Tuesday, February 21, 2017
Pfc. Brian Patrick Odiorne
I'm traveling in some vehicle
I'm sitting in some cafe
A defector from the petty wars
That shell shock love away
," written by Joni Mitchell
, first appears on her album of the same name
This should be news covered by all outlets.
Instead, I see a lot of junk and, worse, opinion passed off as news all over the net.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
DATE: February 21, 2017 12:13:25 PM CST
Death of a Fort Hood Soldier
Pfc. Brian Patrick Odiorne
FORT HOOD, Texas -- The Department of Defense announced Feb. 21 the
death of a Fort Hood Soldier who died Feb. 20, in Al Anbar Province,
Iraq, from a non-combat related incident while supporting Operation
Pfc. Brian Patrick Odiorne, 21, whose home of record is listed as
Ware, Massachusetts, entered active-duty military service in October
2015 as a cannon crewmember.
He was assigned to 2nd Battalion, 82nd Field Artillery Regiment, 3rd
Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division, Fort Hood, Texas, since May
Odiorne's awards and decorations include the National Defense Service
Medal, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal and Army Service Medal. He
will be posthumously awarded the Inherent Resolve Campaign Medal and
Overseas Service Ribbon.
Circumstances surrounding the incident are currently under
investigation by Special Agents from the U.S. Army Criminal
No further information will be released at this time to protect the integrity of the ongoing investigative process.
For more information contact:
The announcement comes on the same day that THE NEW YORK TIMES runs a letter from a LA reader whose comments include:
these principles, the armed forces of the United States and its allies
have killed tens if not hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, a large number
of them civilians, including women and children. And our country has
suffered the death and injury of tens of thousands of our own sons and
daughters, fathers and mothers, husbands and wives by waging this war in
for what purpose? We know that there were no weapons of mass
destruction threatening our peace and security. We had no plan to bring
peace and security to Iraq and its neighbors. So yes, our soldiers and
sailors are valiant and represent the best in our country, but I still
do not know what we’re fighting for.
MICHAEL E. MAHLER
Why is the US still in Iraq?
Why didn't Barack end the war he promised to?
These are questions we're apparently not supposed to be asking.
Which is sad and strange -- because they are the questions that matter.
They're just there to try and make the people free,
But the way that they're doing it, it don't seem like that to me.
Just more blood-letting and misery and tears
That this poor country's known for the last twenty years,
And the war drags on.
-- words and lyrics by Mick Softly (available on Donovan
The e-mail address for this site is firstname.lastname@example.org
Posted at 05:38 pm by thecommonills
Media Availability with Secretary Mattis and General Townsend in Baghdad, Iraq
of Defense Jim Mattis hosts a joint press conference with U.S. Army Lt.
Gen. Stephen Townsend, commander of Combined Joint Task Force Operation
Inherent Resolve, at Baghdad International Airport, Baghdad, Iraq, Feb.
20, 2017. (DOD photo by U.S. Air Force Tech. Sgt. Brigitte N. Brantley)]
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE JIM MATTIS: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.
General Townsend and I have been
spending some time together here and -- and getting current on the
political military situation as the Iraqi army continues to surge
against the enemy on the west side of Mosul. Despite the casualties
they've taken, this is an army that's learned to fight in the middle of a
real tough battle against our common enemy and the coalition commander,
General Townsend, has briefed me up on the situation -- the current
situation there today.
I would just tell you that by, with
and through our allies is the way this coalition is going against
Daesh. We're going to continue to go after them until we destroy them
and any kind of belief in the inevitability of their message. Their
message is going to be proven to be false on the battlefield as well as
how we deal with their mythology of somehow they are the brave new way.
They're going to be shown to be at
fault, they're going to be shown to be exactly what they are, which is a
bunch of murderous relics, to put it bluntly. So the Iraqi army is in
the fight with the coalition supporting them with full support, and as
we go through this fight, Daesh will not be over with. We all know
that. There'll be more fights ahead, we'll stick together. And as we
look at the future, we're going to continue to stand by the Iraqi army,
the Iraqi people, who are fighting this enemy.
So at that point, I would just
throw it open to your questions. We learned a lot here and aligned
ourselves politically and militarily for the current fight and the
future. So what's on your mind? Go ahead.
Q: (Off mic)
LIEUTENANT GENERAL STEPHEN
TOWNSEND: It is true that we're operating closer and -- and deeper into
the Iraqi formation, so we adjusted our posture during the east Mosul
fight and we embedded advisers a bit further down into the formation.
That is true. I do not need -- I have all the authorities that I need
to prosecute our fight and I'm confident if I need -- if I were to need
more, that my leadership would provide those.
Q: For both of you also, as you
look ahead to -- (inaudible) -- fight and the upcoming difficult fight
in Raqqa, what do you see as the key (inaudible) and -- and --
(inaudible) -- to be able to -- (inaudible)?
SEC. MATTIS: We are going to
prosecute this fight against Daesh, against ISIS, in the areas you
mentioned and more areas than that, actually. We'll accommodate any
request from the field commanders. Right now, our allies are carrying,
as you can tell from the casualty list, the overwhelming burden of this
fight in their own territory and we'll work by, with and through allies
from the coalition. And that coalition, as you know, has got more than
60 nations at varying levels.
