I used to think it was politicians who've created this mess. But it isn't. Not totally, anyways. The media has such a big hand in it. 'Pardoning a turkey' on Thanksgiving takes up 3 minutes of coverage on the national news, and things like climate change and income inequality are covered only in second-tier news sources. The truth is elusive and has to be searched out. Most folks don't have the time (or inclination) to do that.
It's almost impossible to fix. People are actually voting directly against their best interests, and aren't even aware of it.
I think the scariest trait that Trump exhibits is his adoration of US police forces.
There has been a lot of talk about reforming law enforcement in this country. Black Lives Matter was born as a result of police violence.
If Trump is elected, I think talk of reforms like videotaping interrogations, wearing body camera's, stopping stop & frisk, and changing civil forfeiture will all lose any ground they have made in the past few years.
5% of Israelis seeing it as murder and only 19% even disapproving (despite the video tape showing the entire episode/execution) is scary. That level of hatred and racism so deeply and widely ingrained in the population will require - not years - but generations, to recognize and overcome. I don't see this ending well for Israel (despite the fact that they continue to keep confiscating Palestinian land unpunished). This level of widespread hate, paranoia and racism will eventually turn inward.
The disconnect between murdering the wounded Palestinian and the outraged reaction of Israel to defend themselves as the true victim is so sharply revealing.
A lot of big donors do not understand what the word "gift" means.
A "gift" is defined as: "something voluntarily transferred by one person to another without compensation."
A "bribe", on the other hand, is defined as: "money or favor given or promised in order to influence the judgment or conduct of a person in a position of trust."
The donors that attempted to exert influence in this case did not really give "gifts" to the University.
Palestine's use of the International Criminal Court on April 1st and whether or not the US protects Israel with a veto in the next Security Council measure are the next two barometers of where this is going
Another orchestrated distraction that keep's the world's eyes off Palestine for a few months. Netanyahu & Obama will eventually kiss and make-up - and we'll be on to the next ruse.
It's true. Good point. And it's a good precedent should the draft ever be enforced.
If there ever comes a war when too many citizens simply refuse to fight, there's a pretty good likelihood that that war isn't being waged for a good reason. (then again...are any of them???)
If somebody questions the police in a confrontation/stop, the current law enforcement culture is that the person questioning the authority can be subdued - or even killed - with no negative repercussions to the police. The boiler plate argument that exonerates the police is that they were protecting themselves or the community from a potential threat.
The only thing that will stop police from overreacting (as they definitely did in the Garner case) is to put them in jail. The problem is – is that the prosecutors who work with the police on a daily basis sympathize with them and manipulate the process so that nothing happens. Meanwhile, the citizenry recognizes the injustice of seeing the process being manipulated, and trust erodes in the entire justice system.
A solution to this is to set up regional grievance boards whose main purpose is to hunt down and imprison (as aggressively as the current criminal justice system does now with people who break the law) police who overstep their bounds. In other words, it’s this special prosecutor’s job to aggressively pursue the police. Maybe even have these special prosecutors be elected officials so they can be be judged on how many police they discipline. There will be mistakes made and some innocent police will be jailed, but that statement is true of our current criminal justice system, too. If the police don’t like it, then quit. Go work in the public sector. It’s a decent paying job and we’ll get people to agree to those terms.
I don’t expect this to happen – but it’s a solution. We have to stop being ‘beholden’ to police departments because they protect us from dangerous people. They are just as dangerous.
I've read about Israel/Palestine for years and thought that Israel must have something planned other than the two-state/one-state resolutions (neither which they seemed to like). Israel has been so persistent, and so well organized in their land acquisitions over the years that it would be foolish to think it's happened all by chance or luck.
Lately, this third option (deporting the Palestinians into Jordan) seems to be picking up momentum. With this option, Israel gets everything they want (the land and they get rid of the Palestinians). One would think that Israel is tired of all the killing and animosity, but it seems to me that they're just getting started.
Abbas: "We do not want to use this right against anyone, and do not want a confrontation with America. For we have an excellent relationship with it"
I agree. The words above do not sound like a man driven to secure justice for his people. They sound like a weak leader who is kowtowing to a country that has vetoed 41 votes in the UN Security Council.
I don't see how anyone that has been vetoed 41 times can call that an "excellent relationship"
Unfortunately, if Abbas loses the next election and Hamas should win it (Will Hamas even have a representative???), the US & Israel also have that base covered to prolong the whole ordeal (they won't negotiate with Hamas (terrorist)).
