Chelsea Manning Adds a Glow to the Day 279


I cannot tell you how delighted I am that Chelsea Manning is going to be released. Having done so much to reveal the truly sordid nature on the ground of the USA’s neo-Imperial aggression, Manning is a true hero. It is a shame that Obama is forcing her to undergo another five months of a truly hellish prison sentence, but still there is now an end in sight.

All of which adds to the mystery of Obama. He launched the most vicious War on Whistleblowers ever in American history. Obama’s people even went for whistleblowers like Bill Binney and Tom Drake of the NSA, whose whistleblowing happened pre-Obama but who Bush had not sought to persecute. So freeing a whistleblower is the least likely act of clemency to be expected.

Of course this all feeds in to the question of whether Obama is a good man frustrated or a charlatan all along, as a tick in the good man frustrated column. I still tend to the man with decent instincts who at the end of the day didn’t care enough to really fight for them.

The other good news is that Abdel Hakim Belhadj has been granted permission by the Supreme Court to sue Jack Straw and Mark Allen for his extraordinary rendition and torture. The unanimous dismissal of the argument of sovereign immunity is extremely important, as it rolls back the assertion that we have no protection from the state.

It is worth recalling Jack Straw lying through his teeth to the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee on 24 October 2005. Every single statement on the substantive issues which Straw makes here is now known to be an outright lie:

Q105 Sandra Osborne: I would like to ask you about the issue of extraordinary rendition. In response to this Committee’s report of last year on the war against terrorism, the government said that it was not aware of the use of its territory or air space for the purposes of extraordinary rendition. However, it appears that there is a growing body of evidence to suggest that the UK air space is indeed being utilised for this purpose, albeit mainly in the media. Some of the suggestions seem to be extremely detailed. For example, the Guardian has reported that aircraft involved in operations have flown into the UK at least 210 times since 9/11, an average of one flight a week. It appears that the favourite destination is Prestwick Airport, which is next to my constituency, as it happens. Can you comment on that? What role is the UK playing in extraordinary rendition?

Mr Straw: The position in respect of extraordinary rendition was set out in the letter that the head of our parliamentary team wrote to Mr Priestly, your Clerk, on 11 March; and the position has not changed. We are not aware of the use of our territory or air space for the purpose of extraordinary rendition. We have not received any requests or granted any permissions for use of UK territory or air space for such purposes. It is perfectly possible that there have been two hundred movements of United States aircraft in and out of the United Kingdom and I would have thought it was many more; but that is because we have a number of UN air force bases here, which, under the Visiting Forces Act and other arrangements they are entitled to use under certain conditions. I do not see for a second how the conclusion could be drawn from the fact that there have been some scores of movements of US military aircraft – well, so what – that that therefore means they have been used for rendition. That is a very long chain!

Q106 Sandra Osborne: The UN Commission on Human Rights has started an inquiry into the British Government’s role in this. Is the Government co-operating fully with that inquiry? Why would they start an inquiry if there were no reason to believe that this was actually happening?

Mr Straw: People start inquiries for all sorts of reasons. I assume we are co-operating with it. I am not aware of any requests, but we always co-operate with such requests.

Q107 Mr Keetch: They are not flying under US military flags; these are Gulfstream aircraft used by the CIA. They have a 26-strong fleet of Gulfstream aircraft that are used for this purpose. These aircraft are not coming into British spaces; they are coming into airports. Some are into bases like Northolt, and some into bases like Prestwick. Whilst it is always good to have the head of your parliamentary staff respond to our Clerk, Mr Priestley, could you give us an assurance that you will investigate these specific flights; and, if it is the case that these flights are being used for the process of extraordinary rendition, which is contrary to international law and indeed contrary to the stated policy of Her Majesty’s Government, would you attempt to see if they should stop?

Mr Straw: I would like to see what it is that is being talked about here. I am very happy to endorse, as you would expect, and I did endorse, the letter sent by our parliamentary team to your Clerk on 11 March. I am happy, for the avoidance of any doubt, to say that I specifically endorse its contents. If there is evidence, we will look at it, but a suggestion in a newspaper that there have been flights by unspecified foreign aircraft in and out of the United Kingdom cannot possibly add up to evidence that our air space or our facilities have been used for the purpose of unlawful rendition. It just does not.

