Dead serious, especially if a person is visibly Muslim, Black, Latino and have been confronted by the police when they are alone or can be isolated. The Washington Post reporter who was arrested said he was more frightened when the police officer shoved him into the coke machine during his arrest in McDonald's. He recognized the danger and the potential for bodily injury. He was in a bad place.
Be passive. You don't want to end up in the emergency room of a hospital. No one should take the chance of a rogue cop going off on them. Michael Brown would probably still be alive if he would have been passive when confronted.
Bad cops need people who resist their authority. If they don't get that, they move on.
Males should always be passive when interacting with the police. ALWAYS answer when a cop asks a question and NEVER say anything about being detained.
A female made this tape 'cause they cops don't go upside their heads for being mouthy. A lot of males learn that the hard way. Getting the shit beat outta ya one time will cure bad habits a person has when interacting with said police.
Rick Perry thinks Missouri has LIGHTWEIGHT SWAT teams. Texas SWAT teams have TANKS and the Guv. wants to turn 'em loose and find out who is really behind those indictments.
Go get 'em Guv. Rick.
Hippies in Austin sabotage ya. They did the same thing to Tom Delay.
Hillary Clinton might or might not be right about arming moderate Syrian rebels. No one knows how it would have turned out, but ISIS being able to use Syria as a base and expanding into Iraq was the worse case scenario come true.
Yea, ISIS got their hands on some serious weapons. Nothing else explains their latest success. ISIS threatening Irbil is right out of the Twilight Zone. Before 6this push, not in a million years would I ever think ISIS could roll into Kurdistan.
Barzani ain't dumb. He'll play it so the Kurds gain their independence while American fighter jets give them cover from ISIS.
How can the U.S. take a chance on ISIS KOOKS doing some really serious damage to the Kurds, Baghdad, Jordan, Lebanon etc.?
Barzani might make the promise to stay in Iraq, but I seriously doubt he'll keep it. The Kurds have waited a long time to gain their independence and Barzani just said the time is right. Obama doesn't have many options here. Either he supports the Kurds with airstrikes and weapons OR ISIL continues to push toward Irbil in Kurdistan and other parts of Iraq with no force capable of stopping them.
ISIL forces have also been attacking in northern Lebanon, so their reach stretches hundreds of miles from Kurdistan through Syria and now, Lebanon. ISIL money, weapons and organization has been badly underestimated, to say the least.
As recently as a few weeks ago, I really thought ISIL had expanded just about as far as they could go without beating themselves up against Maliki forces in Samarra and/or Baghdad and the peshmerga in Kurdistan. So the latest ISIL offensive is STUNNING. Last night, on the Charlie Rise Show, Dexter Finkel said ISIS is close to surrounding Baghdad. But just a few weeks ago, he told Rose that ISIL "would get CRUSHED" if they tried to take Baghdad.
The situation in Iraq has changed dramatically since then.
Netanyahu isn't the whining type. Bibi is a NUTJOB who plays hardball. Letting the Iranians send in troops or take military action in Iraq opens up a different and dangerous can of worms.
From reading and listening to various reports,when ISIS overran military bases they secured heavy artillery, U.S. weapons included. I was very surprised when ISIS forced the Peshmerga to withdraw and advanced to threaten Irbil. ISIS heavy weapons outgunned the Peshmerga. That set off alarm bells in the Obama administration. That's how I read it tonight.
Obama has a real problem on his hands. Stopping ISIS is one thing, defeating them is another. How many ISIS fighters have European passports? What will happen as the U.S. becomes more involved?
Arab-American Justin Amash had a BIG victory in Michigan yesterday. The mainstream Republicans tried every dirty trick in the book, even calling Amash "al Qaeda's best friend in Congress," but it didn't help. He won easy.
Amash's father is Palestinian and his mother is Syrian. They're both Christians, so the Muslim label won't work. War party Republicans fear Justin Amash and Rand Paul antiwar types. Amash even voted against $225 million more from Bibi's IRON DOME.
Justin Amash is one "blade of grass" that won't go down easy.
I stand corrected about Olmert heading the Israeli govt. during Cast Lead. The incoming Obama administration refused to make any comment, so it all worked out very nice and neat.
Today, this captured Israeli soldier might give Obama another out so Netanyahu can go all in. I don't think Bibi will go nuclear but it depends on WHICH WAY THE WIND BLOWS.
During operation "Cast Lead," in late 2008, the incoming Obama administration didn't utter a word of protest--not one. They used the excuse of non-being in office yet. Netanyahu ended Cast Lead just days before Obama was inaugurated.
A Republican president would have also been "hammered nonstop" if he escalated drone attacks or the war in Afghanistan. Obama could have stopped these wars as soon as he took office in Jan. 2009.
Unlike George, Obama is a VERY CLEVER "War President."
Perhaps Netanyahu was trying to influence American politics as well by putting pressure on Obama. Most of Congress, especially the Republicans, are gung ho for the "war" in Gaza to continue. The vast majority of the media is also showing Israel in a sympathetic light. Plus, Netanyahu is much more concerned with Iran's nuclear program rather than ISIS conquering territory in western Syria and northern Iraq.
As long as Israel can play up the danger of Hamas rockets, Netanyahu can keep Obama off balance.
All the negative feedback will soon cause Netanyahu to end his criminal war against the Palestinians in Gaza. By that time, there won't be many places left to bomb.
The focus of the United States will shift to Ukraine, Russia and Vladimir Putin. Yesterday, our State Dept. released intelligence maps showing blast marks of missiles fired from Russia and craters in Ukraine.Did those Rooskie missiles cause those craters in Ukraine?
We don't know, but they aren't Ukrainian sinkholes.
The slaughter of innocent Palestinian, especially women and children, gets a sympathetic response. NOT GOOD FOR THESE NEVER ENDING WARS. "Vlad the Bad" ain't a good guy, so the U.S. govt. and media will transition from Gaza to Ukraine soon enough.
Philo's presentation was "positively enlightening," especially when he explained the methodical way Israel tests every word for audience reaction before that particular word is used. Only the ones that generate an effective response are used and then repeated over and over.
It's almost like a game show...
Now watch Netanyahu defend his attack in Gaza. He says the same thing again and again, almost word for word.
"HAMA ROCKETS made us do it. No country would tolerate HAMAS ROCKETS attacking Israel and it's citizens."
Now watch Obama..."As I've said before, no country would tolerate HAMAS ROCKETS being fired on Israeli cities. Having said that,".....
As Philo explains, the key is repeating the message and not mentioning the Palestinian people. What is left out is just as important as what is said. No mention of the blockade, prisoners or anything that might show them in a positive light or even a sympathetic one.
Pictures oF dead Palestinian children?-----HAMAS ROCKETS were the real cause.
All the facts were never in about 9/11, but there were enough to conclude that it wasn't a false flag attack. The doubters based their theory on WTC bldg. #7 collapsing late in the day and the plane hitting the Pentagon. However, they ignore the fact that Mohammed Atta formed his cell in Hamburg, Germany and they entered this country in June, 2000, 15 months before 9/11. The false flag conspiracy believers ignore many other facts that made it IMPOSSIBLE for 9/11 to have been a false flag attack.
All of the facts about this latest attack will never been known because they crash site was contaminated. However, some conclusions can still be drawn: This attack was done by missile and the Ukrainian govt. had no reason to fire even one because the separatists don't have any planes. The Uk. govt. controlled the skies and were hammering the rebels. The rebels and Putin desperately needed to limit these attacks. Sophisticate missiles would do that.
Neither Putin or Lavrov and denied the missile was Russian, not once. IMO, these non-denials shows consciousness of guilt.
JTMcPhee, everything you said about the U.S. and especially, Victoria Nuland planning this coup is true, IMO. There is a VERY strong probability that Right Sector neo-nazis were the ones who killed all the people on both sides when the Ukrainian govt. collapsed. We helped pull off the coup backed Putin into a corner and he reacted.
John McCain's friend "Misha" did the same thing in Georgia.
Backing Vladimir Putin into a corner is a very, VERY dangerous thing to do.
Both sides have the same missiles but the Ukrainian govt. would have no reason to shoot down any plane. The separatists don't have aircraft and government forces couldn't possibly fire without knowing the plane was civilian UNLESS it was a FALSE FLAG OPERATION.
Circumstantial evidence is pointing LOUDLY at Putin and the separatists being the guilty parties. Why didn't they allow investigators access to the crash sire on the first day?
Did Vladimir Putin give the separatists this sophisticated missile without making sure they could not play cowboy and shoot down a civilian aircraft by mistake?
It's looking like that's what actually happened. These separatists were playing cowboy and pulled the trigger without taking the time to find out what kind of plane they were bringing down. Now, they are delaying the investigation and destroying key evidence while Vladimir Putin is nowhere to be found.
"When I looked into his eyes, I saw three letters---K G B."
"We are all Georgians today."
John McCain, Lindsey Graham and all the neocons will be moondancing in a conga line down Pennsylvania avenue as soon as the missile and/or crew gets traced backed to Putin.
The War Party could not ask for anything better than a "Vlad the Bad" missile shooting down a commercial jet and murdering 300 innocent civilians.
In 2008, the results of the Texas Democratic primary between Obama and Hillary showed how much power Latinos had in the state. Obama easily won both Houston and Dallas by over 15%, yet Hillary Clinton still managed to win the popular vote by 4%. Hillary won the popular vote by a large margin (25%) in every city with a majority Latino population--San Antonio, El Paso, Corpus, Brownsville, McAllen--every one of them.
It was a STUNNING result.
The Democratic party took note and made the Latino Mayor of San Antonio, Julian Castro, the Keynote Speaker at their 2012 convention. Now, Obama nominated Castro as Sec. of Housing and Urban Development.
None of this is a coincidence. Castro is being groomed for a higher position and I wouldn't be surprised if he becomes Hillary Clinton's V.P. candidate.
Cruz, Perry and Paul will try and position themselves like Rick Santorum did in 2012. Evangelicals believe gay marriage is a sin against the word of God and will bring down his wrath.
Those folks are serious.
Where would Ted Cruz go without the Texas Bible Thumpin' vote? š Great video.
No Republican can win the Iowa primary without the Evangelical vote. They rule.
Rand Paul's Neo-confederate States Right's agenda might be overwhelmed by the rapidly changing ethnic demographics and cultural changes happening in this country. Even the president can't turn back the clock on amnesty for illegal immigrants, Gay rights and legalization of recreational marijuana use. Those changes will be permanent.
The Latino vote by itself means BIG changes. I think making the Mayor of San Antonio the Keynote Speaker of the 2012 Democratic convention means the Dems believe they can turn Texas BLUE--34 electoral votes. If they do, Georgia will be the largest red state with 15 electoral votes.