It's worked for almost 70 years and they're still there so I doubt a change in strategy is anywhere in Israel's future. Time is on Israel's side. They're now entering a 3rd generation of Palestinian land grabbing, and people living in adversity and under occupation (the Palestinians) for long periods of time eventually just get worn down. It's got to be difficult to worry about the land your family used to own when your current family is having trouble eating. I wish it wasn't true but I think it probably is.
I enjoy watching all of Greenwald's interviews. He has a direct way of separating facts and fluff, and reminds people of the way things are 'supposed' to work. There can't be a lot of interviewers out there who look forward to arguing a position that is opposite of his on national television.
"The reason that the Tea Party doesn’t want Obamacare is because they are convinced that it is ultimately a transfer of wealth from the white rich and middle classes to the minorities."
What is it that makes the Tea Party believe this? Has there been a recent government or independent projection that taxes on the rich will have to rise in order to afford Obamacare?
The Tea Party being convinced that the Affordable Care Act is a "transfer of wealth" must be based on some concrete analysis? They are spending a lot of money (I've read that the Koch's themselves have spent an estimated 50 million dollars)and(common sense, at least) says that it MUST be based on some reputable projection that their taxes will have to pay for it.
I buy into the notion that the rank and file are being manipulated based on racial anxieties...but not so much the Tea Party leaders. My experience is that - behind these types of skirmishes - there's usually someone afraid that they're going to lose their money.
The debate in Congress hasn't yet begun and Lindsey Graham and John McCain are already saying that surgical strikes will not accomplish anything in Syria and that the US has to commit to more. In addition, Israel is disappointed. Obama drew a 'red line' with Syria's use of chemical weapons and Iran's nuclear program, and now that he's deferred to Congress over Syria crossing the red line, Israel wonders where they stand should Iran's nuclear program accelerate.
A million things can go wrong that could turn a 'limited' strike into a more extensive commitment (Syria counterattacks our warships, lobs missiles into Israel, etc) - and (taking into consideration the influence that the Israeli's have on our Middle East policy) once that ball gets rolling, there’s a possibility it might not stop until it hits Iran.
A limited strike only reinforces that chemical weapons are not acceptable to the international community (something the international community already knows). A limited strike that escalates into a major commitment has the potential to become a global war (considering all of the countries with differing interests over there).
I still think that diplomacy is the best action. If it works, fine. If it doesn’t – at least you tried. Who cares if another country thinks that Obama ‘blinked’? 80% of Americans do not want to get involved – so I would assume that they have forgiven Obama’s perceived ‘blinking’. Those are the opinions he should care about.
Lots of talk yesterday about Obama losing credibility over not taking action on the crossing of the 'red line' he drew a year ago. I don't see it that way. For one, most rational people would draw the same red line (Nobody thinks its OK to use chemical weapons on their own people)
Consequences for crossing Obama's 'red line' would probably gain international support 99.9% of the time. However, in this unique instance, the opposition is also crossing 'red lines' (from what I've read, the rebel forces are slaughtering and eviscerating regime innocents).
It doesn't make sense (just to save credibility) to punish an evil when the result of that punishment will aid another evil. I wouldn't want my kid going over there just so Obama could could claim credibility over a statement he made a year ago and that couldn't possibly have forseen scenarios where punishing one red line contributed to the advancement of another.
I agree that the rebel fighters would not have carried out a mass murder of families who are feeding and sheltering them. I think Dr. Cole's assessment, however, is too limited in it's choices (either it was the Assad regime or the rebels).
There are additional entities out there with their own separate interests who MIGHT carry out a mass murder of families in order to achieve their goals. Israel may see the introduction of chemical weapons as a way to (eventually) entangle Iran (whom they are convinced is developing nuclear weapons; and Saudi Arabia did not seem very happy with the support their receiving (in arming the rebels) from the West.
I'm not sure this is an 'either/or' (Assad/rebels) scenario...
Nice. I bet a lot of people would be surprised at how this short film depicts how similar we are. It goes against the grain of what the mainstream news agencies show us on a nightly basis.
© 2025 All Rights Reserved
Amen!
I used to think it was politicians who've created this mess. But it isn't. Not totally, anyways. The media has such a big hand in it. 'Pardoning a turkey' on Thanksgiving takes up 3 minutes of coverage on the national news, and things like climate change and income inequality are covered only in second-tier news sources. The truth is elusive and has to be searched out. Most folks don't have the time (or inclination) to do that.
It's almost impossible to fix. People are actually voting directly against their best interests, and aren't even aware of it.
Israel grabs more land. False outrage by US. Let a little time pass. Increase aid to 3 billion per year. Repeat
I think the scariest trait that Trump exhibits is his adoration of US police forces.
There has been a lot of talk about reforming law enforcement in this country. Black Lives Matter was born as a result of police violence.
