MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
|
|
|
From the Readers
- barefooted 10 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
Creative corner
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
From the Dagbloggers
- Michael Wolraich 1 year 1 month ago
- Danny Cardwell 3 years 4 months ago
- Doctor Cleveland 4 years 1 month ago
- PeraclesPlease 4 years 3 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 4 years 3 months ago
- William K. Wolfrum 4 years 3 months ago
- William K. Wolfrum 4 years 3 months ago
- Doctor Cleveland 4 years 3 months ago
- Doctor Cleveland 4 years 4 months ago
- William K. Wolfrum 4 years 4 months ago
Hits of the Day
Trump’s Amoral Saudi Statement Is a Pure Expression of Decades-Old “U.S. Values” and Foreign Policy Orthodoxies
By A Guy Called LULU on Wed, 11/21/2018 - 12:20pm |“The United States intends to remain a steadfast partner of Saudi Arabia to ensure the interests of our country, Israel and all other partners in the region.”
URL:
https://theintercept.com/2018/11/21/trumps-amoral-saudi-statement-is-a-pure-and-honest-expression-of-decades-old-u-s-values-and-foreign-policy-orthodoxies/
- Add new comment
- 10117 reads
Comments
In a hierarchical political or economical power structure the individuals who reach the top almost without exception more closely resemble each other than they do those over whom they rule. Greenwald points out some unflattering truths about our historical leaders, truths which reflect unflatteringly on the rest of us.
by A Guy Called LULU on Wed, 11/21/2018 - 12:21pm
Pretending that bombing Serbia to protect Kosovars or shutting Qaddafi's airspace down to prevent a threatened genocide is the same as MSB's locking & torturing Saudi's royalty in a hotel to steal a cool trillion dollars or torturing female driver advocates or hacking apart a WaPo journalist with a bone saw? Keep shitting the bed, Lulu - your moral equivalence is pathetic.
Greenwald's a loser selective apologist - steer clear of that bastard - his shelf-life ran out a decade ago. NCD pointed out what a pro-SovRussian rigged scam the Eric Snowden bit was, and we have a ton of evidence on Wikileaks the last 6 years.
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 11/21/2018 - 12:28pm
Yours is a simplistic straw man rebuttal combined with a hollow ad hominem attack. Apparently the best you can do. Your shit is boring in its repetitive knee-jerk attack mode which does not even pretend to address the point. As usual.
The block quoted paragraph above seems to me to be obviously and self evidently correct and I consider it's point to be important to acknowledge if there actually are things done by countries that are worth getting outraged about. You accuse me of being an apologist. Irony prevails. To the point of the article, do you believe that regarding Saudi Arabia that Trump has done something that is at odds with U.S. foreign policy values [demonstrated repeatedly, not merely those stated repeatedly] or the actions of prior leaders or prevailing foreign policy?
by A Guy Called LULU on Wed, 11/21/2018 - 1:14pm
I don’t think prior Presidents would have called the intel agency reports lies. There are recordings of the murder.
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 11/21/2018 - 2:01pm
I agree, prior Presidents would not have called intel agency reports lies. I don't know if intel agencies or individuals within them have told any President any deliberate lies. I would bet they have. I know they have lied for Presidents. I know they have lied to the American public. I know they have lied to the American media. I know they have lied through the American media.I know they have lied under oath to Congress. I have zero doubt that any President was not aware of those facts. Lying is part and parcel of what the CIA does. It is the first tool of their trade whether they are doing so for good purpose or bad. No presumably sane person I know of doubts that the Saudis committed murder. Trump broke tradition when he said, "So what?"
by A Guy Called LULU on Wed, 11/21/2018 - 4:30pm
The CIA would have given the same report to Obama. How do you believe Obama would have responded?
BTW I seem to remember Greenwald suggesting that he would be killed or indicted if he returned to the United States. As I recall, he returned and was not arrested or killed.
