The Tony Blair House Journal (editor Alan Rusbridger) reports on Kanye West’s disgusting private performance for the Kazakh dictator and his family, and takes a sideswipe at David Cameron for visiting that country.
But peculiarly they fail to mention that Tony Blair receives US $4 million a year as a consultant to the worker murdering Kazakh dictator, and that Alistair Campbell and Jonathon Powell as well as Blair visit to give this support – which has included a behind the scenes campaign to help Nazarbaev win the Nobel Peace Prize, fortunately with no result to date.
We were told there was no point to UN inspections, since evidence degrades quickly. So where did the US acquire the irrefutable evidence of Sarin?
It doesn’t degrade that quickly, and its breakdown compounds are pretty diagnostic. The US was trying to sidestep the UN, of course. And it lied.
@ nevermind 4 Sep, 2013 – 9:04 am “Looks like Putin is bending, today’s comments, on R4, moot that if the evidence is overwhelmingly pointing to Assad using CW’s that Russia might come on board.”
Reading his remarks on RT, nothing’s changed; he claims there is no overwhelming evidence, so he’s calling on US, if it has such evidence, to present it to UN, and without UN authorization US would act illegally.
McCain will have to add a chant to his repertoire. To ‘Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran’ add ‘Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Syria’.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-zoPgv_nYg
Ghastly old warmonger. He and his kind could and should be addressing the poverty of the citizens in their countries. Here in the UK nearly one fifth of workers are paid less than the living wage. Same elsewhere probably.
http://www.theinformationdaily.com/2012/10/29/fifth-of-uk-workers-paid-less-than-living-wage-says-kpmg
Donald Couldn’t believe the bit about playing poker.
‘Tis true I see.
‘Senator McCain is a strong supporter of taking military action against Syria.
He has given President Barack Obama his conditional support ahead of the upcoming vote in Congress, but said any strikes must be “more robust” than previously thought.’
http://news.sky.com/story/1136820/john-mccain-plays-poker-at-syria-hearing
Where is the garlic and the sharp pointed stake? He just won’t lie down,.
McCain, Mary, is evil personified. Thanks God he never made president. The Zionist bankers would have strung him out on the like a marionette. It would be a fearfully appalling sideshow.
Oscar Wilde had some pretty good advice long before the blogosphere came into existence.
“Where ignorance is bliss, ’tis folly to be wise.”
If you want a little bliss ignore the shower of shills. Let them share their crass ignorance and toadyism amongst themselves. Nevertheless I am not for banning their comments however ignorant, inane or mundane. Since they never listen to sound advice from now on I am skipping over certain contributors and advise others to do likewise. Blessings for bliss.
‘strung him out on the stage’ it should have read.
‘He played a few hands under the table’ its says about McCain during the hearing. They should have left him to rot in Vietnam, the man’s a career squaddie and a menace.
Two years on in a land blessed with freedom and democracy after a dose of moral bombing …
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/special-report-we-all-thought-libya-had-moved-on–it-has-but-into-lawlessness-and-ruin-8797041.html
beyond depressing…can’t someone overhtrow these people?
Guardian: US draft resolution allows Obama 90 days for military action against Syria
Senate foreign relations committee agrees on attacks while ruling out ground troops as president’s push for action against Assad regime gathers momentum in Congress
In Washington, key members of Congress swung behind the administration on Tuesday. At the senate foreign relations committee, Kerry and the defence secretary Chuck Hagel were pressed hard to clarify the role of ground forces, but got an otherwise sympathetic reception…
The House of Representatives, where Obama is likely to get a rougher ride, begins its deliberations with a public hearing on Wednesday. Full votes before the Senate and House are expected on Monday.
Sceptical Republicans appeared to have been won over by tougher rhetoric from the White House. For the first time, Obama portrayed his plans for US military action in Syria as part of a broader strategy to topple Bashar al-Assad…
So far, the tougher US rhetoric does not seem to have deterred Democrats who back the president’s call for military action on humanitarian grounds…
For nearly three hours of the subsequent Senate committee hearing the only voices speaking against intervention were those of anti-war campaigners repeatedly ejected by security staff. When senators Rand Paul and Tom Udall eventually began more hostile questioning of Kerry, he brushed it off by asking them to consider what Syria’s response might be to a US decision not to strike. “I guarantee you there would be further chemical attacks,” Kerry told Paul.
The administration received crucial backing from chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, General Martin Dempsey, who had recently been openly sceptical of the merits of US military intervention. Dempsey said the evidence of alleged Syrian chemical weapons use had changed his mind.