If Trump is elected, I think talk of reforms like videotaping interrogations, wearing body camera's, stopping stop & frisk, and changing civil forfeiture will all lose any ground they have made in the past few years.
That's the scariest part of Trump for me.
Politicians like Bernie Sanders come along once in a lifetime. I hope he gets in.
5% of Israelis seeing it as murder and only 19% even disapproving (despite the video tape showing the entire episode/execution) is scary. That level of hatred and racism so deeply and widely ingrained in the population will require - not years - but generations, to recognize and overcome. I don't see this ending well for Israel (despite the fact that they continue to keep confiscating Palestinian land unpunished). This level of widespread hate, paranoia and racism will eventually turn inward.
The disconnect between murdering the wounded Palestinian and the outraged reaction of Israel to defend themselves as the true victim is so sharply revealing.
Great article. Thank you
Good article that highlights just how limited the options have become for Palestinians. Thank you
A lot of big donors do not understand what the word "gift" means.
A "gift" is defined as: "something voluntarily transferred by one person to another without compensation."
A "bribe", on the other hand, is defined as: "money or favor given or promised in order to influence the judgment or conduct of a person in a position of trust."
The donors that attempted to exert influence in this case did not really give "gifts" to the University.
The last sentence of this article raises so many doubts.
Maybe Iran's greatest threat of all is it's ability to expose the confusion, unrest, and political obstruction that the US & Israel seem to stir up.
Civilian casualties in the drone war are secondary characters in a violent video game.
The only way to stop the killing is to humanize the victims - show their pictures, tell their story's, hear from their devastated family's.
The US media is not interested in airing those stories.
Sadly, I agree. But I remain hopeful.
Palestine's use of the International Criminal Court on April 1st and whether or not the US protects Israel with a veto in the next Security Council measure are the next two barometers of where this is going
Scary stuff. American neocons would be ecstatic about the apocalyptic overtones
Another orchestrated distraction that keep's the world's eyes off Palestine for a few months. Netanyahu & Obama will eventually kiss and make-up - and we'll be on to the next ruse.
It's true. Good point. And it's a good precedent should the draft ever be enforced.
If there ever comes a war when too many citizens simply refuse to fight, there's a pretty good likelihood that that war isn't being waged for a good reason. (then again...are any of them???)
If somebody questions the police in a confrontation/stop, the current law enforcement culture is that the person questioning the authority can be subdued - or even killed - with no negative repercussions to the police. The boiler plate argument that exonerates the police is that they were protecting themselves or the community from a potential threat.
The only thing that will stop police from overreacting (as they definitely did in the Garner case) is to put them in jail. The problem is – is that the prosecutors who work with the police on a daily basis sympathize with them and manipulate the process so that nothing happens. Meanwhile, the citizenry recognizes the injustice of seeing the process being manipulated, and trust erodes in the entire justice system.
A solution to this is to set up regional grievance boards whose main purpose is to hunt down and imprison (as aggressively as the current criminal justice system does now with people who break the law) police who overstep their bounds. In other words, it’s this special prosecutor’s job to aggressively pursue the police. Maybe even have these special prosecutors be elected officials so they can be be judged on how many police they discipline. There will be mistakes made and some innocent police will be jailed, but that statement is true of our current criminal justice system, too. If the police don’t like it, then quit. Go work in the public sector. It’s a decent paying job and we’ll get people to agree to those terms.
I don’t expect this to happen – but it’s a solution. We have to stop being ‘beholden’ to police departments because they protect us from dangerous people. They are just as dangerous.
There's a video tape circulating of Rand Paul accusing Dick Cheney of pushing the Iraq War so Halliburton would profit.
Now we're learning that - with just a superficial inquiry - billions of dollars were spent enriching a select few Iraqi officers.
It's a sad thing thinking about young, idealistic soldiers going over there and thinking they're defending some noble cause.
I've read about Israel/Palestine for years and thought that Israel must have something planned other than the two-state/one-state resolutions (neither which they seemed to like). Israel has been so persistent, and so well organized in their land acquisitions over the years that it would be foolish to think it's happened all by chance or luck.
Lately, this third option (deporting the Palestinians into Jordan) seems to be picking up momentum. With this option, Israel gets everything they want (the land and they get rid of the Palestinians). One would think that Israel is tired of all the killing and animosity, but it seems to me that they're just getting started.
Wow. What would happen if Senator David Norris gave that speech in the USA? I can't even imagine...
The 'winning side' gets to write history. Sad but true.
Hopefully, he's able to move forward and find an even better situation for himself and his family.