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 11/21/2018 - 5:31pm
Trump is extremely crude and a strange and unusual combination of stupid and diabolically smart, or at least talented. Obama is intelligent, articulate, and diplomatic, so I am confident that he would have handled the report "better". The next day and the next month and the next year Saudi Arabia would still be our strategic ally with likely all the perks it gets now. You are surely willing to answer your own question aren't you? How do you think Obama would have handled the same report?
by A Guy Called LULU on Wed, 11/21/2018 - 6:50pm
You avoid the answer. Obama would have criticized the Saudi Prince, The Saudis benefit from having the US as an ally, There is no magic bullet to solve the Middle East You have criticism but no solution.
What we do know is that here in the United States, life is harder for many citizens. We have a party willing to steal elections, kidnap infants, and deny health care. Hillary Clinton was a better option than Donald Trump.
Obama would have done a better job. Hillary would have done a better job. Better is what we need. We don’t have perfect. Trump is emboldening white supremacists.
BTW
Greenwald is the guy who said President Obama could rape a nun and be forgiven by his supporters.
https://thegrio.com/2012/01/02/glenn-greenwald-defends-obama-could-rape-a-nun-attack/
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 11/21/2018 - 10:58pm
LIke duh - they hacked his body apart with a bone saw and dissolved the remains in acid within minutes of walking through the door. That's pretty at odds with U.S. foreign policy values. Torturing female Saudi drivers - that's typical "U.S. foreign policy values"? Ad hominem? I'm discussing the news of the day, Lulu - even the month - "ad hominem"?
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 11/21/2018 - 3:18pm
Like duh. Remember Anwar al-Awlaki? And his teenage son? And his young daughter. Al-Awlaki was deliberately blown to bits by order of our President. What was Awlaki's crime. Oh yeah, he published material that the American administration didn't want published, so they killed him. Don't pretend that I am apologizing for el-Awlaki when you explain how this was different in kind from MDS ordering the murder of what's his name.
That is by definition an ad hominem attack which is all you have since the truth you want to deny or at least ignore is so obvious.
by A Guy Called LULU on Wed, 11/21/2018 - 4:38pm
That is simply not the claim Obama's government made for assassinating Awlaki. The claim was that in addition to recruiting terrorists he was central in planning major terrorist actions. We can certainly debate whether the claims of recruitment, funneling money to terrorist organizations, leadership in Al Queda, and planning of terrorists actions were factual or whether they were sufficient justification for a drone strike. But let us be honest about what the claims were.
by ocean-kat on Wed, 11/21/2018 - 5:20pm
Just like Kashoggi, eh?
Rashad Ali, former member of Islamist group Hizb-ul-Tahir and now director of think-tank Centri:
"He was very clear about having this revolutionary jihadist approach. He started delivering lectures on jihad that came out in 2003," he said.
"He gave very explicit verdicts on suicide bombing being religiously acceptable, about the enforcement of religious law and about how jihad in its medieval military form is still necessary today as an imperialist objective."
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 11/21/2018 - 5:22pm
Nuance it 'til the cows come home but in each case the target of the death penalty was using public means to say things the leader of their country did not want said. Maybe other justifications for the killing was made. In each case the leader made the non-judicial, above the law decision, to execute one of his own citizens and so they were each made to be dead. One of those leaders had a regularly scheduled weekly meeting to make the same decision about other people. The other leader is, of all god damned things, acknowledged as Royalty in his own fucked up system and I do not defend anything about him.
by A Guy Called LULU on Wed, 11/21/2018 - 7:11pm
You can make the argument that assassination is never justified or not justified in either case but you can't make the argument that the justification used for killing Kashoggi was the same or equal to the justification used for killing Awlaki. You specifically claimed the justification used was the same in both cases. You're either ignorant or lying. That's why I tend to avoid engaging with you. I'm looking for honest discussion and debate.
by ocean-kat on Wed, 11/21/2018 - 7:34pm
"was using public means to say things the leader of their country did not want said" - so encouraging suicide bombers against a country's people - a gravely illegal act, last I checked - is on par with saying the Saudi government shouldn't lock its royals in a hotel and extort most of their money via torture and threats? That's as "nuanced" as a brick in the face.
