Thursday, January 08, 2015

THIS JUST IN! HE WANTS TO BE THE ONLY ONE TO ATTACK THE PRESS!

BULLY BOY PRESS &    CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE


AFTER MAKING HIS STATEMENT, BARRY WAS HEARD INSISTING, "ONLY I CAN ATTACK MEDIA OUTLETS AND REPORTERS!  I'M REALLY GOING AFTER JAMES RISEN NOW!"

A GLEEFUL MEDEA BENJAMIN CLAPPED HER HANDS WILDLY AS SHE PEED HER PANTS RIGHT ON THE SPOT AND SAID, "WE LOVE YOU BARRY! WE DO!  WE REALLY REALLY DO!"





Starting with a new survey that has a number of outlets in a tizzy.  Of Fairleigh Dickinson University's Public Mind Poll's Iraq section, the university notes

Overall, 42 percent of Americans believe that U.S. forces found active weapons of mass destruction program in Iraq. Republicans are more likely to hold this belief than Democrats: fifty-one percent of Republicans think it’s “probably” or “definitely” true that an active program was found after the 2003 invasion, with 14 percent saying that it was definitely true. Still, large portions of other groups think that the WMD program, a major part of the justification for the invasion, was actually found, including 32 percent of Democrats. 

The findings appear to trouble and confuse RT, The Week, The Hill and more.

I have questions regarding the sample as well as their margin of error (which honestly looks rounded and not really accurate) but assuming the results are correct, why is it a surprise?

February 5, 2003, Colin Powell didn't just go before the United Nations and insist that Saddam Hussein had Weapons of Mass Destruction, he lied.  He knowingly lied.  He presented evidence he knew was false.

So since that time, Collie The Blot Powell has been ridiculed by the media and treated with the disdain that a known liar whose lies resulted in the deaths of millions will be treated, right?

Wrong.

Colin Powell is still considered, by the media, to be a respected and trusted person.


He's far from alone.  As Peter Hart (FAIR -- link is video) noted in June, "It's 2003 all over again, as Iraq 'experts' who promoted the 2003 invasion are back on TV screens offering expert analysis about what to do next."

Justin Raaimondo (Antiwar.com) addressed the issue in March of 2013 noting:

Ten years after the invasion of Iraq, the war criminals are still at large. Saddam Hussein is dead and buried, but the cabal that lied us into war is still around – and not only that, they are mocking us from their podiums in the media, justifying and obscuring their crimes. Here is former Bush speechwriter David Frum declaring he was right all along – if only:
"If we’d found the WMD, it would have been different. If we’d kept better order in Iraq after the overthrow of Saddam, it would have been different. If more Iraqis had welcomed the invasion as we expected, it would have been different. If the case for the war had been argued in a less contrived and predetermined way, it would have been different."Ah, "but it wasn’t different," continues Frum: "Those of us who were involved – in whatever way – bear the responsibility." So what have been the consequences suffered by Frum – as opposed to the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who were killed and maimed, their lives and country destroyed? What price has Mr. "Axis of Evil" paid that is in any way comparable to that exacted from the 5,000 Americans killed and tens of thousands horribly wounded? Why none, of course. There he is, on CNN, in the Daily Beast, pontificating in his new role as a "moderate" Republican.


There is a difference between being wrong and lying.

Anyone who takes a position has a chance of being wrong.  

Liars should be banned by the media.  Colin Powell lied.  That's documented and don't believe his little fluffer Lawrence Wilkerson.  Powell was presented with false charges to make to the UN and he pushed back on some but agreed to go with others.  This has been documented repeatedly, you can refer to FAIR or to the Los Angeles Times, for the Times start with Greg Miller's July 15, 2004 report entitled "Flaws Cited in Powell's U.N. Speech on Iraq."

He lied.

The mainstream media should have rebuked him long ago instead of courting him and presenting him as an expert.

As for those wrong?

No one should be banned from the public discourse for being wrong.  Hopefully, they will at least admit they were wrong but even if they don't we'll all be wrong at some point in our lives -- multiple times (especially me).  

But those wrong on big issues?  They should be brought on far less by Sunday chat shows and balanced out with voices who were right.

That's for the mainstream media -- the broadcast networks, CNN, most newspapers, etc.

For what's supposed to be the left media?

The periodicals like The Progressive, The Nation, In These Times, Mother Jones, various Pacifica Radio programs, etc?

