIS in the first place

The former Secretary of State is so desperate to prove to republicans and independent voters that she has bigger ones than Obama, that she'll be fair game for the neocons and militarists who keep jonesing for more wars in the ME.

[randome]

15. Well, we're not invading countries on false pretexts now.

ISIS is a threat that needs to be dealt with. The article says 'peace in the Middle East' is how to do that. Wow. No one ever came up with that one before!
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

[Proserpina]

73. Since when? Did a Presidential Decree ban invading countries on false pretexts get issued?

Did they tell Victoria Secret? What about Yemen? Burundi?

[randome]

148. No false pretexts there. You may want to object to our not declaring war on those countries.

And that's a valid point. But it's also a valid point that this is where many of the actual terrorists choose to hide out.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

[Buzz Clik]

67. That isn't a solution, tom. It's simply a rejection of an alternative.

[leveymg]

9. HRC was no "mastermind" but she along with Petraeus were the principal regime change advocates

in the Obama Administration's first term. Had she not pushed the policy of overthrow in Libya and Syria, ISIS would be a footnote.

Also, why would the OP suggest that she would ever "break free of the military-industrial complex?" Hillary is the leading neocon in the Democratic Party. The MIC, along with Wall Street and the right-leaning foreign policy establishment, are essential parts of her base.

[polly7]

12. +1000.

And ISIS has recruited more from Libya than anywhere else, the horror they're committing there as well is the fault of every single war-pusher who clamored for regime change in Libya.

[randome]

17. Libya was in a civil war. Now Syria is, too. You really think Obama 'masterminded' all that?

Both countries ruled by dictators.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

[polly7]

22. You really need to do a little research.

Last edited Wed Dec 2, 2015, 03:26 PM - Edit history (4)

Exposed: The "Humanitarian" War In Libya

Check this out - 'The Humanitarian War' = http://www.laguerrehumanitaire.fr/english It's horrifying.

A bunch of LIES submitted to the ICC ..... by the UN - who got their 'numbers and crimes' from the NTC Prime Minister - 'word to ear'. Pages and pages redacted.

No Evidence? No Problem!!

How the CIA Used "Libyan Expatriates" To Engineer Consent For Regime Change

One of the main sources for the claim that Qaddafi was killing his own people is the Libyan League for Human Rights (LLHR), an organization linked to the International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH). On Feb. 21, 2011, LLHR General Secretary Dr. Sliman Bouchuiguir initiated a petition in collaboration with the organization U.N. Watch and the National Endowment for Democracy. This petition was signed by more than 70 NGOs.

Then a few days later, on Feb. 25, Dr. Bouchuiguir went to the U.N. Human Rights Council in order to expose the allegations concerning the crimes of Qaddafi’s government. In July 2011 we went to Geneva to interview Dr. Sliman Bouchuiguir.

"How to circumvent international law and justice 101." - originally published by http://laguerrehumanitaire.fr

A film by Julien Teil

Official Website:
http://laguerrehumanitaire.fr
Official web:
http://thehumanitarianwar.com
Official TV:
http://laguerrehumanitaire-film.rutube.ru/

Videos now here (I watched them on the original site when all of it was happening and posted these here at DU) http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article29428.htm

Must watch videos, the western trained NTC 'Prime Minister' - 'word to ear!' was the source of the 'data (all unofficial and lies, of course) that led to the UN resolution.


*************************************************************************************************
What you don't know about the Libyan crisis:

...

*************************************************************************************************

The horror of Libya - to fulfill the PNAC objective of overthrowing yet another country. "7 countries in 5 years!" This was NO "Humanitarian Intervention", and certainly not for all those migrants Qaddafi had allowed in over decades, Qaddafi loyalists and others who were raped, tortured, mutilated, hung, burned to death .... all known of by the NATO 'humanitarian team'.

It was a bullshit, self-serving, western funded and backed coup against yet another sovereign nation not yet indebted to the IMF and controlling its own resources, not to mention not allowing U.S. bases 'Africom' into all of Africa.

Some of these links don't work anymore, but read and discover just what a sham this was and why.

The Untold Story in Libya

Posted by polly7 in General Discussion
Tue Oct 18th 2011, 10:06 AM

In May 2010, Libya was voted on to the UN Human Rights Council by a huge majority. The UN Watch's campaign to remove Libya from the Human Rights Council began immediately.

In March, 2011, a report, containing positive quotes from UN diplomatic delegations in many countries, was due to be presented by the UN Human Rights Council, leading to a Resolution commending Libya's progress in a wide aspect of human rights (listed in the article). March 19, 2011, the attack on Libya began.

Libya was one of only five countries without a Rothschild model central bank, Quaddafi openly discussed, in 2009, the nationalization of US, UK, Germany, Spain, Norway, Canada and Italy's oil companies, switching to the gold dinar - a single African currency that would serve as an alternative to the U.S. dollar and allow African nations to share the wealth. Libya has an abundance of water - Gaddafi’s Great Man-Made River Project project offers limitless amounts of water for Libyans and would allow them to be totally self-sufficient. In the near-future, water will be the next resource equated with money and power, other countries may be dependent on its reserves. A self-sufficient, dictator-ruled nation with control over some of the world’s most precious resource waves a big red warning flag.

In 2010 Gaddafi made a motion to the UN General Assembly to investigate the circumstances of the invasion of Iraq. He was also wasting the west's ....... 'libya's' oil on free education, housing, tolerance of immigrants, raising the standard of living in Africa, lowering infant mortality while raising life expectancy.

Many of these things are completely similar to what we learned of Iraq.

*************************************************************************************************

Yes, simply put, Nato's member nations are trying to steer back Libya Central Bank into the mainstream financial structure, under the watching eyes of the World Bank and the International Monetary Funds, to provide (reconstruction) funds to Libya with hefty interests payments - and transform a country which was free of debts into a heavily indebted country - as done everywhere else in sub-Saharan African countries.

http://businessafrica.net/africabiz/graphs...
http://businessafrica.net/africabiz/arcvol...

*************************************************************************************************

From a 'no fly zone to all out bombing of targets called out by rebels'. NATO's high-precision bombing preceeded 'rebel' incursions.

http://antemedius.com/content/libya-r2p-no...

"It's now common knowledge that British SAS, French intelligence, US Central Intelligence Agency assets, Qatar special forces and mercenaries of all stripes were parachuted as boots on the ground for months, planning and training the "rebels" and in close coordination with that philanthropic prodigy, NATO.

That was never the UN mandate - but who cares? NATO/GCC paid the bills, NATO conducted the bombing and NATO/GCC will "stabilize" the mess, according to a 70-page plan leaked by the British to Rupert Murdoch'sz Times of London."

"Expect local - and global - fireworks as far as grabbing the loot is concerned. Without even considering the (still unexplored) oil and gas wealth, Libya's foreign assets are worth at least $150 billion. Libya's central bank, now about to be privatized, has no less than 143.8 tons of gold. Then there's at least a millennium supply of fresh water, which had started to be harnessed by Gaddafi via the spectacular, multibillion dollar Great Man-Made River (GMR) project."

*************************************************************************************************

"Oil-rich but with a relatively small population of 6.6. million, Gadhafi's Libya welcomed hundreds of thousands of black Africans looking for work in recent decades. "

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/01/l...

*************************************************************************************************

NATO’s War on Libya is an Attack on African Development–Dan Glazebrook

6 09 2011

http://globalciviliansforpeace.com/tag/afr... /

To prevent this ‘threat of African development’, the Europeans and the USA have responded in the only way they know how – militarily. Four years ago, the US set up a new “command and control centre” for the military subjugation of the Africa, called AFRICOM. The problem for the US was that no African country wanted to host them; indeed, until very recently, Africa was unique in being the only continent in the world without a US military base. And this fact is in no small part, thanks to the efforts of the Libyan government.
Before Gaddafi’s revolution deposed the British-backed King Idris in 1969, Libya had hosted one of the world’s biggest US airbases, the Wheelus Air Base; but within a year of the revolution, it had been closed down and all foreign military personnel expelled.
More recently, Gaddafi had been actively working to scupper AFRICOM. African governments that were offered money by the US to host a base were typically offered double by Gaddafi to refuse it, and in 2008 this ad-hoc opposition crystallised into a formal rejection of AFRICOM by the African Union.

*************************************************************************************************

The force used by the occupier to displace the old regime always makes sure the new regime is supine and complaint. The National Transitional Council, made up of former Gadhafi loyalists, Islamists and tribal leaders, many of whom detest each other, will be the West’s vehicle for the reconfiguration of Libya. Libya will return to being the colony it was before Gadhafi and the other young officers in 1969 ousted King Idris, who among other concessions had let Standard Oil write Libya’s petroleum laws. Gadhafi’s defiance of Western commercial interests, which saw the nationalization of foreign banks and foreign companies, along with the oil industry, as well as the closure of U.S. and British air bases, will be reversed. The despotic and collapsed or collapsing regimes in Tunisia, Libya, Egypt and Syria once found their revolutionary legitimacy in the pan-Arabism of Egypt’s Gamal Abdel Nasser. But these regimes fell victim to their own corruption, decay and brutality. None were worth defending. Their disintegration, however, heralds a return of the corporate and imperial power that spawned figures like Nasser and will spawn his radical 21st century counterparts.