Almost ten million Texans are ethnically Mexicans. Every city from San Antonio to the Mexican border, 400 miles, is at least 60%--80% TexMex. If the Republicans don't or can't think up a strategy to gain many of their votes, the GOP won't be able to win Texas or a national election.
Deep down, Rand Paul is probably a Neo-confederate like his father, Ron Paul. On "Meet the Press," Ron actually blamed Lincoln for starting the Civil War.
If Rand gets elected and moves the capital to Richmond, Virginia, there won't be any doubt. If POTUS Rand makes the "Southern Avenger" his Secretary of Defense, it could get a 'lil hairy up north.
"States Rights" Rand's domestic policy will be straight out of the Confederacy.
The Senate is doubling funds for Israel's Iron Dome. Increased military aid as well as our own defense expenditures play a big part in the soon-to-be War Party anti-Rand crusade.
Bibi Netanyahu drew his red line at the UN as a warning against IRAN, not ISIS. The neocons and most Republicans want war against Iran. Rand Paul is in their way. These Republicans are just waiting for the right moment to attack Obama-Kerry's nuclear negotiations with Iran and away we go.
Just don't kid yourself....
"ALL OPTIONS ARE STILL ON THE TABLE."
Rick Perry is a LIGHTWEIGHT with no shot at winning the GOP nomination. Romney already lost. He won't get the nomination.
Interesting split brewing in the Republican party, especially if Rand Paul continues to gain strength. Rick Perry just fired the opening salvo, but many Republicans will line up and take their shots including Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, Mitt Romney, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Dick and Liz Cheney etc. They'll be coming out of the woodwork because if Rand Paul wins the nomination, the neocon dream of perpetual war and American empire is finished.
Many Americans are racists. How else could the neocons have substituted Saddam Hussein for Osama bin Laden and convinced tens of millions we just had to invade Iraq? ? They were both Muslims and that was all the neocons needed---PAYBACK. Obama did much the same thing with the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan.
President Obama has defended Israel's massive attack on Gaza by saying Hamas rockets put non-combatants in danger.
The networks made "mistakes" like that during the buildup to our invasion of Iraq. Many of our leaders want to expand the war against Muslims but they need the media to get the public in the right frame of mind.
Read Helena Cobban's latest comment on the reporting about Israel and Hamas in the Washington Post. Notice how many times Palestinians were called "ARABS."
"THOSE ARABS HAD A BIG BOMB AND BLEW THE SHIITE OUTTA SOME ISRAELI HOMES."
Grand Ayatollah Sistani didn't overrule the Bush administration on one man, one vote. He forced them to bend to his will by putting on two large demonstrations in January, 2004.
Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney bear the real blame for regime change. In 1991, Bush sr. invaded Iraq with close to 500,000 troops. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Gen. Shinseki said it would take "several hundred thousand" troops for long-term occupation in 2003. Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz insisted that figure was "much too high" and went ahead and invaded with ONLY 150,000 troops. Our "iddy-biddy imperial army" was how one military friend describe the woefully inadequate troop numbers. Rummy was about a quarter of million troops short.
People blame George Bush because it makes them feel better to blame someone who they see as intellectually limited rather than admitting they were duped by their intellectually superiors. The American public were fooled by Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld and Darth Cheney. Their propaganda campaign leading to the invasion of Iraq was simply diabolically BRILLIANT. By the time we cut loose, most of the public was BARKING FOR WAR 'cause they thought Saddam was about to NUKE 'MERICA!!!
On August 19, 2009, in a speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars in Phoenix, Arizona, Obama intentionally misled the American people by calling the war in Afghanistan a "war of necessity" and sent 30,000 more U.S. troops to fight the Taliban.
The so-called "good war" was really just another surged planned by Gen. David Petraeus and supported by Sec. of Defense Robert Gates. The COIN strategy was a complete BUST and never had a chance of working in a country with terrain like Afghanistan against the Pushtuns, the largest ethnic group by far (41%). The planned Big Battle of Kandahar against the Taliban never materialized. As a result, the U.S. got bogged down in the "good war" and Obama's presidency never really recovered.
Dr. Cole, back in 2009, you warned against Obama's foolish escalation. So did many others, including some in Reagan's administration who had NO DOUBT about the fighting capability of Afghans who fought against the Soviet Union.
The Republicans would blame Obama for being soft and not reacting to ISIS threat by bombing them before they attacked the HOMELAND.
Republicans want more war. That's the way they roll.
The Republicans blaming Obama for being soft on terror is their ONLY real hope for 2016. If they can put a 'lil Benghazi blame on Hillary, they'll try and take her down too.
A couple of days ago, the U.S. backed Ukrainian government threatened pro-Russian rebels with a "nasty surprise." Perhaps, Vladimir Putin sending Maliki military aid is his countermove.
Mission creep includes the president having the authority to start and/or escalate wars without Congressional approval. President Obama did that in Afghanistan and Libya. He almost took this country to war in Syria. Congress has no authority to stop him and if the American people did protest they could be detained and charged with national security violations.
During war, the laws are silent.
"Never forget we are a nation at war." President Obama.
Emile Hokayem explained how the nature of the Syrian conflict became local and Assad created the refugee crisis for his own benefit. Basically, he agreed with John McCain that we should have sent aid to the locals two years ago. Emile Hokayem thinks a long war in Syria will at least be partially caused by the United States inaction.
10 million displaced people out of a total of 22 million. geez
I didn't give a very good example. George's XTIAN CRUSADE included other groups with various agendas, many having nothing to do with religion. But religious fanatics don't always launch crusades that end badly. Joan of Arc and John Brown were both religious extremists 100% committed to their cause.
Joan of Arc heard voices. John Brown led a massacre with the victims being hacked to death and then chopped into pieces.
The chaos in Syria and an excellent propaganda campaign, especially on the net is what made ISIS a real force in the Middle East, IMO. That along with their religious extremism.
No matter what their faith, religious fanatics willing to die for their cause are the most dangerous people on the planet. 9/11 and George's XTIAN CRUSADE are the two best examples in the 21st century. 70% of America supported the idea of a PAYBACK CRUSADE AGAINST MUSLIMS even if was in a different country.
"Muqtada al-Sadr in Iraq created the Mahdi army, intended as a force to support the Mahdi, who he thought was about to appear, which took on the U.S. and British militaries; it lost on the battlefield.
Didn't Muqtada al-Sadr believe the U.S. invaded because they were trying to stop the Mahdi from reappearing?
What if Barry Posen is wrong about ISIS falling apart? Having a lot of money is the glue that holds ISIS together. They are well organized as well as well funded. ISIS also controls a huge area in Iraq and Syria.
ISIS could be more dangerous than many non-interventionists realize. The real question is what can be done, if anything, to contain their threat? What would happen if Europeans and even Americans fighting with ISIS return home and commit acts of terror like Obama just warned about?
China Matters: "Getting played by ISIS? Welcome to the Club!"
He thinks they are operating like an organized criminal gang, the mafia. In Syria they rolled Nusra and took over. In Iraq, ISIS has to use more subtle techniques until the time is right to act against the Baathists and whatever Sunni groups/tribes stand in their way. C.M. says it looks like Mosul was their HQ and they had inside help with their rapid takeover. The various crime gangs have to kick 20% of their take upstairs.
If China Matters is right, why should ISIS risk going toe-to-toe with Maliki, the Mahdi Army, perhaps Iran, the U.S. and even the peshmerga?
ISIS controls a big part of northern and western Iraq right now. It will be very expensive and bloody for anyone to take back Sunni country. They would all be treated as occupiers.
Events playing out in Syria and Iraq do seem like they are part of Doug Feith's "A Clean Break" written in 1996. However, ISIS was not part of the plan and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein wound up playing right into Iran's hands.
I think what started out as a neoconservative plan to change the entire Middle East has now become a chain of events where no one has control. It'll will have to play out much like the assassination of the Archduke Ferdinand led to WWI, the Great Depression, rise of Hitler and WWII.
What started one hundred years ago this Saturday on the western end of the old Ottoman empire is happening today on the Eastern end and at a faster and faster speed. Much like World War I, this is also an uncontrollable chain of events.
Maliki wants U.S. special forces in the country, but no more than 300 and all of them hundreds of miles away in Anbar Provence. When they leave, Maliki wants them to exit by going through Syria.
He's not taking any chances on an American coup. Maliki has his own deck of cards, actually it's a poker hand---Saddam, Gaddafi, Assad, the commie in Ukraine. The hand just needs one more card to be complete.
Last night, on the Charlie Rose Show, Dexter Filkens said he really doubted ISIS would attack Baghdad because quote "THEY WOULD GET CRUSHED," unquote mainly by the Shiite militias.
"Every household in Baghdad has an AK-47." Filkens.
"The first thing that occurred to me on the fall of Qa'im is that Iran no longer has a land bridge to Lebanon." The media was claiming the fall of Qa'im opened up a route for Isis to bring in heavy weapons to Iraq. Without air cover, I couldn't understand what ISIS was gaining. Now I think I do. ISIS gained because Iran lost which is the flip-side of Assad gaining because ISIS lost Homs.
Even with the very informative map of the ethnic lines in Diyala Province, the ISIS strategy is still murky to me.
From an AP article..."20,000 men, many in combat gear, marched through Sadr City with assault rifles, machine guns, multiple rocket launchers, field artillery and missiles. The parades were staged by followers of Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr."
Twenty thousand, with many more available if they are needed.
p.s. I could also be flat wrong. According to reports, ISIS is making a major push in Anbar province all headed towards Baghdad. Dunno where all this is going.
I don't understand what capturing the crossing into Syria really means. How can they move heavy artillery and other weapons into Iraq when they can be attacked from the air?
ISIS CONVOYS WOULD SEEM QUITE VULNERABLE. TRIPLE OVERTIME PAY FOR ALL DRIVERS WOULDN'T BE ENOUGH.
ISIS winning in Baghdad against the Mahdi army would be the tallest of orders, IMO. Today's Mahdi military parade in Sadr City must have been quite a show--BAD HOMBRESWITH BIG GUNS. Plus, If ISIS does attack Samarra or Baghdad that's a green light for Obama to attack them with drones not to mention Iran sending in Revolutionary Guard troops.
I just can't imagine ISIS would make such a blunder. Their best strategy is to pull back into Sunni areas and just wait for Maliki, Obama, Iran, Sadr etc. to make a move. Taking control of northern Iraq means ISIS has already accomplished a great deal so moving south into Samarra, Baghdad, Najaf, Karbala would definitely be "a bridge too far." They would go from liberators to occupiers in Shia parts of Iraq, especially if Shia shrines were damage or destroyed.
Everybody is waiting for a big battle, but what if it doesn't happen? The neocons are already chomping at the bit for mo war. THEY CAN HARDLY WAIT FOR THE BOMBS TO START DROPPING.
"Devilishly clever" gets my vote. Obama did the same thing in Afghanistan with his "war of necessity" propaganda to make the public think the the Taliban and al-Qaeda were basically the same outfit.