They might, in the interest of a wide ranging debate, allow those who were wrong to participate but as guests.  You do not hire these people,  you do not give them a regular platform.

Mother Jones presents itself as left -- in its latest incarnation, it has become nothing but a partisan organ for the Democratic Party -- and as a voice of truth.

But when Mother Jones was looking for someone to hire to write bits and pieces for the mag's online site, it didn't go with Cindy Sheehan.  Cindy was a national name and someone who stood for peace and stood against the Iraq War.  Mother Jones didn't pursue her.

Or take Ann Wright.  The former army colonel was serving in the State Dept when Powell was lying.  And her response?  She resigned from the diplomatic corps.  Her resignation letter ended up all over the internet.

Mother Jones didn't pursue her to write for them.

No, when they had a slot open, they went with Kevin Drum who supported and cheerleaded the illegal war.

When the media -- mainstream or in the case of Mother Jones alleged left wing media -- refuses to hold liars and war mongers accountable, they send the impression that this filth was correct, that those of us who said no to war were wrong.

The filth should have been ostracized, publicly humiliated.

Instead, their opinions continue to be treated as important and worthwhile.

Over a million Iraqis are dead because of these liars and their opinions.

But there are no consequences.

Posted by at

Wednesday, January 07, 2015

THIS JUST IN! HE'S GOT AN OPINION ON EVERYTHING!


BULLY BOY PRESS &    CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE

FADED CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O AND PROFESSIONAL BUSYBODY BARRY O HAS HAD TO WEIGH IN AGAIN -- THIS TIME ON A CALL IN A FOOTBALL GAME.

WHEN ASKED IF NO ONE HAD EVER TOLD THE BITCH TO MIND HIS OWN BUSINESS, WHITE HOUSE SPOKESMODEL JOSH EARNEST DECLARED HE DIDN'T BELIEVE THAT THEY HAD.

ASKED IF BARRY O WAS WORKING ON THE ECONOMY, A NERVOUS JOSH EARNEST TRIED TO INTEREST REPORTERS IN BARRY O'S THOUGHTS ON TIDDLYWINKS AND JACKS.




Starting with today's Defense Dept press briefing at the Pentagon moderated by spokesperson Rear Adm John Kirby.


Q: Admiral, when you said in response to Nancy's question with numbers, that hundreds of -- we know that hundreds of ISIL fighters have been killed, can you be more specific on that number? And also, can you give us any idea of civilians killed in the airstrike campaign?


KIRBY: I cannot give you a more specific number of -- of how many ISIL fighters. We just know it's hundreds: several hundred. It's not --

I'd like to make two points. First of all, we don't have the ability to -- to count every nose that we shwack [sic]. Number two, that's not the goal. That's not the goal. The less of these guys that are out there, certainly that's the better, but the goal is to degrade and destroy their capabilities.

And we're not getting into an issue of body counts. And that's why I don't have that number handy. I wouldn't -- I wouldn't have asked my staff to give me that number before I came out here. It's simply not a relevant figure.

On civilian casualties, what I know is that CENTCOM, Central Command, is investigating several, what they believe to be credible allegations of possible civilian casualties. I don't know all the details of that. I would point you to Central Command. I know that they are actively investigating what they believe to be at least a few incidents of civilian causalities that they think, you know, warrant further investigation, that they have found credible to investigate. On their own, they've done this. But again, I'd point you to Central Command for more detail on that.


And if I could just editorialize a second, I mean, this is something we always take seriously. We are very mindful of trying to mitigate the risk to civilians every time we operate, everywhere we operate. And so when we do believe that we've had occasion to cause collateral damage or hurt, kill civilians, we take it seriously and we look into it. It matters to us.


Of the above remarks, AFP points out, "The comments marked the first time the US military has acknowledged that the air war may have exacted a toll on civilians."  Kate Brannen (Foreign Policy) offers:

Depending on whether any civilian casualties are confirmed -- and where they may have happened -- these new investigations could move the debate around whether U.S. troops need to be moved closer to the battlefield, said Paul Scharre, a former Army Ranger.  He worked in the  Office of the Secretary of Defense from 2008 to 2013 on intellligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance policies, among other issues, before joining the Center for a New American Security.
Some critics of the Obama administration’s strategy against the Islamic State have called for more air power, describing the current airstrikes as “pinpricks.” But to unleash more bombs on Iraq or Syria without inadvertently killing civilians would most likely require U.S. troops to move closer to the fight.