Libya: Here We Go Again

Monday 5 September 2011
by: Chris Hedges, Truthdig | Op-Ed

http://www.truthout.com/libya-here-we-go-a...

*************************************************************************************************

LIBYA: Rebels execute black immigrants while forces kidnap others

http://somalilandpress.com/libya-rebels-ex...

"Many Africans have virtually nothing after years in Libya, many have been looted, robbed, while others saw their living quarters and apartments go in flames. Now they are praying to God to send them home.
While the international leaders are busy drafting resolutions to dismantle Muammar Gaddafi, the African Union has not yet commented on the situation in Libya.

Meanwhile, the International Criminal Court is said to have started a formal inquiry into possible crimes against humanity in Libya that will investigate the Libyan regime."

*************************************************************************************************

JohnPilger.com
8 September 2011

http://johnpilger.com/articles/hail-to-the...

..."I quote that not so much for its Orwellian quality but as a model of journalism's role in justifying "our" bloodbaths in advance.
This is Rupert's Revolution, after all. Gone from the Murdoch press are pejorative "insurgents". The action in Libya, says The Times, is "a revolution... as revolutions used to be". That it is a coup by a gang of Muammar Gaddafi's ex cronies and spooks in collusion with Nato is hardly news.

The self-appointed "rebel leader", Mustafa Abdul Jalil, was Gaddafi's feared justice minister. The CIA runs or bankrolls most of the rest, including America's old friends, the Mujadeen Islamists who spawned al-Qaeda.
They told journalists what they needed to know: that Gaddafi was about to commit "genocide", of which there was no evidence, unlike the abundant evidence of "rebel" massacres of black African workers falsely accused of being mercenaries. European bankers' secret transfer of the Central Bank of Libya from Tripoli to "rebel" Benghazi by European bankers in order to control the country's oil billions was an epic heist of little .

*************************************************************************************************

Sirte a 'living hell,' says aid group

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/news/co...

Tuesday 04 October 2011 by Our Foreign Desk Printable Email

A Red Cross team finally entered the besieged Libyan town of Sirte yesterday and delivered urgently needed surgical supplies to treat about 200 wounded people.

Nato has repeatedly targeted Sirte in its seven-month bombing campaign that enabled armed rebels to topple the government of Muammar Gadaffi and gain control of most of the oil-rich state.

*************************************************************************************************

Absolutely horrible to use rape as a propaganda weapon for war, while ignoring the reality of it for all those brutalized, raped and some, murdered by the NATO supported 'rebels' - just one example of their many atrocities.

********* http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2174087 **********

http://andrewgavinmarshall.com/2011/08/26/lies-war-and-empire-nato’s-“humanitarian-imperialism”-in-libya

In early March of 2011, news headlines in Western nations reported that Gaddafi would kill half a million people.

<1> On March 18, as the UN agreed to launch air strikes on Libya, it was reported that Gaddafi had begun an assault against the rebel-held town of Benghazi. The Daily Mail reported that Gaddafi had threatened to send in his African mercenaries to crush the rebellion.<2> Reports of Libyan government tanks sitting outside Benghazi poised for an invasion were propagated in the Western media.<3> In the lead-up to the United Nations imposing a no-fly zone, reports spread rapidly through the media of Libyan government jets bombing the rebels.<4> Even in February, the New York Times – the sacred temple for the ‘stenographers of power’ we call “journalists” – reported that Gaddafi was amassing “thousands of mercenaries” to defend Tripoli and crush the rebels.<5>

Italy’s Foreign Minister declared that over 1,000 people were killed in the fighting in February, citing the number as “credible.”<6> Even a top official with Human Rights Watch declared the rebels to be “peaceful protesters” who “are nice, sincere people who want a better future for Libya.”<7> The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights declared that “thousands” of people were likely killed by Gaddafi, “and called for international intervention to protect civilians.”<8> In April, reports spread near and far at lightning speed of Gaddafi’s forces using rape as a weapon of war, with the first sentence in a Daily Mail article declaring, “Children as young as eight are being raped in front of their families by Gaddafi’s forces in Libya,” with Gaddafi handing out Viagra to his troops in a planned and organized effort to promote rape.<9>

As it turned out, these claims – as posterity notes – turned out to be largely false and contrived. Doctors Without Borders and Amnesty International both investigated the claims of rape, and “have found no first-hand evidence in Libya that rapes are systematic and being used as part of war strategy,” and their investigations in Eastern Libya “have not turned up significant hard evidence supporting allegations of rapes by Qaddafi’s forces.” Yet, just as these reports came out, Hillary Clinton declared that the U.S. is “deeply concerned by reports of wide-scale rape” in Libya.<10> Even U.S. military and intelligence officials had to admit that, “there is no evidence that Libyan military forces are being given Viagra and engaging in systematic rape against women in rebel areas”; at the same time Susan Rice, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, “told a closed-door meeting of officials at the UN that the Libyan military is using rape as a weapon in the war with the rebels and some had been issued the anti-impotency drug. She reportedly offered no evidence to backup the claim.”<


Untrue, says US

US says Gadhafi troops issued Viagra, raping victims
Allegation suggests troops encouraged to turn to sexual violence, envoys say

By Louis Charbonneau
updated 4/28/2011 9:31:26 PM ET

UNITED NATIONS — The U.S. envoy to the United Nations told the Security Council Thursday that troops loyal to Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi were increasingly engaging in sexual violence and some had been issued the impotency drug Viagra, diplomats said.

Several U.N. diplomats who attended a closed-door Security Council meeting on Libya told Reuters that U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice raised the Viagra issue in the context of increasing reports of sexual violence by Gadhafi's troops.

"Rice raised that in the meeting but no one responded," a diplomat said on condition of anonymity. The allegation was first reported by a British newspaper.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42809612/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa#.TqXeG96ImU8


US intel: No evidence of Viagra as weapon in Libya

http://www.msnbc .msn.com/id/42824884/ns/world_news-mide...

UN Ambassador Rice reportedly had said drug was being used in systematic rapes
NBC News and news services updated 4/29/2011 1:52:00 PM ET

UNITED NATIONS — There is no evidence that Libyan military forces are being given Viagra and engaging in systematic rape against women in rebel areas, US military and intelligence officials told NBC News on Friday.

Diplomats said Thursday that US Ambassador Susan Rice told a closed-door meeting of officials at the UN that the Libyan military is using rape as a weapon in the war with the rebels and some had been issued the anti- impotency drug. She reportedly offered no evidence to backup the claim.

While rape has been a weapon of choice in many other African conflicts, the US officials say they've seen no such reports out of Libya.


[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]
lead inL Opponents of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi protesters shout anti-Gadhafi slogans during a protest after the Friday prayer at the court square, in Benghazi, eastern Libya, on Friday March 11, 2011. French President Nicolas Sarkozy faced increasing pressure from fellow leaders Friday who complained he was out of line to suddenly give a Libyan opposition group diplomatic recognition. Rebels held out Friday in part of a strategic oil port after fierce fighting with Moammar Gadhafi loyalists waging a heavy counteroffensive trying to push the opposition further east away from the capital. (AP Photo/Hussein Malla) (Associated Press photographs)


[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]
The gap between Hillary Rodham Clinton's rhetoric warning of a Rwanda-like slaughter of civilians in Libya and the facts gathered by career intelligence staff is taking on significance as the former secretary of state prepares another bid for the White House and her national security credentials are re-examined. (Associated Press)



*************************************************************************************************

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu...
bvar22:

The Untold Story in Libya:

How The West Cooked Up The People's Uprising

http://whowhatwhy.com/2011/08/31/now-that-... ... /

The Global Disaster Capitalists never let a good disaster go to waste.
In the case of Libya, they used their Enforcement Arm (NATO & The US Military) to CREATE a disaster where there was none.

” For all his dictatorial megalomania, Gaddafi is a committed pan-African - a fierce defender of African unity. Libya was not in debt to international bankers. It did not borrow cash from the International Monetary Fund for any "structural adjustment". It used oil money for social services - including the Great Man Made River project, and investment/aid to sub-Saharan countries. Its independent central bank was not manipulated by the Western financial system. All in all a very bad example for the developing world.”

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/M...

*************************************************************************************************
Libya: Oil, Banks, Water, the United Nations, and America’s Holy Crusade by Felicity Arbuthnot

Posted on April 5, 2011 by dandelionsalad

.."The country was commended: “for the progress made in the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals, namely universal primary education (and) firm commitment (to) health care.” There was “praise” for “cooperation with international organizations in combating human trafficking and corruption ..” and for cooperation with “the International Organization for Migration.”

“Progress in enjoyment of economic and social rights, including in the areas of education, health care, poverty reduction and social welfare” with “measures taken to promote transparency”, were also cited. Malaysia: “Commended the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya for being party to a significant number of international and regional human rights instruments.” Promotion: “of the rights of persons with disabilities” and praise for “measures taken with regard to low income families”, were cited...