No Republican could have done the same thing. Obama is a master of doublespeak and a great politician. He'll do what the Republicans want but make it sound like their polar opposites. Obama just slows everything down.
So was his center, Mike Webster. The PBS Frontline starts off with his death and autopsy. His sectioned brained revealed much darker areas in different locations which is a definite sign of CTE.
Webster had many of the symptoms while he was alive.
p.s. Frontline's "League of Denial" about concussions in football is on youtube.. Two hours, but well worth watching. Football today is similar to the gladiator games in Roman times. Instead of being killed outright, many of today's gladiators wind up brain damaged cripples by early middle age--mid 50s.
Football, college and especially the pros is big business--big money. Everybody loves the SUPERBOWL. Until the big profits from today's gladiator games becomes secondary to the health of the participants, very little will change.
It's Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE) which is much worse than TBIs because long term repeated blows to the brain cause emotional problems that sometimes lead to suicide. Traumatic brain injuries are caused by car wrecks, IEDS etc. The injury is the result one blow and doesn't have the same long term emotional impact as CTE. Some of those football players. have committed suicide by shooting themselves in the heart so their brains are saved for the autopsy.
The Dallas Cowboys, "America's team," used to whoop those Washington REDSKINS like a redheaded stepchild because Texans knew their name was derogatory, discriminatory and slanderous toward Native Americans.
What a mess. If Maliki did resign, U.S. war hawks would be able to put even more pressure on Obama to start shocking and awing ISIS like we did Saddam. Dead civilians would be American "collateral damage." When we dropped our bombs, if was their fault for being under them.
The Cheney's video would be perfect Republican war propaganda if Dick was holding a shotgun and the daughter was holding up a dead duck. Love his cowboy hat.
"President Obama should do to ISIS what we just did to this bird."
Whether Maliki stays or goes, it doesn't solve the long-term problem. With one word, Grand Ayatollah Sistani could have a couple of hundred THOUSAND Shiites armed and ready on the streets in Baghdad, so ISIS is facing imminent and very certain martyrdom if they attack.
Maliki ain't at the Alamo. ISIS marching on Baghdad would be exactly like George Armstrong Custer's two hundred men attacking several thousand Indians at the Little Big Horn.
Those consequences might result in Iraq breaking up into three states, strengthening Assad in Syria, as well as helping Iran to become much stronger and perhaps the even the dominant player in the Middle East.
I doubt the American government will take that risk and might even see ISIS as a relatively minor threat long term compared to Iran. You're talking about a total flip-flop of American interests in the Middle East.
What happens to ISIS in Iraq will have much bigger consequences in the whole region. If Iran pours military aid into Baghdad would they do the same thing in Damascus to help Assad defeat the Sunni extremists? Would that aid end up making Hezbollah stronger in Lebanon?
OTOH, what happens if Iran and the U.S. don't aid Maliki? Does taking that course of action end up with Iraq breaking up?
I don't think anyone knows what course of action, if any, would work out best.
Those guys heard John Kerry's comment about ISIS being a threat to attack the Homeland. If ISIS does decide to pass on attacking Baghdad, I think the people in Dallas will remain safe thanks to patriotic Americans with plenty of guns.
The only way to beat a BAD GUY with a gun is with a good guy with a gun. In Big D, the people took that to heart.
Dr. Cole, I haven't forgotten you're comments the day after the Golden Dome in Samarra was blown up in 2006. You immediately said it was very bad news and would probably mean real SEVERE conflict between the Sunnis and Shia." You hit the nail right on the head. That was the beginning of the end for the Sunnis in Baghdad.
I thought about your comments when Prime Minister Maliki went to Samarra of all places and said the ISIS would be driven back and defeated. I don't think the ISIS will get much closer to Baghdad or take control of Samarra.The Shia will fight just as hard as the ISIS and they heavily outnumber them. Maliki also has gunships.
The Shia took all those Sunni bombs in Baghdad and didn't waver.
I think Obama just moves these carriers to various hot spots and lets 'em sit in the water until the "crisis" is over. He did the same thing with Syria.
Three to five thousand marching on Baghdad after they take Samarra and blow up the Golden Dome again. That worked so well for the Sunnis the first time. It was the beginning of the end for the Sunnis. They never recovered.
I suspect the two Iraqi army divisions that folded in Mosul were mainly Sunnis who saw ISIS as liberators from Maliki. How could 30,000 soldiers with American weapons break and run from a few thousand ISIS fighters?
In January, 2004, Grand Ayatollah Sistani called for demonstrations in favor of one man, one vote because the Bush administration was dragging their heels. 30,000 Shia marched in Basra. The very next day, 100,000 protested in Baghdad. When Sistani barks, several hundred thousand Shia bite.
Today, the Republicans are coming out of the woodwork saying the sky will fall if Obama doesn't do something and quick. Peter King and David Ignatius were on Meet the Press with alarming news. Lindsay Graham said Maliki should resign and Obama should send Petraeus and Crocker to Baghdad and form a NEW GOVERNMENT. Even Tony Blair said the west must intervene.
The war party regulars will say just about anything to get the war in Iraq restarted.
From the linked article, on Friday Prime Minister Maliki traveled to Samarra and said this "will not be the last line of defense, but a gathering point and a launchpad. This is the beginning of the end for them (ISIS)."
Maliki could be right. ISIS overrunning and taking control of Sunni towns in northern Iraq without a fight is much different than doing the same thing in mixed cities, especially Samarra with the Golden Dome.. ISIS might have reached their limit and would run up against heavily armed, large Shiite forces if they try to push further south. I don't think they have the numbers to risk such a big defeat.
As always, Iran is playing a clever game trying to get Obama to take action so they can claim "security cooperation" between Tehran and Washington. Bibi Netanyahu would have a stroke. The Iranians never miss a beat. Rouhani offered Iranian troops even though he has not received an explicit request.
Would Iran would be willing to send troops into Syria to fight against ISIS there? The Republicans and John McCain's reaction would be interesting.
After Reagan aiding Saddam and the coup in 1953, Iran would be VERY foolish to ever trust the American government. Our spooks will find out all about their nuclear program and stab them in the back at the first opportunity.
American politicians have no intention of ignoring Israel, Saudi Arabia and Jordan to ally itself with Iran and/or Hezbollah, not to mention Assad in Syria. ISIS is a problem, but as soon as the U.S. thinks up a way to roll them back or contain them, the big pieces on the chess board will look basically the same, except for the Kurds in Kirkuk.
The Kurds taking Kirkuk is probably like Putin taking Crimea--a done deal.
Will the U.S. changed course in Syria and help Iran and Hezbollah prop up Assad? If that happens, will we turn against the Sunni countries like Saudi Arabia and Jordan?
Does the Kurdish state include the four million Kurds in Iran and the twelve million in Turkey? That's a huge area.
When the U.S. first invaded Iraq, the Turkish foreign minister warned the Kurds not to take control of Kirkuk or in his words "there will be bloodshed."
Turkey will not let a large part of their country become part of Kurdistan and probably won't let the Kurds have Kirkuk.
Edward Snowden revealed the power of the NSA to monitor the citizens. Plus, the police have become militarized. If these right-wing "militias" were really a threat, the federal govt. would disrupt their organization and crush them militarily, without a problem.
Either you believe what Edward Snowden said about the federal govt. or in the threat of right wing militias and other groups. Both beliefs can't co-exist.
The police reaction to the Black Panthers in the 60s went hand in hand with the federal government actions against the antiwar movement.
It wasn't just based on race.
Compared to what happened at the Democratic convention in 1968, Kent State or many other illegal and violent government actions in the late 60s and early 70s, today's militia movement are a just buncha yahoo lightweights.
Jerad Miller was made to leave Bundy Ranch after his cop killing desires known. He wanted to "snipe at police."
I think Aaron Ybarra is Latino. His last name is Spanish.
The latest shooter in Oregon was 15 years old.
Dennis Marx was a legitimate right wing kook. Members of the Sovereign Citizen Organization don't recognize the federal government or its authority to tax citizens. He's the only one who didn't kill anybody.
A woman shooter is rare, plus they had to walk five miles before they reached the pizza restaurant. It's getting very warm here (low 100s) and walking a couple of hours in the hot Vegas sun isn't easy to do, especially wearing backpacks.
Miller looked and sounded like a drug addict in his crying video with his shirt off.
Miller and his wife make the Liberty City Seven., the Symbionese Liberation Army and the People's Revolutionary Strike Force in the Dirty Harry movie sound like legitimate terror groups.
Jerad Miller got kicked off the Bundy ranch because he wanted violence with federal agents...It's on tape. He went on and on about killing police at least two years ago. All this talk of a "revolution" was just something he recently picked up and used to make him sound like he was a right wing fanatic instead of being just a LITTLE PUNK AND A COP KILLER.
"I am shocked and dismayed that the KNOWLEDGEABLE Sen. McCain should confuse the Taliban and al-Qaeda and should blame Afghans for 9/11."
McCain isn't confused, he's LYING.
McCain is also very knowledgeable about Georgia.
August, 2008..."I know I speak for every American when I say TODAY WE ARE ALL GEORGIANS." McCain knew the State Dept had warned his "Misha" not to fall into Putin's trap by attacking. Afterward, McCain blamed Putin even though he was just reacting to Georgia's aggression.
The First Lady should grow some hooch in the White House garden, make brownies with them and pass 'em out to Republicans in Congress the next they start talking war with Putin, Assad, Iran etc.
Those brownies will also work wonders on gun nuts and other NRA supporters. How many people smoke pot at gun shows?
You nailed it, IMO. These nuts aren't terrorists and claiming the Georgia good-old-boy is different from other killers because he is a white southerner misses the point, IMO.
Look what happened in Las Vegas today. Yelling "This is a revolution," before shooting to death two police officers at a fast food restaurant doesn't make it an act of terrorism or a revolution.
Most of these people are just very violent mental cases.
With an automatic weapon they could have killed many more, especially after going to Walmart.
I stand correct. I'm not a gun person. The government just needs to close the door on fully automatic weapons, especially ones with high capacity magazines. Many Americans use other types of guns mainly because of the culture and their upbringing.
I'll give you two examples: Gabby Giffords and her husband are gun enthusiasts in Arizona He still target practices using a Glock. Before she was shot, I heard Gifford brag about her prowess shooting a handgun.
"I'm pretty good with it too."
The other example involves Obama "guns and bible" statement he made a few years ago. I believe he was talking about people in Pennsylvania. "The Deer Hunter" was a movie about some of those people.
"ONE SHOT."
To many people, guns mean good-old-boys in the south, but the culture is widespread in this country. Lotta miles between Arizona and Pennsylvania.
Not really. Even though Marx was a member of Sovereign Citizens and had filed several motions against the police for using excessive forces as well as making tax complaints, the fact that he went OFF THE DEEP END is the overriding factor, IMO.
