Saturday, October 29, 2016

THIS JUST IN! SHE EATS SMALL TODDLERS!

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


THAT CRAZY CRANKY CLINTON IS UNDER CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION BY THE F.B.I. YET AGAIN.

REACHED FOR COMMENT, CRANKY STOPPED CHEWING OFF THE HEAD OF A SMALL TODDLER LONG ENOUGH TO SNARL, "IT DON'T MEAN S**T! NO ONE CAN STOP ME! DID YOU NOT SEE MY LATEST TWEET?"

THESE REPORTERS DID SEE IT.


“The Director owes it to the American people to immediately provide the full details of what he is now examining.”



WHEN THESE REPORTERS ASKED WHAT CRANKY HERSELF OWED THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, LIKE THE TRANSCRIPTS TO HER WALL STREET SPEECHES, SHE LUNGED AT THESE REPORTERS WITH HER FANGS BARED BUT TRIPPED OVER HER OWN IMMENSE BELLY FAT AND FELL TO THE GROUND.

AT WHICH POINT, THESE REPORTERS HIGHTAILED IT OUT OF THERE.

FROM THE TCI WIRE:




Saif Hameed and Maher Chmaytelli (REUTERS) report, "Iraqi Shi'ite militias said on Friday they would launch an offensive against Islamic State west of Mosul imminently, a move which would block any retreat by the Sunni jihadists into Syria but is likely to alarm Iraq's northern neighbor Turkey."

This may or may not alarm Turkey.

Of greater concern should be the issue of the region which is not going to see these militias as 'helpers' or 'liberators' but as attackers and threats to their well being.


Then there's the US government.

Their bombings are not to be directed by these militias, they are not to support these militias.

These militias are accused of War Crimes.

There's also the concern that Hayder al-Abadi, prime minister of Iraq, has stated that these militias will not take part.


Is there any consistent in any of this?

Apparently not.


On that topic, Stephen Gowans (GLOBAL RESEARCH) explores the differences between the US government's views and actions in Iraq versus in Syria:

To recover Ramadi from Islamic State, Iraqi forces surrounded and cordoned off the city. [6] In addition, the US led coalition bombarded Ramadi with airstrikes and artillery fire. [7] The bombardment left 70 percent of Ramadi’s buildings in ruins. The city was recovered, but “the great majority of its 400,000 people” were left homeless. [8]
Iraqi forces also besieged the city of Fallujah, preventing most food, medicine and fuel from entering it. [9] Militias “prevented civilians from leaving Islamic State territory while resisting calls to allow humanitarian aid to reach the city.” [10] This was done “to strangle Islamic State” [11] with the result that civilians were also “strangled.” Inside the city, tens of thousands endured famine and sickness due to lack of medicine. [12] Civilians reportedly survived on grass and plants. [13] Many civilians “died under buildings that collapsed under” artillery bombardment and coalition air strikes. [14]

The current campaign to recover Mosul is based on the same siege strategy US forces and their Iraqi client used to liberate Ramadi and Fallujah. US and allied warplanes have been bombarding the city for months. [15] Iraqi forces, aided by US Special Forces, are moving to cordon it off. “Some aid groups estimate that as many as a million people could be displaced by fighting to recapture the city, creating a daunting humanitarian task that the United Nations and other organizations say they are not yet ready to deal with.” [16]
Writer and journalist Jonathan Cook commented on the utter hypocrisy of Westerners who condemn the Syrian/Russian campaign to liberate East Aleppo from Islamist fighters while celebrating the Iraqi/US campaign to do the same in Mosul. Targeting the British newspaper, the Guardian, beloved by progressives, Cook contrasted two reports which appeared in the newspaper to illustrate the Western heart beating for all except those the US Empire drowns in blood.

Report one: The Guardian provides supportive coverage of the beginning of a full-throttle assault by Iraqi forces, backed by the US and UK, on Mosul to win it back from the jihadists of ISIS – an assault that will inevitably lead to massive casualties and humanitarian suffering among the civilian population.
Report two: The Guardian provides supportive coverage of the US and UK for considering increased sanctions against Syria and Russia. On what grounds? Because Syrian forces, backed by Russia, have been waging a full-throttle assault on Aleppo to win it back from the jihadists of ISIS and Al-Qaeda – an assault that has led to massive casualties and humanitarian suffering among the civilian population. [17]

Central to Western propaganda is the elision of the Islamist character of the Al Qaeda militants who tyrannize East Aleppo. This is accomplished by labeling them “rebels,” while the “rebels” who tyrannize the cities the United States and its allies besiege are called “Islamic State,” ISIL” or “ISIS” fighters. The aim is to conjure the impression that US-led sieges are directed at Islamic terrorists, and therefore are justifiable, despite the humanitarian crises they precipitate, while the Syrian-led campaign in East Aleppo is directed at rebels, presumably moderates, or secular democrats, and therefore is illegitimate. This is part of a broader US propaganda campaign to create two classes of Islamist militants—good Islamists, and bad ones.



RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Why would you use my dad? -- Erica Garner blasts C..."
"Iraq snapshot"
"WikiLeaks emails blow hole in Obama story on Clint..."
"Iraq snapshot"
"Iraq snapshot"
"The Iraq War continues"
"Iraq"
"Malcolm X's remarks about politics rings true toda..."
"The face Hillary showed to the world was that of a..."
"Thank you"
"Will the press now do their job?"
"The Clinton Foundation finally begins to get a little attention"
"The Clinton Corruption Foundation and so much worse"
"that crooked clinton foundation"
"She is a lousy candidate"
"It's the 90s all over"
"Bill's actions worried Hill's campaign"
"WILL & GRACE"
"The healthcare scam"
"Her birthday"
"Rigged?"
"Michael Moore"
"ObamaCare continues to fade"
"Those polls"
"As New Hampshire goes, so goes the nation?"
"It's a new day"
"what hillary eats"
"Tom Tom gone"
"She will show her ass"
"THIS JUST IN! HER BIG BUTT!"







Monday, October 24, 2016

THIS JUST IN! HER BIG BUTT!

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

LIKE SLICK WILLIE, CRANKY CLINTON CANNOT BE TRUSTED.


Clinton also told me she has 'nothing to say' about Wikileaks email revealing a $12M Clinton Foundation quid-pro-quo


THE PROBLEM IS 'HANDLED' BY DISTRACTING.

CRANKY CLINTON INSISTS WIKILEAKS DID SOMETHING WRONG -- THEY DIDN'T -- AND THIS ALLOWS HER TO IGNORE QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT WAS EXPOSED.

REACHED FOR COMMENT, CRANKY BRAYED, "JUST BE GLAD I'M NOT PULLING DOWN MY INDUSTRIAL CONTROL TOP PANTYHOSE TO EXPOSE MY BIG OL' BUTT TO YOU!"






Let's stay with the Wednesday debate for a second.

As many Republicans (at least those on TV) flee the GOP for the Democratic Party in order to support conservative War Hawk Hillary Clinton (who stated in the debate she would have voted to ban late term abortions -- a fact no one is discussing except for Rebecca in 'hillary would ban late term abortions'), pundits gasp or cackle this may be the end of the Republican Party.

It may be.

Which would be a reason to vote Green -- unless you're hoping that the GOP's demise means only one party.

As the Democratic Party becomes closer and closer to the Republican Party, a new party is needed.

Just as this could be the year the GOP goes down (I don't think so but it could be), this could be the year a new major party emerges: Green.

Think about all the gas baggery you've seen on so-called 'news' programs on cable about the GOP's demise.

If you're going to gas bag over that topic, then the topic that goes with it is what replaces it.

Only that hasn't prompted gas baggery.

Do we have a media or do we have a Democratic Party megaphone?

This morning Mika is again blathering on about how Donald Trump, in the debate Wednesday night, refused to say if he will accept the results.

This a non-issue.

Let's say Donald understood the question and its meanings and is planning on not accepting the results if he loses.

So what?

The Electoral College will name the winner regardless, that person will be sworn in.

Doesn't really matter what he accepts.

Hillary grandstanded on the issue as always.

But she was wrong, Al Gore did not accept the results.

That's why he filed challenges.

Yes, after the Supreme Court ruling -- one month and five days after the election -- Al Gore did concede to Bully Boy Bush.

But Al did not publicly accept the results until that moment.

'But the results were in dispute!'

Yeah, whine to someone who didn't contribute to Al Gore (I did and to the recount fund) and to someone who doesn't refer to Bully Boy Busy as BBB or "White House occupant" -- check the archives, I have never applied the p-word to BBB.  I will say "President Barack Obama," I do not use the p-wod with BBB.

The results could be disputed again.



RECOMMENDED: "Hillary and the press"




Friday, October 21, 2016

THIS JUST IN! WHO'S ZOOMIN WHO?

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


REALLY?

KIND OF SEEMS LIKE CRANKY CLINTON HERSELF POISONED THE RELATIONSHIP -- WIKILEAKS ONLY EXPOSED WHAT SHE DID AND SAID.






In the time since last night's debate between Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump and Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, a few important themes have developed.

First, the media wants war with Syria -- wants it very badly -- and they're already drooling over (and egging on) the renewed conflict between Russia and the US.





After the debate on ABC NEWS, Martha Raddatz was on her attack of Russia kick.

She felt the need to trash Donald Trump.

"He's doubting our intelligence agencies!"

You mean the same ones who cooked the books on Iraq, Martha?

Better question, trashy Martha.

You're a journalist.

You're supposed to be skeptical.

You're supposed to question.

Why can't you do your job?

Oh, that's right, you're a tool of imperialism.

Martha Raddatz had a freak out on air because Donald Trump dared to question the supposed conclusion of our intelligence agencies.

Poor Martha.

Someone give her a happy pill so she can go back to dreamland.




No longer is it just Martha Raddatz, unable to reach a clitoral orgasm without this war, pimping it during a debate, it's everyone after war and more war.