So we owe some degree of
confidentiality on exactly how we're going to do that and the sequencing
of that fight so that we don't expose to the enemy what it is we have
in mind in terms of the -- the timing of the operations. But you -- you
summed up some of the issues that we'll be dealing with as we go
forward and we'll be addressing each one of them, from intelligence, to
tactics, to logistics as we sustain the fight going into this.
Q: You said -- you mentioned a
number of things that you're looking at, but you have seven days left to
provide your thirty-day review to the president. Did you learn
anything here that you could share with us -- (inaudible) -- what you're
gonna -- (inaudible)?
SEC. MATTIS: I would -- what I
specifically learned here is the resilience of this army. Recognize it
took casualties, it has reconstituted itself both equipment and
personnel wise, and as you know, has already crossed the line of
departure going against the enemy and west Mosul. This is not something
that was a forgone conclusion for an army that only a year ago, many
people were questioning.
And you can see the level of
capability they've constituted in the middle of a war with the kind of
operation that you're right now witnessing today underway.
Q: If I could ask General Townsend. What happens after Mosul? (off mic)
GEN. TOWNSEND: Jennifer -- it's
good to see you again, by the way. We rode together in Baghdad a couple
times a few years ago.
I don't anticipate that we'll be
asked to leave by the government of Iraq immediately after Mosul. I
think that the government of Iraq realizes this is a very complex fight
and they're gonna need the assistance of the coalition even beyond
Q: (Off mic)
GEN. TOWNSEND: I wouldn't want to put a timeline on it.
Q: (Off mic)
SEC. MATTIS: Yeah, this is a
partnership, Jennifer. Your question is very appropriate because
there's been a lot of rocky times out here. But there is no doubt, from
my discussions today, the Iraqi people, the Iraqi military and the
Iraqi political leadership recognizes what they're up against and the
value of the coalition and the partnership in particular with the United
States which has been, as you know, developing very well in terms of
this military's capability.
So I imagine we'll be in this fight for a while and we'll stand by each other.
Q: (Off mic)
SEC. MATTIS: That's a political
issue, an internal political issue right now what we've seen. But there
is only one country in the near proximity where the security forces
actually protect the people when they're out protesting the government
And I say -- think that says a
great deal about how this country has matured in a pretty difficult
neighborhood, that their military is actually seen as a protector of
people who protest at times against government policies. That's what
militaries are supposed to do under civilian control in a democracy.
Q: I have a version of the same
question. In your meetings today, did you hear anything that made you
confident that while the military’s successes-- (inaudible)and for you
General Townsend, do you see (inaudible)?
SEC. MATTIS: Yeah, your -- both
your questions are related because without political progress, you can't
set the conditions institutionally, organizationally in a government
that earns the people's respect, holds their aspirations close and
actually allows a country to be resilient and resistant to this sort of
So, what we've seen here is
actually I think a new =found understanding among the Iraqi people about
what it means to be an Iraqi country against this kind of threat, how
they have worked together. You've seen the Peshmerga and the Iraqi
security forces working together. You've seen some of the militias
working alongside them. So there's -- there's something coming together
here in terms of political and military maturation, I think, that shows
exactly what you're talking about so we're not back here five years
with that sort of a situation.
At the same time, this is not a
threat that's going to go away overnight, so it's going -- we all
recognize that it's going to be a long-fought battle.
You have anything to add to that?
GEN. TOWNSEND: Nothing to add, Mr. Secretary.
SEC. MATTIS: All right. We'll take one last one, there you go.
Q: Thank you. Thank you, sir -- (inaudible).
I wanted to ask you about the advance of Raqqa, in particular -- (inaudible) -- question about whether or not -- (inaudible)?
SEC. MATTIS: Yeah, we're still
sorting it out. The allies are working together. They're sharing
planning and that's ongoing right now, but the planning is still
underway so there's not -- it's not been all decided on who's going to
do what and where. We're working together to sort it out.
Q: (Off mic)Can I ask you a
personal question, Mr. Secretary? This is your first arrival as
secretary of defense and you spent many years here as a combat
commander. How do you feel returning here (inaudible)?
SEC. MATTIS: Yeah. Well, coming
back here after the years that we've fought alongside each other through
good times and bad times, it's just a privilege to come back and look
out the helicopter door and see what's going on down below, to see an
Iraqi military that can fight as truly valiantly as this one has
considering the situation they faced as -- as ISIS rose to occupy much
of their country and to see that in spite of the casualties, it's not
only held together, it's come back stronger and is now winning.
It's now freeing up and I'll have
the general say how much they've freed up in terms of area, but he's got
better awareness of that. But look at what the map looked like eight
months ago where ISIS was, where they are today and the attack that's
underway here. It's very heartening to come back at this point in my
Steve, if you want to just talk
about some of the progress that this army's made during this time which
gives more than just my words, it gives objective data for why I would
be heartened by it. Steve?
GEN. TOWNSEND: I think the
secretary alluded to it a couple of questions ago when he talked about
where this army has come over the last year.
If you look back just a little over
two years ago, this army was broken and defeated and barely able to
hold their capital when they asked the coalition, the world for
assistance. That army has done this remarkable turnaround in just two
years and now they're running a multi-divisional operation involving
40,000 or 50,000 Iraqi security forces up around Mosul 400 kilometers
from their capital and their logistics base.
It is an incredible turnaround.
They've liberated approaching half of their lost territory and they're
-- they're about to liberate their second-largest city, the largest
population city center held by ISIS anywhere in the world.