Shooting a cop in the south means Marx did the good-old-boy version of JIHAD.
Oklahoma City bombing conspirator Terry Nichols was also a member of the Sovereign Citizen Movement. Marx was more of a tax nutter gone off the deep end than an out and out terrorist.
Any "terrorist" who drives up to a country courthouse armed to the teeth, crashes it on the steps, throws smoke bombs and shoots a policeman will probably be killed in the next couple of minutes. Lots of cops with guns around most courthouses.
Did Marx really think he's charged into the courthouse and take hostages?
A terrorist is a person who uses terror in pursuit of political aims. The Boston bombers were clearly terrorists. Being a southerner with a gun doesn't make one a terrorist any more than that nutjob in California.
Terrorists can be Muslims but the can also be white folks like the IRA bombing London. An Xtian who blows up an abortion clinic is DEFINTELY a terrorist.
It's not the violence or even the weapons used that determines if a person is a terrorist. Was the attack political in nature?
Is robbing a bank and shooting people an act of terror? No.
Is robbing a bank and shooting people in order to finance a revolution an act of terror? YES.
"The shooter at the Seattle Christian College was using a shotgun. They need to be broken and reloaded, UNLIKE SEMI-AUTOMATIC weapons. If Aaron Ybarra, the shooter, had been using a semi-automatic, the student who tackled him would be dead, along with a large number of others slated to be killed."
"You get what you lobby for, GOP."
THANK YOU, DR. COLE.
Semi-automatic weapons with large capacity magazines were used at Virginia Tech , Sandy Hook and Aurora. That was my point about the recent shooter in California. He could have easily killed a "large number of others" with a semi-automatic weapon instead of a hand gun which ONLY fired ONE BULLET each time the trigger was pulled.
Dennis Marx was also into EXPLOSIVES---BIG TIME. I'm surprised his house wasn't rigged to blow up when someone knock on the door. Kooks like Marx don't worry about open carry laws.
Obama is taking some real heat from the Republicans over Sgt. Bergdahl's release, so the timing could not be better for him to grow a beard and show solidarity with Bergdahl Sr. Then, instead of God Bless America at the end of every speech, Obama could close by saying...."GOD IS GREAT," and see how long before FOX News picked it up.
In the movie "Gettysburg," those long fake beards the southerners wore weren't much different from the average Taliban "terrorist" or papa Bergdahl's. If the beard is long and looks bad, there's usually a bad guy with evil intent underneath. When he returns to the HOMELAND, if Sgt. Bergdahl also grows a beard, the Republicans will say....
"See, we told ya."
Is there even ONE Republican in Congress sporting a beard, 'stache or any other facial hair such as long sideburns.
Very true, but timing is the key. In 2008, Obama labeled Afghanistan as the "good war," vs. the Bush gang's bad war in Iraq. Once he was elected, Obama went even further with his "war of necessity" and sent thousands of extra troops for what was supposed to the big battle of Kandahar. The Taliban didn't cooperate and Gen. Petraeus's COIN strategy crapped out.
Now, Obama is doing what he should have done five years ago and that puts the GOP in a very difficult situation. Their leaders want more war, but nobody else does.
With the midterms just five months from now, negotiating with the Taliban for the release of Sgt. Bergdahl might be a way to get the War Party barking for more war which could lead to disaster for them in November.
How many Republicans will try and bring back their glory days by showing the "Mission Accomplished" banner to counter the Taliban's "Don't Come Back" sign?
How long will it be before John McCain and Lindsey Graham accuse Obama of "cutting and running" from the terrorists?
The release of five senior Taliban prisoners is just one side of War Party's rants about the deal to free Sgt. Bergdahl. The other side of the coin is Bergdahl leaving his post unarmed and just walking into the Taliban arms. War Party members can't be happy about any of this.
Sgt. Bergdahl comments about the war in Afghanistan and the Taliban will be very interesting.
I've been totally against both wars from the beginning and stopped supporting Obama when he committed 30,000 more troops to his "war of necessity." Obama called Iraq a "dumb war," but he made his own dumb move when he let Gates and Petraeus talk him into doing an Afghan surge.
However, apparently Sgt. Bergdahl either left his post and his weapon while on duty or just walked away after his replacement came on and relieved him. Today, he has gotten criticism from several soldiers who were stationed at his base back in 2009.
One said this: "I was pissed off then and I'm more pissed off now."Some of these guys are talking desertion.
It'll be very interesting to hear how the Stormtroopers in the GOP try to play this. It's almost like Obama is dangling a carrot trying to make those war mongers bite like junkyard dogs, but at the same time Obama knows the public is fed up with all these wars.
If he's doing that, it's a clever move and Obama is a VERY clever politician.
Obama negotiating the release of Sgt. Bergdahl might mean serious conflict with the Republican party as we get closer to the midterms. I can understand why the GOP hardliners are ranting and raving. Bergdalh is like Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden.
Obama seems to have drawn a line in the sand.
Justin Raimondo's column at Antiwar.com gives more background. Apparently, Sgt. Bergdahl was disgusted with the whole war in Afghanistan and walked off the base AWOL before the Taliban captured him.
If Obama trades one Shinseki for a McChrystal and the stormtroopers in the GOP suddenly start singing "WE ARE FAMILY," there are some BAD GUYS somewhere who need to be bery, bery careful. š
The release of Sgt. Bergdahl along with Obama's Afghanistan withdrawal plan makes it clear that his "war of necessity" really wasn't. Before Obama escalated this foolish conflict, many people including you Dr. Cole, warned him against it. Now, over four years later, we can see the results.
President Obama deliberately confused the public with vague statements and actions linking the Taliban to the real terrorists in al-Qeada. As far as I know, the Taliban in Afghanistan have never attacked another country. The Taliban in Pakistan are in conflict with the Pakistan government, not us.
George Bush suffers from diminished mental capacity due to years and years of alcohol abuse. However, when George had his "moment of clarity" and said "Let's ROLL!!!," 70% of the American people thought that was a great idea. They were GUNG HO to get some PAYBACK for 9/11 and go to war against Muslims in Iraq.
Many former supporters of that war did NOT turn against it until the invasion got bogged down. Before that, I'll bet they cheered the president went he landed on the U.S.S. Lincoln and gave his "Mission Accomplished" speech.
Next, 6'4" John Kerry will dress up like John Belushi on Saturday Night Live and challenge the 5'10" Edward Snowden to an old fashion duel, using BROADSWORDS.
"If broadswords were good enough for Abraham Lincoln, they are good enough for John Kerry. Come back to our Homeland and man up Mr. Snowden, IF YOU DARE."
p.s. The massacres at Aurora, Tucson and Virginia Tech would NOT have happened unless the killers had weapons capable of firing multiple rounds in just a few seconds. Without the firepower to initially stun the crowd, all three of the shooters would have apprehended by the young adults at the scene.In Tucson and Aurora the killers were within a few feet of numerous people when they attacked.
I didn't make a comment about access because I do NOT think much can be done to change that equation with over 200 million handguns already in the public's hands. Legally or illegally buying a handgun in any big city isn't difficult.
That's the reason the real battle is with the NRA lobby over high capacity magazines and automatic-- semi-automatic guns. One person isn't at risk if this battle is lost. People will be killed in droves just like they were at Sandy Hook, Aurora, Virginia Tech and in many other mass murders.
Being able to fire one round at a time doesn't compare to 31 bullets the killer in Tucson was able to fire in just 15 seconds. Automatic-Semi Auto guns with large capacity magazines are a far greater danger to people, especially in crowded areas. In Arizona and Aurora, both shooters had enough firepower to keep the crowd away with their heads down. That firepower is what enabled them to kill and wound scores of innocent people.
I really have no idea why people do NOT understand the difference between these weapons. One is a WMD capable of killing scores in seconds. The other doesn't have that capability.
From what I've read, Rodger used a gun that only fired ONE BULLET each time he pulled the trigger. Those kind of guns aren't part of the discussion in Congress and play no part in the NRA' outrageous defense of automatic or semi-auto guns that fire multiple rounds when the shooter pulls the trigger just once.
My position is NOT hostility over regulation. It's knowing the difference between what might be possible and the IMPOSSIBLE. The gun Rodger used isn't comparable to the WMD types used when one person kills and maims more than thirty after pulling the trigger one time.
APPLES AND ORANGES.
If Rodger had been in a crowd of people like the killers in Arizona, Virginia Tech or Aurora, he would have been quickly overwhelmed.
To you, my statement is "highly insulting, disgusting, callus and a fascist statement," but it's also the truth. You are in denial and rather than admit it, you attack me instead.
Many Americans do tolerate these MASS MURDERS. If they didn't, why weren't the laws changed after Virginia Tech, Aurora and especially, Sandy Hook.? The killer broke into a school and slaughtered over twenty children ages 6-7---1st graders.
AND YET, NOTHING WAS DONE---NOT ONE THING. NO LAWS WERE CHANGED.
I have never even heard or read about such a heinous crime.
What happened in Santa Barbara wasn't much different than what happened in Chicago (6 killed, 16 wounded) or New Orleans (4 killed, 15 wounded) over Memorial Weekend. In the week before the holiday, 80 people were killed by gun violence.
BTW, the 7% who own 65% of the guns is around 20 million people. The other 280 million plus still own over 80 million guns.
I'm not a troll, I just don't live in denial.
The media treats violent deaths caused by gun violence much like car wrecks, IMO. The news cycle has already moved on from what happened in Santa Barbara.
© 2025 All Rights Reserved
Dead serious, especially if a person is visibly Muslim, Black, Latino and have been confronted by the police when they are alone or can be isolated. The Washington Post reporter who was arrested said he was more frightened when the police officer shoved him into the coke machine during his arrest in McDonald's. He recognized the danger and the potential for bodily injury. He was in a bad place.
Be passive. You don't want to end up in the emergency room of a hospital. No one should take the chance of a rogue cop going off on them. Michael Brown would probably still be alive if he would have been passive when confronted.
Bad cops need people who resist their authority. If they don't get that, they move on.
Males should always be passive when interacting with the police. ALWAYS answer when a cop asks a question and NEVER say anything about being detained.
A female made this tape 'cause they cops don't go upside their heads for being mouthy. A lot of males learn that the hard way. Getting the shit beat outta ya one time will cure bad habits a person has when interacting with said police.
Rick Perry thinks Missouri has LIGHTWEIGHT SWAT teams. Texas SWAT teams have TANKS and the Guv. wants to turn 'em loose and find out who is really behind those indictments.
Go get 'em Guv. Rick.
Hippies in Austin sabotage ya. They did the same thing to Tom Delay.
You're going to prison, Rick.
Hillary Clinton might or might not be right about arming moderate Syrian rebels. No one knows how it would have turned out, but ISIS being able to use Syria as a base and expanding into Iraq was the worse case scenario come true.