Talk show host Gayle King couldn't get enough of it last night on CBS' post coverage.  And by the way, hosting a daytime talk show and being Oprah's 'gal pal' really don't speak to why you're invited to opine on TV.  CBS has had the weakest staff doing post debate coverage throughout the debates.

On MSNBC's MORNING JOE today, they were whining that Donald Trump would not give them the war they wanted.




RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"





Wednesday, October 19, 2016

THIS JUST IN! CLINTON THE SWINGER!

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

THANKS TO WIKILEAKS, AMERICA NOW KNOWS CRANKY CLINTON IS A SWINGER AS A RESULT OF HER BEING ASKED ABOUT HER OPEN MARRIAGE AND EXPLAINING.


YES, SHE'S A SWINGER.

IN FACT, SOME OF THE WEIRD FACIAL TICS PEOPLE POINT TO AS EVIDENCE THAT SHE'S HAD A STROKE ARE, IN REALITY, LEFT OVER ISSUES FROM HER MANY ORGIES AND GANG BANGS.

"YOU DON'T KNOW HOW MANY F**KING C**KS I'VE HAD SWINGING NEAR MY FACE.  I'VE BEEN POKED IN THE EYE WITH A DICK MORE THAN I'VE BEEN POKED WITH A FINGER," SHE EXPLAINED AFTER TONIGHT'S DEBATE WHILE CHECKING HER WATCH AND EXPLAINING THAT SHE WAS LATE FOR A GANG BANG WITH STENY HOYER AND CHRIS CHRISTIE ("THEY'RE F**KING STALLIONS," SHE INSISTED.)


FROM THE TCI WIRE:

The Iraq War continues.




We have reports of U.S. Marines on the ground in Mosul.

Aren't you glad you voted for Obama to get us out of the Iraq War?









Not only did he promise that, in 2011 and 2012 he was bragging that he had done that.

He did no such thing.






Obama will try to claim "ending the Iraq War" as part of his "legacy" while he is simultaneously waging war in Iraq. That should be good.










He will try to claim that.

But his true legacy is destroying the reputations of his legions of whores.

Except for the millions he basically extorted from Jane Fonda, Tom Hayden didn't have much but he did have his (inflated) past.

Now the forever sell out doesn't even have that.

He's just an old drunk who couldn't speak out against the ongoing Iraq War, the Drone War, the war on Muslims (no surprise there, as a member of the California Assembly, he was a tool of the Zionist machine), the spying on Americans, you name it.

He's exposed as an old drunk.

And Jane Fonda?

She's an "activist."

She always says.

But then in DC in January 2007, she also said she was committed to ending the Iraq War and would not be silent.

Since then?

She's covered for Barack and worn really ugly wigs.

She's whored for Barack and done some lousy acting (NEWSROOM was especially an embarrassment).

She's pimped more exercise videos -- how many calories does one lose with each repeated face lift? -- and she's stayed silent.

Please note, when Richard Nixon had Jane's mail opened and her phones tapped, Jane sued the government -- after the fact.

It was that important to her.

And for years and years, she'd blather on about how important that was.

But today, with Barack collecting every bit of information on a person?

Jane's too busy making sure her bad wig doesn't upstage Robert Redford's bad wig as they rush to make a bad movie for NETFLIX.

She's an "activist," she says.

Does anyone believe her anymore?

Leslie Cagan, Bill Fletcher . . .

So many fake asses.

We've seen a million frauds, and we've exposed them all.

Like the 'leader' who was with Veterans for Peace.

Remember him?

His own son doesn't want to serve in the Iraq War and wants to self-check out and this 'anti-war' 'leader' criticizes him and condemns him.

Yeah, check the archives, we've been exposing the fake asses all along.

They better grasp that they will not escape their pasts.

They cannot, as they did during Vietnam, claim to have been doing something when they weren't.

They have Twitter feeds now -- the better to stroke the forever hungry egos.

Via THE WAYBACK MACHINE, their statements and activities will live on forever.

So when they step forward to try to lead next and insist they protested the Iraq War, people will be able to say to the United For Peace and Justice folks, for example, "Wait, a week after the November 2008 election of Barack Obama as president, you announced you were closing shop.  You weren't protesting the Iraq War, you were protesting a Republican -- Bully Boy Bush -- being in the White House."


RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Iraq snapshot"
"Not a snapshot"
"Hillary Clinton used to talk a lot like Donald Tru..."
"Barack doesn't understand the Constitution or the ..."
"CNN falsely states that it is unlawful for the pub..."
"Mosul"
"Janet Jackson"
"Janet? Yes! Joan? No."
"That gross John Oliver"
"Can we make them return our tax dollars?"
"Big surprise, pay to play Hillary also tried quid pro quo"
"the fix was always in"
"Hillary wants to destroy Social Security"
"Hillary Hypocrite"
"She's so hideous"
"What if The Originals is cancelled?"



" Under The Tree"
"More leaks"
"THIS JUST IN! BIG MOMMA HRC!"