The Iraqi security forces are going
to take that city back, no doubt about it. I think that's a remarkable
achievement and it just -- some examples of what the secretary is
talking about what the Iraqi security forces have done.
SEC. MATTIS: Well done, Steve. Thanks very much.
Posted at 05:38 pm by thecommonills
Tuesday, February 21, 2017. Illusions fall away.
Let's start with useless.
Alyssa, I'm telling you not to Tweet politics. And I didn't vote for Donald Trump.
I'm telling you it because you have (a) a herd mentality and (b) you are so woefully uninformed.
Calling you "ignorant" would be generous.
You've never done the work required. And, Alyssa, I know you.
You have every right to Tweet about anything you want -- we all can weigh in.
But for your own image, I'd urge you to find something else to Tweet about.
You're a misguided and misinformed stooge whose Tweets are reactionary and back up war while you're not even aware of it.
From a professional point of view, it's not smart to take money from
Atkins and to offer Tweets that insult a good portion of the American
people but your people have already told you that. (Atkins is also
considering parting ways with you at the end of your current
arangement.) They hired you to popularize their product. That's why a
lot of us don't do advertising -- it's whoring.
But you wanted to keep you name out in front of your public -- such as
it is -- and so you agreed. But you're not living up to the bargain,
However, my concern is your deep stupidity and lack of curiosity which
leads you to accept simplistic pronouncements that encourage violence
I was having a debate with a friend last night on the phone that turned into an argument.
She's an actress who can't stop her nonsense Tweets about Donald Trump being evil and the Democrats being salvation.
Is Donald Trump evil?
He may or may not be. Time will tell.
Are Democrats the salvation?
And she was raised in a Socialist family.
And we both used to listen to Gore Vidal go on (constantly) about the boiled frog.
Gore was right.
The Democrats are not the answer.
Could they be?
Maybe if they were pushed.
's pushing them. Which is why hacks like Debra Messing get so angry.
Everyone should be pushing them.
No, you don't have a right to our votes.
You earn them.
And if the Democratic Party wants our votes, it damn well better try to earn those votes.
The country doesn't need pretty words, it needs action.
It needs jobs.
If all your money goes to rent and food, you're not making a living and we need to stop kidding otherwise.
Alyssa, my friend and I live very fortunate lives.
We need to be aware that many others are not so fortunate.
These are the people the Democratic Party has abandoned -- a party that
can't even publicly mention the poor, a party that should have declared
one of their so-called wars on the issue of the homeless long ago. If
10% of what's been spent on the 'war on drugs' in any year was spent on
addressing the homeless, the people would be better off.
The Democratic Party has joined the corporations in fleecing the American people.
That's not going to turn out any votes.
And Alyssa and others can tell themselves they're so damn superior to
Trump or whomever because they say the right things but words don't keep
a roof over your head or food on your table (unless you're a paid
The Democrats need to be pressed to earn votes.
They don't need to be defended.
They have lined their pockets with corporate donations. Nancy Pelosi is
a lousy leader but gets to hold on (for now) because she brings in so
much corporate cash to each election cycle.
The party's entirely about greed.
I doubt that will change.
But you can pressure them to make concessions to We The People.
And you don't do that by castigating Susan Sarandon.
You do that by saying more people are going to walk -- like Susan -- if
you don't start addressing the basic needs, the reason political parties
exist, which is jobs. You're going to keep losing if you can't defend
the safety net -- which needs to be increased, not gutted.
Alyssa's very good at fingering pointing at others. She's just not very good at introspection -- true of far too many.
From Danny Haiphong's "Trump's Foreign Policy: Continuity or Break?
" (BLACK AGENDA REPORT):
Some on the left political spectrum in the US are suspicious of
Trump's foreign policy, and for good reason. US imperialism's war agenda
is non-negotiable. Trump's status as a billionaire champion of American
(white) exceptionalism does not necessarily breed confidence in Trump’s
rhetorical gestures to scale back key points in US foreign policy. His
Administration should be resisted at every turn for current and future
war provocations against Iran and China. His Administration should be
held accountable for the deaths of thirty people in Yemen during the
late January Commando raid just as Obama's Administration should have
been held accountable for killing thousands of people in Yemen,
Pakistan, and Afghanistan by drone strike over the course of eight
But the anti-war movement died the day Obama was elected, leaving the
contradictions that were brought to the fore throughout the
Presidential electoral cycle unaddressed. One does not have to support
Trump or refrain from struggle against the GOP to recognize that Trump's
rhetorical gestures against regime change in the Middle East and Russia
came from somewhere. These statements are the product of a rapidly
changing world. In this world, the US can no longer call itself the only
most influential or dominant global power. Russia's geopolitical
significance, China's unprecedented economic growth, and the stagnation
of the US economy have forever changed the international order of
How's that Iraq War that Saint Barack didn't end going?
W.J. Hennigan and Nabih Bulos (LOS ANGELES TIMES) report
U.S. military advisors are now fighting alongside Iraqi forces near the front lines against Islamic State, a sign of President Trump's
willingness to grant more latitude to American commanders than they've
had since Iraq’s ground war against the militants was launched more than
two years ago.
The Trump administration has not yet
granted new authorities, but has loosened the reins for U.S. generals
running the war, allowing hundreds of U.S. troops to join advancing
Iraqi forces as they embark on their most complex mission to date:
liberating Mosul, their second largest city.