The neocons won't be haunted. What's happening in Iraq, Syria and Gaza is like a dream come true for them.
"A Clean Break" written in 1996, by Doug Feith and Richard Pearl for Israel Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu makes for some VERY interesting reading.
Perpetual war and remaking the Middle East is a neocon perfect world.
Yea, ISIS got their hands on some serious weapons. Nothing else explains their latest success. ISIS threatening Irbil is right out of the Twilight Zone. Before 6this push, not in a million years would I ever think ISIS could roll into Kurdistan.
Barzani ain't dumb. He'll play it so the Kurds gain their independence while American fighter jets give them cover from ISIS.
How can the U.S. take a chance on ISIS KOOKS doing some really serious damage to the Kurds, Baghdad, Jordan, Lebanon etc.?
Barzani might make the promise to stay in Iraq, but I seriously doubt he'll keep it. The Kurds have waited a long time to gain their independence and Barzani just said the time is right. Obama doesn't have many options here. Either he supports the Kurds with airstrikes and weapons OR ISIL continues to push toward Irbil in Kurdistan and other parts of Iraq with no force capable of stopping them.
ISIL forces have also been attacking in northern Lebanon, so their reach stretches hundreds of miles from Kurdistan through Syria and now, Lebanon. ISIL money, weapons and organization has been badly underestimated, to say the least.
As recently as a few weeks ago, I really thought ISIL had expanded just about as far as they could go without beating themselves up against Maliki forces in Samarra and/or Baghdad and the peshmerga in Kurdistan. So the latest ISIL offensive is STUNNING. Last night, on the Charlie Rise Show, Dexter Finkel said ISIS is close to surrounding Baghdad. But just a few weeks ago, he told Rose that ISIL "would get CRUSHED" if they tried to take Baghdad.
The situation in Iraq has changed dramatically since then.
Netanyahu isn't the whining type. Bibi is a NUTJOB who plays hardball. Letting the Iranians send in troops or take military action in Iraq opens up a different and dangerous can of worms.
THE OTHER JACK.
From reading and listening to various reports,when ISIS overran military bases they secured heavy artillery, U.S. weapons included. I was very surprised when ISIS forced the Peshmerga to withdraw and advanced to threaten Irbil. ISIS heavy weapons outgunned the Peshmerga. That set off alarm bells in the Obama administration. That's how I read it tonight.
Obama has a real problem on his hands. Stopping ISIS is one thing, defeating them is another. How many ISIS fighters have European passports? What will happen as the U.S. becomes more involved?
This could turn out to be very nasty.
Arab-American Justin Amash had a BIG victory in Michigan yesterday. The mainstream Republicans tried every dirty trick in the book, even calling Amash "al Qaeda's best friend in Congress," but it didn't help. He won easy.
Amash's father is Palestinian and his mother is Syrian. They're both Christians, so the Muslim label won't work. War party Republicans fear Justin Amash and Rand Paul antiwar types. Amash even voted against $225 million more from Bibi's IRON DOME.
Justin Amash is one "blade of grass" that won't go down easy.
I stand corrected about Olmert heading the Israeli govt. during Cast Lead. The incoming Obama administration refused to make any comment, so it all worked out very nice and neat.
Today, this captured Israeli soldier might give Obama another out so Netanyahu can go all in. I don't think Bibi will go nuclear but it depends on WHICH WAY THE WIND BLOWS.
During operation "Cast Lead," in late 2008, the incoming Obama administration didn't utter a word of protest--not one. They used the excuse of non-being in office yet. Netanyahu ended Cast Lead just days before Obama was inaugurated.
A Republican president would have also been "hammered nonstop" if he escalated drone attacks or the war in Afghanistan. Obama could have stopped these wars as soon as he took office in Jan. 2009.
Unlike George, Obama is a VERY CLEVER "War President."
Perhaps Netanyahu was trying to influence American politics as well by putting pressure on Obama. Most of Congress, especially the Republicans, are gung ho for the "war" in Gaza to continue. The vast majority of the media is also showing Israel in a sympathetic light. Plus, Netanyahu is much more concerned with Iran's nuclear program rather than ISIS conquering territory in western Syria and northern Iraq.
As long as Israel can play up the danger of Hamas rockets, Netanyahu can keep Obama off balance.
All the negative feedback will soon cause Netanyahu to end his criminal war against the Palestinians in Gaza. By that time, there won't be many places left to bomb.
The focus of the United States will shift to Ukraine, Russia and Vladimir Putin. Yesterday, our State Dept. released intelligence maps showing blast marks of missiles fired from Russia and craters in Ukraine.Did those Rooskie missiles cause those craters in Ukraine?
We don't know, but they aren't Ukrainian sinkholes.
The slaughter of innocent Palestinian, especially women and children, gets a sympathetic response. NOT GOOD FOR THESE NEVER ENDING WARS. "Vlad the Bad" ain't a good guy, so the U.S. govt. and media will transition from Gaza to Ukraine soon enough.
Philo's presentation was "positively enlightening," especially when he explained the methodical way Israel tests every word for audience reaction before that particular word is used. Only the ones that generate an effective response are used and then repeated over and over.
It's almost like a game show...
Now watch Netanyahu defend his attack in Gaza. He says the same thing again and again, almost word for word.
"HAMA ROCKETS made us do it. No country would tolerate HAMAS ROCKETS attacking Israel and it's citizens."
Now watch Obama..."As I've said before, no country would tolerate HAMAS ROCKETS being fired on Israeli cities. Having said that,".....
As Philo explains, the key is repeating the message and not mentioning the Palestinian people. What is left out is just as important as what is said. No mention of the blockade, prisoners or anything that might show them in a positive light or even a sympathetic one.
Pictures oF dead Palestinian children?-----HAMAS ROCKETS were the real cause.
Repetition is the key to BRAINWASHING.
All the facts were never in about 9/11, but there were enough to conclude that it wasn't a false flag attack. The doubters based their theory on WTC bldg. #7 collapsing late in the day and the plane hitting the Pentagon. However, they ignore the fact that Mohammed Atta formed his cell in Hamburg, Germany and they entered this country in June, 2000, 15 months before 9/11. The false flag conspiracy believers ignore many other facts that made it IMPOSSIBLE for 9/11 to have been a false flag attack.
All of the facts about this latest attack will never been known because they crash site was contaminated. However, some conclusions can still be drawn: This attack was done by missile and the Ukrainian govt. had no reason to fire even one because the separatists don't have any planes. The Uk. govt. controlled the skies and were hammering the rebels. The rebels and Putin desperately needed to limit these attacks. Sophisticate missiles would do that.
Neither Putin or Lavrov and denied the missile was Russian, not once. IMO, these non-denials shows consciousness of guilt.
JTMcPhee, everything you said about the U.S. and especially, Victoria Nuland planning this coup is true, IMO. There is a VERY strong probability that Right Sector neo-nazis were the ones who killed all the people on both sides when the Ukrainian govt. collapsed. We helped pull off the coup backed Putin into a corner and he reacted.
John McCain's friend "Misha" did the same thing in Georgia.
Backing Vladimir Putin into a corner is a very, VERY dangerous thing to do.
Both sides have the same missiles but the Ukrainian govt. would have no reason to shoot down any plane. The separatists don't have aircraft and government forces couldn't possibly fire without knowing the plane was civilian UNLESS it was a FALSE FLAG OPERATION.
Circumstantial evidence is pointing LOUDLY at Putin and the separatists being the guilty parties. Why didn't they allow investigators access to the crash sire on the first day?
Did Vladimir Putin give the separatists this sophisticated missile without making sure they could not play cowboy and shoot down a civilian aircraft by mistake?
It's looking like that's what actually happened. These separatists were playing cowboy and pulled the trigger without taking the time to find out what kind of plane they were bringing down. Now, they are delaying the investigation and destroying key evidence while Vladimir Putin is nowhere to be found.
"When I looked into his eyes, I saw three letters---K G B."
"We are all Georgians today."
John McCain, Lindsey Graham and all the neocons will be moondancing in a conga line down Pennsylvania avenue as soon as the missile and/or crew gets traced backed to Putin.
The War Party could not ask for anything better than a "Vlad the Bad" missile shooting down a commercial jet and murdering 300 innocent civilians.
In 2008, the results of the Texas Democratic primary between Obama and Hillary showed how much power Latinos had in the state. Obama easily won both Houston and Dallas by over 15%, yet Hillary Clinton still managed to win the popular vote by 4%. Hillary won the popular vote by a large margin (25%) in every city with a majority Latino population--San Antonio, El Paso, Corpus, Brownsville, McAllen--every one of them.
It was a STUNNING result.
The Democratic party took note and made the Latino Mayor of San Antonio, Julian Castro, the Keynote Speaker at their 2012 convention. Now, Obama nominated Castro as Sec. of Housing and Urban Development.
None of this is a coincidence. Castro is being groomed for a higher position and I wouldn't be surprised if he becomes Hillary Clinton's V.P. candidate.
Cruz, Perry and Paul will try and position themselves like Rick Santorum did in 2012. Evangelicals believe gay marriage is a sin against the word of God and will bring down his wrath.
Those folks are serious.
Where would Ted Cruz go without the Texas Bible Thumpin' vote? š Great video.
No Republican can win the Iowa primary without the Evangelical vote. They rule.
Rand Paul's Neo-confederate States Right's agenda might be overwhelmed by the rapidly changing ethnic demographics and cultural changes happening in this country. Even the president can't turn back the clock on amnesty for illegal immigrants, Gay rights and legalization of recreational marijuana use. Those changes will be permanent.
The Latino vote by itself means BIG changes. I think making the Mayor of San Antonio the Keynote Speaker of the 2012 Democratic convention means the Dems believe they can turn Texas BLUE--34 electoral votes. If they do, Georgia will be the largest red state with 15 electoral votes.
Almost ten million Texans are ethnically Mexicans. Every city from San Antonio to the Mexican border, 400 miles, is at least 60%--80% TexMex. If the Republicans don't or can't think up a strategy to gain many of their votes, the GOP won't be able to win Texas or a national election.
Deep down, Rand Paul is probably a Neo-confederate like his father, Ron Paul. On "Meet the Press," Ron actually blamed Lincoln for starting the Civil War.
If Rand gets elected and moves the capital to Richmond, Virginia, there won't be any doubt. If POTUS Rand makes the "Southern Avenger" his Secretary of Defense, it could get a 'lil hairy up north.
"States Rights" Rand's domestic policy will be straight out of the Confederacy.
The Senate is doubling funds for Israel's Iron Dome. Increased military aid as well as our own defense expenditures play a big part in the soon-to-be War Party anti-Rand crusade.
Bibi Netanyahu drew his red line at the UN as a warning against IRAN, not ISIS. The neocons and most Republicans want war against Iran. Rand Paul is in their way. These Republicans are just waiting for the right moment to attack Obama-Kerry's nuclear negotiations with Iran and away we go.