Abbas: "We do not want to use this right against anyone, and do not want a confrontation with America. For we have an excellent relationship with it"
I agree. The words above do not sound like a man driven to secure justice for his people. They sound like a weak leader who is kowtowing to a country that has vetoed 41 votes in the UN Security Council.
I don't see how anyone that has been vetoed 41 times can call that an "excellent relationship"
Unfortunately, if Abbas loses the next election and Hamas should win it (Will Hamas even have a representative???), the US & Israel also have that base covered to prolong the whole ordeal (they won't negotiate with Hamas (terrorist)).
And round and round we go...
I'm going to be optimistic and hope that this brings the entire mess to a head. When Israel is hit in the pocketbook, it will bend. Not before then
It's worked for almost 70 years and they're still there so I doubt a change in strategy is anywhere in Israel's future. Time is on Israel's side. They're now entering a 3rd generation of Palestinian land grabbing, and people living in adversity and under occupation (the Palestinians) for long periods of time eventually just get worn down. It's got to be difficult to worry about the land your family used to own when your current family is having trouble eating. I wish it wasn't true but I think it probably is.
I enjoy watching all of Greenwald's interviews. He has a direct way of separating facts and fluff, and reminds people of the way things are 'supposed' to work. There can't be a lot of interviewers out there who look forward to arguing a position that is opposite of his on national television.
"The reason that the Tea Party doesn’t want Obamacare is because they are convinced that it is ultimately a transfer of wealth from the white rich and middle classes to the minorities."
What is it that makes the Tea Party believe this? Has there been a recent government or independent projection that taxes on the rich will have to rise in order to afford Obamacare?
The Tea Party being convinced that the Affordable Care Act is a "transfer of wealth" must be based on some concrete analysis? They are spending a lot of money (I've read that the Koch's themselves have spent an estimated 50 million dollars)and(common sense, at least) says that it MUST be based on some reputable projection that their taxes will have to pay for it.
I buy into the notion that the rank and file are being manipulated based on racial anxieties...but not so much the Tea Party leaders. My experience is that - behind these types of skirmishes - there's usually someone afraid that they're going to lose their money.
The debate in Congress hasn't yet begun and Lindsey Graham and John McCain are already saying that surgical strikes will not accomplish anything in Syria and that the US has to commit to more. In addition, Israel is disappointed. Obama drew a 'red line' with Syria's use of chemical weapons and Iran's nuclear program, and now that he's deferred to Congress over Syria crossing the red line, Israel wonders where they stand should Iran's nuclear program accelerate.
A million things can go wrong that could turn a 'limited' strike into a more extensive commitment (Syria counterattacks our warships, lobs missiles into Israel, etc) - and (taking into consideration the influence that the Israeli's have on our Middle East policy) once that ball gets rolling, there’s a possibility it might not stop until it hits Iran.
A limited strike only reinforces that chemical weapons are not acceptable to the international community (something the international community already knows). A limited strike that escalates into a major commitment has the potential to become a global war (considering all of the countries with differing interests over there).
I still think that diplomacy is the best action. If it works, fine. If it doesn’t – at least you tried. Who cares if another country thinks that Obama ‘blinked’? 80% of Americans do not want to get involved – so I would assume that they have forgiven Obama’s perceived ‘blinking’. Those are the opinions he should care about.
Lots of talk yesterday about Obama losing credibility over not taking action on the crossing of the 'red line' he drew a year ago. I don't see it that way. For one, most rational people would draw the same red line (Nobody thinks its OK to use chemical weapons on their own people)
Consequences for crossing Obama's 'red line' would probably gain international support 99.9% of the time. However, in this unique instance, the opposition is also crossing 'red lines' (from what I've read, the rebel forces are slaughtering and eviscerating regime innocents).
It doesn't make sense (just to save credibility) to punish an evil when the result of that punishment will aid another evil. I wouldn't want my kid going over there just so Obama could could claim credibility over a statement he made a year ago and that couldn't possibly have forseen scenarios where punishing one red line contributed to the advancement of another.
Stay out of it and try diplomacy.
I agree that the rebel fighters would not have carried out a mass murder of families who are feeding and sheltering them. I think Dr. Cole's assessment, however, is too limited in it's choices (either it was the Assad regime or the rebels).
There are additional entities out there with their own separate interests who MIGHT carry out a mass murder of families in order to achieve their goals. Israel may see the introduction of chemical weapons as a way to (eventually) entangle Iran (whom they are convinced is developing nuclear weapons; and Saudi Arabia did not seem very happy with the support their receiving (in arming the rebels) from the West.
I'm not sure this is an 'either/or' (Assad/rebels) scenario...
Nice. I bet a lot of people would be surprised at how this short film depicts how similar we are. It goes against the grain of what the mainstream news agencies show us on a nightly basis.