And that's the thing about selling war -- those who do can always use anything to sell even more of it.  "You say we're killing civilians?  Well the answer is for us to up our involvement!  Ground troops will save civilians!" 

Sadly, there are many who will go along with that claim -- despite the fact that the years 2003 through 2011 in Iraq, with massive numbers of US troops on the ground -- did not create a safety zone for civilians.


The point Kirby raised about civilian deaths kind of got smoothed over in press reports.

Probably because this press lives to protect itself.

The issue isn't just that there may have been civilian deaths.

There was another important comment -- one that reflects on the press so they prefer to bury it.

Kirby noted, "First of all, we don't have the ability to -- to count every nose that we shwack [sic]."

The US government -- with all its military might, its Special Ops and CIA in Iraq, et al -- can't "count every nose that we whack." 

Yet, day after day, the claims by the US government and/or the Iraqi government as to how many 'militants,' 'Da'ash,' 'terrorists,' what have you are treated as fact and repeated as such.

Not only can they not "count every nose," they can't guarantee that the dead were who they claim they were.




RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"







Posted by at

Tuesday, January 06, 2015

THIS JUST IN! WASTING MONEY ON FOOD HE'S JUST GOING TO PUKE BACK UP!


BULLY BOY PRESS &    CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE

FADED CELEBRITY BARRY O THE MANOREXIC WENT TO DINNER WITH MICHELLE AND SPENT $1000.

SHOCKING AS IT IS WHEN THE ECONOMY IS IN THE TOILET, THE DOW IS SLIDING AND BARRY O REMAINS AN ELECTED PUBLIC SERVANT AND NOT THE QUEEN OF D.C., WHAT'S EVEN MORE SHOCKING IS THAT SO MUCH MONEY WOULD BE SPENT FOR MANOREXIC BARRY TO CHEW HIS FOOD A LITTLE AND THEN PUKE IT UP TO MAINTAIN HIS TRIM AND GIRLISH FIGURE.







Take thug Nouri al-Maliki.  The man Bully Boy Bush imposed on Iraq, demanded he be prime minister is, was and always will be a thug.  Despite that reality, in 2010, when Nouri lost to Ayad Allawi, Barack Obama demanded Nouri get a second term.

That second term pulled Iraq ever closer to the abyss as Nouri attacked protesters, allowed his goons to rape girls and women in Iraqi jails and prisons, bullied politicians, threatened leaders of neighboring countries and much more.


Nouri's finally out as prime minister (Haider al-Abadi currently holds the title) but Nouri has reportedly told his flunkies that he'll be back in the post of prime minister in a matter of months.  Currently, he spews his crazy from the post of Vice President -- he's one of three -- the other two are Osama al-Nujaifi and, yes, Ayad Allawi.



Former European Union member Struan Stevenson offers:


 Riven with dishonesty and fraud, the Iraqi army mirrors the rampant corruption of the Iraqi government in post-Saddam Iraq. 
These circumstances have provided the perfect conditions for the brutal Shiite militias to thrive and take control of the battlefield. There are perhaps hundreds of these militias. They are trained, financed and often led by the terrorist Iranian Quds Force. They are Iranian proxies. So the US air strikes are aiding and abetting Iran in achieving its ultimate objective, which is total control of Iraq.
The current war raging across Iraq was as avoidable as it was predictable. Nouri al-Maliki’s second term as prime minister was a tragedy for the Iraqi people, for the region and for the world. As a puppet of the Iranian mullahs, he encouraged the Iranian-led Shiite militias and used them to enforce his merciless “iron fist” sectarian policy of indiscriminate bombing, shelling, arbitrary arrests, torture and mass execution of innocent Sunni civilians. Maliki utilised the claim of fighting a war against terror to secure his grip on power and the West fell for it. 



Nouri's failures and crimes are well known.  Despite that reality, Nouri attempted to rewrite history on Sunday.   AFP reports:

Iraqi Vice President Nouri al-Maliki, who was widely criticized for sectarian policies during his time as premier, said Sunday that politicians are to blame for the country’s Sunni-Shiite strife.
“There is no problem between the Sunnis and the Shiites as communities, but rather between us the politicians -- we think as Sunnis and Shiites, and we are driving people toward this doom, for which we will bear responsibility before God,” he said.
Maliki himself pursued policies that marginalized and angered members of Iraq’s Sunni Arab minority, especially during his second term as premier.