Just don't kid yourself....
"ALL OPTIONS ARE STILL ON THE TABLE."
Rick Perry is a LIGHTWEIGHT with no shot at winning the GOP nomination. Romney already lost. He won't get the nomination.
Interesting split brewing in the Republican party, especially if Rand Paul continues to gain strength. Rick Perry just fired the opening salvo, but many Republicans will line up and take their shots including Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, Mitt Romney, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Dick and Liz Cheney etc. They'll be coming out of the woodwork because if Rand Paul wins the nomination, the neocon dream of perpetual war and American empire is finished.
Many Americans are racists. How else could the neocons have substituted Saddam Hussein for Osama bin Laden and convinced tens of millions we just had to invade Iraq? ? They were both Muslims and that was all the neocons needed---PAYBACK. Obama did much the same thing with the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan.
President Obama has defended Israel's massive attack on Gaza by saying Hamas rockets put non-combatants in danger.
The networks made "mistakes" like that during the buildup to our invasion of Iraq. Many of our leaders want to expand the war against Muslims but they need the media to get the public in the right frame of mind.
Read Helena Cobban's latest comment on the reporting about Israel and Hamas in the Washington Post. Notice how many times Palestinians were called "ARABS."
"THOSE ARABS HAD A BIG BOMB AND BLEW THE SHIITE OUTTA SOME ISRAELI HOMES."
"BIG BOMB. BAD ARABS!!!" ABC NEWS
Grand Ayatollah Sistani didn't overrule the Bush administration on one man, one vote. He forced them to bend to his will by putting on two large demonstrations in January, 2004.
Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney bear the real blame for regime change. In 1991, Bush sr. invaded Iraq with close to 500,000 troops. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Gen. Shinseki said it would take "several hundred thousand" troops for long-term occupation in 2003. Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz insisted that figure was "much too high" and went ahead and invaded with ONLY 150,000 troops. Our "iddy-biddy imperial army" was how one military friend describe the woefully inadequate troop numbers. Rummy was about a quarter of million troops short.
People blame George Bush because it makes them feel better to blame someone who they see as intellectually limited rather than admitting they were duped by their intellectually superiors. The American public were fooled by Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld and Darth Cheney. Their propaganda campaign leading to the invasion of Iraq was simply diabolically BRILLIANT. By the time we cut loose, most of the public was BARKING FOR WAR 'cause they thought Saddam was about to NUKE 'MERICA!!!
BLAMING GEORGE IS HISTORICAL REVISIONISM.
On August 19, 2009, in a speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars in Phoenix, Arizona, Obama intentionally misled the American people by calling the war in Afghanistan a "war of necessity" and sent 30,000 more U.S. troops to fight the Taliban.
The so-called "good war" was really just another surged planned by Gen. David Petraeus and supported by Sec. of Defense Robert Gates. The COIN strategy was a complete BUST and never had a chance of working in a country with terrain like Afghanistan against the Pushtuns, the largest ethnic group by far (41%). The planned Big Battle of Kandahar against the Taliban never materialized. As a result, the U.S. got bogged down in the "good war" and Obama's presidency never really recovered.
Dr. Cole, back in 2009, you warned against Obama's foolish escalation. So did many others, including some in Reagan's administration who had NO DOUBT about the fighting capability of Afghans who fought against the Soviet Union.
The Republicans would blame Obama for being soft and not reacting to ISIS threat by bombing them before they attacked the HOMELAND.
Republicans want more war. That's the way they roll.
The Republicans blaming Obama for being soft on terror is their ONLY real hope for 2016. If they can put a 'lil Benghazi blame on Hillary, they'll try and take her down too.
A couple of days ago, the U.S. backed Ukrainian government threatened pro-Russian rebels with a "nasty surprise." Perhaps, Vladimir Putin sending Maliki military aid is his countermove.
This is like a chess game.
Mission creep includes the president having the authority to start and/or escalate wars without Congressional approval. President Obama did that in Afghanistan and Libya. He almost took this country to war in Syria. Congress has no authority to stop him and if the American people did protest they could be detained and charged with national security violations.
During war, the laws are silent.
"Never forget we are a nation at war." President Obama.
Emile Hokayem explained how the nature of the Syrian conflict became local and Assad created the refugee crisis for his own benefit. Basically, he agreed with John McCain that we should have sent aid to the locals two years ago. Emile Hokayem thinks a long war in Syria will at least be partially caused by the United States inaction.
10 million displaced people out of a total of 22 million. geez
An excellent discussion.
I didn't give a very good example. George's XTIAN CRUSADE included other groups with various agendas, many having nothing to do with religion. But religious fanatics don't always launch crusades that end badly. Joan of Arc and John Brown were both religious extremists 100% committed to their cause.
Joan of Arc heard voices. John Brown led a massacre with the victims being hacked to death and then chopped into pieces.
History has judged both favorably.
The chaos in Syria and an excellent propaganda campaign, especially on the net is what made ISIS a real force in the Middle East, IMO. That along with their religious extremism.
No matter what their faith, religious fanatics willing to die for their cause are the most dangerous people on the planet. 9/11 and George's XTIAN CRUSADE are the two best examples in the 21st century. 70% of America supported the idea of a PAYBACK CRUSADE AGAINST MUSLIMS even if was in a different country.
"Muqtada al-Sadr in Iraq created the Mahdi army, intended as a force to support the Mahdi, who he thought was about to appear, which took on the U.S. and British militaries; it lost on the battlefield.
Didn't Muqtada al-Sadr believe the U.S. invaded because they were trying to stop the Mahdi from reappearing?
Playing devils advocate.
What if Barry Posen is wrong about ISIS falling apart? Having a lot of money is the glue that holds ISIS together. They are well organized as well as well funded. ISIS also controls a huge area in Iraq and Syria.
ISIS could be more dangerous than many non-interventionists realize. The real question is what can be done, if anything, to contain their threat? What would happen if Europeans and even Americans fighting with ISIS return home and commit acts of terror like Obama just warned about?
China Matters: "Getting played by ISIS? Welcome to the Club!"
He thinks they are operating like an organized criminal gang, the mafia. In Syria they rolled Nusra and took over. In Iraq, ISIS has to use more subtle techniques until the time is right to act against the Baathists and whatever Sunni groups/tribes stand in their way. C.M. says it looks like Mosul was their HQ and they had inside help with their rapid takeover. The various crime gangs have to kick 20% of their take upstairs.
If China Matters is right, why should ISIS risk going toe-to-toe with Maliki, the Mahdi Army, perhaps Iran, the U.S. and even the peshmerga?
ISIS controls a big part of northern and western Iraq right now. It will be very expensive and bloody for anyone to take back Sunni country. They would all be treated as occupiers.
Events playing out in Syria and Iraq do seem like they are part of Doug Feith's "A Clean Break" written in 1996. However, ISIS was not part of the plan and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein wound up playing right into Iran's hands.
I think what started out as a neoconservative plan to change the entire Middle East has now become a chain of events where no one has control. It'll will have to play out much like the assassination of the Archduke Ferdinand led to WWI, the Great Depression, rise of Hitler and WWII.
What started one hundred years ago this Saturday on the western end of the old Ottoman empire is happening today on the Eastern end and at a faster and faster speed. Much like World War I, this is also an uncontrollable chain of events.
Both terrible and fascinating at the same time.
Maliki wants U.S. special forces in the country, but no more than 300 and all of them hundreds of miles away in Anbar Provence. When they leave, Maliki wants them to exit by going through Syria.
He's not taking any chances on an American coup. Maliki has his own deck of cards, actually it's a poker hand---Saddam, Gaddafi, Assad, the commie in Ukraine. The hand just needs one more card to be complete.
"GULP!"
Last night, on the Charlie Rose Show, Dexter Filkens said he really doubted ISIS would attack Baghdad because quote "THEY WOULD GET CRUSHED," unquote mainly by the Shiite militias.
"Every household in Baghdad has an AK-47." Filkens.
John Kerry's comments today lead me to believe Obama will launch bombing raids against ISIS VERY soon, in a few days at the most.
"The first thing that occurred to me on the fall of Qa'im is that Iran no longer has a land bridge to Lebanon." The media was claiming the fall of Qa'im opened up a route for Isis to bring in heavy weapons to Iraq. Without air cover, I couldn't understand what ISIS was gaining. Now I think I do. ISIS gained because Iran lost which is the flip-side of Assad gaining because ISIS lost Homs.
Even with the very informative map of the ethnic lines in Diyala Province, the ISIS strategy is still murky to me.
From an AP article..."20,000 men, many in combat gear, marched through Sadr City with assault rifles, machine guns, multiple rocket launchers, field artillery and missiles. The parades were staged by followers of Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr."
Twenty thousand, with many more available if they are needed.
p.s. I could also be flat wrong. According to reports, ISIS is making a major push in Anbar province all headed towards Baghdad. Dunno where all this is going.
I don't understand what capturing the crossing into Syria really means. How can they move heavy artillery and other weapons into Iraq when they can be attacked from the air?
ISIS CONVOYS WOULD SEEM QUITE VULNERABLE. TRIPLE OVERTIME PAY FOR ALL DRIVERS WOULDN'T BE ENOUGH.
ISIS winning in Baghdad against the Mahdi army would be the tallest of orders, IMO. Today's Mahdi military parade in Sadr City must have been quite a show--BAD HOMBRESWITH BIG GUNS. Plus, If ISIS does attack Samarra or Baghdad that's a green light for Obama to attack them with drones not to mention Iran sending in Revolutionary Guard troops.
I just can't imagine ISIS would make such a blunder. Their best strategy is to pull back into Sunni areas and just wait for Maliki, Obama, Iran, Sadr etc. to make a move. Taking control of northern Iraq means ISIS has already accomplished a great deal so moving south into Samarra, Baghdad, Najaf, Karbala would definitely be "a bridge too far." They would go from liberators to occupiers in Shia parts of Iraq, especially if Shia shrines were damage or destroyed.
Everybody is waiting for a big battle, but what if it doesn't happen? The neocons are already chomping at the bit for mo war. THEY CAN HARDLY WAIT FOR THE BOMBS TO START DROPPING.
What happens if ISIS pulls back and consolidates its control of northern Iraq without attacking Maliki and the Shiites?
"Devilishly clever" gets my vote. Obama did the same thing in Afghanistan with his "war of necessity" propaganda to make the public think the the Taliban and al-Qaeda were basically the same outfit.
No Republican could have done the same thing. Obama is a master of doublespeak and a great politician. He'll do what the Republicans want but make it sound like their polar opposites. Obama just slows everything down.
So was his center, Mike Webster. The PBS Frontline starts off with his death and autopsy. His sectioned brained revealed much darker areas in different locations which is a definite sign of CTE.