.."So how does the all tie together? Libya, in March being praised by the Majority of the UN., for human rights progress across the board, to being the latest, bombarded international pariah? A nation’s destruction enshrined in a UN., Resolution?
The answer lies in part with the Geneva based UN Watch.(vii) UN Watch is : “a non-governmental organization whose mandate is to monitor the performance of the United Nations.” With Consultative Status to the UN Economic and Social Council, with ties to the UN Department of Public Information, “UN Watch is affiliated with the American Jewish Committee.” (AJC.)"

http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2011/0... /

Interesting ..... the involvement in HR Watch of persons whose core values include securing energy resources.

************************************************************************************************

Colonel Muammar Gaddafi died after being stabbed with a bayonet in the anus and not in a firefight as originally claimed by Libyan authorities, according to a report on the Libyan dictator's last hours.

Two Nato missiles forced the group to leave the cars and escape on foot, seeking shelter in a drainage ditch. A bodyguard hurled grenades at approaching militiamen but one grenade "hit the concrete wall and bounced back to fall between Muammar Gaddafi and Abu Bakr Younis", Younis junior said.

"The shrapnel hit my father and he fell down to the ground. Muammar Gaddafi was also injured by the grenade, on the left side of his head," he said.

New York-based Human Rights Watch said Gaddafi was already bleeding from head wounds caused by blast shrapnel as he tried to flee Sirte, his hometown.

The charity obtained unedited mobile footage that showed militia fighters abusing Gaddafi as they took him into custody in October 2011.

"As he was being led on to the main road, a militiaman stabbed him in his anus with what appears to have been a bayonet, causing another rapidly bleeding wound," the report said.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/gaddafi-killed-bayonet-stab-anus-libya-395224



The Grand finale - sodomized with a bayonet, beaten, tortured and murdered in the street - "We came, we saw ....... he died, lol".

**************************************************************************************************

The campaign in Libya began with an innocent sounding UN Security Council Resolution calling for the protection of civilians. Both China and Russia abstained rather than voting to veto the resolution. Then they realized they had been tricked. In her book, Clinton describes how Russia “chafed as the NATO-led mission to protect civilians accelerated the fall of Qaddafi”. In reality the NATO led mission “to protect civilians” resulted in vastly more civilian deaths than had occurred before it began.

Horace Campbell and Maximilian Forte have written two solid accounts describing the reality versus myths of regime change in Libya. Clinton’s characterization of “accelerating” the fall of Qaddafi is a cynical understatement, like her self congratulatory comment that “we came, we saw, he died” after rebels killed Qaddafi on the street. Many of the refugees drowning in the Mediterannean Sea or reaching the shores of Italy today are a direct consequence of that operation. Yet who has been held to account?

Full article: http://dissidentvoice.org/2015/09/the-wicked-war-on-syria/

************************************************************************************************

Britain, Libya and the Mediterranean - The Creation of a Humanitarian Emergency

by Dan Glazebrook / May 1st, 2015

Last week’s drownings in the Mediterranean were the foreseeable, and indeed deliberate, a result of the anti-human policies of strategic violence by a dying neo-colonial empire. They were the consequence, firstly, of a series of wars of aggression that have made life intolerable across vast swathes of Africa and West Asia, and, secondly, of the fateful EU decision last November to end Italy’s search-and-rescue programme, Mare Nostrum. This much has been admitted by politicians and commentators from across the entire British political establishment, from Nigel Farage and the Daily Telegraph to David Cameron and Ed Miliband. Whilst these admissions have often been tempered with caveats, denials, distortions and half-truths, the hideous reality behind them is increasingly impossible to deny.

NATO’s war of aggression against Libya in 2011 turned the country over to racist death squads, with hundreds of sub-Saharan migrant workers and black Libyans beaten and burnt to death by the ‘revolutionaries’ and tens of thousands illegally detained and tortured by the militias. Tawergha, the only black African town on the Mediterranean, and formerly home to around 30,000 people, is now a ghost town after NATO’s shock troops – militias with names like the ‘Brigades for the purging of black skins’ – ‘ethnically cleansed’ the region. Last week’s butchering of 30 Ethiopian workers by ISIS is but the latest chapter in the anti-African pogroms that have characterised the Libyan insurgency from the very start. This is the reality of NATO’s ‘Libyan revolution’ (led by AbdulHakim BelHaj, now leader of ISIS in Libya) and it is precisely this from which black Africans in Libya are now fleeing. As Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi put it, “a person has to risk his life because he needs to escape from a situation where they are chopping off the heads of those near him”.

And this head-chopping has not been restricted to Libya’s borders. NATO’s war has boosted head-choppers across the entire region, from Tunisia and Algeria to Mali, Nigeria and Cameroon. Before 2011, Boko Haram barely existed. Today, thanks to NATO opening up Libya’s arsenals to them and their friends, they are killing hundreds every week, often burning them alive in churches and mosques. As one Nigerian told a reporter last week, “We prefer to die trying (to migrate) than stay back there and die….Stay at home and get shot dead or maybe burnt to death; I just prefer to die while trying or survive.”

Yet the Libyan war itself is only the latest in a long series of acts of aggression launched by the British state and its allies, all of which continue to have disastrous consequences across the entire Middle East and North Africa region. A look at the list of where the migrants come from makes this devastatingly clear. The majority of the world’s refugees come from one of three countries: Afghanistan, Somalia and Syria. What all have in common is that they have all been subject to vicious terror campaigns by Britain, the USA and their allies: whether directly, as in Afghanistan; through allied states, as with the US-backed Ethiopian invasion of Somalia in 2006 (which toppled the first stable government the country had had in decades); or through the provision of cash, weapons and diplomatic cover to sectarian death squads, as in the case of Syria. Yemen is the latest additional source of refugees, with the Saudi bombing campaign bringing new arrivals to almost 10,000 per week.

Full article: http://dissidentvoice.org/2015/05/britain-libya-and-the-mediterranean/

Behind Every Refugee Stands an Arms Trader

http://dissidentvoice.org/2015/04/behind-every-refugee-stands-an-arms-trader/

**************************************************************************************************

Trapped in Libya: the flotsam of the West’s wars

By Vijay Prashad
Source: al-Araby
May 14, 2015

Next week, the EU will launch work on its plan to tackle the Mediterranean migrant crisis. The EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini has asked the UN for help to dismantle the smuggling networks.

European ambassadors have drafted a UN resolution, under chapter VII (which allows use of force), to tackle the crisis. For them the military option is the brightest light. As Mogherini said, the EU wants the authority to “use all necessary means to seize and dispose of the [smugglers’] vessels.

“Thus far in 2015, over 60,000 people have tried to cross from Libya to Europe. Of them, close to two thousand have died – a death toll 20 times higher than in 2014,” it continues.

Since 2011, Libya has been ripped apart, its social fabric torn asunder and its state structure largely absent. Nato’s bombardment precipitously destroyed the state and handed over the country to warring militias.

The threat to the refugees is a direct outcome of UN Security Council Resolution 1973, ironically under the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) banner. A new UNSC resolution is not going to be about the protection of the refugees, but to use force to destroy their lifeline. R2P has been ground under by the West’s behavior in Libya.

Full article: https://zcomm.org/znetarticle/trapped-in-libya-the-flotsam-of-the-wests-wars/


On Monday, a New York Times story demonstrated more specifically why Clinton's interactions with Blumenthal may have been a bad idea. Blumenthal, the Times reports via solid sources, was advising the Secretary of State both before and after former Libyan autocrat Muammar Qaddafi's death while also advising a group of private individuals who hoped to make money by obtaining reconstruction-type contracts in a post-Qaddafi Libya.

Much of the Libya intelligence that Mr. Blumenthal passed on to Mrs. Clinton appears to have come from a group of business associates he was advising as they sought to win contracts from the Libyan transitional government. The venture, which was ultimately unsuccessful, involved other Clinton friends, a private military contractor and one former C.I.A. spy seeking to get in on the ground floor of the new Libyan economy ...

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/05/18/hillary_clinton_sidney_blumenthal_libya_unofficial_adviser_represented_business.html


The detritus of regime change in Libya

By Vijay Prashad
Source: al-Araby
November 1, 2015

.......In Iraq, parts of the deposed army and some Baath Party members linked up with al-Qaeda in Iraq, and then later the Islamic State of Iraq. It was these motivated and trained men that formed the backbone of the IS advance on Fallujah and Ramadi in 2014.

Much the same story is being repeated with the emergence of IS in Libya. Adversaries of Gaddafi in the 1990s took refuge in the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group; one of whose strongholds was the town of Derna.

These fighters fled the country to join the Jihad International in Afghanistan, Chechnya, Iraq, Yemen and Syria.

It had become a familiar matter to meet an al-Libi in the redoubts of the jihadis. Studies show that Libya provided per capita the highest number of jihadis to this global campaign.

The lesson of Iraq was not learned. It was repeated in Libya. Both countries still hang by a thread. Their people suffer painfully. They have been sacrificed to a theory that is arrogant and erroneous. It deserves a place only in the dustbin of history.

