Skip to content

Month: June 2014

Glenn Beck falls back on the racist failure condition of the neoconservative, by @DavidOAtkins

Glenn Beck falls back on the racist failure condition of the neoconservative

by David Atkins

Glenn Beck has come to the conclusion that liberals were right about Iraq because those damned Iraqi savages just don’t want freedom, after all:

“In spite of the things I felt at the time when we went into war, liberals said, ‘We shouldn’t get involved, we shouldn’t nation-build and there was no indication the people of Iraq had the will to be free,’” Beck said. “I thought that was insulting at the time. Everybody wants to be free.”
On Tuesday, Beck admitted, “You cannot force democracy on the Iraqis or anybody else, it doesn’t work. They don’t understand it or even really want it.”

As Naomi Klein discussed at length in the Shock Doctrine, this is the standard modern imperial playbook: smash and grab for resources and corporate gain, pretend it’s about freedom, and then when the locals get angry and everything turns to chaos, claim that there’s something culturally wrong with the people that they just don’t understand freedom. The same playbook was run after American corporate-backed intervention led to fascist juntas in South America. The same rhetorical games were played after the fall of the Soviet Union–those Ruskies just didn’t appreciate freedom, it was said. And now we see the same game in Iraq.

The reality is that people around the world are all the same. We have the same physiology, the same neurology, the same almost everything. We have the same natural inclinations toward violence and greed and prejudice. Every society has sociopaths in its midst who try to take advantage of people. And yes, we all do yearn for freedom: freedom from want, from pain, from sickness, from forced ignorance, and from oppression.

Also, there are things we can do to help people achieve those freedoms. Not supporting and propping up dictatorial regimes would be a good start. Not using corporate power to exploit people would be helpful. Not attempting to foist evil economic libertarian regimes on countries with strong safety nets would be useful, too. Creating stronger institutions of international law and more strident international enforcement of conventions on human rights would be another.

And when corrupt, brutal dictators exploit their people in spite of it all, truly international pressure to remove those dictators peacefully can be applied sparingly. Under the very worst case scenarios, regime change may be necessary–but there’s no reason anyone but the dictator’s immediate friends and family be endangered by that in those very rare cases.

What you cannot do is bomb an entire country to smithereens, brutalize its people, break down all its institutions to create an Objectivist experiment, conduct mass profiteering, and install a corrupt puppet regime and hope to “succeed.” That will not work. That will certainly engender hatred and encourage extremism.

.

Oh heck, we just don’t know who to kill

Oh heck, we just don’t know who to kill

by digby

Huh:

As Baghdad awaits Barack Obama’s decision on air strikes against the jihadist army conquering much of Iraq, the senior US military officer suggested that the US still lacks sufficient intelligence to take action.

Army general Martin Dempsey, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, told a Senate panel on Wednesday that “until we can clarify this intelligence picture” the US would have difficulty knowing who it would be attacking from the air, indicating military as well as political reluctance to any return to the skies above Iraq.

“It’s not as easy as looking at an iPhone video of a convoy and then striking it,” Dempsey told a Senate appropriations subcommittee as he and defense secretary Chuck Hagel focused far more on the limits of what the US can accomplish in Iraq than the possibilities. Both sounded far less urgent than Iraqi leaders.

Dempsey, who once commanded the training of the Iraqi military and police, cited the case of an Iraqi army facility in Mosul falling first to the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (Isis) and then to the Kurdish peshmerga quasi-army within a 36-hour timeframe, raising doubts about the ability of the US air force or navy aviators to sufficiently know who they would be striking by the time of their arrival.

The good news is that the government can instantly locate every one of your postings to that medical marijuana message board for the last couple of years. So there’s that.

This does raise another question, but I’m not sure it really matters to any of those who call for military involvement at the drop of a hat: does it really matter who we hit with our aerial bombardment and drone strikes? It doesn’t seem to have mattered much in the past …

And anyway, I think it’s mostly supposed to be a mechanism for us to show how shockingly awesome we are — you know, to “send a message” (our most important weapon — at least according to all of our national security and foreign policy wonks.) Nothing says, “don’t fuck with us” like indiscriminate killing, amirite?