Q108 Mr Keetch: I accept that, but if there were evidence of that, you would join with us, presumably, in condemning —–
Mr Straw: I am not going to pre-judge an inquiry. If there were evidence, we would look at it. So far there we have not seen any evidence.
Q109 Richard Younger-Ross: Our former Ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, has stated in a document to us: “I can confirm it is a positive policy decision by the US and UK to use Uzbek torture material.” He states that the evidence is that the aircraft that my colleague referred to earlier, the Gulfstreams, are taking detainees back to Uzbekistan who are then being tortured. Is that not some indication that these detainees are being transferred through the UK?

Mr Straw: It is Mr Murray’s opinion. Mr Murray, as you may know, stood in my constituency. He got fewer votes than the British National Party, and notwithstanding the fact that he assured the widest possible audience within the constituency to his views about use of torture. I set out the British Government’s position on this issue on a number of occasions, including in evidence both here and to the Intelligence and Security Committee. I wrote a pretty detailed letter to a constituent of mine back in June, setting out our position. As I said there, there are no circumstances in which British officials use torture, nor any question of the British Government seeking to justify the use of torture. Again, the British Government, including the terrorist and security agencies, has never used torture for any purpose including for information, nor would we instigate or connive with others in doing so. People have to make their own judgment whether they think I am being accurate or not.

Q110 Mr Illsley: Foreign Secretary, the letter which you supplied to the Committee in March which gave the conclusion that the British Government is not aware of the use of its territory or air space for the purpose of extraordinary rendition was taken at face value by most members of the Committee at that time, before the election. We took that to mean that we were not aware of any extraordinary rendition, and that it was not happening. The press reports were therefore something of a surprise. Would our Government be contacted by any country using our airspace, taking suspects to other countries? Would we be asked for permission or would there be any circumstances where we would be contacted; or is it the case that it could well be happening but that our Government is not aware of it simply because we have not been informed, or our permission is not necessary?

Mr Straw: Mr Illsley, on the precise circumstances in which foreign governments apply for permission to use British air space, I have to write to you, because it is important that I make that accurate. What Mr Stanton on my behalf said in the letter is exactly the same: why would I, for a second, knowingly provide this Committee with false information, if I had had information about rendition? We do not practise rendition, full-stop. I ought to say that whether rendition is contrary to international law depends on the particular circumstances of the case; it depends on each case, but we do not practise it. I would have to come back to you on that question.

Chairman: We will expect a letter. Thank you very much

Yesterday, we had Theresa May’s unremitting hard Brexit speech, which made plain that pandering to racism on immigration was going to be the priority over every possible interest in her approach to negotiations on leaving the EU. The pound stirred slightly on hopes that her announcement that Parliament would be given a vote on the final deal, could give hope that the whole thing might be avoided. However it is plain that she meant that Parliament could vote on a leaving with a deal or just leaving with no deal.

I feel pleased with May’s speech on two grounds. The first is that its contemptuous dismissal of the views of the 2 to 1 majority in Scotland which wishes to remain in the EU, brings Scottish Independence palpably closer. Even after three centuries of subservience, at some stage a natural reaction to having your face ground into the dog food must set in. A second Independence referendum is now inevitable.

Secondly, the EU is actually an extremely successful union and the euro an extremely successful currency, perceptions which a rabid nationalist UK media have successfully distorted. It is impossible that the UK will find replacement relationships in fields from trade to external relations to security to education and scientific research, which are anything like as economically beneficial. It is not just internal EU trade – the EU’s external market access will never be bettered by the UK, and the common external tariff is much more liberal than commonly realised. For example there are effectively no tariffs on manufactured goods from Africa. I confidently predict a Brexit Britain will both impose and face higher external tariffs than the EU.

My optimism arises from the fact that the May thesis is so barmy – that all of this should be sacrificed to pander to the daft xenophobia of the English and Welsh who don’t like “foreigners coming in” – that I still cannot believe that the political system will allow it to happen. The idea that the basis of the country’s economy can be destroyed on the basis of the sloganizing of the semi-educated, will meet institutional resistance. I want Scotland independent, but I also want England to avoid the self-harm of leaving the EU. I am farily confident both options are simultaneously achievable.


Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

279 thoughts on “Chelsea Manning Adds a Glow to the Day

1 2 3
  • Anon1

    There hasn’t been much interest in the Manning story from the eminences here, Craig.

    I think they are secretly disappointed that she wasn’t locked up for the remainder of her sentence so they could continue to berate the US.