Full article: https://zcomm.org/znetarticle/the-detritus-of-regime-change-in-libya/

Just as much a sham as Iraq, with the exact same results. And on ........ to Syria.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=632260


Deadliest Terror in the World: The West’s Latest Gift to Africa

by Dan Glazebrook / November 30th, 2015

Nigeria’s Boko Haram are now officially the deadliest terror group in the world. That they have reached this position is a direct consequence of Cameron and Co’s war on Libya – and one that was perhaps not entirely unintended.

In 2009, the year they took up arms, Boko Haram had nothing like the capacity to mount such operations, and their equipment remained primitive; but by 2011, that had begun to change. As Peter Weber noted in The Week, their weapons “shifted from relatively cheap AK-47s in the early days of its post-2009 embrace of violence to desert-ready combat vehicles and anti-aircraft/ anti-tank guns”. This dramatic turnaround in the group’s access to materiel was the direct result of NATO’s war on Libya. A UN report published in early 2012 warned that “large quantities of weapons and ammunition from Libyan stockpiles were smuggled into the Sahel region”, including “rocket-propelled grenades, machine guns with anti-aircraft visors, automatic rifles, ammunition, grenades, explosives (Semtex), and light anti-aircraft artillery (light caliber bi-tubes) mounted on vehicles”, and probably also more advanced weapons such as surface-to-air missiles and MANPADS (man-portable air-defence systems). NATO had effectively turned over the entire armoury of an advanced industrial state to the region’s most sectarian militias: groups such as the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and Boko Haram.

The earliest casualty of NATO’s war outside Libya was Mali. Taureg fighters who had worked in Gaddafi’s security forces fled Libya soon after Gaddafi’s government was overthrown, and mounted an insurgency in Northern Mali. They, in turn, were overthrown, however, by Al Qaeda’s regional affiliates – flush with Libyan weaponry – who then turned Northern Mali into another base from which to train and launch attacks. Boko Haram was a key beneficiary. As Brendan O’ Neill wrote in an excellent 2014 article worth quoting at length:

Boko Haram benefited enormously from the vacuum created in once-peaceful northern Mali following the West’s ousting of Gaddafi. In two ways: first, it honed its guerrilla skills by fighting alongside more practised Islamists in Mali, such as AQIM; and second, it accumulated some of the estimated 15,000 pieces of Libyan military hardware and weaponry that leaked across the country’s borders following the sweeping aside of Gaddafi. In April 2012, Agence France France Presse reported that ‘dozens of Boko Haram fighters’ were assisting AQIM and others in northern Mali. This had a devastating knock-on effect in Nigeria. As the Washington Post reported in early 2013, ‘The Islamist insurgency in northern Nigeria has entered a more violent phase as militants return to the fight with sophisticated weaponry and tactics learned on the battlefields of nearby Mali’. A Nigerian analyst said ‘Boko Haram’s level of audacity was high [in late 2012]’, immediately following the movement of some of its militants to the Mali region.

That NATO’s Libya war would have such consequences was both thoroughly predictable, and widely predicted. As early as June 2011, African Union Chairman Jean Ping warned NATO that “Africa’s concern is that weapons that are delivered to one side or another…are already in the desert and will arm terrorists and fuel trafficking”. And both Mali and Algeria strongly opposed NATO’s destruction of Libya precisely because of the massive destabilisation it would bring to the region. They argued, wrote O’Neill, “that such a violent upheaval in a region like north Africa could have potentially catastrophic consequences. The fallout from the bombing is ‘a real source of concern’, said the rulers of Mali in October 2011. In fact, as the BBC reported, they had been arguing since ‘the start of the conflict in Libya’ – that is, since the civil conflict between Benghazi-based militants and Gaddafi began – that ‘the fall of Gaddafi would have a destabilising effect in the region’.” In an op-ed following the collapse of Northern Mali, a former Chief of Staff of UK land forces, Major-General Jonathan Shaw, wrote that Colonel Gaddafi was a “lynchpin” of the “informal Sahel security plan”, whose removal therefore led to a foreseeable collapse of security across the entire region. The rise of Boko Haram has been but one result – and not without strategic benefits for the West.

Full article: http://dissidentvoice.org/2015/11/deadliest-terror-in-the-world-the-wests-latest-gift-to-africa/

bbm

Seriously ....... this is a NSS article for all of us who knew that getting rid of Qaddafi to get into Africa was just one of the reasons for the lying 'no-fly zone' and subsequent bombings and horror. I don't believe for one millisecond that those who were involved in this didn't see the consequences perfectly clear. Give them an opportunity to form, grow, and arm them (indirectly, of course), then go in to 'save' their victims ........ it never ends.

And on to Syria:

Turkey, ISIS and Syria

WikiLeaks released a batch of classified Saudi diplomatic cables proving that Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey had a secret deal to topple Assad as far back as 2012. Turkey has trained, and is training, and arming rebels of the Syrian Army on its territory,

**************************************************************************

#t=177

..........“Then, came a pivotal moment that most Americans aren’t even aware of,” Swann said. “In June 2013, a Northern General for the Free Syrian Army spoke out on Al Jazeera Qatar and stated that if international forces did not send weapons, the rebels attempting to overthrow Syrian president Bashar al-Assad would lose their war within a month.”

“Within a matter of weeks of the Syrian general making his plea for international help, the U.S., the Saudis, Jordan, Qatar, Turkey and Israel began providing weapons, training and money to so-called rebel groups like the Free Syrian Army,” Swann said.[/i

Full article: http://benswann.com/truth-in-media-the-origin-of-isis/

*************************************************************************

While Annan was trying to get an agreement in the first Geneva conference, Qatar and Turkey were pushing for more military aid to the rebels “whatever the outcome in Geneva”. (p 457)

http://dissidentvoice.org/2015/09/the-wicked-war-on-syria/

*************************************************************************

Posted 31 May 2015 20:24 GMT


Looted ancient coins from Syria on sale on Facebook. Photograph shared by @zaidbenjamin on Twitter

Ancient Syrian antiques are being posted for sale on Facebook.

The alarm was raised by Washington DC-based journalist Zaid Benjamin, who shared screenshots of the Facebook pages posting Syrian antiques for sale in Turkey.

http://globalvoicesonline.org/2015/05/31/syrian-antiques-on-sale-on-facebook/?utm_source=Global+Voices&utm_campaign=097c5fa192-June1_2015_Daily_Digest_2015&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_633e82444a-097c5fa192-287939489

*****************************************************************************************

The United States spent years sabotaging UN attempts at peace in Syria.

The United States dismissed out of hand a Russian peace proposal for Syria in 2012.

Full article: https://zcomm.org/znetarticle/a-waroholic-wishes-you-peace-on-earth/

The Wicked War on Syria

by Rick Sterling / September 29th, 2015

This description is widespread but misleading. In his 2007 article Seymour Hersh exposed the U.S. promotion of Sunni fundamentalists to undermine Syria and Iran. In 2010 Secretary of State Clinton pressed Syrian President Bashar al Assad to comply with Israeli and US calls to stop supporting the Lebanese resistance and break relations with Iran. Was Clinton especially hostile to the Syrian President because he did not comply with her requests/demands and soon after forged an agreement with Iran? She makes no mention of this in her book but it is obviously relevant to the issue of Syria-USA relations.

Regarding the so-called peaceful protesters, in fact, there was a violent element from the start. In Deraa in March 2011 several police were killed. In the original “capital of the revolution”, Homs, a very credible eye-witness reported armed demonstrators initiating the violence.

The solution is not impossible. What is wicked is the devastation of Syria by some of the wealthiest and most powerful countries in the world. What is wicked is the justification of this on a “humanitarian” pretense. The solution simply requires countries such as the USA and allies to stop their illegal and destructive efforts to overthrow any government they don’t like. It’s up to the people of Syria to determine their government. It’s time for the United Nations and genuine humanitarian organizations to demand the end of this war so that Syrians can start reconciliation and rebuilding.

Full article: http://dissidentvoice.org/2015/09/the-wicked-war-on-syria/

**********************************************************************************************

In 2011, when the Arab Spring came to Libya, Clinton was the Obama administration’s most forceful advocate for intervening to overthrow Muammar Gaddafi. She even out-hawked Robert Gates, the Pentagon chief first appointed by George W. Bush who was less than enthusiastic about going to war in Libya.

Clinton favors greater military intervention in Syria’s civil war, too. In her presidential bid, she’s joined hawkish Republican senators like John McCain and Lindsey Graham in supporting the creation of a no-fly zone over the country.

That puts her at odds not only with President Barack Obama, but also with her Democratic presidential rival Bernie Sanders, who warned that it could “get us more deeply involved in that horrible civil war and lead to a never-ending U.S. entanglement in that region.”

http://otherwords.org/hillary-clinton-hasnt-learned-a-thing-from-iraq/

[randome]

24. Oh, so Obama was trying to prevent 'African development'. I see.

Most of the rest of your impressively long post is composed of opinion and unsubstantiated innuendo. You clearly want to believe the worst of anyone from the U.S. on the international stage. As if you see everyone else as mere puppets for the amusement of the U.S.