Thank you, Cult of St. Barack.
When he sent US troops in back in 2012, you said nothing.
Let me spoon feed you:
fact that Barack sent a brigade of Special-Ops in during the fall of
2012. Tim Arango (New York Times) reported, "Iraq and the United States are negotiating an agreement that could
result in the return of small units of American soldiers to Iraq on
training missions. At the request of the Iraqi government, according to
General Caslen, a unit of Army Special Operations soldiers was recently
deployed to Iraq to advise on counterterrorism and help with
That was reported right before the 2012 presidential debates.
But no one 'moderator' brought it up.
And in 2014, when Barack sent in 'advisors' and 'trainers,' people were only slightly more vocal.
Where were you, Alyssa?
This didn't happen overnight.
And those of us who have been covering it have long noted that US troops have been in combat from day one.
As the then-Secretary of Defense noted, dropping bombs from planes is also combat.
And the US government had bombed Iraq daily since August 2014.
Again, where have you been?
Off with The Cult of St. Barack?
Hands off the man, flim flam man
His mind is up his sleeve and his talk is make believe
Oh, Lord, the man's a fraud,
He's a flim flam man
He's so cage, he's a flim flam man
Hands off the man, flim flam man
He's the one in the Trojan horse making out like he's Santa Claus
"Hands Off The Man" (also known as "The Flim Flam Man") was written by
Laura Nyro and she performed it on her debut album MORE THAN A NEW
DISCOVERY (now known as THE FIRST SONGS). It was covered by many
including Peggy Lipton.
Peggy covered many of Laura's songs (they were friends from before Peggy
did THE MOD SQUAD) and let's note "Stoney End" because no one did a
better cover of that than Peggy.
"Now I don't believe I want to see the morning" -- indeed.
Of the US troops fighting in Iraq, Dan Lamothe (WASHINGTON POST) notes
Army Lt. Gen. Stephen Townsend said that the advisers, numbering
about 450, are “operating closer and deeper into Iraqi formations” as a
new assault on western Mosul gets underway. U.S. commanders made the
adjustment during the fight for the eastern side of the city,
which began in October and ended last month, and the deployment has
continued with the attempt, beginning Sunday, to capture western Mosul,
It marks the first time the U.S. military has
acknowledged how close American service members are to the front lines
as it assists what Townsend characterized as a force of more than 40,000
Iraqi police officers and soldiers fighting to retake Mosul. The battle
for the western half of the northern Iraqi city is likely to stretch
for months in urban neighborhoods where up to 1,000 militants are
believed to be entrenched, U.S. military officials said.
It's day 127 of The Mosul Slog, the operation to liberate or 'liberate'
Mosul from the Islamic State -- the operation that only began in October
(despite the Islamic State seizing Mosul in June of 2014).
Only 180 more days, the Defense Dept has insisted. Apparently they have
based that judgment on the fact that deploying US troops into combat
(officially) can accomplish that. (Of course, they've been wrong
Making official what's been happening all along may be one of the reason
for US Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis' trip to Baghdad.
That's him yesterday, meeting with Prime Minister Hayder al-Abadi.
The following community sites -- plus Jody Watley -- updated:
Posted at 05:36 pm by thecommonills
Monday, February 20, 2017. Chaos and violence continue, The Mosul Slog
continues, the US Defense Secretary visits Iraq, and much more.
US Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis is in Baghdad.
Mattis visit comes days after meeting with Kurdistan Regional Government President Massoud Barzani.
Of that meet-up, the US Defense Dept noted:
WASHINGTON, Feb. 18, 2017 —
Defense Secretary Jim Mattis met with
Kurdistan Regional Government President Masoud Barzani in Munich
yesterday, a Defense Department spokesperson said in a statement.
The two men affirmed their commitment
to their partnership to defeat the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, the
statement said, and they discussed the latest developments in the Mosul operation and the key role Peshmerga forces have played in the counter-ISIS fight.
Mattis and Barzani both noted the
important military cooperation between the government of Iraq and the
KRG, the statement said. They agreed battlefield success over the past
year was made possible by strong cooperation between the government of
Iraq, the Kurdistan Regional Government and the United States.
Donald Trump has not said he would seize Iraq's oil.
But the press loves to act as though he did.
It's actually great when they repeat it.
They remind the world that wars are about resources.
Even better would be if they'd explain how Iraq's oil has been seized by the IMF and the World Bank.
But that would require actual reporting.
Fortunately, Iraqis who listen to Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani are
aware of what took place, even if the western media blacks it out.
While Mattis is in Baghdad, US Vice President Mike Pence recently met with Iraq's prime minister Hayder al-Abadi.
Wednesday, November 16, 2016
Wednesday, November 16, 2016. Chaos and violence continue, the lies of
the US election continue, an idiot proposes it is sexist to criticize
Hillary Clinton -- at least right now, let us grieve, let us grieve, and
Starting with the US election so many of us were tired of before it
happened and remain tired of now. There are real issues effecting lives
right now and it's must be so very nice to be an American citizen
unconcerned with the wars your government is currently actively carrying
The ridiculous Angelina Chapin (HUFFINGTON POST) tries to pretend
she's a feminist (she's not) and ties criticism of War Hawk, corporatist and scandal magnet Hillary Clinton to sexism:
I think every liberal woman has broken down at some point in the past
week. For me, it was at 2 a.m. on Wednesday when I called my boyfriend
If you think every liberal woman cried, then you're not only a bad columnist, you live in a tiny and terrifying bubble.