Webster had many of the symptoms while he was alive.
p.s. Frontline's "League of Denial" about concussions in football is on youtube.. Two hours, but well worth watching. Football today is similar to the gladiator games in Roman times. Instead of being killed outright, many of today's gladiators wind up brain damaged cripples by early middle age--mid 50s.
Football, college and especially the pros is big business--big money. Everybody loves the SUPERBOWL. Until the big profits from today's gladiator games becomes secondary to the health of the participants, very little will change.
It's Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE) which is much worse than TBIs because long term repeated blows to the brain cause emotional problems that sometimes lead to suicide. Traumatic brain injuries are caused by car wrecks, IEDS etc. The injury is the result one blow and doesn't have the same long term emotional impact as CTE. Some of those football players. have committed suicide by shooting themselves in the heart so their brains are saved for the autopsy.
A football player with CTE is a dead man walking.
The Dallas Cowboys, "America's team," used to whoop those Washington REDSKINS like a redheaded stepchild because Texans knew their name was derogatory, discriminatory and slanderous toward Native Americans.
What a mess. If Maliki did resign, U.S. war hawks would be able to put even more pressure on Obama to start shocking and awing ISIS like we did Saddam. Dead civilians would be American "collateral damage." When we dropped our bombs, if was their fault for being under them.
The Cheney's video would be perfect Republican war propaganda if Dick was holding a shotgun and the daughter was holding up a dead duck. Love his cowboy hat.
"President Obama should do to ISIS what we just did to this bird."
Whether Maliki stays or goes, it doesn't solve the long-term problem. With one word, Grand Ayatollah Sistani could have a couple of hundred THOUSAND Shiites armed and ready on the streets in Baghdad, so ISIS is facing imminent and very certain martyrdom if they attack.
Maliki ain't at the Alamo. ISIS marching on Baghdad would be exactly like George Armstrong Custer's two hundred men attacking several thousand Indians at the Little Big Horn.
Those consequences might result in Iraq breaking up into three states, strengthening Assad in Syria, as well as helping Iran to become much stronger and perhaps the even the dominant player in the Middle East.
I doubt the American government will take that risk and might even see ISIS as a relatively minor threat long term compared to Iran. You're talking about a total flip-flop of American interests in the Middle East.
What happens to ISIS in Iraq will have much bigger consequences in the whole region. If Iran pours military aid into Baghdad would they do the same thing in Damascus to help Assad defeat the Sunni extremists? Would that aid end up making Hezbollah stronger in Lebanon?
OTOH, what happens if Iran and the U.S. don't aid Maliki? Does taking that course of action end up with Iraq breaking up?
I don't think anyone knows what course of action, if any, would work out best.
Those guys heard John Kerry's comment about ISIS being a threat to attack the Homeland. If ISIS does decide to pass on attacking Baghdad, I think the people in Dallas will remain safe thanks to patriotic Americans with plenty of guns.
The only way to beat a BAD GUY with a gun is with a good guy with a gun. In Big D, the people took that to heart.
"BRING 'EM ON."
BID D WON'T FALL TO AN ISIS INVASION.
FORMER PRESIDENT BUSH CAN REST EASY. š
A very informative article. Recent neocon moves from Syria to Ukraine back to Iraq.
They were coming out of the woodwork on the Sunday morning news shows.
"Apocalypse Now" or very soon if Obama doesn't start bombing. Peter King had on his most serious face.
Good point. It just didn't add up to me.
Dr. Cole, I haven't forgotten you're comments the day after the Golden Dome in Samarra was blown up in 2006. You immediately said it was very bad news and would probably mean real SEVERE conflict between the Sunnis and Shia." You hit the nail right on the head. That was the beginning of the end for the Sunnis in Baghdad.
I thought about your comments when Prime Minister Maliki went to Samarra of all places and said the ISIS would be driven back and defeated. I don't think the ISIS will get much closer to Baghdad or take control of Samarra.The Shia will fight just as hard as the ISIS and they heavily outnumber them. Maliki also has gunships.
The Shia took all those Sunni bombs in Baghdad and didn't waver.
I think Obama just moves these carriers to various hot spots and lets 'em sit in the water until the "crisis" is over. He did the same thing with Syria.
"The Americans are here. We've arrived."
Three to five thousand marching on Baghdad after they take Samarra and blow up the Golden Dome again. That worked so well for the Sunnis the first time. It was the beginning of the end for the Sunnis. They never recovered.
I suspect the two Iraqi army divisions that folded in Mosul were mainly Sunnis who saw ISIS as liberators from Maliki. How could 30,000 soldiers with American weapons break and run from a few thousand ISIS fighters?
In January, 2004, Grand Ayatollah Sistani called for demonstrations in favor of one man, one vote because the Bush administration was dragging their heels. 30,000 Shia marched in Basra. The very next day, 100,000 protested in Baghdad. When Sistani barks, several hundred thousand Shia bite.
Today, the Republicans are coming out of the woodwork saying the sky will fall if Obama doesn't do something and quick. Peter King and David Ignatius were on Meet the Press with alarming news. Lindsay Graham said Maliki should resign and Obama should send Petraeus and Crocker to Baghdad and form a NEW GOVERNMENT. Even Tony Blair said the west must intervene.
The war party regulars will say just about anything to get the war in Iraq restarted.
Today, Iran is warning against "any foreign military intervention in Iraq" saying it would only complicate the crisis.
From the linked article, on Friday Prime Minister Maliki traveled to Samarra and said this "will not be the last line of defense, but a gathering point and a launchpad. This is the beginning of the end for them (ISIS)."
Maliki could be right. ISIS overrunning and taking control of Sunni towns in northern Iraq without a fight is much different than doing the same thing in mixed cities, especially Samarra with the Golden Dome.. ISIS might have reached their limit and would run up against heavily armed, large Shiite forces if they try to push further south. I don't think they have the numbers to risk such a big defeat.
As always, Iran is playing a clever game trying to get Obama to take action so they can claim "security cooperation" between Tehran and Washington. Bibi Netanyahu would have a stroke. The Iranians never miss a beat. Rouhani offered Iranian troops even though he has not received an explicit request.
Would Iran would be willing to send troops into Syria to fight against ISIS there? The Republicans and John McCain's reaction would be interesting.
After Reagan aiding Saddam and the coup in 1953, Iran would be VERY foolish to ever trust the American government. Our spooks will find out all about their nuclear program and stab them in the back at the first opportunity.
That's how we roll and Iran knows it.
American politicians have no intention of ignoring Israel, Saudi Arabia and Jordan to ally itself with Iran and/or Hezbollah, not to mention Assad in Syria. ISIS is a problem, but as soon as the U.S. thinks up a way to roll them back or contain them, the big pieces on the chess board will look basically the same, except for the Kurds in Kirkuk.
The Kurds taking Kirkuk is probably like Putin taking Crimea--a done deal.
Will the U.S. changed course in Syria and help Iran and Hezbollah prop up Assad? If that happens, will we turn against the Sunni countries like Saudi Arabia and Jordan?
What about Israel?
"Three states."
Does the Kurdish state include the four million Kurds in Iran and the twelve million in Turkey? That's a huge area.
When the U.S. first invaded Iraq, the Turkish foreign minister warned the Kurds not to take control of Kirkuk or in his words "there will be bloodshed."
Turkey will not let a large part of their country become part of Kurdistan and probably won't let the Kurds have Kirkuk.
It could be bigger. What will Turkey do when the Kurds keep Kirkuk under their control?
What happens if the Kurds in Syria link up to the Kurds in Iraq?
12 million Kurds in southern Turkey. Plus, four million more in Iran.
Iraq has broken apart like Humpty Dumpty.
"All the Kings horses and all the King's men."
Read "Dear America: You are in the army now."
Edward Snowden revealed the power of the NSA to monitor the citizens. Plus, the police have become militarized. If these right-wing "militias" were really a threat, the federal govt. would disrupt their organization and crush them militarily, without a problem.
Either you believe what Edward Snowden said about the federal govt. or in the threat of right wing militias and other groups. Both beliefs can't co-exist.
The police reaction to the Black Panthers in the 60s went hand in hand with the federal government actions against the antiwar movement.
It wasn't just based on race.
Compared to what happened at the Democratic convention in 1968, Kent State or many other illegal and violent government actions in the late 60s and early 70s, today's militia movement are a just buncha yahoo lightweights.
Jerad Miller was made to leave Bundy Ranch after his cop killing desires known. He wanted to "snipe at police."
I think Aaron Ybarra is Latino. His last name is Spanish.
The latest shooter in Oregon was 15 years old.
Dennis Marx was a legitimate right wing kook. Members of the Sovereign Citizen Organization don't recognize the federal government or its authority to tax citizens. He's the only one who didn't kill anybody.
A woman shooter is rare, plus they had to walk five miles before they reached the pizza restaurant. It's getting very warm here (low 100s) and walking a couple of hours in the hot Vegas sun isn't easy to do, especially wearing backpacks.
Miller looked and sounded like a drug addict in his crying video with his shirt off.
Less than three weeks ago, Elliot Rodger mass murdered six people.
Miller and his wife make the Liberty City Seven., the Symbionese Liberation Army and the People's Revolutionary Strike Force in the Dirty Harry movie sound like legitimate terror groups.
Jerad Miller got kicked off the Bundy ranch because he wanted violence with federal agents...It's on tape. He went on and on about killing police at least two years ago. All this talk of a "revolution" was just something he recently picked up and used to make him sound like he was a right wing fanatic instead of being just a LITTLE PUNK AND A COP KILLER.
p.s. Jerad Miller was forced to leave the Bundy Ranch. Listen to his comments while he was there and you understand why.
I'm surprised federal agents did not detain him for questioning. geez
"I am shocked and dismayed that the KNOWLEDGEABLE Sen. McCain should confuse the Taliban and al-Qaeda and should blame Afghans for 9/11."
McCain isn't confused, he's LYING.
McCain is also very knowledgeable about Georgia.
August, 2008..."I know I speak for every American when I say TODAY WE ARE ALL GEORGIANS." McCain knew the State Dept had warned his "Misha" not to fall into Putin's trap by attacking. Afterward, McCain blamed Putin even though he was just reacting to Georgia's aggression.
The First Lady should grow some hooch in the White House garden, make brownies with them and pass 'em out to Republicans in Congress the next they start talking war with Putin, Assad, Iran etc.
Those brownies will also work wonders on gun nuts and other NRA supporters. How many people smoke pot at gun shows?
ZERO.
You nailed it, IMO. These nuts aren't terrorists and claiming the Georgia good-old-boy is different from other killers because he is a white southerner misses the point, IMO.
Look what happened in Las Vegas today. Yelling "This is a revolution," before shooting to death two police officers at a fast food restaurant doesn't make it an act of terrorism or a revolution.
Most of these people are just very violent mental cases.
With an automatic weapon they could have killed many more, especially after going to Walmart.