It seems to me, this is a perfect situation to make some really acidic lemonade out of sour lemons. The sooner we can show the world, once again, that we have a military machine like no other, we can go back to doing what we really do best — ineffectually searching for a needle in a haystack by spying on innocent people.

.

QOTD part II by tristero

QOTD Part II

by tristero

Nutritionist Marion Nestle:

“There really isn’t much better dietary advice than eating your veggies, exercising and limiting calories,” she said. “People just seem to like making eating difficult for themselves.”

Adding: Mark Bittman explains that there is no money to be made in eating well. And also repeats another great Nestle quote:

A slightly-better-for-you junk food is still junk food.

Yep. I can still recall the disbelief on my daughter’s face when I tried to explain that organic lemonade was not health food but merely a treat. Organic added sugar is, first and foremost, added sugar.

The lying liars are lying again. And the hawks are following. Again.

The lying liars are lying again.  And the hawks are following. Again.

by digby

My piece in Salon today is about the lying liars who got us into Iraq. Actually, it’s about one specific liar: Paul Wolfowitz. And he’s still lying:

[T]he recent events in Iraq have brought some of those players back into the limelight as media outlets inexplicably look to them for “expert” commentary. (If the story is about how one deals with the burden of being so devastatingly wrong, then I suppose it might make sense.) Wolfowitz has been one of the more ubiquitous of these ignominious experts, in the last few days appearing on several programs to talk about what the U.S. should be doing in Iraq. But considering the history of lies with which he is so closely affiliated, this comment was of particular note:

Wolfowitz argued on both programs that the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria and other militants in Iraq should be referred to as Al Qaeda-linked groups, saying that the use of terms like “ISIS” and “Sunni and Shia” doesn’t appropriately signify the urgency of the situation for the American people.

You’ll note that he doesn’t acknowledge that the designations ISIS and “Sunni and Shia” are correct terms. He is giving propaganda advice: if you want to convey the urgency of the situation you must link this current activity to al-Qaida. It’s déjà vu all over again.

And just as it was in 2003, when the Bush administration used this same “sense of urgency” to rush the nation into an unnecessary war, Paul Wolfowitz is going on television and telling people they should do it again. And once again, it’s a lie.

Read on to see who is taking his propaganda advice.

Yes, they are taking his propaganda advice. But then, when you think about it, why wouldn’t they?  It worked the first time didn’t it?  And nobody has paid a price for being found out.  In fact,  they are still the first people the media call on for “expert” commentary.

Update: And let’s not forget the Humanitarian Hawks. They’re all excited too:

Enough force to remind all parties that we can, from the air, see and retaliate against not only Al Qaeda members, whom our drones track for months, but also any individuals guilty of mass atrocities and crimes against humanity. Enough force to compel governments and rebels alike to the negotiating table. And enough force to create a breathing space in which decent leaders can begin to consolidate power.

Isn’t it pretty to think so? Except in the real world it would be nice if we could point to even one example where that has happened. And where the risk of the whole thing being an epic cock-up like the Iraq war doesn’t have a 99% probability.

.

One of these men is president. The other is not. There’s a good reason for that. by @DavidOAtkins

One of these men is president. The other is not. There’s a good reason for that.

by David Atkins

As we watch the media continue to ask advice from the same stumbling fools and heartless knaves who planned and executed the invasion of Iraq, it’s important to remember a couple of key facts:

1) Barack Obama defeated Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary in large part because he opposed the war from the beginning, while Clinton refused to apologize for her vote.

2) Barack Obama defeated John McCain in large part because McCain continued to celebrate the invasion of Iraq and seemed eager to bomb Iran.

Cue the latest poll:

More Americans agree with President Barack Obama’s views on Iraq than those of Sen. John McCain, a new poll says. 

According to a Public Policy Polling survey released Tuesday, 54 percent of voters say they agree more with the president on Iraq, compared with 28 percent who said they agree more with McCain.

Why are we asking Republicans and hawks how to handle Iraq again?

.

Benghazi and the Right’s post-effort media operation, by @DavidOAtkins

Benghazi is a distraction from Benghazi

by David Atkins

So, this happened:

After months and months of fake investigations and fake outrage over Benghazi, the mastermind (if you call him that) responsible for the attack is in custody after an efficient and professional military operation.

Remember that every single issue since then has been called a “distraction from Benghazi.”