As Demi Moore
said THE BUTCHER'S WIFE, "Well you ought to get out more."
Angelina goes on to whine that Hillary has "30 years of political experience."
No, she has 12 years -- she was a US senator for 8, she was Secretary of
State for 12. First Lady is not political experience. Especially now
that women have opportunities, we no longer need to pretend that 'woman
behind the man' is experience.
And non-feminist Hillary sneered so at First Lady that she insisted she
would give Bill things to do as First Spouse so that he wouldn't have to
plan dinners, etc. In other words, Hillary said, "That's women's
work." And only a few of us feminists took the time to call her out on
She takes Thomas Frank to task for calling Hillary a "party hack." I'm
no fan of Thomas Franks (I hope I've been fair to him but I'm not a fan
of his). But Thomas Frank's criticism of Hillary did not begin today,
this month or even this year. And it has nothing to do with sexism.
Were Angelina a feminist, she'd grasp that. But she's just another whiner trying to play the woman card to get her way.
She insists that "when you inflict your analysis on a woman who is
devastated that Americans just elected a man who considers her subhuman,
you are being sexist. Plain and simple."
Angelina, grow the f**k up.
Plain and simple.
Crawl back, crying, to your safe space, try to create the illusion of being in the womb if it helps.
But stop kidding that you're about feminism.
Women want to run for political office (and have and are).
There's no "Oh, but it's a girl so shut up with the criticism."
That's not feminism.
We can handle it.
We get pushed around and pushed down every day. Like many Americans.
And we get back up.
And we pull ourselves together and we go on.
If we want to compete in political races, we can't whine, "Oh, the
results hurt my tender little girl bits and feelings so nobody can say
People can say whatever they want, first of all, in a democracy.
Second of all, you need to grow the hell up and you need to toughen the hell up.
I'm embarrassed, as a feminist, that you chose to publish that crap.
Your nonsense is as pathetic today as Gloria Steinem's b.s. in
REVOLUTION FROM WITHIN about how she saw her future as running a diner
and there's a table in there where women can whisper and talk alone.
That's not radical. Taking the conversation to the public square isn't
even radical -- it's just democracy.
While we're mentioning Gloria Steinem -- who started her career as a CIA
operative -- as THE NEW YORK TIMES recently noted and refused her
request for a correction because it is true (and she used to brag about
it before she suddenly became a feminist) . . .
She at least got her overall theme right -- don't mourn, organize -- in her recent GUARDIAN column
(Though I would have said, don't wallow, organize.)
Hillary didn't change any rules in the political game. Gloria's dead
wrong on that and the speeches Hillary gave to Wall Street back that up.
Gloria, for those who are too young to know, appointed herself a
feminist leader and had her friends in the media join her with that.
It's how she leaped ahead of women who'd written books on feminism,
given speeches, done activism, how she leaped ahead of entire
collectives of women.
She's never done much for women. Since 1976, she's actively undercut
women at every Democratic Party convention -- usually with regards to
the party's platform. This is documented and if you don't know it, you
didn't bother to educate yourself.
She can't hide those actions. Through the threat of lawsuits and
bullying, she was once able to hide the CIA past that she's previously
Gloria's still thinking she can get away with rewriting history. In her column, she insists:
In 1972, I ran as a delegate pledged to congresswoman Shirley Chisholm, a candidate for the presidency.
You did run, Gloria, but you lost
. A detail you leave out.
More to the point, not only was Gloria not a delegate for Shirley, she didn't support Shirley.
From Jackson Landers piece for THE SMITHSONIAN
earlier this year:
“Feminists were split over her candidacy,” recalls Gottlieb. “Gloria Steinem,
who you would expect to have supported her, supported McGovern instead.
That was significant and it hurt on a personal level quite a bit. . .
.you can’t look at 1972 through the same magnifying glass as 2016.
Having a woman run for President was like having somebody from Mars run
for President. And you then have a black woman running for president and
everybody, all interest groups, were grappling with ‘how do you deal
with such a changed landscape?’ People were not comfortable with having a
black woman. And she often said, between being black and being a woman,
the biggest problem was being a woman.”
So just stop grandstanding, Gloria.
And stop lying.
The media anointed her leader and helped her push out "old" Betty Friedan.
Betty was 52 when Gloria and her cronies shoved Betty aside insisting that "young blood" was needed.
Gloria's now 82 and has refused to step aside or to elevate any other
woman because she's going to die holding on to the title the media
created for her.
Actress Jane Fonda appeared with Gloria recently. A friend started to
tell me about it and I stopped her saying I couldn't deal with the
stupidity right now. She insisted (good for her) and it turns out Jane
actually made sense. From CNN
"I am very grateful for the time that I
lived in Georgia. I learned so much," Fonda said. "And one of the most
important things that l learned was the importance of listening to
people who you don't agree with, with an open heart."
And that's what needs to happen now, she said.
know that we all didn't vote for the same people," Fonda told the
crowd. "And we have to, as women, we have to have each others' backs, no
matter who we voted for. We have to listen carefully."
Those are smart words. Maybe they're a step back to activism? Something Jane spent the last 8 years forgetting?