I don't see things that way.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

[polly7]

25. I don't care how you see things. nt.

[senz]

39. Wow. You have definitely done the research, polly7.

[Duval]

55. She sure did. Must have taken quite a bit of investigating!

[polly7]

84. Thanks senz, but those were just mostly articles and FACTS dug up

years ago when it was happening. So many of us here were trying very hard to oppose the constant daily dozens/hundreds? of posts pushing the horror, making little comics about it and even laughing when Qaddafi was sodomized in the street with a bayonget, tortured and murdered - it was pukeworthy. As hated as he was for keeping the west out, he was still a human being. The responses to that war-crime and atrocity made me almost leave this place. Also, the torture, rape, hanging in the street of Qaddafi loyalists (of which there were millions, despite the propaganda we were fed) and 'mercenaries' (those hundreds of thousands of African migrants and refugees living for decades in Libya for decades with no problems). Qaddafi was safeguarding the rest of Africa from invasion by the IDF, Africom, etc. etc. - he definitely had to go and this was long-planned. 7 countries in 5 years. The lying 'no-fly zone' and 'protests instigated by the CIA puppets' were a sick, sad joke as evidenced at the start of that very long post. The video shows the lie of the violent protests and 'civil war'. Some of the links don't work and I apologize for that, but most of the articles make it very clear what happened, and why.

Hillary Clinton's advancement of the 'viagra for rape' meme (completely discounted) was absolutely disgusting.

[jwirr]

126. +1

[Euphoria]

177. +2. nt

[ismnotwasm]

51. A couple of your links don't work and I'm not reading anything by "paranormal press"

The rest is a disjointed hodgepodge. Not "research"

[polly7]

85. Good. Don't. nt.

[ismnotwasm]

91. Ok. Won't. nt.

[polly7]

92. Awesome. nt.

[randome]

145. K.

Sorry, just wanted to get the shortest possible response in the correct order. No one can beat that!
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

[think]

155. .

[randome]

181. Grr!

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

[leveymg]

159. If you don't like those sources, try the NYT and The Nation.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1042611
HRC and Petraeus championed the policy, which Obama cut off.

Yes, I blame her for being an author and a principal backer of a failed policy with catastrophic results. She was a leading advocate, not just an instrument of policies of regime change in Libya and Syria.

As a result of the failure of this policy that he had most aggressively pursued, Petraeus was fired and a few months later the President graciously accepted the resignation of the Secretary of State. It was Obama who restrained and ultimately brought this operation to a halt. The conflict within the Administration and the roles taken by Clinton and the other principals were all described in a series of articles in the WSJ and NYT. I'll dig out the links for you.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/08/us/politics/panetta-speaks-to-senate-panel-on-benghazi-attack.html?_r=0
deep divisions over what to do about one of those issues — the rising violence in Syria — spilled into public view for the first time in a blunt exchange between Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, and the leaders of the Pentagon.

Testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta acknowledged that he and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, had supported a plan last year to arm carefully vetted Syrian rebels. But it was ultimately vetoed by the White House, Mr. Panetta said, although it was developed by David H. Petraeus, the C.I.A. director at the time, and backed by Hillary Rodham Clinton, then the secretary of state.

(. . .)

Neither Mr. Panetta nor General Dempsey explained why President Obama did not heed their recommendation. But senior American officials have said that the White House was worried about the risks of becoming more deeply involved in the Syria crisis, including the possibility that weapons could fall into the wrong hands. And with Mr. Obama in the middle of a re-election campaign, the White House rebuffed the plan, a decision that Mr. Panetta says he now accepts.

With the exception of General Dempsey, the officials who favored arming the rebels have either left the administration or, as in Mr. Panetta’s case, are about to depart. Given that turnover, it is perhaps not surprising that the details of the debate — an illustration of the degree that foreign policy decisions have been centralized in the White House — are surfacing only now. A White House spokesman declined to comment on Thursday.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/03/us/politics/in-behind-scene-blows-and-triumphs-sense-of-clinton-future.html WASHINGTON

— Last summer, as the fighting in Syria raged and questions about the United States’ inaction grew, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton conferred privately with David H. Petraeus, the director of the C.I.A. The two officials were joining forces on a plan to arm the Syrian resistance.

The idea was to vet the rebel groups and train fighters, who would be supplied with weapons. The plan had risks, but it also offered the potential reward of creating Syrian allies with whom the United States could work, both during the conflict and after President Bashar al-Assad’s eventual removal.

Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Petraeus presented the proposal to the White House, according to administration officials. But with the White House worried about the risks, and with President Obama in the midst of a re-election bid, they were rebuffed.

( . . .)

The disclosures about Mrs. Clinton’s behind-the-scenes role in Syria and Myanmar — one a setback, the other a success — offer a window into her time as a member of Mr. Obama’s cabinet. They may also be a guide to her thinking as she ponders a future run for the presidency with favorability ratings that are the highest of her career, even after her last months at the State Department were marred by the deadly attack on the American Mission in Benghazi, Libya.

“Secretary Clinton has dramatically changed the face of U.S. foreign policy globally for the good,” said Richard L. Armitage, deputy secretary of state during the George W. Bush administration. “But I wish she had been unleashed more by the White House.”

(. . .)

After Britain and France argued for intervening to defend Libya’s rebels against Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, Mrs. Clinton played an important role in mobilizing a broad international coalition and persuading the White House to join the NATO-led operation.

But it was Syria that proved to be the most difficult test. As that country descended into civil war, the administration provided humanitarian aid to the growing flood of refugees, pushed for sanctions and sought to organize the political opposition. The United States lagged France, Britain and Persian Gulf states in recognizing that opposition as the legitimate representative of the Syria people, but by December, Mr. Obama had taken that step.

Still, rebel fighters were clamoring for weapons and training. The White House has been reluctant to arm them for fear that it would draw the United States into the conflict and raise the risk of the weapons falling into the wrong hands. Rebel extremists affiliated with Al Qaeda had faced no such constraints in securing weapons from their backers.

When Mr. Petraeus was the commander of forces in Iraq and then-Senator Clinton was serving on the Senate Armed Services Committee and preparing for her 2008 presidential bid, she had all but called him a liar for trumpeting the military gains of the troop increase ordered by President Bush. But serving together in the Obama administration, they were allies when it came to Syria, as well as on the debate over how many troops to send to Afghanistan at the beginning of the administration.

Mr. Petraeus had a background in training foreign forces from his years in Iraq, and his C.I.A. job put him in charge of covert operations. The Americans already had experience in providing nonlethal assistance to some of the rebels.

http://www.thenation.com/blog/172774/obama-opposed-syria-war-plan-clinton-petraeus-panetta-gen-dempsey

Let’s give the White House and President Obama, personally, credit for blocking the hawks in his administration from going to war in Syria.

Last week, we learned that Hillary Clinton and David Petraeus, now thankfully pursuing other opportunities and spending more time with their families, had cooked up a plan to arm and train the ragtag Syrian rebels, thus getting the United States directly involved in that horrible civil war.

Now we learn that Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs—both of whom are about to join Clinton and Petraeus in the private sector—also backed the Clinton-Petraeus plan,

Who was against it? Obama.

Here’s how The New York Times reports the bombshell revelation, which emerged at a Senate Armed Service Committee hearing with Panetta and Dempsey, under questioning from the invariably pro-war John McCain:

Did the Pentagon, Mr. McCain continued, support the recommendation by Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Petraeus “that we provide weapons to the resistance in Syria? Did you support that?”

“We did,” Mr. Panetta said.

“You did support that,” Mr. McCain said.

“We did,” General Dempsey added.

Despite the formidable coalition of Panetta, Clinton, Petraeus, and Dempsey—and no doubt Susan Rice was in there punching, too—Obama nixed the idea.

[polly7]

160. Great post! nt.

[ismnotwasm]

164. Whatis your point with those links?

I'm read the news ones. Hillary is to blame for what, exactly? And no I don't like "paranormal" anything as a source.

[leveymg]

165. Exactly as I said, HRC and Petraeus were the principal sponsors of regime change in Libya and Syria

That had the effect of destabilizing the region and allowing ISIS to grow into a regional and global threat. I've been saying this for years, and events have proven me (and Obama) correct and Hillary's brand of neoconservative intervention has proven a disaster.

See, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/09/14/1131854/-Blowback-in-Benghazi-Attack-Linked-to-Regime-Change-Operations-in-Libya-and-Syria

[ismnotwasm]

166. That is not what they say

And bringing up Benghazi doesn't add to your personal credibility

[leveymg]

168. Please tell us, what do you think they say, M(s.) notwasm?

Last edited Wed Dec 2, 2015, 04:05 PM - Edit history (1)

BTW: That was posted way before Benghazi!!!, the GOP pseudo-scandal circus, which helped Hillary by deflecting public attention from the real policy failures of Secretary Clinton.

[polly7]

167. And you were exactly right, leveymg. nt.

[Nyan]

59. Great research polly7

you might also wanna know that besides England and their agendas in the region, France still views Africa as their sphere of influence. Many countries in Africa are still under the thumb of France policies. Ivory Coast civil war is a great recent example. France has a slightly different approach than US imperialism though, in that they tend to use multilateral institutions such as UN and NATO, as they did in Ivory Coast and Libya.

[polly7]

86. Thank you for this Nyan.

Africa is now in trouble. I worry about them just as much as I did Libya and Iraq now ................... also Syria, as we are seeing the same tactics.