  • Solomon Hughes

    I really think Obama is the “good man frustrated ” fits best- although he is frustrated by his own drive to have a consensual govt, even though that meant consensus with the total warmongers in Democrat ranks. The war on whistleblowers, along with the Drone and ‘Special Forces’ interventions, and Libya where what he fed to the War party in return for trying to be less “Washington Playbook” elsewhere- far too many compromises with the “Do stupid shit” brigade, but I think in his mind they were ‘compromises’ not good things. He has a bit more freedom in his last days, and obviously an eye to his legacy, which has made him more receptive to protests over Chelsea Manning’s imprisonment. Needless to say, but without the protests he would have not freed Chelsea. I think not making her release immediate is a typical Obama compromise, and does cause some anxiety- it gives the right time to organise against the Release (so means pro Chelsea Manning work remains important)

    • Shatnersrug

      Obama is a lawyer, and as a lawyer he has the ability too exclude his opinions and serve his employers. I think it’s probably something he does automatically. Once it was clear that his funding was coming from Wall Street I think he locked into lawyer mode and behaved that way.

      Come on though, we all knew he’d be like this. We just thought he’d be better than bush.

      • Aurora

        Well he was better than Bush, on balance, no?
        Party funding constraints aside, I think Obama played far too safe. Some of his expressed foreign policy aims were very sound: move the US away from oil dependency, distance from Israeli government policy, mitigation of climate change, Iran, Cuba – all indicate an intention to break with militarism and the oil-military complex. But he seemed to play fast and loose with human rights issues (drone assassination, state surveillance, protection of whistleblowers) despite his attempt to close Guantanamo, for example. Disappointing to say the least from a lawyer with a keen awareness of the civil rights movement.

      • philw

        If by ‘better than Bush’ you mean ‘achieved more of what Bush was trying to do then yes, he was better than Bush. Bush destroyed Afghanistan and Iraq, but he was just finishing the job that his predecessors had started.

        Obama destroyed Libya and very nearly Syria.
        He has brought us to the brink of war with Russia, and ratcheted up tensions with China.
        He has set going a vast upgrade in US nuclear weapons capability, and pioneered the use of cyberwarfare (Stuxnet against Iran).
        He has prosecuted more whistleblowers than have ever previously been prosecuted.
        He has institutionalised a surveillance state.
        He has aided the Saudis in the destruction of Yemen.
        He has facilitated the rise of Da’esh, by allowing Saudis to fund them and Turkey to supply them.
        He has caused the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians in the drone assassination program.
        He has allowed a huge rise in racial tension in the US, failing to act on the concerns of Black Lives Matter.

        He may not have personally chosen to do those things. He may be a nice guy. But then the same may be said of Bush, and Obama obviously knew what was going on, whereas Bush didn’t have a clue – he just did as he was told.

        See also John Pilger article:
        https://www.rt.com/op-edge/373933-issue-donald-us-trump-pilger/

  • Anon1

    “My optimism arises from the fact that the May thesis is so barmy – that all of this should be sacrificed to pander to the daft xenophobia of the English and Welsh who don’t like “foreigners coming in””

    Why do you persist with this idiotic line of argument, Craig? The majority voted for sovereignty and the ability to make our own laws by way of our own elected representatives. You want Scotland to remain in the EU, which is fine, but it is not independence.

    It is not “xenophobic” to oppose the staggering levels of immigration this country has endured over the past few decades. Nobody is “anti-foreigner” as you keep telling us we are, the 17 million of us you hold in contempt.

    The truth is you cannot make a decent argument in support of mass, uncontrolled immigration so you resort to smear tactics of labelling anyone who opposes it as a racist, xenophobic, little Englander.

    You have never even set out your reasons for being such an avid Europhile. You just state without argument or evidence that everyone who says otherwise is wrong and the EU is a tremendous success and all is fine and dandy within it. And if you don’t agree you’re a racist anti-foreigner type.

    • fred

      “You have never even set out your reasons for being such an avid Europhile.”

      I think the fact he only started being so avid after the referendum make the reasons pretty obvious.

    • Martinned

      The majority voted for sovereignty and the ability to make our own laws by way of our own elected representatives.

      Brexit Means Brexit!

      It is not “xenophobic” to oppose the staggering levels of immigration this country has endured over the past few decades.

      What country is that, pray tell? Surely it isn’t the UK, which has had more immigration than emigration, but nothing remotely resembling “staggering levels”, certainly not from other EU member states, which is what is at issue here.

      And if you don’t agree you’re a racist anti-foreigner type.

      Res ipsa loquitur. (Although I guess for at least some of the Leavers the better Latin maxim is noscitur a sociis.)

      • Anon1

        350,000 net per year is a staggering amount. That is a city the size of Birmingham every three years. Birmingham is our second largest city.

