Let's consider the remarks of Erdogan on those who "support" terror. Where does it lead? Old material is in [brackets], new material is in (parentheses).
“There is no difference between a [terrorist with a gun and bomb in his hand] (genocidal state with an army in its hands) and those who use their work and pen to support [terror] (genocide). The fact that an individual could be (a President), a deputy, an academic, an author, a journalist or the director of an NGO [nongovernmental organization] does not change the fact that that person [is a terrorist] (has committed genocide).”
Perhaps Erdogan has signed his own death warrant. Would the Armenians or Kurds care to execute it?
"[N]o one except the so-called “Islamic State” has the stomach to stand up to it"--"it" being Iran.
ISIS is not "standing up to" Iran. It is "standing up to" the entire Muslim world. Singling out Iran shows a real lack of understanding of the Middle East, or a dangerous partisan agenda cloaked as "expert opinion."
What has Iran done that other of our "allies" has not done? Support terrorism? Saudi Arabia funded the creation of al Qaeda, the Taliban, and ISIS. Pakistan uses terror as a quotidian instrument of foreign policy. Israel daily terrorizes the Palestinians. Indeed, Israel was born of Zionist terror.
Iran denies human rights? Iran gives women far more human rights than any Wahhabi state, and most Sunni states. Israel denies full religious rights to female Jews. Try being a female Jew and pray at the Western Wall.
Iran is trying to dominate the region? Earth to Robert, that is what all countries try to do. Why should Iran back off and watch Saudi Arabia, Israel, Turkey, and every other nation in the region try to dominate it? If Iran backs off, will we?
Framing the region as the West versus Iran is a relic of the imperialist past--a time for which the Brits seem now more than ever for which to deeply pine.
There are two major differences between Poland and America that would make it less likely that America B could ever regain its political power over America A.
First, unlike Poland, America has a large class of America A voters permanently disenfranchised. Consider Florida, the ultimate swing state. Florida, like much of America, uses mass incarceration to to convict minorities of felonies and then permanently disenfranchise them. Up to one-quarter of black male Floridians cannot vote because of this. Give them the right to vote and Florida becomes reliably blue. If that happens, America B loses for decades its ability to elect our President.
Second, unlike Poland, America has millions, if not tens of millions, of immigrant workers invited here by American business. America B has not allowed them a path to citizenship and its concurrent right to vote. Should that change, America A gains millions, if not tens of millions, of new electoral supporters.
Should America A gain complete control in the November, i.e., win not only the Presidency and the Senate but also the House, then America A would have within its reach the power to permanently reduce America B to a political minority. This would take only two changes to the law. First, a Congress under the control of America A could allow convicted felons and even those in jail to vote in federal elections. As stated above, Florida would turn permanently blue and America A would control the White House for the foreseeable future.
Florida recently passed anti-gerrymandering amendments to the Florida Constitution. Combine this with putting a million new Democrats on the voter rolls and even the Florida Congressional delegation could easily flip from mostly Republican to mostly Democrat.
Second, that Congress could enact comprehensive immigration reform to add possibly tens of millions of new voters who would vote Democratic. That, too, would help cement the control of America A over the federal government. Add to this the shrinking share of the American electorate that is from America B and we have America A in charge for the foreseeable future.
If the Democrats take the House and control both Houses of Congress, they will have the chance to accomplish all this in a stroke. Then the changing demographics of America will do the rest.
Poland, on the other hand, seems to have a much more static electorate. Poland A would seem unable to suddenly increase its electoral power. Thus, the comparison seems weak.
11. Iran would close the Straights of Hormuz and cut off the supply of oil from the Persian Gulf. Oil prices would double at a minimum, and likely triple. Gasoline at $9 per gallon? You can imagine the damage to the economy. Try collapse. It would be worse than the financial collapse in 2008.
Could Iran close the Straights? They'd only need to do so for a few months at most. Remember how effectively Hezbollah handled Israel in 2006? Iran trained Hezbollah. It's the junior varsity. Iran's Revolutionary Guards are the varsity. They've had years to prepare. War games by the US showed the IRG successfully closing the Straights.
Do we really want another Great Depression? The war hawks say that would be a small price to pay for proving our manhood. Do the rest of us agree?
The African-American mentioned in the article, who was strip-searched in a minor traffic case, also had an official receipt showing he had paid the fine!
But not good enough for the conservatives on the Court! The State cannot be challenged or questioned! Obey!
"In saying that boycotting settlements is the same as boycotting Israel, the [Israeli] government is saying that occupation is intended to last forever, that settlement cannot and should not be opposed, and that Israeli endorsement of the principle of a two-state solution is a lie."
Funny how all this Islamophobic propaganda keeps popping up in anti-terrorism training programs for the military and law enforcement all over the country. Such wide distribution cannot be a random coincidence.
Is there a concerted program to inject this disinformation into the training programs? If so, who are its patrons and inside agents?
As to bin Laden contacting ISI officers who knew his location, the source Telegraph article raises a disturbing point. It states that someone in the US military or intelligence leaked to Stratfor data found in bin Laden's compound.