But Kerry was forced to backtrack after appearing to acknowledge that US ground troops could become involved under certain scenarios…
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/04/syria-strikes-draft-resolution-90-days
If you want a little bliss ignore the shower of shills. Let them share their crass ignorance and toadyism amongst themselves. Nevertheless I am not for banning their comments however ignorant, inane or mundane. Since they never listen to sound advice from now on I am skipping over certain contributors and advise others to do likewise. Blessings for bliss.
Seconded, John, except that the Krishnamurky offering, whether it’s a genuine and persistent antisemite or just designed to look like one, is contrary to Craig’s stated (several times) policy. (Interesting that the excrescences never engage with that poster, isn’t it?)
I was about to ask what our hottest celebrities are advising on Syria. It’s important to know before making an informed decision.
A comment on DM: “Oh they’ve rolled out angelina jolie, we must attack Syria know now they’ve pulled that card. The Jolie card is a bit like the polar bear card for climate change.
Now it will be a scramble for others of fame defending mindless war on behalf of refugees.
“But Kerry was forced to backtrack after appearing to acknowledge that US ground troops could become involved under certain scenarios…”
Évidemment.
The idea is to get some/any sort of authorisation (but crucially, not UN authorisation) and mission creep will do the rest. The object of the exercise is régime change in Syria, and they’ll go for it no matter how illegal it is. No matter what lies they have to spout to get there. No matter how many people they kill when they do get there. How many mutilated bodies? How many orphaned children? How much infrastructure destroyed? How many more refugees than there are now?
Iraq all over again. Libya all over again. And what sort of a mess will Syria be in when it’s over?
But of course Gen. Wesley Clark warned us, didn’t he.
That was 2007. And there’s another interesting bit:
http://news.rapgenius.com/General-wesley-clark-seven-countries-in-five-years-lyrics
My heart is not in it today. Not even in posting on Twitter. Not even in reading the blather from Washington.
He said, “I guess it’s like we don’t know what to do about terrorists, but we’ve got a good military and we can take down governments.” And he said, “I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail.”
I can’t get my head around the US fighting on the same side as Al Qaeda.
The following article from The Long War Journal raises vital questions of direction:
Still more questions about the proposed US military intervention in Syria
By BILL ROGGIO AND LISA LUNDQUISTSeptember 2, 2013 11:36 AM
Read more: http://www.longwarjournal.org/threat-matrix/archives/2013/09/still_more_questions_about_the.php#ixzz2durVpSVy
Extract:
“The US is also being pressured by allies Israel, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and South Korea, among others, to move forward with the planned military intervention. Their reasons include concerns that a US failure to enforce a “red line” against the use of chemical weapons in Syria now may signal weakness to Iran and North Korea, encouraging them further.
With the momentum building for the proposed US intervention, despite setbacks including the UK Parliament’s vote against intervention, and a failure by the Arab League to clearly endorse such action, it is time to ask some hard questions:
1. The administration is convinced that the Syrian regime used chemical weapons, and President Obama said military force is necessary. But the administration has not articulated a policy towards Syria. What outcome does the administration hope to obtain by conducting strikes?
2. Despite claims to the contrary, does the administration seek to overthrow the Assad regime? Does it seek to deny the regime the ability to launch future chemical attacks? Or does it wish to punish the regime, and launch attacks as part of a deterrent?
If the US seeks to overthrow the government, or if as a result of the strikes the rebel forces are able to sufficiently capitalize on the intervention to succeed in overthrowing the regime, who moves in to govern Syria? Some policy analysts believe the Free Syrian Army and the overarching Syrian Opposition Council are effective partners. But as we have documented numerous times at LWJ, the FSA and SOC often collude with al Qaeda’s affiliates and other Islamist groups [see LWJ report, Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant leads charge to take Syrian airport.]
3. How would overthrowing the government effectively secure Syria’s stockpiles of chemical weapons? Is the US willing to send tens of thousands of troops into Syria to secure those stockpiles, which are thought to be stored in numerous locations? Keep in mind that a recent declassified intelligence assessment said that the US has lost track of said weapons. And back in early May, the Daily Beast reported that “the Syrian military has transferred more and more of its stock of sarin and mustard gas from storage sites to trucks where they are being moved around the country,” and as a result “the U.S. military and intelligence community are quietly acknowledging that the United States does not know where many of those weapons are located.”
The US will have few, if any, partners to occupy Syria; Britain isn’t even willing to conduct airstrikes. And what happens when al Qaeda and other Islamist groups begin attacking US forces?
4. If the US seeks to deny the Assad regime the ability to launch future chemical strikes, but is unwilling to overthrow the regime, occupy the country, and physically secure the weapons, just how would an air campaign achieve this? The attacks in Damascus were launched with mortars and rockets. Does the administration believe it can take out every small platform in Syria?
5. If the US intervention seeks to punish the regime in the hope that a “body blow” will deter it from launching another attack, what happens if the Assad regime is undeterred? What if the regime actually views the US’s airstrikes and unwillingness to commit ground forces as a sign of weakness?
6. What is the US plan for the not-so-implausible scenario that rebel forces, and in particular those associated with al Qaeda, have already procured and possibly used chemical weapons in Syria?
7. What is the US plan for the likelihood that a strike on Syria, which is already the site of a proxy war, ignites a regional war, as the various parties seek to retaliate?
8. If the US intends to attack the Assad regime, is it not important that the US have a clear case for intervention? Despite claims by American, French, and British officials that the evidence is clear and compelling for their accusation that the Assad regime is to blame for the Aug. 21 chemical attack, intelligence reports released by the governments of the US, the UK, and France have all relied essentially on circumstantial evidence.”
Recommend read the whole article
Read more: http://www.longwarjournal.org/threat-matrix/archives/2013/09/still_more_questions_about_the.php#ixzz2dus6m67V
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RC1Mepk_Sw
Dreoilin: “My heart is not in it today. Not even in posting on Twitter. Not even in reading the blather from Washington.”
Dreo, this is where meditation comes in. When one feels helpless, the only one one can help is oneself. Else it can meddle with our hearts/inner intelligence. I understand how you feel.
“My heart is not in it today. Not even in posting on Twitter. Not even in reading the blather from Washington.”
Dreolin, I feel the same and the gastro enteritis does not help. Trying to post stuff between sips of Diorilyte and hasty walks to the bog, too much information I hear people scream, just makes this whole sordid US aggression something hard to manage.
heads up, there is always someone who is worse off, Jordan has hardly enough water for its own residents, now they got approx. 2 million refugees, half of them children, the conditions must be impossible.
I only mention water because its what keeps us sane, and a nice walk along a new country lane might do the trick, somewhere you have never been… hope you feel better soon.
Agent Cameron has his little chopper out. The first of the No voters has got the chop. Many more to follow according to Robinson.
Tory MP Jesse Norman sacked as adviser over Syria vote
Breaking news
Conservative MP Jesse Norman has been sacked as a government adviser after abstaining in last week’s vote on military intervention in Syria.
Downing Street said it was “sad” to be losing Mr Norman, a member of the No 10 policy board.
~~
Agent Cameron opened PMQs by offering fawning congratulations to the royal couple of the birth of their sprog. Mil(l)ipede concurred.
s/be No voters and abstainers, the latter either accidental or deliberate!
Craig’s friend Ray McGovern writes:
August 27th, 2013 5:37 PM
The Broader Stakes of Syrian Crisis
By Ray McGovern
Amid the increased likelihood that President Barack Obama will cave in to pressure from foreign policy hawks to “Libya-ize” Syria and to accord Syrian President Bashar al-Assad the same treatment meted out to Libya’s Col. Muammar Gaddafi, the main question is WHY? Obviously, there is concern about the human rights catastrophe in Syria, but is the main target Syria’s main ally, Iran, as many suspect?
Surely, the objective has got to be more than simply giving Secretary of State John Kerry a chance to brag, in the manner of his predecessor, Hillary Clinton, regarding Gaddafi, “We came, we saw, he died.” And, there is little expectation – however many Cruise missiles the United States fires at Syrian targets in a fury over disputed claims about chemical weapons – that lives are likely to be saved.
So, what are Iran’s new leaders likely to see as the real driving force behind Obama’s felt need to acquiesce, again, in a march of folly? And why does it matter?
/..
http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/mike-friends-blog/broader-stakes-syrian-crisis
@ John Goss,
I fully agree with you. No banning of nobody. If necessary I can either choose to deal with or completely ignore forum members, but banning, now way. Once you start, where will you end?
Off topic, by unpopular demand.
Rubbaduck has a request. It is (inter much alia) that we discuss
– the persecution of Tamils in Sri Lanka
That would be the genocide and breach of international law by a government to which the West very proactively flogged weapons, rather than deciding to support the Tamils and do some regime change in Colombo? The regime being spun and lobbied for by Bell Pottinger? Or would it be anti-Western to point that out? See multiple blog entries on Liam Fox, Adam Werritty, passim.
As usual, pffft.
So it wants to discuss Sri Lanka, why I wonder, could it be that he ‘expects.’
Not failing to assess the close advisor’s of this ‘slow genocide’ ending in a turkey shoot on the beaches of kalmunai.
http://electronicintifada.net/content/israel-advises-sri-lanka-slow-motion-genocide/12644
Just so it has something to look at and understands that this massacre was planned and prepared by those who understand genocide from their own experiences, there is a little video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BeDmZFrqeG4
Off course the BBC then would call it a ‘mystery massacre’. what else could they have done to support Israel.
@ Dreoilin.