        • Martinned

          That says more about British urbanisation/London-bias than about immigration. And again, that number includes non-EU migration, students, refugees, and various other people that it would be nonsensical to count.

  • Anon1

    Nothing on the Gambia, Craig? I thought West Africa and human rights were areas of interest of yours?

    Or is there no anti-British angle to exploit from it?

  • AdrianD

    It seems that this is one of the rare occasions that I disagree with you Craig – the Euro is anything but a successful currency. Next time you bump into Yanis Varoufakis ask his views on the subject.

    If you’ve got a few weeks to spare, check out Bill Mitchell’s blogs on the subject (he’s particularly strong on the myths peddled about the UK’s integration into the EC/EU):

    http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/

    Or for a more pithy account, check out the chapter in Greg Palast’s ‘Vulture’s Picnic’ – which frankly everyone should read.

    • Bill Marsh

      Couldn’t agree more. As far as I can see the main beneficiary of the dysfunctional Euro is Germany.

  • fred

    Obama has managed to released another ten prisoners from Guantanamo and it doesn’t get a mention, Muslim prisoners not as important I expect. He didn’t quite succeed in closing the prison as he had hoped but he went a long way towards it, down to 45 inmates from 242 when he took office.

    Trump supporters here, mentioning no names, should note that he has promised to start filling it up with “bad dudes” again.

    • Martinned

      Don’t worry, the only people who will be put in Guantanamo under Trump are people that are Putin-certified bad dudes. So that should be OK then.

  • michael norton

    good news that manning is to be pardoned by Obomba.
    next he will be saying sorry of all the civilians he has droned?
    Great news on BREXIT MEANS HARD BREXIT

    United Kingdom Economy continues to pick up.

    UK unemployment fell by 52,000 to 1.6 million in three months to November, official figures showed.

    The jobless rate was steady at an 11-year low of 4.8%, in line with forecasts, the Office for National Statistics said.

    The employment rate was steady at a record 74.5%, while wage growth picked up pace.
    Ministry of Truth.

    They said on the wireless today that Britain was the third largest economy in Europe, well, I’m assuming Germany is the largest, so which is the second largest?

  • John Goss

    It looks like Obama, as with the Caesars at gladiatorial events, has been allowed one or two chances to give the thumbs up or thumbs down without having to answer to the puppeteers. Since these puppeteers are on their way out and new showmen and show-women will be in Uncle Sam’s magic theatre the least they can do is grant Obama a little freedom in his last days. I often think about people like Obama and Blair what a waste of good brains. Both were and are persuasive speakers. This trouble is both were hellbent on persuading the populace to pursue fruitless wars (at least fruitless for ordinary people).

  • Brianfujisan

    Mr Illsley: Foreign Secretary, the letter which you supplied to the Committee in March which gave the conclusion that the British Government is not aware of the use of its territory or air space for the purpose of extraordinary rendition was taken at face value by most members of the Committee at that time, before the election. We took that to mean that we were not aware of any extraordinary rendition, and that it was not happening.

    Makes me think.. Yes I Know… But Dreoilin Shanon..

  • Sharp Ears

    Praise be for Chelsea. Her courage to have exposed those atrocities is amazing. Thank goodness her suicide attempts failed. Julian to be freed next but don’t hold your breath.

    He is calling the US’s bluff.
    http://news.sky.com/story/julian-assange-stands-by-extradition-deal-pledge-after-chelsea-manning-release-10733049

    As I said earlier, Obama is trying, very belatedly, to clean up his tarnished image.

    Biden has made his last speech as a state operative. Names Russia as the greatest threat to our freedom. Oh yes indeedee!

    Special Address by Joe Biden, Vice President of the United States
    https://www.weforum.org/events/world-economic-forum-annual-meeting-2017/sessions/special-address-by-joe-biden-vice-president-of-the-united-states

    • Anon1

      Julian can’t be “freed” as he already is a free man who can walk out of the embassy whenever he chooses (providing he leaves a couple of cans of Fabreeze).

      • michael norton

        of course, OBOMBA might be trying to pull the wool over the eyes of people, he may want julian to walk out of his safe haven, then arrested by the goons loyal to Amber Rudd, where they shaft him in irons, to be temporally held in a dungeon at Glasgow=Prestwick, while they await further instructions.
        Swedeland or America

        bee careful julian it ain’t over till the Fat Lady sings,
        his only hope might be Nicola Sturgeon?