I stand correct. I'm not a gun person. The government just needs to close the door on fully automatic weapons, especially ones with high capacity magazines. Many Americans use other types of guns mainly because of the culture and their upbringing.
I'll give you two examples: Gabby Giffords and her husband are gun enthusiasts in Arizona He still target practices using a Glock. Before she was shot, I heard Gifford brag about her prowess shooting a handgun.
"I'm pretty good with it too."
The other example involves Obama "guns and bible" statement he made a few years ago. I believe he was talking about people in Pennsylvania. "The Deer Hunter" was a movie about some of those people.
"ONE SHOT."
To many people, guns mean good-old-boys in the south, but the culture is widespread in this country. Lotta miles between Arizona and Pennsylvania.
Many southerners use guns to hunt for food.
Not really. Even though Marx was a member of Sovereign Citizens and had filed several motions against the police for using excessive forces as well as making tax complaints, the fact that he went OFF THE DEEP END is the overriding factor, IMO.
Shooting a cop in the south means Marx did the good-old-boy version of JIHAD.
Oklahoma City bombing conspirator Terry Nichols was also a member of the Sovereign Citizen Movement. Marx was more of a tax nutter gone off the deep end than an out and out terrorist.
Any "terrorist" who drives up to a country courthouse armed to the teeth, crashes it on the steps, throws smoke bombs and shoots a policeman will probably be killed in the next couple of minutes. Lots of cops with guns around most courthouses.
Did Marx really think he's charged into the courthouse and take hostages?
Have they found his suicide note?
A terrorist is a person who uses terror in pursuit of political aims. The Boston bombers were clearly terrorists. Being a southerner with a gun doesn't make one a terrorist any more than that nutjob in California.
Terrorists can be Muslims but the can also be white folks like the IRA bombing London. An Xtian who blows up an abortion clinic is DEFINTELY a terrorist.
It's not the violence or even the weapons used that determines if a person is a terrorist. Was the attack political in nature?
Is robbing a bank and shooting people an act of terror? No.
Is robbing a bank and shooting people in order to finance a revolution an act of terror? YES.
TERRORISM IS POLITICAL.
"The shooter at the Seattle Christian College was using a shotgun. They need to be broken and reloaded, UNLIKE SEMI-AUTOMATIC weapons. If Aaron Ybarra, the shooter, had been using a semi-automatic, the student who tackled him would be dead, along with a large number of others slated to be killed."
"You get what you lobby for, GOP."
THANK YOU, DR. COLE.
Semi-automatic weapons with large capacity magazines were used at Virginia Tech , Sandy Hook and Aurora. That was my point about the recent shooter in California. He could have easily killed a "large number of others" with a semi-automatic weapon instead of a hand gun which ONLY fired ONE BULLET each time the trigger was pulled.
Dennis Marx was also into EXPLOSIVES---BIG TIME. I'm surprised his house wasn't rigged to blow up when someone knock on the door. Kooks like Marx don't worry about open carry laws.
Obama is taking some real heat from the Republicans over Sgt. Bergdahl's release, so the timing could not be better for him to grow a beard and show solidarity with Bergdahl Sr. Then, instead of God Bless America at the end of every speech, Obama could close by saying...."GOD IS GREAT," and see how long before FOX News picked it up.
In the movie "Gettysburg," those long fake beards the southerners wore weren't much different from the average Taliban "terrorist" or papa Bergdahl's. If the beard is long and looks bad, there's usually a bad guy with evil intent underneath. When he returns to the HOMELAND, if Sgt. Bergdahl also grows a beard, the Republicans will say....
"See, we told ya."
Is there even ONE Republican in Congress sporting a beard, 'stache or any other facial hair such as long sideburns.
I can't think of any.
Very true, but timing is the key. In 2008, Obama labeled Afghanistan as the "good war," vs. the Bush gang's bad war in Iraq. Once he was elected, Obama went even further with his "war of necessity" and sent thousands of extra troops for what was supposed to the big battle of Kandahar. The Taliban didn't cooperate and Gen. Petraeus's COIN strategy crapped out.
Now, Obama is doing what he should have done five years ago and that puts the GOP in a very difficult situation. Their leaders want more war, but nobody else does.
"DON'T COME BACK TO AFGHANISTAN"
Dem's fightin' words to the War Party.
With the midterms just five months from now, negotiating with the Taliban for the release of Sgt. Bergdahl might be a way to get the War Party barking for more war which could lead to disaster for them in November.
How many Republicans will try and bring back their glory days by showing the "Mission Accomplished" banner to counter the Taliban's "Don't Come Back" sign?
How long will it be before John McCain and Lindsey Graham accuse Obama of "cutting and running" from the terrorists?
The release of five senior Taliban prisoners is just one side of War Party's rants about the deal to free Sgt. Bergdahl. The other side of the coin is Bergdahl leaving his post unarmed and just walking into the Taliban arms. War Party members can't be happy about any of this.
Sgt. Bergdahl comments about the war in Afghanistan and the Taliban will be very interesting.
NBC evening news reported that six U.S. soldiers were killed during the searches for Sgt. Bergdahl, including two from his platoon.
I've been totally against both wars from the beginning and stopped supporting Obama when he committed 30,000 more troops to his "war of necessity." Obama called Iraq a "dumb war," but he made his own dumb move when he let Gates and Petraeus talk him into doing an Afghan surge.
However, apparently Sgt. Bergdahl either left his post and his weapon while on duty or just walked away after his replacement came on and relieved him. Today, he has gotten criticism from several soldiers who were stationed at his base back in 2009.
One said this: "I was pissed off then and I'm more pissed off now."Some of these guys are talking desertion.
It'll be very interesting to hear how the Stormtroopers in the GOP try to play this. It's almost like Obama is dangling a carrot trying to make those war mongers bite like junkyard dogs, but at the same time Obama knows the public is fed up with all these wars.
If he's doing that, it's a clever move and Obama is a VERY clever politician.
Obama negotiating the release of Sgt. Bergdahl might mean serious conflict with the Republican party as we get closer to the midterms. I can understand why the GOP hardliners are ranting and raving. Bergdalh is like Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden.
Obama seems to have drawn a line in the sand.
Justin Raimondo's column at Antiwar.com gives more background. Apparently, Sgt. Bergdahl was disgusted with the whole war in Afghanistan and walked off the base AWOL before the Taliban captured him.
If Obama trades one Shinseki for a McChrystal and the stormtroopers in the GOP suddenly start singing "WE ARE FAMILY," there are some BAD GUYS somewhere who need to be bery, bery careful. š
The release of Sgt. Bergdahl along with Obama's Afghanistan withdrawal plan makes it clear that his "war of necessity" really wasn't. Before Obama escalated this foolish conflict, many people including you Dr. Cole, warned him against it. Now, over four years later, we can see the results.
President Obama deliberately confused the public with vague statements and actions linking the Taliban to the real terrorists in al-Qeada. As far as I know, the Taliban in Afghanistan have never attacked another country. The Taliban in Pakistan are in conflict with the Pakistan government, not us.
George Bush suffers from diminished mental capacity due to years and years of alcohol abuse. However, when George had his "moment of clarity" and said "Let's ROLL!!!," 70% of the American people thought that was a great idea. They were GUNG HO to get some PAYBACK for 9/11 and go to war against Muslims in Iraq.
Many former supporters of that war did NOT turn against it until the invasion got bogged down. Before that, I'll bet they cheered the president went he landed on the U.S.S. Lincoln and gave his "Mission Accomplished" speech.
ZOOM!!!
DID Richard Clarke forget about Paul Wolfowitz?
Next, 6'4" John Kerry will dress up like John Belushi on Saturday Night Live and challenge the 5'10" Edward Snowden to an old fashion duel, using BROADSWORDS.
"If broadswords were good enough for Abraham Lincoln, they are good enough for John Kerry. Come back to our Homeland and man up Mr. Snowden, IF YOU DARE."
"I'M JOHN KERRY, REPORTING FOR DUTY."
p.s. The massacres at Aurora, Tucson and Virginia Tech would NOT have happened unless the killers had weapons capable of firing multiple rounds in just a few seconds. Without the firepower to initially stun the crowd, all three of the shooters would have apprehended by the young adults at the scene.In Tucson and Aurora the killers were within a few feet of numerous people when they attacked.
That's my point. I can't be any clearer.
I didn't make a comment about access because I do NOT think much can be done to change that equation with over 200 million handguns already in the public's hands. Legally or illegally buying a handgun in any big city isn't difficult.
That's the reason the real battle is with the NRA lobby over high capacity magazines and automatic-- semi-automatic guns. One person isn't at risk if this battle is lost. People will be killed in droves just like they were at Sandy Hook, Aurora, Virginia Tech and in many other mass murders.
Being able to fire one round at a time doesn't compare to 31 bullets the killer in Tucson was able to fire in just 15 seconds. Automatic-Semi Auto guns with large capacity magazines are a far greater danger to people, especially in crowded areas. In Arizona and Aurora, both shooters had enough firepower to keep the crowd away with their heads down. That firepower is what enabled them to kill and wound scores of innocent people.
I really have no idea why people do NOT understand the difference between these weapons. One is a WMD capable of killing scores in seconds. The other doesn't have that capability.
From what I've read, Rodger used a gun that only fired ONE BULLET each time he pulled the trigger. Those kind of guns aren't part of the discussion in Congress and play no part in the NRA' outrageous defense of automatic or semi-auto guns that fire multiple rounds when the shooter pulls the trigger just once.
My position is NOT hostility over regulation. It's knowing the difference between what might be possible and the IMPOSSIBLE. The gun Rodger used isn't comparable to the WMD types used when one person kills and maims more than thirty after pulling the trigger one time.
APPLES AND ORANGES.
If Rodger had been in a crowd of people like the killers in Arizona, Virginia Tech or Aurora, he would have been quickly overwhelmed.
To you, my statement is "highly insulting, disgusting, callus and a fascist statement," but it's also the truth. You are in denial and rather than admit it, you attack me instead.
Many Americans do tolerate these MASS MURDERS. If they didn't, why weren't the laws changed after Virginia Tech, Aurora and especially, Sandy Hook.? The killer broke into a school and slaughtered over twenty children ages 6-7---1st graders.
AND YET, NOTHING WAS DONE---NOT ONE THING. NO LAWS WERE CHANGED.
I have never even heard or read about such a heinous crime.
What happened in Santa Barbara wasn't much different than what happened in Chicago (6 killed, 16 wounded) or New Orleans (4 killed, 15 wounded) over Memorial Weekend. In the week before the holiday, 80 people were killed by gun violence.
BTW, the 7% who own 65% of the guns is around 20 million people. The other 280 million plus still own over 80 million guns.
I'm not a troll, I just don't live in denial.
The media treats violent deaths caused by gun violence much like car wrecks, IMO. The news cycle has already moved on from what happened in Santa Barbara.
IT WON'T RETURN.