[leveymg]

161. Thank you for all you do here, Polly.

[polly7]

162. Oh, TY, that means a lot to me! Thank you for all your research and great info. nt.

[George II]

89. You use the Washington Times to help justify your abject disdain for President Obama...

....and Hillary Clinton?

Sad that.

[ismnotwasm]

94. And "Paranormal press"

In all fairness, I haven't heard of that one before.

[George II]

96. Interesting...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paranormal

Paranormal events are phenomena described in popular culture, folklore and other non-scientific bodies of knowledge, whose existence within these contexts is described to lie beyond normal experience or scientific explanation.[1][2][3][4]

A paranormal phenomenon is different from hypothetical concepts such as dark matter and dark energy. Unlike paranormal phenomena, these hypothetical concepts are based on empirical observations and experimental data gained through the scientific method.[5]

The most notable paranormal beliefs include those that pertain to ghosts, extraterrestrial life, unidentified flying objects, psychic abilities or extrasensory perception, and cryptids.

[polly7]

100. Oh, my ....... that's TERRIBLY interesting.

The destruction of the nation and the resulting horror for millions in the area - not so much.

I can almost pity people with no empathy, but then it must be easy to sleep at night - so maybe that's all cool. I wouldn't want to have none myself though, I find it better to care, even though it's painful to watch.

[George II]

129. The "destruction of the nation" has been predicted over and over again almost....

....from the day that the Treaty of Paris was signed.

[ismnotwasm]

103. I thought it interesting. Some people are into that kind of thing

Not sure I accept it as a "research" source though

[polly7]

97. Awww .......... hate the messenger, ignore the FACTS

that have led to the destruction of a nation, horrible suffering for millions, the most recruitments of any area in the region for IS to spread its horror - all for western imperialism and control by predatory IDF, the enablement of Africom to get into areas previously unavailable, multinational corporations, etc, etc. Apparently suffering isn't something you care about ............... no worries. There are millions/billions of us that do.

[ismnotwasm]

101. ...

But "The paranormal press"??

[polly7]

105. Who the fuck cares? I'm intelligent enough to judge what's right and what isn't using other

sources to verify and repeat what I've seen elsewhere. I guess maybe some aren't. If you have a problem with anything I posted, like you said, don't read it.

[ismnotwasm]

115. To be honest

I usually don't read your posts. I do read anyone's though when they've strung together a lot of links, and a obviously but work into a post or OP--unless they've been discredited in some way.

So I started reading. If those sources are good enough for you I have no problem with it really, but you've not made any case at all. In fact, between paranormal press, links that don't work or links that have little to do with each other, I don't know what your case actually is.

[polly7]

117. To be honest, I usually don't read your posts, they're usually full of nothing but blah. nt.

[ismnotwasm]

119. Ok

[polly7]

111. Now you're just boring me. Seriously. nt.

[ismnotwasm]

121. Just enough to keep you responding?

I'm not bored--well obviously a little-- I just have a day off. Soon I'll get off the internet and go do something interesting.

And should I care if you're bored?

[polly7]

128. Millions have died, been maimed and mutilated, made homeless,

hung in the streets, burned alive, beheaded, disemboweled, children been made orphans - drowning at sea trying to escape with their desperate families, women and children kidnapped and raped, mass graves, women's rights they enjoyed in the former sectarian nations of Iraq and Libya, and now Syria - set back decades with their new radical overlords, Libya - a nation - among the 7 stated for regime change, destroyed, opening up all of Africa to more of the same as IS and Boko Harem continue their horror on a larger scale every day - ALL BECAUSE of the disastrous invasion of Iraq and Libya, and Syria - using those proxy terrorists, of course. Just some of the many atrocities and horrors resulting from a western policy you seem to have no problem with, and facts relating to and those that discuss them that bore you. Awwwwwies.

That takes something sick that I don't even have the capacity to understand.

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[ismnotwasm]

136. You're the one who said they were bored.

Me-only a little. I said I was going to go do something interesting. You have zero idea of what that might be, but it might involve Syrian refugees.

[polly7]

137. I was bored by your pathetic excuse for all this horror that one of the sources

bothered you. Who fucking cares? I've read hundreds of articles regarding the suffering of so many that turn my stomach. You have a problem with one ............... so what??? Of course it would bore me. I really don't care how you feel, you're obviously so intent on having it all hidden and denied that you pick the most boring shit to do it with. People aren't stupid, they're completely able to judge what's real and what isn't - the FACTS are here, all over the web and have been for years.

Try harder.

[ismnotwasm]

141. Sure you have

Hundreds.

And I've seen your sources--my little volunteer work pales in comparison.

And I will try just as hard--or not as I feel like.

[polly7]

142. Still boring.

And YES, I HAVE.

[ismnotwasm]

144. Still responding

You can't be THAT bored

[ismnotwasm]

104. But I do care

Both about human suffering and FACTS.

[polly7]

107. Yeah ............. don't really believe that for a second, but it's probably wise to say it. nt.

[ismnotwasm]

118. Ok

[polly7]

95. I have disdain for the ACTIONS of anyone causing harm to this planet and its

people - no matter who they are - especially using lies to do it.

If that's fucking sad for you .......... get some tissues, I hate those type of actions for many, many people. Buy a big box.

[George II]

99. So I'm sure you have disdain for your candidate who has voted numerous times.....

....to provide funding to continue bush's wars.

And please, don't say "well the troops were already there, so we have to fund them" - if the funding wasn't available it would have been easier, indeed necessary, to remove our troops.

[polly7]

102. I don't have a candidate.

I chime in on issues that relate to policy that affects millions outside the U.S. and Canada.

How about you?

[pa28]

184. Excellent material. Should be an OP.

[Nyan]

53. As you might have wished,

now there's no civil war in Libya. And there's no dictator. In fact, there is no such thing as Libya. It's now an ISIS stronghold where terrorists run wild, thanks to Clinton state department and NATO and Obama's ill-advised actions. You happy now? that there's no civil war or dictator? Do you know how many people died in that country? How many people suffered because of those powerful people fucking everything up in that region? Do you think Iraq is better without Saddam Hussein? Libya's better without Gaddafi? Do you think Syria would be better without Assad?

[randome]

57. I don't presume to be an expert on international matters.

If I had the decision to act or sit comfortably back and do nothing, I truly don't know what I'd do. But I won't presume to know that someone is 'wrong' if I can't point to an alternative. The idea that Obama is just rampaging through the Middle East subverting Democracy because...well, because it's cool, I guess...strains my imagination.

Libya was in a civil war. And no, I don't advocate overthrowing everyone who meets our definition of 'dictator'. That's the kind of thinking that got us in the Iraq travesty.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

[Nyan]

131. I don't think Obama himself is interested in the whole risky geo-political game

But he's part of the war machine. He's in office for 8 years. Intelligence agencies and lobbyists and war industry, they are there forever. War-mongering NATO, it somehow insists on existing well after the supposed threat of USSR disappeared when Warsaw pact got dismantled. It just goes on and on and on whether Obama likes it or not. My take on the Obama foreign policy overall is that he came in when US hegemony already started to decline, and war machine absolutely out of control that it could not be stopped with a mere well-meaning president. Libya, he has to hold on to the narrative that it was a brutal dictator that had to be eliminated immediately. Well, there are a lot of brutal dictators in the world. But, France needed him to go, FAST. In my opinion, Obama kinda walked into trap set by France on Libya instance. Iraq, he can frame in his favor because he was against it, but US effort to deal with ISIS takeover there could be seen as 'half-hearted,' to borrow the term used by Iraqi foreign minister. And Syria should have followed a swift regime change scenario through covert operation as US has done for many decades, but like I said, the hegemony is in decline. So it becomes bloody and messy, and because of that messy policy, ISIS appears and takes advantage of the situation. So, they need to own up to what they've done. Clinton, for example, represents the US foreign policy of the past. The past failures. Her Iraq War vote was not a mistake. It perfectly represents her policy preference throughout her career. Iraq. Libya. And now, her policy for Syria.

[polly7]

135. I agree with all of that. Well said, Nyan. nt.

[randome]

139. Putin is trying to resurrect the USSR so at a minimum, NATO serves its original purpose.

So at the start, ISIS wasn't seen as the all-devouring force it wants to become? You're faulting Obama for not knowing the future? The Middle East is an ungodly mess. I'm not going to fault anyone for trying to deal with all the incredibly complicated situations that arise from that region of the world. I'm not going to fault Obama or Clinton. (I will fault Bush for making a bad situation immensely worse.)

Clinton's Iraq War vote was a political calculation. I wish she had been above that sort of thing but I don't think she would have attacked Iraq on her own and I don't think she'll start attacking other countries willy-nilly once she's President, either.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

[Nyan]

157. I guess that is the image projected on Putin these days

which I won't get into because it's likely to be a long rant. As for 'Putin trying to resurrect USSR,' you might just wanna take a look at Obama's initial position on Russia with regard to Crimea. In all fairness, Obama himself assessed the situation correctly. Initially he said that Russia is acting out of 'weakness' or 'fear' (I'm paraphrasing) because Russia is a regional power responding to what it views as a threat, meaning NATO encroachment on all six countries on its border except Ukraine at the time. Obama said that Russia is not America's enemy, and that he's more focused on actual threat posed on US soil. That should have been the approach to Russia the whole time. It still takes two to tango. US and Russia together could make peace. Honestly, I think if it was just Obama and Putin, the two world leaders who seem to like each other despite the whole mess around them, they would have made peace in the ME. But, the whole Ukraine crisis cannot be explained when you put Europe's opportunism out of the equation. Nothing is that black and white. You might wanna take a step back and see the big picture before you fall back to the Cold War propaganda.

