In exchange for allowing US troops back into Iraq in significant numbers, Al Rafidayn reports, the Iraqi government will get many things including weapons which can shoot down any thing entering Iraq's air space. You may remember that Iraq has airspace issues. And even the Iraqis currently in the US training to fly in Iraqi skies are not going to change that. 2014 was the 'hoped for' date when bandied around by the Bush administration as when Iraq could patrol their own skies.
For details on the negotiations, Al Rafidayn cites an MP and the New York Times, Tim Arango's article, which contained this: "Iraq and the United States are negotiating an agreement that could result in the return of small units of American soldiers to Iraq on training missions."
Tom Hayden wrote six paragraphs for The Nation about the sentence that followed ("At the request of the Iraqi government, according to General [Robert] Caslen, a unit of Army Special Operations soldiers was recently deployed to Iraq to advise on counterterrorism and help with intelligence.") but forgot to inform readers that Barack was in talks to send significant numbers of US troops back into Iraq.
The return of US troops, Al Rafidayn reports, is wanted by the White House in part because Iraq has been unable to stop Iranian flights to Syria. In addition, they want it due to fears that, in the words of Sheikh Hamid al-Hayes, that rebel fighters are grouping in units with al Qaeda in Mesopotamia.
How the hell is this not front page news?
Oh, that's right, the jobs of a news outlet is to ensure re-election of Barack Obama, not to report the truth.
But back in the days when news oulets were expected to report the news, talks to bring more US troops into Iraq would qualify as MAJOR STORY.
Yesterday afternoon, Joe Hamilton explains to the Muskegon Chronicle editors why he's supporting Barack, "But I’d maintain that if the only thing that Barack Obama accomplished
in foreign policy during his entire time in office was the end of U.S.
military involvement in Iraq, then that alone makes his presidency
significant, historic and well worth voting for. Yesterday Jack Burgess (Ironton Tribune) explained, "He’s brought the troops home from Iraq on schedule, in spite of
pressures from some in the military and Republicans such as Sen. John
McCain, his opponent in 2008, who said he didn’t care if our troops
remained there for 100 years." Last week, Tonja Adams insisted to the Wisconsin State Journal, "Thankfully, President Barack Obama brought our troops home from Iraq and will bring more home from Afghanistan in 2014."
That makes the no-longer secret talks news. So does this from September 8th.
Key line: "We’ve ended the war in Iraq and brought our troops home."
He's running on that claim. And in negotiations to send US troops back into Iraq.
When the hell is that not major news?
Oh, that's right, it's not news when the news media sees its role as to protect a politician, not to inform the American people. Democracy depends upon an informed citizenry. Yet again the US media demonstrates that they do not support democracy. Message received.
The following community sites -- plus Susan's On the Edge, Antiwar.com, Cindy Sheehan, Adam Kokesh, the Center for Constitutional Rights, Chocolate City, C-SPAN, the Los Angeles Times, PRI, Black Agenda Report, Pacifica Evening News and The Diane Rehm Show-- updated last night and this morning:
Dr. Jill Stein is the Green Party's presidential candidate. Her campaign notes:
Though, if you prefer to see America continue on its current
path, a vote for Green Party Candidate, Dr. Jill Stein, would be a
Holding both parties accountable for 30
years of this country's largest transfer of wealth to the rich means
coming to terms with the fact that neither are in a position to solve
the challenges we face. While some partisan Democrats are once again
claiming that a vote for the Greens is a vote for the Republicans, that
argument falls flat with millions of disenfranchised voters who believe
we can do better.
These are Americans who believe we must stop our descent into
economic disparity, the erosion of our civil liberties, and the
corruption of our political system by corporate power and massive
wealth. They are Americans who understand the Democratic Party has been
complacent, if not complicit, in this process and is now, as evidenced
by an administration that has kept the policies of George W. Bush
largely in place, institutionally incapable of any real reform.
The fact is, political parties change over time, so why shouldn't our votes change as well?
is not the Democracy the revolutionaries of 1776 envisioned. They had
just lived through a long, bloody war to throw off the shackles of an
oppressive regime that had denied them rights and representation while
pillaging their resources and their labor. It was not their intention
that we live under a duopoly political system where a tiny handful of
people control the pursestrings and allegiances of both parties.
Votes aren't being stolen, they are being bought.
of millions of dollars from a small group of individuals are being
spent by the two establishment parties to control the national
conversation and convince Americans they have a clear choice. That sum
of money and their record provide clarity enough. It is not a choice, it
is maintenance of the status quo. It is a further grab for power by
those who are threatened by recent cracks in the national conversation
opening to issues of money and politics, the polarization of wealth,
ecological responsibility, and the preservation of civil liberties.
The choice to be made is: Do we wish to be truly represented? Do we
need to set a new course as a country? Do we need a real opposition
party immediately capable of new ideas and energy, that isn't subject to
the approval of the most rich and powerful?
Evil vs. Eviler.
Choosing the lesser of two
evils keeps things exactly as they are. Fear tactics have worked well in
the past to keep party stragglers and independent voters in check. But
today's America is not the the America of 2000. We've seen first hand
that the lesser of two evils isn't lesser at all. Arguably, it is worse
because we are encouraged to hope against history, yet the outcome is
If Democratic operatives were only concerned with the 2012 election
results, they would not be aggressively fighting to keep people from
voting Green in states like New York, California, Oregon, Minnesota,
Illinois, Massachusetts, and many more, that have absolutely no chance
of going GOP due to the Electoral College system. These tired tactics
and failed arguments of the two dominating parties are beginning to be
seen for what they are: the last remnants of a fear-based political
landscape that is changing.
The election IS spoiled, but not by the Greens.
though the Republican and Democratic Parties were once third parties
themselves, they have shored up the political system to keep third
parties out. This battle continues over the issue of the presidential
debates. Neither of the establishment candidates wishes to share to
stage with a candidate like Dr. Stein who freely speaks truth to power -
a candidate who stands on a platform of building a sustainable economy
and creating a future that puts the dignity of Americans ahead of
Including Dr. Stein in the debates would do something unthinkable to
the Democrats and Republican candidates: show them as two peas from the
same, spoiled, pod. An alternative voice is urgently needed and Dr.
Stein's deserves to be heard.
Vote what you believe.
A simple enough
statement. If we all found the courage to do so, we would begin to
rebuild the country we deserve instead of settling for what gets left
The Green Party and our 2004 presidential nominee made
the Ohio Recount possible. If not for the continued determination of
elected Greens, we would not have municipal sick leave or minimum wage
and living wage policies in cities across the country. There would be no
movement to amend the Constitution to overturn the Citizens United
ruling and end the toxic influence of money in our political system. The
cause of equal marriage rights would not be as far along as it is
(because of Green mayors and mayoral candidates defying anti-marriage
laws in CA and NY). And the 100s of cities that passed anti-war and
anti-PATRIOT Act resolutions would likely have been many fewer, since
those efforts were also led by Green elected officials.
Meanwhile the establishment parties try to avoid our discontent by
changing the subject from the real problems we face, and making
elections all about preventing the other party from winning. In a way,
the Democrats and Republicans are each correct. Either one of them
winning would mean more of the same for America: maintaining a status
quo that continues to ruin what is best about the United States.
The Green Party and the Green New Deal will
shatter the status quo by addressing the real economic, social, and
political challenges we face at their root causes with specific and
already proven solutions. Vote for Jill Stein for President. Give a
mandate for the Green New Deal.
Join us and come be part of the solution. We are all in this together.
The e-mail address for this site is email@example.com.
all iraq news
the times of malta