And I'm saying "actress" and not "actress and activist" -- as she bills
herself -- because the Iraqi people have never forgotten her
grandstanding January 2007 speech in DC where she claimed she would not
be silent or stop fighting until the Iraq War was over.
Then Barack was elected and the issue never mattered to her again.
On actresses, Susan Sarandon
Angelina Chapin is just so upset by negative criticism of Hillary.
It's so mean.
And what are the outright attacks on Jill Stein and Susan Sarandon?
Jill ran for president. As Ann -- a born and bred Green Party member from day one -- pointed out
maybe Jill's supporters should be cursing out Hillary's crowd for
refusing to support a woman who was against endless war, for the
environment and for the people.
In other words, Hillary cost Jill Stein the election. (Jill's run has
resulted in the Green Party getting ballot access on 12 more states in
the 2020 election.)
Debra Messing is a psycho, a lousy actress, star of three failed TV shows and a bully online.
She hates Susan Sarandon. She lied about her months ago to start a
Twitter war and get a little bit of fame in the hopes NBC wouldn't
cancel her show. (They did. Largely because the hate she was spewing
in her Twitter feed at that time was alienating viewers and NBC was
getting tons of complaints -- and Ava and I warned about it when it
started, we wrote about it at THIRD as soon as NBC suits told us and
Debra still didn't cool it. So she cost a crew, the cast and others
jobs because she couldn't stop spewing her hate.)
She's still hating on Susan Sarandon.
Debra's an idiot. (I love the "my understanding" Tweet regarding
contacting Congress -- did you miss out on third grade, Debra?)
She just can't stop going after Susan nor can "I forgot because I'm ill" Kurt Eichenwald (see Betty's "Crazy Debra Messing
" for a good laugh on that loser).
Are Kurt and Debra going to buy food for the people they're trying to put out of jobs.
If you missed it, if the head of a company endorsed Donald Trump or gave
money to his campaign, Debra's started a campaign to put them out of
How many thousands of people is Debra trying to put on the unemployment line?
Chances are, if you own the business, you'd be okay if it went under -- you should have diversified your portfolio.
But if you work for the business, where are you going to find a job elsewhere.
You could argue Debra's crackpot scheme is racist since
African-Americans still have a larger unemployment rate in this
Debra and her ilk need to grasp people like Ann.
She is a Green.
She was raised that way.
Ann has never voted Democrat in her life (or Republican) and she never plans to.
But because she's a woman and African-American, Debra's racist thinking is that Ann owes the Democratic Party a vote?
Not only is the Green Party a valid party for any American to choose to
vote for, it's also now a party with people being born into it. Just as
the Iraq War has gone on so long you have people who were in first
grade when it started already having finished high school, the Green
Party has been around so long now that there are people who are raised
in Green families the same way people have been raised in Democratic
families and Republican families.
So before someone laments poor feelings again and calls for safe spaces, they better curb Debra and get her shots.
And, for the record, I'm not a bully.
I'm a bitch.
There's a big difference.
One difference? A bully tries to put you out of business. A bitch just
warns you that if you don't calm down your Twitter feed the corporation
paying you money is about to drop you. And after Ava and I warned on
Sunday and it was confirmed on Monday, the actress learned to drop the
hate (not the politics, just the hate).
You know what's atrocious?
US House Rep Barbara Lee did nothing to stop the Iraq War or the
Afghanistan War under Barack. On the Afghanistan War, she was always
resetting the clock, "If President Obama hasn't ___ by ___, I'm going to
propose . . ."
Marriage to him?
Because she never proposed to end a war.
She was in the Democratic controlled House in 2009 and 2010. Democrats also controlled the Senate.
The only way to stop the War Hawks was to do a Congressional investigation into the lies of the Iraq War.
They elected not to.
For numerous reasons.
So don't come crying now that people whose behavior you tolerated and,
yes, normalized are now likely to be back in government. A full and
public investigation would have ended that. You didn't call for one,
For the Democrats -- as many e-mails from Iraqis are currently noting --
it was "move on" about the Iraq War -- a luxury that the Iraqi people
did not have. But on this election, as the e-mails from Iraqis keep
pointing out, Americans want to whine.
Gloria Steinem, he is your president. I've got 15 e-mails in the last
24 hours alone from Iraqis stating that he is your president, Donald
Trump, and you are responsible for what is done in his name the same way
you were for Barack Obama (I agree) and the same way you were for Bully
Boy Bush (I don't use the p-word for BBB, he was gifted with the oval
office by the Supreme Court).
In Iraq, the war continues, the tragedies continue, the War Crimes continue.
And let's dedicate this snapshot to John Stauber who keeps telling
truth. Taking on the nonsense at Huff-n-Puff and Gloria's nonsense
inspired by John's latest COUNTERPUNCH article.
ADDED at 5:43 pm est on 11/16/16:
The following community sites updated:
Posted at 06:53 pm by thecommonills
Thursday, July 21, 2016
July 21, 2016. Chaos and violence continue, meet-ups to 'help' Iraqis
continue, talk of five US bases being built in the KRG circulates, and
The never-ending Iraq War continues with the US Defense Dept announcing today:
Strikes in Iraq
Fighter and remotely piloted aircraft conducted 11 strikes in Iraq, coordinated with and in support of Iraq’s government:
-- Near Qaim, a strike produced inconclusive results.
-- Near Haditha, a strike destroyed an ISIL command-and-control node.