Richard Engel is a correspondent for NBC News.  Today, he Tweeted.




  • 5 hours ago
    As of now there are 2,140 American soldiers and Marines in Iraq, to grow to around 3k this spring.



    • Staying with the topic of US service members in Iraq, Nikki Henderson (Nexstar Broadcasting) reports that US Col Steve Warren has confirmed that US troops stationed at al-Assad airbase are under regular mortar assault from the Islamic State with Warren terming the assaults "completely ineffective."  (So far, at any rate.) Barbara Starr (CNN) adds the attacks are "raising continuing concern that U.S. forces in Iraq can be kept safe and at least technically out of a combat role, a separate defense official said. The Pentagon would not say whether security measures had changed at the base."



    RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"

    Posted by at

    Sunday, January 04, 2015

    THIS JUST IN! FADED CELEBRITIES MATE!


    BULLY BOY PRESS     &    CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE



    UNTALENTED EDDIE VEDDER -- WHO SUFFERS FROM BOTH NEVER BEING ABLE TO MEASURE UP TO KURT COBAIN AND ALSO FROM PENIS ENVY -- PLAYED SCHOOL GIRL IN HAWAII AS HE SQUEALED WITH JOY AND WET HIS PANTIES WHILE FLIRTING WITH FADED CELEBRITY BARRY O.

    SAID EDDIE, "HE MADE MY BOY VAG-JAY ALL MOIST AND TINGLY.  THE THOUGHT OF BEING THAT CLOSE TO A WAR CRIMINAL GAVE ME MULTIPLE ORGASMS.  THE BIGGEST DILDO AT THE PLEASURE CHEST HAS NEVER BROUGHT ME SO MUCH JOY.  STANDING NEXT TO HIM, THE SMELL OF ALL THE CIVILIANS HE'S KILLED IN THE DRONE WAY?  OH, IT WAS INTOXICATING.  I'M JUST A TIRED WHORE WHO WANTS TO BE FISTED BY BARRY."







    Nickolay Mladenov has declared, "The Iraqi ordinary citizen continues to suffer from violence and terrorism.  2014 has seen the highest number of causalities since the violence in 2006 - 2007."

    Nickolay Mladenov is United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's special envoy to Iraq.  The United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq counts at least 12,282 deaths and 23,126 people left injured.  This doesn't include Anbar which means the numbers are significantly higher since Anbar is the scene of much violence.

    Not including Anbar not only reduces the number of dead and wounded, it also allows people to pose and pretend. 

    'Oh, that awful Islamic State! Killing innocent civilians!'

    You mean like the Iraqi government does?

    Alsumaria reports 20 civilians were killed in Falluja yesterday -- including 3 children -- and another twenty left injured.

    Who killed and wounded those people?

    The Iraqi military.

    They've been bombing residential neighborhoods in Falluja since January.  It's a War Crime.

    Nickolay Mladenov has made one statement opposing it -- it's now a year that it's been going on, that the Iraqi government has been killing Iraqi civilians.

    And Nickolay thinks one statement takes care of it?

    Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has never said one word.

    Not one word.

    Does he really think he represent the best of the world's aspirations by staying silent about a government killing civilians?

    1900.

    That's not the century.

    That's the number of civilian corpses Falluja General Hospital has received since the fall of victims of these attacks.

    1900 is the number the western press won't tell you.

    1900 is the number of innocents whose lives didn't matter to the Iraqi government and whose deaths clearly do not matter to the world press, to the White House or to the United Nations.

    At what point does the world insist that the Iraqi government stop killing Iraqi civilians?

    If you're wondering that's why the UN doesn't include Anbar in their death tolls -- they don't want to confront the reality that people are being killed -- so many are being killed -- by the Iraqi government.


    It's not because they can't 'verify' the deaths.  They can verify deaths in Anbar as easily as they can anywhere else in Iraq -- in fact, they can verify them in Anbar a great deal easier than they can in Nineveh Province (especially Mosul). 

    They chose not to include Anbar and have done so because they don't want to 'embarrass' the Iraqi government.

    Never forget that: The UN which proclaims "it's your world" bends over backwards to avoid documenting the deaths in Anbar because they don't want to 'embarrass' the Iraqi government.



    RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
    "Iraq"








    Posted by at
    Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)