"According to one of the e-mails, the firm was shown the information papers collected from bin Laden's Abbotabad compound after the US special forces attack last May that resulted in his death."
This is a serious breach of security. Who leaked such sensitive information to Stratfor? Will they be found and prosecuted? If not, why a free pass for the leaker?
What other sensitive information has been leaked to Stratfor and by whom?
The Administration aggressively prosecutes those who leak to Wikileaks. Will it be as aggressive here? Or is Stratfor special?
Perhaps we should make it clear to Karzai that we will arm the non-Pashtuns to the teeth if he takes any steps to siding with the Taliban. Rearm the Norther Alliance, the Hazaris, and the rest with modern weapons, train them in their use, and turn them loose on the Pashtuns.
One and one-half million Americans who want to violently overthrow the USA? Beck is quite right on this. He refers to the NRA, the teahadists (remember the ones showing up at rallies carrying assault rifles?), the militia movement, and all the other right-wing nutcase extremists who love guns, got guns, and want to use guns. They believe in black UN helicopters, that Obama wants to take away their guns, that Obama wants to force Sharia on America, that Obama is a secret Muslim, and all the other Obama Derangement Syndrome symptoms.
Where's the ISI? Where's the billions we gave the ISI and the Pakistani military?
Further, any rock stars trying to raise money for the victims of the Pakistan floods will immediately be demonized the the right in the US as aiding and abetting terrorists. We can just imaging how much Palin and Beck would support any effort to raise funds. We can just imagine how Fox News would cover it. They'd immediately start demanding how it would be possible to guarantee that no finds would go to "terrorists."
Of course, they'd be right if the ISI was in any way involved. And the ISI would be involved.
Let's consider the remarks of Erdogan on those who "support" terror. Where does it lead? Old material is in [brackets], new material is in (parentheses).
“There is no difference between a [terrorist with a gun and bomb in his hand] (genocidal state with an army in its hands) and those who use their work and pen to support [terror] (genocide). The fact that an individual could be (a President), a deputy, an academic, an author, a journalist or the director of an NGO [nongovernmental organization] does not change the fact that that person [is a terrorist] (has committed genocide).”
Perhaps Erdogan has signed his own death warrant. Would the Armenians or Kurds care to execute it?
"[N]o one except the so-called “Islamic State” has the stomach to stand up to it"--"it" being Iran.
ISIS is not "standing up to" Iran. It is "standing up to" the entire Muslim world. Singling out Iran shows a real lack of understanding of the Middle East, or a dangerous partisan agenda cloaked as "expert opinion."
What has Iran done that other of our "allies" has not done? Support terrorism? Saudi Arabia funded the creation of al Qaeda, the Taliban, and ISIS. Pakistan uses terror as a quotidian instrument of foreign policy. Israel daily terrorizes the Palestinians. Indeed, Israel was born of Zionist terror.
Iran denies human rights? Iran gives women far more human rights than any Wahhabi state, and most Sunni states. Israel denies full religious rights to female Jews. Try being a female Jew and pray at the Western Wall.
Iran is trying to dominate the region? Earth to Robert, that is what all countries try to do. Why should Iran back off and watch Saudi Arabia, Israel, Turkey, and every other nation in the region try to dominate it? If Iran backs off, will we?
Framing the region as the West versus Iran is a relic of the imperialist past--a time for which the Brits seem now more than ever for which to deeply pine.
Welfare appeasement policies? You mean supply-side economics?
There are two major differences between Poland and America that would make it less likely that America B could ever regain its political power over America A.
First, unlike Poland, America has a large class of America A voters permanently disenfranchised. Consider Florida, the ultimate swing state. Florida, like much of America, uses mass incarceration to to convict minorities of felonies and then permanently disenfranchise them. Up to one-quarter of black male Floridians cannot vote because of this. Give them the right to vote and Florida becomes reliably blue. If that happens, America B loses for decades its ability to elect our President.
Second, unlike Poland, America has millions, if not tens of millions, of immigrant workers invited here by American business. America B has not allowed them a path to citizenship and its concurrent right to vote. Should that change, America A gains millions, if not tens of millions, of new electoral supporters.
Should America A gain complete control in the November, i.e., win not only the Presidency and the Senate but also the House, then America A would have within its reach the power to permanently reduce America B to a political minority. This would take only two changes to the law. First, a Congress under the control of America A could allow convicted felons and even those in jail to vote in federal elections. As stated above, Florida would turn permanently blue and America A would control the White House for the foreseeable future.
Florida recently passed anti-gerrymandering amendments to the Florida Constitution. Combine this with putting a million new Democrats on the voter rolls and even the Florida Congressional delegation could easily flip from mostly Republican to mostly Democrat.
Second, that Congress could enact comprehensive immigration reform to add possibly tens of millions of new voters who would vote Democratic. That, too, would help cement the control of America A over the federal government. Add to this the shrinking share of the American electorate that is from America B and we have America A in charge for the foreseeable future.