[ljm2002]

188. "Both countries ruled by dictators."

Hmmm, I seem to remember another country, back in 2003 or so, that was "ruled by a dictator". We decided he had to go. How did that work out?

The point is that, civil war or not, our adventurism in the Middle East, our proclivity to think we can topple "dictators" and then everything will be a-okay, is wrong, and we now have several disastrous outcomes to prove it.

We need to change our MO before it's too late. May already be too late in fact.

[Major Hogwash]

151. Well said. I agree totally.

I hope she gags at her next speech when she advocates starting another war.

She makes me gag.

[KoKo]

189. ...! n/t

[leveymg]

191. I'm surprised this line of argument against the HRC candidacy isn't immediately, universally obvious

Or is denial that deep?

[KoKo]

193. Denial is Deep...Power and Influence is the Hope or the Want...

Depending on whether one agrees or disagrees with the policies of Clinton/Bush? Those who saw the flaws are considered "Outliers" to the Party.

[leveymg]

194. The outliers who admit there is a problem are the only hope for change

that can create a solution. Otherwise, there is only that uncontrolled plunge into oblivion. No soft landing.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. IT'S OVER

[The Blue Traveller]

36. For hillary, yes madame.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

38. I am a sir, a Big Sir at that, not there is anything wrong with being a madame.

And I would literally bet my life she will be #45, so far no takers.

[The Blue Traveller]

40. I don't want your life. Just a huge apology to the true Democrats

[DemocratSinceBirth]

43. How about a smaller wager?

Like eating road kill, cooked of course?

[JonLeibowitz]

49. How about another wager

If you are right and Hillary wins the nomination, i will vote for her in the general.

On the other hand, if Sanders wins you make an OP explaining the myriad ways Sanders better and more consistently represents core democratic values than the right of center Hillary.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

50. Sure, no problem.

Just remind me.

[Hiraeth]

48. I only know of one Big Sur and it is in California ...

[Orrex]

61. "true Democrats"

[Buzz Clik]

69. -1

Offensive.

[one_voice]

98. True Democrats?

[MaggieD]

20. LOL - your hyperbolic, breathless thread titles

.... Always amuse me.

[Buzz Clik]

70. He has a certain charm.

[peacebird]

26. 'We came, we saw, he died' would undoubtably escalate our military adventures, not end them.

[Buzz Clik]

72. That was truly cringeworthy.

[KoKo]

190. How about this one with Hillary and Repub James Baker Laughing Up Bombing Iran?

(UNBELIVEABLE) Hillary Clinton laughs with Repub James Baker about possible war against iran on Charlie Rose Show

[JoePhilly]

27. OP needs some bold and maybe some ALL CAPS.

[pinebox]

29. Care to address the article Joe?

Or are you going to just deflect?

[JoePhilly]

35. Sure, its hyperbolic nonsense.

Tada.

[pinebox]

37. It is?

So nothing in there is factual? Got it.

[randome]

46. No, there are no facts. There is opinion and innuendo.

Let's make it easy: list the facts in the article.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

[pinebox]

47. Well then what is this?

The CIA-led Bay of Pigs fiasco and other CIA blunders had provoked a terrifying response from the Soviet Union. Recognizing that the U.S. approach had contributed to bringing the world to the brink, Kennedy bravely and successfully stood up to the warmongering pushed by so many of his advisors and pursued peace, both during and after the Cuban Missile Crisis. He thereby saved the world from nuclear annihilation and halted the unchecked proliferation of nuclear arms.

/shrug

[randome]

54. Even that is not a fact, although I agree with it. What that has to do with Clinton, I don't know.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

[pinebox]

58. I'd disagree

[JoePhilly]

52. Well, it's no word cloud, that's for sure.

[pinebox]

60. Because word clouds are wrong

that analyze entire social media trends? Are you familiar how SEO works Joe?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

44. Ten

[Trajan]

33. Tired of your cynical interjections ...

It's time for you to go ...

[JoePhilly]

34. How do you plan to accomplish that?

[Ned_Devine]

66. It just means you are being put on ignore.

[JoePhilly]

88. DU needs a feature that would say something like this ...

People who are ignoring you are also ignoring these people ...

Ignored person 1
Ignored person 2
...
Ignored person n

Be a great way to make new friends.

[Ned_Devine]

110. What happens is...

...these little bickering sessions become so tedious that people get to the point where they know they're not going to get through to someone or change her/his mind. Their best option to maintain their sanity is to just ignore that person so they can just enjoy their time here.

[JoePhilly]

120. I've never put anyone on ignore.

Seems silly to go on a public forum, and then try to insulate yourself.

And why tell the person? It's childish.

[Ned_Devine]

132. It's their way of letting you...

...know that any response you give from there on in that conversation and any future conversation will be invisible to that person.

[JoePhilly]

134. Don't care really.

Somewhere between 5-20% of people who come to a site post anything, the rest just read.

So ignoring me does nothing to stop others from seeing my posts.

And as you've demonstrated, others often feel free to step in and continue the line of discussion without the "ignorer".

[merrily]

28. Apparently, a member of the group that is definitely NOT alert stalking Bernie supporters alerted

on a post consisting almost exclusively of material quoted from common dreams (aka not a right wing source).

On Wed Dec 2, 2015, 09:32 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Absolutely damning!- Hillary Clinton and the ISIS Mess
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251865465

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Please hide. It is OK to discuss your candidate without vicious rw attacks on fellow democratic candidates

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Dec 2, 2015, 09:48 AM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Funny how anything criticizing Clinton is labeled a right wing attack, even when it's her actions that are right wing.


Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Abuse of the alert system

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[pinebox]

30. LOL That is hilarious!

Commondreams is as left wing as it gets! http://www.commondreams.org/
So now apparently anything criticizing HRC is right wing propaganda? lol

[merrily]

31. Not necessarily, no, but anything criticizing Hillary apparently is "alert worthy," for one reason

or another.

Pick a reason, any reason.

[pinebox]

32. Apparently :)

[JTFrog]

45. I guess there is always about a 5% chance of your source

not being ultra conservative right wing or ultra fringe left wing crazy. I didn't alert, but I can sure empathize with that alerter. This is what happens when you keep dragging in nothing but trash to DU.

[Buzz Clik]

74. You have no idea who alerted that post or why.

[merrily]

78. Hence the word "apparently" Reading comprehension is your friend (I promise).

[Buzz Clik]

82. Your strong implication is crystal clear, and your history leaves no doubt about your intent.

Your snotty attitude notwithstanding, I am not backing away from original point.

[merrily]

83. Aren't you the guy who warned me (gratuitously, I might add) against posting angry this am?

It's really not good for you, but words do matter.

[Buzz Clik]

90. Ask yourself this question:

What is the likelihood of Sanders getting destroyed in the primaries when the Sanders supporters make it clear that anyone who even hints at supporting HRC or would consider voting for her is beneath contempt?

The hate that you and your ilk have for both HRC and her supporters exceeds the despise that the average DUer has for the likes of Trump, Cruz, and GW Bush. It's astonishing yet totally consistent and unrelenting.

What are you hoping to accomplish? I truly dislike HRC, but the actions of the Bernie clan are so repugnant that it gives me pause.

[merrily]

130. My posts are not hate-filled, except maybe in the imaginations of some who see only their way or

or hate.

You might, however, check out the content of some of your own posts, on this thread alone.

[Buzz Clik]

133. Yeah, yeah. More of the "What? Did you not read my words?"

You are a fine representative of the DU Sanders crowd, carrying the torch (and pitchfork) with great zeal.

Congrats.

[merrily]

156. Yes, "notice what my post actually says" is hate filled, while your accusing me of hating

and carrying torches and pitchforks is not.

The double standards are hilarious.

[polly7]

140. Your posts are great, merrily. They just need to have all this 'go away', as well

as anyone posting of it or even appearing on a thread about it. I have never seen you state anything hateful - but they need you to be seen that way too - it's just a strategy to deflect and distract from the truth (but that doesn't really work all that well).

[merrily]

153. Thanks, polly7.

Music to my ears.

[Maedhros]

106. As if the right wing would criticize ANYONE for being a hawk.

Why do they always call principled opposition "right wing attacks?"

[merrily]

114. Because they they have to give some reason for the alert and they think "left"

may not be a good enough reason on Democratic Underground? And neither is, "We are trying to drive the left off this board, so we're just pretty much alerting on everything the left posts?" Dunno.

[Maedhros]

125. The magnitude and volume of innuendo, half-truths and outright lies from the Hillary camp

is staggering.

Intellectual dishonesty is a badge of honor, it seems.

[merrily]

127. Are you on team DNC/Hillary or are you a right winger? You must choose one of those two.

No other possibilities exist.