    • PhilE

      Russia is indeed the greatest threat to the Biden family’s pillaging of the Ukraine. These money grubbing politicians make me sick.
      Anyone who thinks Obama has an ounce of decency should view Stacey Dooley’s film Girls, Guns and Isis about Yazidi women and reflect that in his last days Obama is trying to set Deir Ezzor up for the same fate as Sinjar.
      His commuting of Chelsea’s sentence, while welcome is nothing to do with Assange, Craig or Greenwald, it’s a bone to the U.S. LGBT community.

    • John Spencer-Davis

      The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has ruled that Julian Assange is arbitrarily detained in violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

  • oban university

    The United States gained independence with the concept of no taxation without representation. There has often been something extra which supplies success to a nation’s search for self government. In 2014 that highly focussed extra something was lacking even although Scots came close to voting Yes.

    This time the something extra is that Scotland is being forced to accept drastic constitutional and economic change against Scotland’s democratic majority wish.

      • michael norton

        Quite so Anon!
        they could have agreed to set up a Referendum on the grounds that each part of the United Kingdom,
        Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and England, Gibralta, soveriegn terriotory of Cyprus, The Falklands,
        aal had to return a majority in fovour of leaving, to make it binding.

        But it was not set up like that.
        Theresa May is following the result that transpired.
        That the majority of those who voted in the Referendum, voted to LEAVE.

        Thank you Theresa may to keeping to the promise made by Boy George Osbourne and the Scottish David Cameron.

      • oban university

        The 2014 referendum is now obsolete. Scotland was bombarded with unionist establishment propaganda in the indyref1 campaign that the only way to keep Scotland in the European Union was to vote No. Now clearly the only way to keep Scotland in the European Union is to vote Yes.

        If unionists are so confident that Scotland will put remaining in the health privatising, TTIP friendly UK above remaining in the TTIP sceptical EU then as good democrats you should have no objections to confirming your beliefs with a democratic vote.

        Persisting with the argument that Scotland voted to stay in the UK in 2014 when that vote took place two years before the EU referendum result materially changed our political landscape so drastically is an attempt to cite a previous democratic vote in order to discourage another one.

        • fred

          Not much has changed. The Nationalists have gained a bit of support from Unionists who want to remain in Europe and lost a bit of support from Nationalists who want to leave.

          Overall things are pretty much the same as they were in 2014.

    • fred

      The question on the ballot paper wasn’t should Scotland leave the EU, it was should Britain leave the EU.

      Not being a specific referendum concerning Scotland and there only being a 67% turnout that leaves the majority of the Scottish electorate either voting to leave the EU or not caring enough either way to vote.

      The Nationalists can’t declare the referendum answered a question it didn’t even ask.

      • Martinned

        it was should Britain leave the EU

        No it wasn’t.

        ‘Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?’

        • michael norton

          Scotland has already had a “ONCE IN A LIFETIME RFEFERENDUM”
          Question: Do you want to leave the United kingdom.
          Those who could be bothered to vote,
          voted to remain part of the United kingdom.

          • oban university

            Democracy is not a one off vote. If it was we wouldn’t have the chance to vote in a new governing party every four or five years.

            There has been a drastic material change in politics since indyref1 with the EU leave result. Since the majority of Scottish residents didn’t vote for that drastic change there is a democratic need for a second indyref to allow Scots to decide which union, UK or EU, we wish to remain in.

          • michael norton

            Once the United Kingdom, all of it, leaves the hated European union, in less than two years time.
            Scotland, probably should have another ONCE IN A LIFETIME REFERENDUM.

            But please think on, if Scotland voted to leave the U.K. there will be a HARD BORDER between us.

          • Martinned

            I was struck by someone at the same time speaking up for Scotland and completely forgetting about Northern Ireland. They voted against Brexit too, and they are going to be stuffed much more than Scotland as a result of the (re-)introduction of border controls between the UK and Ireland.

          • bevin

            What is Northern Ireland anyway? The Kossovo of the 1920s, born of bigotry and imperialism. It is ludicrous for it to want to be in the EU but not in Ireland of which it is a part geographically and culturally.

      • Node

        ,,,, there only being a 67% turnout that leaves the majority of the Scottish electorate either voting to leave the EU or not caring enough either way to vote.

        Interesting voting analysis you used there, Fred. Let’s apply it to the Independence Referendum.

        …. there only being a 84.6% turnout that leaves the majority of the Scottish electorate either voting to leave the UK or not caring enough either way to vote.

        • fred

          The 2014 independence referendum was about independence, the question on the ballot paper asked if Scotland should leave the UK? The Brexit referendum wasn’t about independence, the question on the ballot paper wasn’t should Scotland leave the UK?

          To claim the result of the Brexit referendum gives a mandate for another independence referendum the Nationalists need to show the majority of the electorate wants to remain in Europe.

          • Node

            Fred, that is irrelevant to your insight into how we should interpret the results of referendums. For once we agree on something …..

            ….. the majority of the Scottish electorate either voted to leave the UK or didn’t care enough to vote.

  • Colin Dawson

    Following a day when Theresa May outright lied in her Brexit speech, it’s worth remembering that it’s common practice for Westminster politicians to tell blatant lies. We have seen it with Hillsborough, the Miners Strike, Iraqi WMDs, the McCrone Report, the Alastair Carmichael affair and countless other scandals.

    The courts have now ruled that the Crown Immunity is not a defence against extraordinary rendition and torture. The UK Government can now be sued by those who suffered from this atrocity.

    This court ruling may have far wider implications. Knowing that Crown Immunity might not protect them will hopefully make politicians think twice before engaging in illegal activities and will hopefully encourage more whistle blowers to come forward and expose illegal activities carried out by the British State and it’s representatives.

    • giyane

      Zooming in on Craig’s testimony to the Joint Committee on torture, it was stated that Bush made an exception to the Geneva Convention for combatants against the US and its allies. The term US exceptionalism means, not just the priveledge to do what you like, but the absence of any right for your victims to complain.

      I note that these were the exact words used by my CIA agent Al Qaida Kurdish friend, that he would do what he liked with me and I didn’t have the right to complain. US Calvinist tradition and Political Islam are one and the same fundamentalism. I have complained and I will continue to complain about political Islam and neo-con “exceptionalism “.

      Theresa May’s poodling to Trump, by adopting a brash illogical hard Brexit which she thinks is going to impress the new President, is an enourmous gamble. Trump is not a man of his word, he is a man of expediency. May’s coy sexual charms are highly unlikely to be sufficient to secure any deal from Trump.
      He knows that the UK is part of the rat-bag of neo-cons who have ground the world into war with Obama and Hillary. The UK is a spineless creature of the neo-con swamp, same as him.

      As to Belhaj, he is in the same profession as Straw, neo-con poodling. Although it is not fair that one of them was subjected to torture by another of the same ilk who walks free, as Kissinger is quoted as saying, ” Anyone who thinks that special operations is the same as social work, is mistaken.”

    • BJ

      ‘This court ruling may have far wider implications. Knowing that Crown Immunity might not protect them will hopefully make politicians think twice before engaging in illegal activities ‘

      I would love to think that you’re right Colin but the last forty years have encouraged a cynicism in me that is often depressing.
      I doubt there will be any change in their behaviour at all. They appear to be totally shameless, devoid of any conscience whatever their dealings might be.
      There are no shortage of taxpayer funded ‘gatekeepers’ in place to protect them from investigation.

  • Sharp Ears

    I, like many, do not see Obama in a rosy light. What he did was unforgiveable.

    John Pilger, with his usual incisiveness, describes him:

    ‘One of the persistent strands in American political life is a cultish extremism that approaches fascism. This was given expression and reinforced during the two terms of Barack Obama. “I believe in American exceptionalism with every fibre of my being,” said Obama, who expanded America’s favourite military pastime, bombing, and death squads (“special operations”) as no other president has done since the Cold War.

    According to a Council on Foreign Relations survey, in 2016 alone Obama dropped 26,171 bombs. That is 72 bombs every day. He bombed the poorest people on earth, in Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, Syria, Iraq, Pakistan.

    Every Tuesday – reported the New York Times – he personally selected those who would be murdered by mostly hellfire missiles fired from drones. Weddings, funerals, shepherds were attacked, along with those attempting to collect the body parts festooning the “terrorist target”. A leading Republican senator, Lindsey Graham, estimated, approvingly, that Obama’s drones killed 4,700 people. “Sometimes you hit innocent people and I hate that,” he said, but we’ve taken out some very senior members of Al Qaeda.”‘

    17 January 2016
    http://johnpilger.com/articles/this-week-the-issue-is-not-trump-it-is-ourselves-

    • Martinned

      who expanded America’s favourite military pastime, bombing, and death squads (“special operations”) as no other president has done since the Cold War

      I call BS on that one. Have we forgotten about Bush jr. already?

      • bevin

        You are wrong.
        And not for the first time.
        Obama expanded Special Operations Assassinations and Drone killings far beyond anything that the hapless W ever dreamed of.
        Incidentally the lie, for which you are responsible, earlier in the thread, to the effect that the US merely intervened in a Civil War in Libya (and, no doubt, Syria too. And why not throw in Iraq and Afghanistan as well?) will not wash. The ultimate responsibility for the carnage in all of these places-and it amounts to a holocuadst in the millions- lies with the US government and its puppets, particularly Saudi Arabia.