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 11/21/2018 - 11:13pm
Huh? No it's not the definition of "ad hominem" - i'm not attacking greenwald's personal life - i'm attacking his crap lobsided "journalism" and being an apologist for Russia, et al.
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 11/21/2018 - 5:17pm
There is perhaps some value in pointing out America's foreign policy flaws to illiterate naive people who still believe we are a paragon of virtue throughout the world. But none of us here is illiterate and naive. Greenwald's article reads like a both sides do it argument, even less, a just our side does it argument. There is some truth in the both sides do it argument, both in American politics and our foreign policy. But the more nuanced view looks at the quality and quantity of what both sides do.
World affairs looks more like Game of Thrones than the good vs evil model every country popularizes for it's less educated citizens. Again the people here aren't among the less educated citizens. We all see the lack of nuance in Greenwald's arguments, don't you?
No one is denying the many flaws in America. But I would rather be a black in 1950's America than a Uighar in China today. More than that I'd rather be a Japanese American in an internment camp in America during WWII than a Uighar in Chinese internment camp in 2018.
America first has long been a large component of our foreign policy. As my country first has been with Russia, China, France, etc. Yet we have often used our power to push against human rights abuses. We have often spoken up for oppressed minorities. Perhaps not often enough but some. When has Russia or China ever used it's power to push for human rights in any of the counties it controls? When has either country even allowed it's own citizens to push for civil rights within their own country?
We don't deny America's foreign policy failures. We don't deny how often we've ignored atrocities committed by our allies. But in a Game of Thrones world how does one interact, what is the best path forward? Disengagement simply creates a power vacuum that lesser powers will fill. So in Syria we rejected the cold war model of propping up dictators friendly to us. In our absence Iran and Russia moved in to prop up Assad. With barrel bombs and chemical weapons used on civilian areas. Was that a better outcome? Would it have been better for us to adopt and prop up Assad as our friendly dictator? Where there other options?
I don't know, but I do think we need a more complex understanding of world affairs. The bash America and only America position of Greenwald lacks the nuance and complexity we need.
by ocean-kat on Wed, 11/21/2018 - 6:13pm
Far better essay than Greenwald's. Bravo. (P.S. If you're using a stimulant to focus your writing, tell us what it is!)
by artappraiser on Thu, 11/22/2018 - 1:14am
Here's some more grist for your mill:
by artappraiser on Thu, 11/22/2018 - 1:14am
But America beat #OWS protesters - all sides do it!
by PeraclesPlease on Thu, 11/22/2018 - 1:29am
OK makes some good points in his comment and I don't think stimulants produce clarity or focus. The knee-jerk moralistic reactions to Trump's maintaining strong ties with the KSA from the likes of Greenwald and others ignores the facts, over the long term, about how US foreign and economic policy have helped to spread democracy around the globe. Aligning with autocrats in the short term doesn't mean supporting despotism over the long term, as the left would have people believe.
by Peter (not verified) on Fri, 11/23/2018 - 11:51am
Making pragmatic decisions is different than basing decisions on lies. To begin with the $450 billion investment in America by Saudi Arabia is a lie. We can maintain relations with SA without totally caving. We can maintain relations while still holding SA to account and pushing for the civil liberties that MBS has promised. As usual Trump is giving away bargaining chips and getting nothing in return. It's similar to Trump recognizing Jerusalem as the capitol of Israel and getting nothing in return. In the end it is highly probable that Jerusalem would be the capitol of Israel. But that recognition could have been traded for something.
by ocean-kat on Fri, 11/23/2018 - 1:59pm
It'd been over 50 years, so even "likely" might be a bit strong.
by PeraclesPlease on Fri, 11/23/2018 - 2:08pm
Since we are all striving to be nuanced in our political thinking I will pick at this a bit.
A decision considered to be ‘pragmatic’ may be based on believed lies. Lies, or distortions and exaggerations of the truth which are a form of lying when done deliberately, may be used to sell a decision as a tough but pragmatic choice for the country when the real pragmatic choice is, for example, to boost profits for a corporation. Four hundred fifty million, or how ever many millions is the correct number, is little more or a little less than a dollar apiece per American citizen. Give that amount to every citizen to consider defense policy and the result would be an immeasurably small affect but channel those millions into one industry and it creates profits which can lead to huge payoffs for top executives of Lockheed Martin, for instance, who can then pragmatically direct funding by the corporation they lead of the politicians who vote for policies and voice views which keeps alive the perception that a pragmatic view of the world requires greater and greater investments in weapons.
