Obama Drones On 193

Four more years of drone killings, Guantanamo, crazy FBI agent provocateur plots, whistleblower prosecutions and surveillance of citizens were going to come whoever won. Goldman Sachs funded both candidates royally. I probably prefer the slightly tempered or disguised neo-con to the red meat neo-con, but let nobody pretend it makes a vast difference.

A respected retired African President told me last week that George Bush did more for Africa than Obama. Amazingly, I believe that to be true; whatever his motives, a number of Bush initiatives pumped real money into useful African infrastructure. Obama’s relations with Africa have almost entirely revolved around location of military bases.

Perspective changes as you move around the globe.

193 thoughts on “Obama Drones On

1 5 6 7
  • Ben Franklin (head honcho CIA Office for Craig Murray Operations)

    “It seems that members of the Obama Admiration Society have been wading in here overnight.”

    More like perspicacious observers, Mary. Some people just want to whine and point fingers; others wish to understand the complexity, and study the peripherals, before making wide-ranging pronouncements of self-righteous indignation.

  • amre

    Saw u tried drawing Craig’s attention to the collapsed shopping cntre in accra, Ghana. I read from one of the websites is that the occupants of the building had turned the top floor into warehouse when infact it was NOT built for the purpose. th

    The idea of there been a engineering fault is little cause of the whole collapse. the Incompetent Mayor of the city was heard calling for the pulling down of the rest of the owner’s other buildings because he ‘didnt’ attin permit for the building.

    Since Craig you are in GHana can u give us updates/.

    On RObama, there’s no difference between them….either we bomb you NOW or Tommorrow, but then YOU HAVE TO BOMBED……..

  • glenn

    So sorry too, Komodo, not just about your rather idiotic bigotry against cyclists, but that you feel entitled to make it personal and be unpleasant for no other reason. It goes without saying you know nothing about my riding habits, my attire and so on, yet feel free to loose a stream of childish insults. That says vastly more about you than it does about me.

    As it happens, my main interest is motorbikes. Motorcyclists generally have a jaundiced view of the attitudes and practices of many car drivers, because they cause them serious accidents at virtually no risk to the car driver. Cyclists are even more at risk, because they lack the speed to get ahead of danger, are constantly being overtaken as if it were a god-given right/imperative, and lack the heavy safety clothing. I would not think this entitles me to insult everyone who drives a car.

    But that’s by-the-by, it’s clear you prefer school-yard name calling (“Lycra-clad twat arsehole”, etc.) to any genuine discussion.

    We’ve both learned something. I’m a cyclist at times, so you now know I’m a “Lycra-clad twat arsehole”. And now I know a bit more about you.

  • Villager


    “And now I know a bit more about you.”

    And so do we all. Glenn your balanced responses reflect a maturity that one would like to assume here, in a blog like this. But unfortunately that is not the case. It baffles me how (apparently otherwise) intelligent people can stoop so low with language my teenager son would not use, at the drop of a pin, when someone simply disagrees with them. Its like crapping in public, to me. Shameful, disgraceful and anything but clever, which i think is their motivation.

    Thank you for your high standards. I have some sympathy with “Lycra-clad twat arsehole(s)” that had not been aroused earlier.

    I’m for “Keep this website clean”.

  • glenn

    Thanks Villager… not speaking about Komodo here, but it is a shame that genuine discussions between people who’ve been around, and should presumably show a little respect to each other, can’t happen in – as you say – a forum like this. It’s like someone feels entitled to throw their glass on the floor and spit at another, when this is supposed to be a respectable establishment.

    Heck, someone can call me what they like – one shouldn’t get upset about receiving anonymous insults if they’re going to get online. But it is a sorry thing to see at times, because you might feel we hang around here to see a higher standard. Mostly, it doesn’t disappoint at all – you expect no better from some, and enough others provide a perspective well worth considering.

    In points of disagreement, we have something to become interested in – and it becomes much more significant the longer that we’ve been regarding their perspectives. I’d like to discuss it, not just state a view!

    For instance, Mary – for who I have great respect – sees Obama’s re-election as no cause for any optimism at all, in fact it was treated as “bad news day”. I like to discuss that sort of thing, and refine my own thoughts given the opportunity of that interaction. That’s the purpose of this site, for me.

  • Mary


    New Figures: Almost 1,500 US/UK Drone Strikes in Afghanistan Since 2009

    New information about the number of US drone strikes in Afghanistan has been revealed by DangerRoom, the national security blog at Wired.com. According to official US figures supplied to the website there have been a total of 1,160 US drone strikes in Afghanistan since the beginning of 2009. (Note each ‘weapon released’ is counted by the military as a strike; in press reports often several weapons releases at a single location are counted as a single ‘strike’.) This is not the overall total number of US drone strikes as figures have only been given from the beginning of 2009, while US drones have been operating in Afghanistan for several years before that. (Mike D Medialens)

  • Ben Franklin (head honcho CIA Office for Craig Murray Operations)

    “It’s like someone feels entitled to throw their glass on the floor and spit at another, when this is supposed to be a respectable establishment.”

    Not wading in on the specifics, Glenn, but I would much rather be discussing a contentious point within boundaries, as you describe. If something offensive is written by someone you know to be reasonable, it’s easier to overlook. What I can’t stand is pyromania. You know, the folks who just want to arouse emotions for personal titillation, then stand back and lustfully watch the flames?

    A pyro is a bad maniac.

  • Mary


    From part one of the interview:

    Well, one, I think that it’s morally obscene and spiritually profane to spend $6 billion on an election, $2 billion on a presidential election, and not have any serious discussion—poverty, trade unions being pushed against the wall dealing with stagnating and declining wages when profits are still up and the 1 percent are doing very well, no talk about drones dropping bombs on innocent people. So we end up with such a narrow, truncated political discourse, as the major problems—ecological catastrophe, climate change, global warming. So it’s very sad. I mean, I’m glad there was not a right-wing takeover, but we end up with a Republican, a Rockefeller Republican in blackface, with Barack Obama, so that our struggle with regard to poverty intensifies.

1 5 6 7

Comments are closed.