        • Martinned

          I don’t know why I even bother, but here goes:

          You’re moving the goal posts. The original quote said nothing about drones, specifically.

          As for Libya and Syria, yes, there was a war there, and the US intervened – together with international partners – to push out a tyrannical dictator. (With dubious success.) Both places were already well and truly on fire before any foreign intervention took place, and would have been regardless of such intervention. I’m not sure what your delirious fever dreams are telling you, but that’s how it is.

    • MJ

      “He bombed the poorest people on earth, in Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, Syria, Iraq, Pakistan”

      Libyans and Syrians were on the whole rather wealthy.

    • Kempe

      The majority of this bombing, 80%, was directed against ISIS in Syria and Iraq. I assume those objecting don’t approve of any action being taken against this murderous cult?

      The usual whining about ISIS being a wholly controlled branch of the CIA/MI5/MOSSAD/Illuminati/Ovaltinnies will of course be ignored.

  • rest

    too late, too little
    obama just under pressure 3 days to go , this is no grace
    most violent president of usa history in modern times , irony is with nobel peace price, what i would call Piece price for shredding humanity forming a refugee camp out of middle east?
    Chelsea imprisoned for 7 years whilst real culprits, exposed are out there probably continuing most horrid human rights violations at this very moment.
    Obama you betrayed us
    designed president with a coloured label
    Shame
    Disgrace
    Hail Chelsea for your courage, humanity!

    • Fredi

      A Picture of the Obama Economy

      The old saying is that “a picture is worth a thousand words.” Well, economic graphs are “pictures” where data-driven lines, bars or circles tell a story—and sometimes tell that story better than the raw data.
      So the Institute for Policy Innovation decided to pull together several charts that tell a story about how the economy and current economic policies are working. It’s not a pretty picture.

      http://www.ipi.org/ipi_issues/detail/a-picture-of-the-obama-economy

  • Tony_0pmoc

    I’m delighted and surprised that Manning is being released.

    I’m puzzled by RobG’s comment last night as he normally makes sense. “Assange and Wikileaks were taken out last October”. He was interviewed by Fox News of all people less than 3 weeks ago.

    Couldn’t disagree more with Craig’s view about the EU and BREXIT.

    Incidentally, I think the origins and logic of BREXIT come from the “Deep British State” – the old establishment including the City of London. Much the same applies to Trump from an American point of view.

    The current neocon controlled Deep State which includes the EU has been a complete and utter disaster and embarrassment not just for the Middle East – but also for the lives of millions of Americans and Europeans.

    I have never been of the opinion that all these old imperial elites have been agreed and are working in unison – even within their own national boundaries. There has always been a power struggle, and there is at least now a chance that the current real evil abomination (which includes us British & The EU) will be replaced with something that could at least be a slight improvement on the atrocities we have had to witness over the last 20 years – including this..

    http://www.moonofalabama.org/2017/01/how-the-us-enabled-isis-to-take-deir-ezzor.html

    Tony

    • michael norton

      The Scottish Donald

      “Mary Anne was born in the village of Tong, in the parish of Stornoway on 10th May 1912, to a fisherman named Malcolm MacLeod and his wife, Mary Smith. This couple had been married in 1891 and both were Gaelic speakers, and although not so widespread as it once was, the language is still alive and well in that region. It is thus likely that Mary Anne herself would have spoken it and the young Donald may well have been soothed by Gaelic lullabies as a child.”
      https://www.scottishroots.com/people/donald.php

  • michael norton

    Julian Assange ‘stands by’ extradition deal pledge after Chelsea Manning release
    Sky News

    • lysias

      Trump will have a choice then: either do not prosecute Assange, or subject him to a trial that will be a circus, in which all sorts of U.S. secrets are publicized.

  • Bert.

    I must confess that, for once, they in the beltway have caught me on the wrong foot.

    I never expected that Manning would be freed, but it must be very very welcome.

    Bert.

  • giyane

    Stunningly brave Chelsea Manning gets released, very good news. Obama hitting the panic button about his evil deeds is no reason for putting him in the category of exonerated criminals. Trump could not have discovered how revoltingly corrupt the neo-cons were without the bravery of whitleblowers like Chelsea Manning, nor could the electorate have discharged Obama and his legacy into the sewers without her and others testimony against US war-crimes.