Meditate on Social liberalism!
One day soon the warmongering Hawks may become beautiful butterflies.
Kind words Mary. Addresing poverty.
That is a good aim.
Freedland is a tosser. Is Obama really wracked by indecision because he is afraid of starting wars, or is he instead stunned that the public haven’t swallowed the latest lie and that the UK, the trusted sidekick, isn’t riding shotgun as a public relations figleaf for this neocon war? Obama is desparate for Congressional support precisely because he doesn’t have public or UK support. If none of us are allowed to speculate, that’s just as likely (or unlikely) as Freedland’s guff.
In today’s ‘Guardian’ column, Freedland also forgets to mention that chemical warfare has been carried out in Fallujah and Gaza, and when he wrote that Obama was more hawkish on Iranian nukes “for his own reasons” I really had to laugh out loud. For his own reasons! No mention of AIPAC and Israel.
Freedland also said the weapons promised to the Syrian rebels three months ago hadn’t arrived. How the fuck does he know? What did he expect — a ticker tape send off from New York?
Perhaps he should be more concerned about arming the heart-eating crazies (even though Bibi’s having wet dreams about this prospect right now). That would be a perfect excuse for Israel to create a “buffer zone” right up to the Litani River, as it has been wanting to do for years.
Also no mention in the column of a possible tussle with Russia as a reason not to go to war. Ah well, that’s just a minor detail.
Thanks Villager. Yes, some time out today, I think.
Nevermind, thank you too. I didn’t know you had gastro enteritis. What a horrible dose! I do hope you recover quickly. (Diorilyte is not much fun either …)
Indeed. I could be in Jordan, or Syria. Whereas I’m here with all the usual Western home comforts – and plenty of water DG. I’ll chin up and carry on. Back later.
“I can’t get my head around the US fighting on the same side as Al Qaeda.” Villager,11:16am, today.
Well, it’s normative as a tactical alliance. Think of Afghanistan/Pakistan during the 1980s. And of Egypt under Nasser and US/UK support for the Muslim Brotherhood. And think too of Lawrence ‘of Arabia’ and regressive elements in Afghanistan in the late 1920s (and of course his WW1 sojourn in the Levant and the Arabian peninsula. And so on. And at root, think of the strategic alliance with Saudi Arabia, whence the Jihadist nutters get their bread, butter and bullets (?and sarin). I’m not at all surprised. It is expected. The fight against the Taliban (but for the Islamist ‘Northern Alliance’) was/is a peculiar aberration – turning the inevitable Jihadist blowback into profit for the big boys.
Normally, the USA/UK are allies of Islamist paramilitary death squads, except when the latter get out-of-line, of course. Now, they are back in line, so that their tactical, if not strategic, interests wrt the region coincide with those of the USA/UK/Israel/Saudi Arabia et al., albeit with different political end-points. But in the interim, there will be Sunni Islamist hegemony (led by Saudi Arabia, which imagines it can control and direct the death squads forever) in the context of balkanisation, a series of states with weak central governments and, ultimately, the partition of Iran or at least severe dilution of Iran’s regional influence.
Get well soon Nevermind. Plenty of fluids as you know. Not a good time to be laid low in this heat and humidity which was 74%here earlier. The temp is now 26C.
In Damascus it is 33C with low humidity, and in Gaza (Rafah) 28C with medium humidity. We know about their water supply difficulties.
I’m sure Israel will let Gaza have some water, Mary, if and when it steals the Litani River.
The shape of things to come in our prisons. Four to be closed and one new one to be built in Wrexham for 2,000 prisoners. Super Max style? Privatised? Probably.
‘The closures mean 1,400 prison places will be lost in England and Wales while the new £250m prison in Wrexham will hold more than 2,000 inmates.’
I think it will not be the easiest place to reach for relatives and friends to visit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrexham#Transport
NuLabour proposed Titan prisons and then turned them down.
”Giant warehouses’
Prisons in numbers
83,632 – the prison population in England and Wales
90,451 – the maximum population it can hold, known as the operational capacity
Six years – until the prison system reaches capacity
1,600 – net prison places set to be lost under plans coming into effect this year, including new house blocks on four existing sites
Source: Ministry of Justice
The concept of super prisons is nothing new. A £2.9bn proposal for three 2,500-capacity “Titan” jails was considered and then scrapped by Labour in 2009.
Andrew Coyle, University of Essex emeritus professor of prison studies and a former governor of Brixton Prison, has “a real feeling of déjà vu” about the latest plan.
He points out that while in opposition, Conservative minister Dominic Grieve criticised Labour’s prison proposals as akin to building “giant warehouses”.’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20972550 January 2013
They tried it before Mike. Almost forgotten now. Look at the comparative numbers of deaths.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Litani