This skips over the fact that Trump has already received a great deal for his perceived value to Israel from avid supporters of that foreign state which involved itself in our elections in many ways. Trump and the right wing Israeli government both received benefit from what they considered pragmatic choices. He was supported politically by Netanyahu, AIPAC, many other Jewish organizations, and by millions in campaign donations by Adelson and others. They clearly wanted Trump over Clinton. I think it is clear that those actions by those supporters were pragmatic in the sense that they expected a payoff for their investment in time, money, and influence. Because I do not believe Trump has any ideology other than self promotion I believe that he made a pragmatic but soulless decision to court that support and a further pragmatic decision to do what is necessary to maintain that support. Trump did not waste the bargaining chip but he spent it for himself rather than for our country’s best interest. So, where decisions by Trump can correctly fit the definition of ‘pragmatic’ from his point of view they may be totally counterproductive from a view of what is best from a rational perspective.
by A Guy Called LULU on Fri, 11/23/2018 - 2:38pm
Trump acts for his own benefit. He was the worst option for President. Hillary was the better choice.
by rmrd0000 on Fri, 11/23/2018 - 3:43pm
Four hundred fifty million, or how ever many millions is the correct number,
The number bandied about is $450 billion or 1000 times your estimate. Your analysis has some validity but there are other reasons to sell weapons to those we decide to ally with. If a country has the money to purchase weapon systems and high tech weapons it will find someone to sell it to them. Once a country is in possession of weapons systems they are reliant on the country of origin for spare parts and repairs. That gives that country some influence on how those weapons are used. I know far left liberals are against selling weapons but I don't have much of a problem with America selling weapons because countries will get them from someone and I'd prefer the US had that influence over their use rather than Russia. I'm not saying the US always uses that influence wisely but I'd still prefer the US has that influence rather than Russia. If America stopped selling weapons Russia would have a celebration not just for the economic benefit to their weapons industry but because of the influence those sales would have on it's geopolitical power.
I've seen no evidence that Trump received more support from conservative Jewish organizations than Bush nor did Adelson substantially increase his contributions to Trump over what he gave Bush. Trump would have that support without recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capitol. In fact Trump's divisive rhetoric and lack of push back against anti-semitism has lost him some support among moderate Jews and even some conservative jews that supported Bush. I stand by my opinion that he gave away recognition of Jerusalem for nothing. Nothing for the US, nothing for mideast peace, and nothing for himself.
I suppose one could make the argument that Trump was too stupid to realize he didn't have to recognize Jerusalem to get the conservative Jewish vote. I doubt that. Who knows why Trump does anything? I think he acts on a whim. I don't think he did it for the conservative Jewish Americans. I think he did it for the evangelical Christians. Or perhaps just to be able to claim he did something no other president did.
by ocean-kat on Fri, 11/23/2018 - 6:43pm
The primary importance of the US/Saudi alliance is to confront Iran along with other Gulf states and Israel as Trump stated clearly in his comments. The economic investments and arms sales are important but secondary however many hundreds of billions are eventually spent. It's very likely that there wouldn't be many future deals if Trump started virtue signaling and demanding concessions or cutting ties with the KSA. The likely outcome of that would be to further weaken MBS and undermine our whole ME strategy. MBS is responsible for this murder whether he ordered it or not and and if he survives this crisis he will owe Trump bigly. Trump probably wouldn't be a billionaire if he hadn't chosen long term investment over short term gain and the same pragmatism/foresight applies to this and other FP decisions.