    Obama is a man who is content to stink for a living. No amount of perfumed soap will get the stink of sludge out of his finger-nails. He has caused untold misery to Iraqis, Libyans and Syrians by deploying terrorists to circumvent international law. He is not a common criminal. He is a lawyer who has used his knowledge to circumvent the law. Trump should reserve Chelsea’s vacant cell for him.

  • Anon1

    Another devastating performance from Jeremy at PMQs. Even his own MPs were waiting for the next laugh.

  • Phil Ex-Frog

    Craig
    “whether Obama is a good man frustrated or a charlatan”

    Jeez, your insistence on fretting over wether an individual is good or evil is infantile.

    Manning’s clemency will have it’s reason. Perhaps it was as yet indiscernible move against the incoming administration. Perhaps it was Obama grasping for some liberal leaning PR to help secure his and the democratic party reputation in the eyes of idiots who look to good and evil when trying to make sense of the world.

  • Manda

    “… I still tend to the man with decent instincts who at the end of the day didn’t care enough to really fight for them.”

    Very generous indeed in my opinion.
    There was no reason to not commute the sentence with immediate effect. May is a lifetime away in politics and especially in US prison system and change of presidency. I don’t find Obama ‘mysterious’ at all.

  • eddie-g

    “the euro an extremely successful currency”

    No.

    For most of Europe, it’s like the gold standard, only worse. All for Scottish independence, but have your own currency, there’s no sane reason to want to join the Euro.

      • eddie-g

        Interesting. You call it “not a design flaw”, yet pro-cyclical fiscal policy stipulations were written into the Maastricht treaty.

        And separately, if a currency is underpinned by “stupid” monetary policy, how does it become “extremely successful”?

        • Martinned

          Lots of things of varying levels of stupidity were written into the EU treaties. That doesn’t mean they “underpin” the Euro.

          That said, I certainly wouldn’t want to own the claim that the Euro has been “extremely successful” (and didn’t). There have clearly been transitional problems in that investors overestimated the extent that loans to Southern member states were somehow backed up by the ECB or by the other Eurozone countries. As a result, those loans were underpriced and too many of them were originated. (= Those countries ended up borrowing too much money.) But that’s not a mistake financial markets will make a second time. In the future, Bund spreads will never be as low again as they were in 2000-2007.

          • eddie-g

            I don’t really know what you’re trying to say.

            Craig called the Euro “extremely successful”, I disagreed, and you’ve since gone off in various directions which are either irrelevant, wrong or contradictory.

  • Phil Ex-Frog

    Craig
    “the EU is actually an extremely successful union…there are effectively no tariffs on manufactured goods from Africa”

    A always you rationalise your choices with selective arguments.

    Everything is manufactured in Asia these days. The tariffs against African states are not imposed on industries relatively marginal to Europe and Africa. This allows bleeding heart liberals to claim how fair the EU is. The tariffs are imposed where it matters to the EU and where it really hurts the Africans. Such as agriculture.

    Your hypocrisy is especially revolting regarding your constant calls of racism against the UK state whilst praising the EU. As if the EU did not choose to let migrants die in the med. As if Frontex will suddenly stop returning refugees back into prison camps once the UK is no longer a member.

      • Phil Ex-Frog

        Tariffs are imposed. Your question makes no sense. There is nothing in my comment suggesting I support more tariffs if that’s what you are trying to ask.

        Look, there’s a rabbit! Three cheers for Frontex!

  • Chris Rogers

    CM,

    I’m not too sure how you can claim the Euro has been an economic success, given most of the left-of-centre economists I associate with believe its been an unmitigated disaster, one foreseen by none other than Prof Wynne Godley in his 1992 London Review of Books Essay – I’m quite confident certain sections of the electorate in Cyprus, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Portugal and Spain would also question the validity of your claim, one disputed today by the likes of Prof. Steve Keen, Prof. Michael Hudson, Stephanie Kelton and many others globally. As Bismarck once observed, personally I don’t believe the economic carnage inflicted by monetary union “is worth the bones of a single Pomeranian grenadier”.

    • Stu

      The Euro didn’t cause the problems of those countries. Their problems were caused by irresponsible politicians and bankers.

      Think of the Irish bankers laughing about the bail out they knew they were guaranteed to receive. Greek politicians colluding with Goldman Sachs to cook the books. Cyprus dedicating itself to money laundering and paying crazy interest rates.

      The Euro allowed them to do these things but they didn’t have to. It’s like having a bottle of whisky on the table, you don’t need to drink it all.

1 2 3

Comments are closed.