If the Democrats take the House and control both Houses of Congress, they will have the chance to accomplish all this in a stroke. Then the changing demographics of America will do the rest.
Poland, on the other hand, seems to have a much more static electorate. Poland A would seem unable to suddenly increase its electoral power. Thus, the comparison seems weak.
Isn't there also a story about a woman in Mecca or Medina pouring bathroom waste on Muhammad, and his doing nothing to retaliate?
No, I'm saying just the opposite. Going to war would destabilize oil prices by causing them to increase greatly.
On whether Iran can close the Straits, see link to nation.time.com.
See also link to zerohedge.com
All Iran need do is close the Straits for a month or two at most.
11. Iran would close the Straights of Hormuz and cut off the supply of oil from the Persian Gulf. Oil prices would double at a minimum, and likely triple. Gasoline at $9 per gallon? You can imagine the damage to the economy. Try collapse. It would be worse than the financial collapse in 2008.
Could Iran close the Straights? They'd only need to do so for a few months at most. Remember how effectively Hezbollah handled Israel in 2006? Iran trained Hezbollah. It's the junior varsity. Iran's Revolutionary Guards are the varsity. They've had years to prepare. War games by the US showed the IRG successfully closing the Straights.
Do we really want another Great Depression? The war hawks say that would be a small price to pay for proving our manhood. Do the rest of us agree?
Don't think so.
The African-American mentioned in the article, who was strip-searched in a minor traffic case, also had an official receipt showing he had paid the fine!
But not good enough for the conservatives on the Court! The State cannot be challenged or questioned! Obey!
Gee, if we had normal relations with Iran we wouldn't need Pakistan.
Which of these two nations has admitted to having nukes?
Which nation has not signed the non-proliferation treaty?
Which nation has been proven to have helped other nations develop nukes?
Which uses terrorism as just another arm of its military?
Which nation protected the Taliban and al Qaeda after 9/11?
Which nation is close to being a failed state, unable to control its sponsored terrorists within its own borders?
Which nation are we better off having normal relations with?
Should we assume that S-300 would truly be effective against Israel's Air Force?
WOW!
BTW, when will Dershowitz demand rebuttal time?
Bradley Burston of Haaretz nailed it:
"In saying that boycotting settlements is the same as boycotting Israel, the [Israeli] government is saying that occupation is intended to last forever, that settlement cannot and should not be opposed, and that Israeli endorsement of the principle of a two-state solution is a lie."
link to haaretz.com
Funny how all this Islamophobic propaganda keeps popping up in anti-terrorism training programs for the military and law enforcement all over the country. Such wide distribution cannot be a random coincidence.
Is there a concerted program to inject this disinformation into the training programs? If so, who are its patrons and inside agents?
Could Cheney fear that the MacKenzie brothers, Doug and Bob, are out for him, eh?
As to bin Laden contacting ISI officers who knew his location, the source Telegraph article raises a disturbing point. It states that someone in the US military or intelligence leaked to Stratfor data found in bin Laden's compound.
"According to one of the e-mails, the firm was shown the information papers collected from bin Laden's Abbotabad compound after the US special forces attack last May that resulted in his death."
This is a serious breach of security. Who leaked such sensitive information to Stratfor? Will they be found and prosecuted? If not, why a free pass for the leaker?
What other sensitive information has been leaked to Stratfor and by whom?
The Administration aggressively prosecutes those who leak to Wikileaks. Will it be as aggressive here? Or is Stratfor special?
I'd rather see the Koch brothers testify on their business dealings with the Ayatollahs in Iran.
Perhaps we should make it clear to Karzai that we will arm the non-Pashtuns to the teeth if he takes any steps to siding with the Taliban. Rearm the Norther Alliance, the Hazaris, and the rest with modern weapons, train them in their use, and turn them loose on the Pashtuns.
One and one-half million Americans who want to violently overthrow the USA? Beck is quite right on this. He refers to the NRA, the teahadists (remember the ones showing up at rallies carrying assault rifles?), the militia movement, and all the other right-wing nutcase extremists who love guns, got guns, and want to use guns. They believe in black UN helicopters, that Obama wants to take away their guns, that Obama wants to force Sharia on America, that Obama is a secret Muslim, and all the other Obama Derangement Syndrome symptoms.
I like the new format. Looks more professional.
Where are the Rock Stars?
Where's the ISI? Where's the billions we gave the ISI and the Pakistani military?
Further, any rock stars trying to raise money for the victims of the Pakistan floods will immediately be demonized the the right in the US as aiding and abetting terrorists. We can just imaging how much Palin and Beck would support any effort to raise funds. We can just imagine how Fox News would cover it. They'd immediately start demanding how it would be possible to guarantee that no finds would go to "terrorists."
Of course, they'd be right if the ISI was in any way involved. And the ISI would be involved.
How about a site where white christians can refudiate slavery?
Maybe you can get these clerics to issue a fatwa against Rich Rodriguez.
Considers breaking off Ties;
Israel Lobbies in Congress denounce Ankara
How would Turkey be at risk of lawsuits if Congress recognized the Armenian Holocaust? Under which law?