[Goblinmonger]

109. Ironically, the jury is in

FWIW, I was #5:

Apparently, a member of the group that is definitely NOT alert stalking Bernie supporters alerted
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=865672

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Alerts are allowed, this kind of alert stalking drama is over the top and disruptive. Both sides do it, this drama of only one side does it needs to stop.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Dec 2, 2015, 12:03 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Let's grow some thicker skin around here.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: So you don't like alert stalking and you attack that problem by alert stalking. Alerter needs to reimburse me for a new irony meter because mine just exploded. This would be the most hilarious thing I've seen this week if it weren't so damn sad.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[merrily]

116. Just out of curiosity, Juror 5, what would you suggest for handling alert stalking?

BTW, that was not my alert. Not that you said it might be, but I'd like to negate any possible implication.

[Goblinmonger]

152. I think people just need to calm the hell down.

From any times I've read ATA, it seems like nothing will be done from the top with the jury system.

If people here would stop acting like middle schoolers, it might get better.

I had no thoughts it was your alert.

[Scuba]

41. Well, sure she's a war monger and tool of the 1%, but she's OK on some social issues ...

... so we should all be very afraid of someone who's also a war monger and a tool of the 1% but is not OK on social issues.

So vote for Hillary!









Yeah, that's it.

[Buzz Clik]

75. And, in the absence of substance, just make shit up!

[Thinkingabout]

42. The brilliance of think the Saudi was going to handle the problem did not

Materialize, so what's next Bernie?

[SoapBox]

56. But, but, but...it's her turn!

Fingers in ears...Can't hear you!

[Buzz Clik]

62. I'll give you credit, pinbox: you are tireless.

Your willingness to dedicate hours to the cause of slamming HRC is .... something.

[Proserpina]

65. It comes down to this: If She's for it, I'm Against It for 2 reasons (and I'm not the only one)

1) Serial Insincerity to Ordinary People and Corporate Pandering to Big $ Donors
2)Bernie's got a better plan and the popular support for it

There may be other reasons that come to me later, but that will do for now.

[Buzz Clik]

77. About this: "2)Bernie's got a better plan and the popular support for it"

In almost every way, it's the same plan.

So, you oppose her because ... 1%!

Praise Bernie.

[Tommy2Tone]

81. 2)Bernie's got a better plan and the popular support for it

Bernie is losing big time with Democrats. He seems to be a hit with people who don't vote, so there is that.

[99th_Monkey]

68. K&R - nt

[zappaman]

71. ok. n/t

[floriduck]

76. More of the same

says it all. But the Hill people flat out don't care and refuse to open their eyes. Like Ron White always says, "You can't fix stupid."

[Tommy2Tone]

79. More and more is becomes evident to be a Bernie fan....

you not only have to hate Hillary but President Obama as well. Or so it appears to me.

[jalan48]

87. Hillary's part of the "Big Club" that George Carlin told us about.

This is only damning if you happen to be a casualty of these wars. Hillary has suffered no immediate effect (Chelsea wasn't a volunteer for the wars). Bush, Cheney and the rest have not suffered either. One of the reasons Hillary is the nominee is that she's part of this war club-and sadly-I'm beginning to think you can't get elected President without the approval of the war club members.

[yallerdawg]

93. Is there any bad thing in the world...

that Hillary Clinton is not responsible for?

You see - that is where you lose all credibility.

Even the most ardent Hillary supporters do not consider her to be this omnipotent, all-powerful being the Hillary Haters infer.

We only anticipate a coronation, not an Ascension to Godhead!

[Blue_Adept]

112. Pretty much

It really comes down to people calling her EVIL and being done with it. It's hilarious in how far they go to paint in this direction.

[JoePhilly]

123. ^^^^ THIS ^^^^

[treestar]

149. This ^^^^^^^

It's a miracle that she has already taken over from Obama !

[pinebox]

150. Well yallerdawg let's take a look at things shall we?

We have someone running for president who's done this;

Lied about incoming sniper fire
Has massive ties to big banks
Refuses to fight for universal health care
Won't fight for a living wage
Had made disparaging remarks about undocumented people
Ran racist ads at 3am against Obama
Voted for the biggest blunder in the history of America with the Iraq war
Was for the TPP before she was against it
Defended the Defense Of Marriage Act
defended Don't Ask Don't Tell
Has a former KXL lobbyist on her team
Is constantly marred in controversy (RW smear or otherwise)
Defended NAFTA


Sorry but it is what it is. She built that.

[yallerdawg]

172. I don't know.

This doesn't sound like a complete biography.

This doesn't sound like an objective biography.

This doesn't sound like an accurate biography.

We have spent decades arguing with people who have no intention of conceding any point or accepting any argument. This is not productive in any way. This is not convincing. This is not positive. This gets you nothing and goes nowhere.

You have no credibility, and now we dismiss your opinion.

And this is pointless.

[Sancho]

186. Let's see how that list stacks up against the other choice?

We have someone running for President who:

Catered to the MI complex for years to get them to Vermont.
Voted repeatedly to help out the NRA and gun manufacturers.
Lied about being a CO to try and get out of the draft.
Wrote crazy porn stories about degradation of women.
Says he's for education and immigration but represents a state without tuition equity.
Lies and exaggerates about his role in the civil rights movement.
Doesn't even know if a picture is of himself.
Didn't seem to notice his wife's illegal deals and payoff to go away.
Proposed a tax on the retirement funds of public employees and union workers.
Used the NRA to do his dirty work and get rid of a political opponent.
Has a reputation of not getting along with colleagues in Congress, staff, or constituents.
Says he's not a Democrat and then he's a socialist, and then he's whatever is convenient; basically a liar.
Supported the F35 over the objection of voters who put him in office.
Doesn't own a comb or tie so he looks like he's a leftover from Vaudeville.
Yells, shouts, and makes sexist comments.
Goes to a RW, fundamental university and quotes the Bible and condones crazy values.

Well....the list goes on and on for someone who makes loud claims but has little to show in effectiveness.

I guess it's a mud-slinging toss-up when you get down to it?

[2pooped2pop]

108. I can tell the Hillary supporters do not have kids that she can send to war

you know, foot soldiers, cannon fodder.

[JoePhilly]

122. You sound like the RW folks who think ...

... every Dem is on welfare.

[2pooped2pop]

170. that the best you got?

when you don't agree, everyone else sounds like rw? Well, if you want to go that route, I think many Hillary supporters are closer to rw than left.

[JoePhilly]

173. You think no one who supports Hillary has kids ...

... its one of the more ridiculous things I've heard any one on DU say in quite a while. And that is saying something.

And to be clear, I did not say you were a RWer, I'm simply pointing out that your simplistic and rather silly notion that no one who supports Hillary has kids, is just as simplistic and silly as when the RWers claim non of us on the left have jobs and must be on welfare.

Hope that helps.

[ismnotwasm]

124. I have two that were deployed to Afghanistan and Iraq respectively.

It was not a good time.

You win the thread prize, considering its author

[2pooped2pop]

171. wow hard to believe you would support a warmonger then.

If Hillary wins, there will be more war. And oh goody another prize awarding thread. I notice some people who have nothing else use that, as well as the old "that says a lot about you". I guess if you have nothing else you can use those old standbys.

[JoePhilly]

174. The guy telling others what they "must think" is upset because some one said ...

... "that says a lot about you".

That's hilarious.

Self awareness is a really useful skill to develop.

[2pooped2pop]

175. upset? They would have to do much more than that to upset me.

I just find it funny. I laugh all the time on here. The grammar police especially cracks me up, but many of the ones with the "better than thou' attitude also give me chuckles.

[JoePhilly]

178. That's how I see some of you ...

... self proclaimed High Priests of Liberalism, sitting on the right hand, passing your judgements on those who are not worthy.

[2pooped2pop]

179. see? see? so much to laugh at here.

thanks for the chuckle. Love it.

[JoePhilly]

180. Only one of us will be laughing in a few months.

[2pooped2pop]

183. if Hillary wins No one will be laughing.

It's going to be a disaster.

[Uncle Joe]

113. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, pinebox.

[polly7]

143. K&R. nt.

[Faux pas]

158. K N R

[MisterP]

169. that's why I always roll my eyes when everyone starts chirping that "we need to arm the Kurds"

because it's just the same cycle: we're already pretending they're left-Democrats in abayas--so feminist! so secular! so ... like what I want America to be!
a few years later we're getting shocked at these human locusts, this peshmerga rampage against anyone who isn't Yezidi AND who is, and go proxy shopping again--why there's this socialist womyn-led Iranian group that we've been working with for years and even got off the terror list!
a few years later the genocidal death cult with the Paris shootings and the mass graves isn't looking too hot ...

[misterhighwasted]

176. pinebox hit & run. There's an obvious pattern.

Just sayin.

[JTFrog]

192. He won't be doing another one for a couple of months.

I guess folks finally got tired of him dragging in every right wing attack against Clinton he could find.

[misterhighwasted]

195. About time, glad to hear.

[Cheese Sandwich]

187. I know this will be unpopular but the US should never have funded Syrian rebels who turned out to be

ISIS and Al Qaeda. Major oopsies.