by Peter (not verified) on Fri, 11/23/2018 - 9:41pm
Peter, I agree with too much of what you say in this particular comment to not say so considering my only comment to you before. It is at the very end where you credit Trump for long term foresight in strategy and give him personal credit for even having a conscious strategy, that I veer into strong disagreement. Trump might in his own way be a sort of idiot savant but he is obviously and dangerously and for sure, an idiot. And, where you make an accurate description, I believe it is laid out approvingly based on defending what I believe to be an ultimately unsustainable strategy which a pragmatist with a certain long term pragmatic view would recommend pragmatically altering while we can still do so from a position of great power.
by A Guy Called LULU on Fri, 11/23/2018 - 11:31pm
If you view Trump as an idiot then all the people he bested to become Hegemon, including the repub elite, Clintonites, media, political experts and academics must be something less than idiots because they were unable to stop him. With zero political experience and half the money of his opponent he harnessed a group of political misfits and dreamers while under covert attack from the deep state rode the wave of populism to victory. This wasn't an accident or fluke. With almost 100% negative media attacks he took the new idiot-box the smartphone and the most stilted communication platform, Twitter and turned it into a direct unfiltered connection with about 50 million Americans who gave him probably the greatest political upset in our history.
Yes Trump is a very,very dangerous man especially to all the groups I mentioned above but also to the Chinese, the Iranians, the Russians and the Club of Rome and their NWO agendas. I feel very fortunate to be alive and hope to witness the victory of the pro-humanity populist movement led by Trump over the anti-humanity collectivists who worship nothing but raw power.
by Peter (not verified) on Sat, 11/24/2018 - 11:34am
A shame your herpes hero will go to jail in disgrace, taking all these misleading measures of greatness with him. Certainly there are ways he's not an idiot, just like Rain Man was able to count cards, bit that doesn't meanhe's a fully functional human being, and he's certainly lacking in morals.
Let's wait a month or two more in judging that "upset" as well. The better subpoenas and plea bargains are just coming to fruition, such as with Manafort, Credico, Mifsud, Nadler, et al, unless you think "upsets" done grossly illegally are still praiseworthy. Tho to date you manage to dismiss all the convictions and guilty pleas from "the finest people" anyway, so likely no persuading you. I hear Assange is even getting on a plane soon - won't that be fun. But the bigger story is that Russian "collusion" has expanded to Saudi/UAE/Israel "collusion" as well. So much crime, so much time (to serve). Shame your boy Whitaker didn't work out with his scam patent business and $1mill in unexplained dark money contrubutions - one more piece of roadkill in the road to rash cronyism and trying to stack the deck. BTW, do you think Donald's neglecting the troops while sitting in his comfy FL hotel is exemplary? (asking for a friend)
by PeraclesPlease on Sat, 11/24/2018 - 12:46pm
Weird conclusion about a guy who enjoys bankrupting himself (and others) and whose major talents are boasting and renting out his daddy's name, cashing in on the $400mill and real estate farm he inherited (can you say "Queens slumlord"? sure, I knew you could) and illegally avoided taxes on.
Sorry, the "bringing business to government" chumera is thoroughly discredited except possibly a bit with Bloomberg.
To add to OK's comment, traditionally wuth Soviet weapons purchases you got the Soviet Army, for better or worse, so if we're not selling, there's likely going to be Ivan filling the vacuum.
ETA: the lawsuit against Trump's scam foundation that's allowwed to go forward (mirroring his scam "university"):
https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5bf853b9e4b03b230fa17c3f
by PeraclesPlease on Sat, 11/24/2018 - 12:28am
Deceived by liberals, during the Clinton era, people said that character was molded by the environment. Trump refutes this persuasively: He worked hard to build his fortune and knowledge such that he became one of the deepest experts not only of human nature, but on the deep political connections of the world. Trump's ruthless self discipline has given him the strength of his convictions and the unshakable confidence of a very stable genius.