-- Near Hit, two strikes struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL vehicle.
-- Near Mosul, two strikes struck a large ISIL tactical unit,
an ISIL headquarters and an ISIL financial headquarters and destroyed
seven ISIL assembly areas, an ISIL vehicle and an ISIL artillery piece.
-- Near Qayyarah, two strikes struck two separate ISIL tactical
units and destroyed five ISIL boats, an ISIL mortar system and an ISIL
-- Near Ramadi, two strikes struck two separate ISIL tactical
units and destroyed an ISIL recoilless rifle, an ISIL fighting position
and an ISIL weapons cache.
-- Near Sinjar, a strike struck an ISIL tactical unit.
Task force officials define a strike as one or more kinetic
events that occur in roughly the same geographic location to produce a
single, sometimes cumulative, effect. Therefore, officials explained, a
single aircraft delivering a single weapon against a lone ISIL vehicle
is one strike, but so is multiple aircraft delivering dozens of weapons
against buildings, vehicles and weapon systems in a compound, for
example, having the cumulative effect of making those targets harder or
impossible for ISIL to use. Accordingly, officials said, they do not
report the number or type of aircraft employed in a strike, the number
of munitions dropped in each strike, or the number of individual
munition impact points against a target. Ground-based artillery fired in
counterfire or in fire support to maneuver roles is not classified as a
Wait, two strikes near Ramadi?
Thought that was one of the 'liberated' cities.
Don't wait for the press to ask.
And none of these bombings helps the Iraqi people in need, does it?
At today's State Dept press briefing, spokesperson John Kirby declared,
"Yesterday, also I think as you know, the Secretary [of State John
Kerry] hosted the Pledging
Conference for Iraq, which raised over $2.1 billion from the
international community, to include $316 million from the United States –
funds that will provide Iraq with critical stabilization and
What's he talking about?
He was too busy playing Secretary of Defense to explain.
But President Barack Obama's Special Envoy to Iraq, Brett McGurk, explained it July 19th in a press briefing:
But very importantly, there’s much more than just the military campaign.
We’re very focused on what comes after ISIL in these areas. So as a
coalition we’ve established two stabilization funding facilities, one a
funding facility for immediate stabilization. This is kind of to get the
lights on, to get police trained, to get them back in the streets, to
allow people to return to their homes. And this has actually been quite
successful. We have about $100 million in the fund at any given time.
And in the city of Tikrit, for example, nearly the entire population has
returned to the city of Tikrit. And overall in Iraq, we’ve liberated
about 50 percent of the territory from ISIL and more than 700,000 Iraqis
have returned to their homes in areas that ISIL used to control.
So we've used Brett McGurk to rescue floundering John Kerry's Wednesday remarks.
Wednesday, US Secretary of Defense Ash Carter spoke about the military aspects:
As I said earlier today, our coalition's military
campaign plan has three objectives. First, to destroy the ISIL parent
tumor in Iraq and Syria. That's necessary, but it's not sufficient. As
recent attacks remind us, ISIL safe havens threaten not only the lives
of Iraqi and Syrian people, but also the security of our own citizens.
And the sooner we defeat ISIL in Iraq and Syria, the safer our countries will be.
So our second objective is to
combat ISIL's metastasizes everywhere they emerge around the world. And
third, and most important, to help protect our homelands.
In January this year, we updated
our comprehensive coalition military campaign plan to accomplish the
military aspects of these three objectives. And we've pursued a number
of deliberate decisions and actions to accelerate this plan and hasten
ISIL's lasting defeat.
And since then, in play after play,
town after town, from every direction and in every domain, our campaign
has accelerated further, squeezing ISIL and rolling it back towards
Raqqah and Mosul. By isolating these two cities, we're effectively
setting the stage to collapse ISIL's control over them.
Thanks to the hard work and
sacrifice of our local partners and our service members, and more
contributions from the nations that met here today, we seized
opportunities, reinforced success, and taken the fight to the enemy.
But we're not going to rest.
Today, we reviewed and agreed on the next plays in our campaign, which
of course we won't discuss publicly yet, but let me be clear, they
culminate in the collapse of ISIL's control over the cities of Mosul and
Now, before I continue, I want to
say that we're aware of reports of civilian casualties that may be
related to recent coalition airstrikes near Manbij city in Syria, which
is one of the last junctions connecting Raqqah to the outside world.
We'll investigate these reports and continue to do all we can to
protect civilians from harm.
Being scrupulously careful to avoid
civilian casualties and being transparent about this issue is a
reflection of the civilized nature of this coalition.
Getting back to the future campaign
and the next plays, after detailing those next plays, we identified the
capabilities and the support required to execute those plays. Since
our first full defense ministerial in Brussels in February, our nations,
including the United States, have provided even more support to
accelerate the campaign, as our local partners have made advances.
But we're all going to need to do
more. For the United States' part, President Obama decided to deploy an
additional 560 troops to support the Iraqi security forces in their
offensive to retake Mosul. And on my visit to Iraq last week, where I
met with Prime Minister Abadi and Defense Minister Obaidi, who by the
way is here today and I was pleased to speak with him and he spoke to
the other ministers several times -- I offered to share some of our
hard-earned expertise in countering improvised explosive devices with
the Iraqi security forces.
In fact, the director of our joint
improvised threat defeat agency, Lieutenant General Mike Shields, is in
Baghdad today meeting with Iraqi officials to discuss this topic, a
pledge I made to Prime Minister Abadi last week.
