'Power corrupts.' 15 e-mails seize on that notion and insist Jason Ditz (Antiwar.com) is describing that when lumping Nouri al-Maliki and Haider al-Ibadi together.
Oh, is that what he was doing?
He was executing a bromide for sentence after sentence?
Woody Allen made the point more clearly and with humor in Sleeper, but okay.
If Jason Ditz has information to bring forward on al-Ibadi, he should do so.
For example, the outrage Americans would have felt in 2006, when Bully Boy Bush made Nouri prime minister, might have ended US involvement immediately. It certainly would have prevented all the help and assistance the US government gave Nouri over the years if most Americans had been aware that, in exile, Nouri took part in attacks US institutions and US soldiers.
The man who can't stop screaming "terrorist!" today is in fact someone with a history rooted in terrorism. Frontline (PBS) even had to touch on it in their recent Iraq special.
Now if Ditz knows al-Ibadi took part in similar actions, he should, by all means, make that claim publicly.
I've not argued al-Ibadi is a saint. I've not argued on his behalf. Check the snapshots. Iraq needs a reset. He could provide that.
I think it is very dangerous and very destructive to do what Ditz is doing.
If he knows or suspects something, speak up.
But he doesn't appear to know anything and he's smearing al-Ibadi.
The press had a role in the violence uptick following the April elections.
Instead of reporting, they wanted to tell you it was a sure thing Nouri would get a third term. As they repeated that over -- that falsehood -- you saw the violence increase even more.
The press took away hope and did so not based on facts but based on gossip and conventional 'wisdom.'
Now there's a chance at a reset and here comes Ditz saying, "It's all the same, they're both the same."
Are they? Then back it up.
If you can't, why are you saying that because saying that has an impact in Iraq.
So if you don't know anything, sit your tired ass down.
I like Glen. We highlight him all the time here. We make him a truest voice of the week all the time at Third. Black Agenda Report's a great website.
If anyone's confused about the critique of Glen's statements yesterday, that's my fault.
A) I really wasn't into calling Glen out because he does do great work and B) it was a topic I'm not really into discussing.
From Ava and my "Media: Barack Lies, Cher Tweets and Martha Plays (Ava and C.I.):"
Cher notes that the group -- she doesn't define it and shouldn't have to, she's Tweeting; but few in the press have attempted to define it -- said it would take the battle to New York.
What is she Tweeting about?
Michael Daly (Daily Beast) reported in June:
When Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi walked away from a U.S. detention camp in 2009, the future leader of ISIS issued some chilling final words to reservists from Long Island.The Islamist extremist some are now calling the most dangerous man in the world had a few parting words to his captors as he was released from the biggest U.S. detention camp in Iraq in 2009.
We've noted that (barely) and failed to emphasize it. It's one of those 'pleasing' tales. We're not calling Daly or King a liar, we're just not vested into that story.
If it is true, two points. (A) He was released from US custody under Barack. (As were the League of Righteous but let's keep this simple.) (B) The comment could be an intended threat, could be mere words, could be any number of things.
Again, we're not too vested in it.
Cher next Tweeted:
[. . .]
Again, I'm not vested in the claim, I have more important to focus on. That said, yesterday
Glen Ford (Black Agenda Report) offered:
The U.S. corporate media were more interested in the rest of al-Baghdadi’s message, in which he warned Washington that “soon enough, you will be in direct confrontation – forced to do so, God willing. And the sons of Islam have prepared themselves for this day. So wait, and we will be waiting, too.” For most self-obsessed Americans, this was received as a threat to attack “the Homeland.” However, downtown Manhattan is not on the Caliphate leader’s map. Al-Baghdadi meant that the American strategy of financing Muslim muppets to fight imperialism’s wars is kaput, and that the Pentagon will soon have to do its own dirty work, dressed in “Crusader” uniform.
While I don't take the tale too seriously, I think Glen's just gone beyond tortured logic -- in fact, he's water boarded logic with that nonsense.
"I'll see you in New York" in 2009 now means something that it couldn't possibly have meant. Glen's made al-Baghdadi not just a strategist but also the ultimate seer who, leaving a prison in 2009, knew what was going to happen in 2014. And knows where it's going to go in the next five years.
al-Baghdadi as the new Nostradamus? Not buying it.
Any confusion over my critique of Glen is my fault because I really just let it drop and because I wasn't in the mood to criticize him and I'm really not wanting to popularize the folk tales of al-Baghdadi.
On Ditz, if he's got something on the new prime minister-designate, he needs to come forward. But I'm not seeing it. What I am seeing is a man who giggled and tickled with Scott Horton over how wonderful Nouri was and how he was sticking it to the US and other nonsense is now supposedly offended by Nouri and wants everyone to know that al-Abadi is just like Nouri.
And wants people to know that while offering no proof (neither evidence nor even real accusations) and while failing to own up to the fact that, as late as 2012, Ditz was on board with Nouri anytime he and Scott Horton got to talking for 'Antiwar' Radio.
Let's be really clearly that Ned Parker had already exposed Nouri's use of secret prisons. Let's be clear that Nouri was already targeting journalists. And there was Ditz giggling with Horton about how great Nouri was and how he stood up to Barack and blah, blah, blah.
If Ditz and Horton need to be spanked to shoot their load, more power to them. I'm not going to judge them. We all have our kinks. But how about you take your S&M role play out of your political 'analysis'? Your desire to be dominated really needs to stop with political analysis because you embarrass yourself as you cling to this or that man in your role play fantasies that have them 'striking back' against the US and therefore worthy of your devotion.
Sarah Mimms and Matt Berman (National Journal) are a must read this morning.
The following community sites -- plus Jody Watley, On the Wilder Side, The Diane Rehm Show, McClatchy, Foreign Policy, Pacifica Evening News and Antiwar.com -- updated:
The e-mail address for this site is firstname.lastname@example.org.
iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq
all iraq news national iraqi news agency iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraqiraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq
iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraqiraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq
iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq iraq