Steven "Kurt" King, (R) Iowa
by NCD on Fri, 11/23/2018 - 1:52pm
MBS' tyrant tells under Obama -
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/jamal-khashoggi-and-us...
by PeraclesPlease on Fri, 11/23/2018 - 4:45pm
Mitt Romney Nov. 20 tweet on topic:
by artappraiser on Sat, 11/24/2018 - 12:58am
More Republicans challenge Trump on defense of Saudi crown prince
@ WaPo, Nov. 25
cites Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) statements on Sunday shows and notes Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who co-sponsored an effort with Lee earlier this year to end U.S. support for the Saudi campaign in Yemen, also said on ABC’s “This Week” that he thought more lawmakers would line up behind such an effort after Khashoggi’s killing. Then moves on to the House with statements by Waters and Schiff.
and then there's this new
by artappraiser on Sun, 11/25/2018 - 8:28pm
I would really be surprised if Graham actually challenges Trump. Trump remains popular with the Republican base. He is going to be the head of the Judiciary Committee and up for re-election in 2020. We will see if he remains steadfast on the Saudi prince.
by rmrd0000 on Sun, 11/25/2018 - 9:19pm
All talk, misleading diversion, distraction, insincerity.....brings to mind a quote from an Orwell essay, Politics and the English Language", especially good.... the "words falling like snow, blurring" the facts, reality, intentions etc, and the final outcome forgotten, not reported, skipped, particularly on Fox News:
by NCD on Sun, 11/25/2018 - 9:41pm
by A Guy Called LULU on Sun, 11/25/2018 - 9:48pm
Lulu, Kuttner, 2017, on this Orwell essay and status of political speech today, excerpt:
Kuttner:
Note that Orwell was writing two full decades before the Vietnam War. Even before the advent of Donald Trump, the misuse of language in our own day has been in many respects more insidious and more corrosive than the plague against which Orwell was warning....the trend feeds the ability of demagogues to persuade citizens that up is down, or black is white.
by NCD on Sun, 11/25/2018 - 10:05pm
You get the Orwell Newspeak award for this comment. If the supposed CIA leak was accurate it claimed no evidence or facts linking MBS directly to ordering the killing. It only stated an opinion about the assumption that this action couldn't have occurred without MBS's knowledge or order. I'll wait for a report on the actual CIA conclusions to make a judgment.
My opinion is that this killing could have been an attack on MSB's economic modernization and social moderation agenda based on the fact that he has corrupt enemies in the House of Saud. MBS detained and preached the wrath of Allah to these corrupt and powerful relatives who have much to lose if their corruption is not allowed to continue. This is more than enough reason for them to plot and execute this crime because they are already criminals.
by Peter (not verified) on Mon, 11/26/2018 - 11:37am
CIA's opinion is based on billions of dollars in intel and technology including recordings. Yours is based on what, a gut feeling? It is no surprise the CIA might not fill in exactly which intel fed their conclusion, as they're not in the business of giving away methods and specifics and exposing secret agents.
But nice try at spin - trying to be a "useful" co-opted mouthpiece I suppose.
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/cia-concludes-saudi-crown-prince-bin-...
by PeraclesPlease on Mon, 11/26/2018 - 4:28pm
You might be surprised or even happy that Fox News has invited dem operative Mary Anne Marsh to spin a new witch-hunt fantasy about why Trump refuses to pass judgment on MBS until he sees the actual CIA report on this murder. It seems that Murdoch is moving Fox back into the #NeverTrump camp by airing this new conspiracy theory where MBS has some secret hold over Trump or they are colluding on some secret scheme.
[Half delete of Peter ranting again - PP]
by Peter (not verified) on Mon, 11/26/2018 - 5:18pm
Link to the Fox guest op-ed you are yammering about.
This paragraph is interesting as I never thought of Gina Haspel as a snowflake type.
She's gone over to the light Never Trump side from the dark torturing side? Go figure, who knew? Is Dick Cheney in on the plot to get Trump, too?
Edit to add: Just keep twisting yourself into delusional knots to prove Trump is a rational and sane person not just promoting but delivering sane foreign and economic policies. He doesn't do shit, he just babbles, he wouldn't "read" a CIA report if it was given to him in pictograph format.
by artappraiser on Mon, 11/26/2018 - 5:34pm
I suggest Fox News editorial in general doesn't like this known side of Trump and never has:
by artappraiser on Mon, 11/26/2018 - 5:59pm
by artappraiser on Mon, 11/26/2018 - 8:45pm