So the reaction from the Right to the capture? It’s a “distraction.”

A distraction to…help Hillary Clinton’s book tour. No, really.

Also, it’s the only Benghazi story that Fox News doesn’t think is a bombshell.

I will say this for the Bush-Cheney-Rove operation: they did seem to have a crack media team that actually gave a damn. These people just don’t. It’s not the post-truth media environment. It’s the post-effort media environment.

They know their base is lazy and completely uninformed, they know they’ve lost what little is left of the middle, and they’ve stopped caring what kind of slop gets thrown at the rubes. If the rubes are dumb enough to believe that oil company spokespeople know more about climate change than climate scientists, they’ll believe that capturing the Benghazi mastermind was orchestrated to promote Hillary’s book tour. Why not?

.

What ever happened to those 5 million missing Bush White House emails anyway?

What ever happened to those 5 million missing Bush White House emails anyway?

by digby

My Salon piece today is about the latest right wing hysteria comparing the missing Lois Lerner IRS emails to Nixon’s 18 minute gap. The wingnuts have a very selective memory about missing emails and erased tapes. You don’t have to go back 40 years …

It’s also interesting how soon these conservative commentators forget a more recent “missing email” scandal. Remember that time when the Bush White House couldn’t provide years worth of emails from the office of the President and Vice President involving Scooter Libby and kept it secret for years until it was finally forced to admit that the emails were destroyed and they hadn’t kept a back-up? Apparently Krauthamer and company forgot about that. (You’d think his colleague at Fox would remind him — she was the presidential press secretary at the time and the official who finally admitted publicly that they didn’t have the missing emails.) They also forgot about that time when the Bush administration couldn’t turn over emails in the US Attorney scandal because they had failed to follow the law and conduct government business on government email servers and had instead used private RNC email addresses.

And then there was this:

A videotape showing Pentagon officials’ final interrogation of al-Qaeda suspect Jose Padilla is missing, raising questions about whether federal prosecutors have lost other recordings and evidence in the case…

Prosecutors and the Pentagon have said they cannot find the tape despite an intensive search.

But hey, that’s nothing to the horror of a Tea Partier having to fill out some extra tax forms.

Meanwhile, as the right fulminates over some missing IRS emails, it’s clear that nobody is concerned about this:

At the time that the Central Intelligence Agency destroyed videotapes of the interrogations of operatives of Al Qaeda, a federal judge was still seeking information from Bush administration lawyers about the interrogation of one of those operatives, Abu Zubaydah, according to court documents made public on Wednesday.

The court documents, filed in the case of Zacarias Moussaoui, appear to contradict a statement last December by Gen. Michael V. Hayden, the C.I.A. director, that when the tapes were destroyed in November 2005 they had no relevance to any court proceeding, including Mr. Moussaoui’s criminal trial.

More here with bonus hot sexy Nixon action.

GOP generosity

GOP generosity

by digby

This makes shockingly good sense:

Late Monday, Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee outlined their $48.3 billion package, including over $3 billion for refugee accounts. And Senate Democrats are expected to provide in the same range when they mark up their version of the annual appropriations bill on Tuesday.

In his own 2015 budget in March, President Barack Obama requested just $2 billion for refugee assistance — a one-third cut from what had been enacted in January for 2014. But the Appropriations leadership is clearly uncomfortable with this approach and wants more available, given Syria’s bloody civil war and the spreading turmoil in Iraq.

Personally, I think we should appropriate far more to refugee aid (and take the money from unnecessary military spending) but it’s good to see that the Republicans aren’t so selfishly insane that instead of cutting these funds they are at least keeping the appropriations at the same level they are today.

But like a lot of Americans I can’t help thinking that while we must help these refugees we could at least have extended unemployment benefits for Americans too. It’s not that they are in as dire a situation as refugees, but the fact is that this wealthy, prosperous nation can walk and chew gum at the same time. If it wants to. It just doesn’t.

I’ll be surprised if this doesn’t bubble up on hate radio. If there’s one thing the far right really hates it’s foreign aid of any kind. Just look at what they’re saying about those poor little kids who are coming over our border. At the very least they’re going to demand to pick the “winners and losers” of the refugee lottery. They are very picky about which human beings are worthy of being allowed to live.

.