Meanwhile, away from the meet-ups, a document the US government signed is in the news. Mustafa Saadoun (AL-MONITOR) reports
The military protocol agreement signed
July 12 between the Iraqi Kurdistan Regional Government and the United
States might create controversy in Iraq’s public and political circles,
especially those that do not have good relations with the United
States and are preparing to fight US forces if they step on Iraqi soil. According to officials in Kurdistan,
the agreement states that five US bases should be built in the Iraqi
Kurdistan Region areas of Erbil, Atrush, Harir, Dahuk and Sinjar.
Moreover, the United States vowed to pay the salaries of the Kurdish
peshmerga for 10 years, although this has not been confirmed by any US
Perhaps this agreement will give the peshmerga more autonomy and
international legitimacy, but at the same time it might create problems
with its counterparts in Iraq such as the predominately Shiite Popular Mobilization Units
(PMU) and the Sunni tribal forces. The agreement will allow the
peshmerga to equal the Iraqi army in strength and might provide it with
more arms and develop it further in the future. During the liberation of
Iraqi areas, clashes broke out between the peshmerga and forces from
the Iraqi army and the PMU, the last of which was in April in Tuz Khormato.
The PMU that are
close to Iran have increased in number and become better equipped, and
they are almost on par with the Iraqi army. They enjoy huge influence in
Iraq that might be greater than that of the Iraqi army. However, the tribal forces that constitute the Sunni version of the PMU do not have the same impact.
that US Ambassador to Iraq Stuart Jones told the network today that
Baghdad is fully aware of the agreement the US signed with the KRG. ALL IRAQ NEWS notes
that Jones has stated that the US has "no intention to set up bases" in the KRG. NATIONAL IRAQI NEWS explains
that the party of Shi'ite cleric and movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr is
calling for Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi to nominate ministers to
The agreement was signed 10 days after the KRG became the target of threats.
July 2nd, Adil Alsalmi and Dalshad Abdullah (ASHARQ AL-AWSAT) reported
Tension prevailed at the Kurdish frontier between Iran and Kurdistan
following the threat of General Hossein Salami, deputy chief of the
Revolutionary Guards Corps, to launch an attack on a wide scale.
Salami explicitly said that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps
(IRGC) will not hesitate to strike and destroy any region that threatens
the Iranian regime and hosts rebels.
Salami addressed top officials at Iraqi Kurdistan saying that
Kurdistan should abide by its pledges or else the military response will
be decisive. The General accused some of the countries in the region of
supporting Kurdish opposition parties and playing with fire.
Kurdish Democratic Party of Iran official Khalid Wanawsha told Asharq
Al-Awsat newspaper that the purpose of these threats is to exert
pressure on Iraqi Kurdistan but this will not falter the party’s strive
to gain the legitimate rights they are demanding.
Massoud Barzani is the President of the Kurdistan Regional Government.
That is what he Tweeted. Here is what was posted on his official website regarding the agreement:
Salahadin, Kurdistan Region of Iraq, (Krp.org)- President Masoud Barzani
received a United States military delegation headed by Ms. Elissa
Slotkin, the acting assistant Secretary of Defense for International
Security Affairs. This meeting was followed after a telephone
conversation between President Barzani and Mr. Ashton Carter, the U.S.
Secretary of Defense.
President Barzani and Ms. Slotkin discussed
the liberation of Mosul and the status of the preparations and
readiness from the U.S., Iraqi and Kurdistan Region perspectives.
President Barzani focused on the importance and urgency of the
liberation of Mosul and used the opportunity to reiterated his position
of the extreme importance of planning for post liberation Mosul.
Slotkin stated that the Peshmerga forces will play an essential role in
the Mosul operation just as they have played similar roles in other
operations against the terrorists of the Islamic State.
Barzani expressed his gratitude to the people and government of the
United States for their support to the Kurdistan Region and for leading
the collective effort to exterminate the terrorists of the Islamic
The meeting was attended by a number of military officials
from both the United States and the Kurdistan Region and a memorandum
of understanding on the military coordination between the Kurdistan
Region and the United States was signed. The acting Minister of
Peshmerga Affairs, Mr. Karim Sinjari and the the acting Assistant
Secretary of Defense of International Security Affairs were the two
signatories of the MoU.
The memorandum makes references to
military and financial support to the Peshmerga forces and also to some
of the details of the Mosul operation.
That makes no mention of bases -- which doesn't mean they're not in the agreement.
Nor does Jones' denial mean that the bases aren't in the agreement.
Meanwhile, WORLD BULLETIN reports
Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr on Thursday welcomed this week’s resignation
of seven government ministers, urging remaining cabinet members to
On Tuesday, Iraqi Prime Minister Haidar al-Abadi accepted the
resignation of six members of his government, including the ministers of
interior, industry, petroleum, transportation, housing and construction
and water resources.
The following day, Hussein al-Shahristani, minister of higher
education and scientific research, also resigned, leaving a total of
seven ministerial portfolios vacant.
In the United States, the Republican Party wrapped up their political
convention tonight with the party's nominee Donald Trump delivering a
speech -- a speech Stephen Collinson (CNN) notes
lasted "one hour and 15 minutes."
Gary Johnson is the presidential nominee for the Libertarian Party and this is from his Twitter feed: