Tag Archives: white

When Will Benjamin Netanyahu Finally Go Too Far?

by MilfordMnh Posted on January 25, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

I keep wondering if it’s ever possible for Benjamin Netanyahu to go too far. He’s treated President Obama with truly astonishing levels of contempt and disdain for nearly his entire tenure, and he’s done it in the apparent belief that his political support in the US is so strong and so bipartisan that he’ll never be held to account for it. And so far he hasn’t been.

But what about his latest stunt? The fact that John Boehner invited him to address Congress is hardly surprising. Boehner needed to poke Obama in the eye to demonstrate his conservative bona fides, and this was a perfect opportunity since he knew Netanyahu would deliver plenty of trash talk about Obama’s Iran policy. But the fact that Netanyahu kept the invitation a secret from the administration and failed to even notify them he was planning a visit—well, that’s a whole different story. As former US ambassador to Israel Martin Indyk put it, “Netanyahu is using the Republican Congress for a photo-op for his election campaign….Unfortunately, the US relationship will take the hit. It would be far wiser for us to stay out of their politics and for them to stay out of ours.”

And it turns out that even two Fox News hosts agree. Max Fisher relays the story:

Two prominent Fox News hosts, Chris Wallace and Shepherd Smith, harshly criticized Boehner and Netanyahu on Friday for secretly arranging a Netanyahu speech to Congress that is transparently aimed at undermining President Obama, and set up without the White House’s knowledge.

….”I agree 100 percent,” Wallace said when Smith read a quote from Indyk criticizing the Boehner-Netanyahu maneuver. Wallace went on:

And to make you get a sense of really how, forgive me, wicked, this whole thing is, the Secretary of State John Kerry met with the Israeli Ambassador to the United States for two hours on Tuesday, Ron Dermer. The ambassador, never mentioned the fact that Netanyahu was in negotiations and finally agreed to come to Washington, not to see the president, but to go to Capitol Hill, speak to a joint session of congress and criticize the president’s policy. I have to say I’m shocked.

Smith said, “it seems like Netanyahu’s government thinks we don’t pay attention and that we’re just a bunch of complete morons, the United States citizens, as if we wouldn’t pick up on what’s happening here.”

Shep Smith goes off the Fox reservation all the time, so perhaps his comments aren’t too much of a surprise. But although Wallace is no Sean Hannity, he’s fairly reliably conservative and even he was shocked.

So has Netanyahu finally gone over the line? So far I haven’t heard much criticism from sitting US politicians, so I’d have to say not. Not yet, anyway. But it sure seems like the day is going to come. No matter how close an ally Israel is, there’s only so much contempt their leaders can show for a sitting American president and his policies. Eventually the American public is going to lose patience, even the folks who aren’t huge Obama fans themselves.

It hasn’t happened yet. Maybe it never will. But it sure seems as if Benjamin Netanyahu is hellbent on pushing the line until he finally rings a bell he can’t unring. The only question now is whether he stays in office long enough to make that final, fatal mistake.

Link to original:

When Will Benjamin Netanyahu Finally Go Too Far?

Posted in alo, Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on When Will Benjamin Netanyahu Finally Go Too Far?

Obama Wants to Crack Down on Fracking Emissions

by DemetriHmi Posted on January 13, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

This story originally appeared in the Guardian and is republished here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

President Barack Obama will unveil a new plan to cut methane from America’s booming oil and gas industry ahead of the State of the Union address, in an attempt to cement his climate legacy during his remaining two years in the White House.

The new methane rules—expected ahead of the State of the Union speech next week—are the last big chance for Obama to fight climate change, campaigners said.

“It is the largest opportunity to deal with climate pollution that this administration has not already seized,” said David Doniger, director of the climate and clean air program at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Methane is the second biggest driver of climate change, after carbon dioxide. On a 20-year timescale, it is 87 times more powerful as a greenhouse gas.

US officials acknowledge that Obama will have to cut methane if he is to make good on his promise to cut US greenhouse gas emissions 17 percent from 2005 levels by 2020, and by 26 percent to 28 percent by 2025.

“It is the largest thing left, and it’s the most cost-effective thing they can do that they haven’t done already, and all the signs are there that they intend to step forward on that,” Doniger said.

The Environmental Protection Agency is expected to roll out a combination of regulations and voluntary guidelines for the oil and gas industry, people familiar with the plan said.

The rules represent Obama’s first big climate push on the oil and gas sector, after moving to cut emissions from power plants and, during his first term, cars and trucks.

But the clock is ticking. Any new EPA regulations would have to be finalized by the end of 2016—and Republicans in Congress and industry lobby groups are already mobilizing to oppose the standards.

Methane accounts for about 9 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, according to the EPA. The biggest share of this by far comes from the oil and gas industry, which has exploded over the last decade.

The US is now the world’s largest producer of natural gas, and is on track to become the world’s largest oil producer in 2015.

Most of those greenhouse gas emissions are from leaky equipment—faulty casing on newly fracked wells, but also millions of miles of pipelines and aging infrastructure.

The EPA had originally promised to announce a new methane plan by the end of last year.

The agency administrator, Gina McCarthy, indicated that the agency would combine regulations with voluntary guidelines for industry.

Unlike the power plant rules, which left industry a fair amount of latitude in cutting emissions, the methane standards are believed to be tightly focused on plugging leaks.

The new rules could directly target leaking valves and other equipment that allow methane to escape from wells, pipelines and other infrastructure.

The new rules could also be backed up with voluntary guidelines for other types of air pollutants that would also lower methane emissions.

“If you take steps to reduce volatile organic compounds, those steps would automatically have the secondary benefit of reducing methane emissions,” said Sandra Snyder, an environmental attorney at the Bracewell Giuliani law firm.

Read this article:

Obama Wants to Crack Down on Fracking Emissions

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, organic, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Obama Wants to Crack Down on Fracking Emissions

I Have Some Advice for Mitt Romney

by MonaPenington Posted on January 13, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The political media world has been in a tizzy these past few days due to the news that Mitt Romney is serious about taking a third stab at a presidential run. On Friday, the Wall Street Journal reported that Romney had told a group of Republican fat-cat funders—who else?—that he was pondering a 2016 bid. On Monday, the Washington Post revealed that Romney was trying to get the band back together, calling former aides and donors and informing them he was almost ready to jump in. With Jeb Bush, another GOP prince with a business career open to political attacks, plotting his own 2016 moves, Romney’s actions raised the possibility of a dynasty-versus-dynasty clash that would cause awkward conversations in country clubs and corporate boardrooms across the land, with the two tussling to win the hearts, minds, and mega-dollars of the GOP establishment. Given that the voting base of the Republican Party will likely be motivated by tea party passions, not centrism or concerns about electability, a Romney-Bush primary battle might be akin to a contest to make the best salad at a cannibals’ convention. Nevertheless, it promises to be a bitter and bare-knuckled brawl, as each camp has already begun shooting spitballs at the other.

For Romney, the key question is this: What would he do differently than last time? In 2012, he did manage to win the GOP nomination, but he achieved that within a profoundly weak Republican field. Rick Perry opposed his way into inconsequence. And Romney only had to vanquish Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Jon Huntsman, Ron Paul, Herman Cain, Tim Pawlenty, and Michele Bachmann—none of them serious contenders. In the general election, he was widely panned—even by Republicans and conservatives—as a less-than-stellar campaigner who could not fully exploit the external factors (a still-sluggish economy, low approval numbers for President Barack Obama) that afforded the Republicans a good chance of seizing the White House. And, of course, there was that 47 percent moment—for which Romney has been offering contradictory and factually-challenged explanations ever since.

Continue Reading »

Link:

I Have Some Advice for Mitt Romney

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on I Have Some Advice for Mitt Romney

WSJ: Mitt Romney Considering ’16 Presidential Bid

by VedaGLWCow Posted on January 9, 2015

Mother Jones

Wow! The Wall Street Journal just ripped open everyone’s Friday afternoon with this shocking, game-changing scoop:

This would be a good time to watch the 2014 Netflix documentary Mitt, which was the first time Romney signaled that he’d run again.

Have a good weekend, everyone.

View post: 

WSJ: Mitt Romney Considering ’16 Presidential Bid

Posted in Anchor, Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on WSJ: Mitt Romney Considering ’16 Presidential Bid

Could the GOP-controlled Congress actually raise the gas tax?

by Jonathan Davidson Posted on January 6, 2015

Could the GOP-controlled Congress actually raise the gas tax?

By on 6 Jan 2015commentsShare

Thanks to low gasoline prices, the average American family is expected to spend at least $550 less on gasoline this year than in 2014. Meanwhile, our country’s transportation infrastructure is crumbling after years of underfunding. Why not use some of Americans’ savings on gas to make repairs to the roads they’re using that cheap gas to drive on?

That’s the idea behind raising the federal gas tax, a concept being cautiously floated by a few politicians of both parties and a number of advocacy groups on the left and right. America hasn’t raised it since 1993, when it was set at 18.4 cents a gallon and not pegged to inflation. The tax is supposed to fund the U.S. Highway Trust Fund, but it isn’t bringing in enough money, so general treasury funds have been used to partially plug the hole while tens of billions of dollars of needed maintenance work has gone undone. Right now, infrastructure is funded through a short-term fix, implemented last summer, which expires in May.

Republican Sen. Bob Corker (Tenn.) is proposing to increase the tax by 12 cents a gallon over two years, and then index it to inflation. The tax hike would be offset by a decrease in income taxes, or some other means to make the change “revenue-neutral.” Sen. Jim Thune (R-S.D.) told Fox News Sunday that he’s open to at least considering the idea: “I don’t favor increasing any tax. But I think we have to look at all options. … It is important that we fund infrastructure.”

Many business-friendly groups, like the conservative U.S. Chamber of Commerce, favor a gas-tax increase to pay for infrastructure. The Chamber’s Janet Kavinoky told The New York Times that many in Congress are closeted supporters of the tax, but fear retribution if they come out and support the policy publicly.

As New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman put it last month, raising the gas tax would be “a hard political choice” but “a win for the climate, our country and our kids.” There’s increasing talk about raising gas taxes at the state level too.

The president isn’t anxious to raise the federal gas tax, though, as USA Today reports:

The White House is declining to endorse calls for gas tax hikes to pay for new road and bridge construction, but will look at anything Congress approves.

White House spokesman Josh Earnest says the administration wants to stick with its original plan to finance new infrastructure spending with revenue to be gained by closing tax loopholes that favor the wealthy.

And some politicians on the right continue to vehemently oppose a gas-tax hike, whether it’s offset or not. They say it would be fine to let the Highway Trust Fund go bankrupt, arguing that infrastructure maintenance should be left up to state and local governments, not the feds.

So a gas-tax increase might be more likely now than it was a few months ago, but not a lot more likely.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get stories like this in your inbox

AdvertisementAdvertisement

Read more: 

Could the GOP-controlled Congress actually raise the gas tax?

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Could the GOP-controlled Congress actually raise the gas tax?

Will Obama Get Answers From Mexico’s President on the Disappearance of 43 Students?

by BartSochab Posted on January 6, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

On Tuesday, Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto arrived in Washington to meet with President Barack Obama. Familiar topics, such as trade and the economy, are high on the leaders’ agenda. But Peña Nieto’s record on security—particularly the 2014 disappearance of 43 Mexican students taken by police and believed to be dead—will likely dominate this week’s meetings. So too will the sheer scope of Mexico’s eight-year drug war: Since 2007, it’s estimated that more than 100,000 Mexicans have been killed and some 20,000 disappeared.

Since taking office in 2012, Peña Nieto has enjoyed an “extraordinarily close” relationship with the Obama administration, and—rhetorically, at least—has sought to move from the militarized response to organized crime that characterized the presidency of his predecessor, Felipe Calderón. Nevertheless, human rights organizations and activist groups are calling on Obama to demand answers from Peña Nieto for the Mexican government’s failures. In a letter to Obama, Human Rights Watch claimed that Peña Nieto’s government “has largely failed to follow through on its own initiatives” to make the country safer, and called on the president to “ask Peña Nieto to explain exactly what steps he is taking to ensure that Mexico prosecutes abuses.”

The students’ disappearance isn’t just a Mexican problem. Under the Merida Initiative, a joint security partnership, the United States has given more than $2 billion to Mexican security forces since 2008. The funding—provided by American taxpayers—come with conditions, including that Mexico investigate police abuses. “Despite unequivocal evidence—including cases documented in the State Department’s own reports—that Mexico has failed to meet these requirements, your administration has repeatedly allowed the funds to be released,” Human Rights Watch wrote in the letter.

In a Monday press release, a senior White House official expressed the administration’s “strong belief” that those responsible for the students’ disappearance will be brought to justice, and nodded at the Mexican government’s arrest of more than 70 suspects. “I’m certain that this will be a part of the conversation tomorrow,” the official said.

The Obama administration’s assurances did not mollify the dozens of protesters who greeted Peña Nieto at the White House on Tuesday morning. Andrea Adum, who made the trip from Staten Island, said she wanted to see a stronger response, including reconsideration of Merida and the ousting of Peña Nieto’s government. “We know the government did nothing” to investigate the students’ disappearance, she said. The 70 arrested, she claimed, were “people the government were looking to blame, to try to calm the protesters down.” Protester Arnoldo Borja was pessimistic too: Nothing constructive will happen between the two leaders, he predicted. “It’s been massacre after massacre” in Mexico, he said. “After this, then what?”

Link: 

Will Obama Get Answers From Mexico’s President on the Disappearance of 43 Students?

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Safer, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Will Obama Get Answers From Mexico’s President on the Disappearance of 43 Students?

Quote of the Day: Obama’s Clean Record Is Evidence of How Corrupt He Really Is

by RosalynNewdegat Posted on December 31, 2014

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

From Jonah Goldberg, explaining the “culture” that causes Hillary Clinton’s supporters to attack 2016 primary opponent Jim Webb even if she hasn’t asked them to:

She’s created an infrastructure. The incentives are in place. The culture exists. It’s a bit analogous to Lois Lerner at the IRS. She didn’t need to be told by the White House to target conservative groups. She simply knew what she had to do.

I guess this is where we are. Even Darrell Issa’s committee report—Darrell Issa’s!—was forced to concede that whatever the IRS did or didn’t do in its targeting of nonprofit political groups, there’s no evidence the White House was involved in any way. This creates a real pickle. What’s a good conservative to do?

Answer: simply declare that the White House was involved—in fact, so deeply involved that there was no need for actual marching orders. The very lack of evidence is the best evidence we have of massive, deep-seated corruption in Obama’s inner circle. Case closed!

Continued here:  

Quote of the Day: Obama’s Clean Record Is Evidence of How Corrupt He Really Is

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Quote of the Day: Obama’s Clean Record Is Evidence of How Corrupt He Really Is

Obama Just Blew A Chance to Crack Down on Coal

by RonnieDonahue Posted on December 23, 2014

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

This story originally appeared on Grist and is published here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

On Friday, the Obama administration quietly passed up an opportunity to make the coal industry clean up its act.

The EPA issued a final rule on the disposal of coal ash, a byproduct of coal burning that contains toxic heavy metals such as arsenic, lead, and selenium. Up until now, disposal of coal ash hasn’t been regulated by the federal government at all. Now it will be regulated, but not very strongly.

“Your banana peel that you throw away has stronger protections when it winds up in a dump than coal ash does,” says Mary Anne Hitt, director of the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal campaign, who is highly critical of the new rule.

More than 100 million tons of coal ash are produced annually in the US, and much of it is simply dumped into open pits. In recent years, there have been large coal-ash spills into rivers in Tennessee and North Carolina.

Groups like the Sierra Club and Natural Resources Defense Council wanted EPA to declare coal ash “hazardous waste” and thereby subject it to more stringent federal regulation. Pesticides, for example, are in that category and so they must be disposed of “in a way that prevents releases … to the environment.” That means in a leakproof container meeting various requirements.

Coal ash will instead be categorized as “solid waste,” also known as garbage, and its disposal will be held to a lower standard. The rule does include requirements about where and how coal ash is stored that are intended to prevent leaching into groundwater. It has to be placed “above the uppermost aquifer,” and protected with a geomembrane and a two-foot layer of compacted soil. But environmentalists say that’s not strong enough. Also, old coal-ash dumps won’t have to be cleaned up or improved unless problems are discovered. And the EPA’s new rules won’t even be enforced by the federal government; enforcement will be left to the states.

Greens are disappointed. “We believe coal ash meets all the qualifications of being hazardous,” says Hitt. “It’s tied to cancer among other problems.”

NRDC legislative director Scott Slesinger issued a statement saying, “The EPA is bowing to coal-fired utilities’ interests and putting the public at great risk by treating toxic coal ash as simple garbage instead of the hazardous waste that it is.”

The climate angle

While most of enviros’ complaints focus on the risk to water, air, and surrounding communities, this decision also has bad implications for climate change.

Coal-burning power plants are the biggest source of US greenhouse gas emissions, and the coal industry’s ability to belch CO2 and conventional pollutants without paying for the damage they cause has made coal power cheaper than renewables.

President Obama is said by his fans to be doing everything he can to address greenhouse gas emissions. With Republicans in Congress blocking legislative action, Obama has supposedly put coal in a vise with the EPA’s new regulations on mercury and forthcoming regulations on CO2 emissions from power plants. The centerpiece of Obama’s Climate Action Plan is using his authority under existing laws to limit power-plant pollution or make coal uneconomical by requiring the industry to pay for cleaning up after itself.

But here Obama has passed up a prime opportunity to raise the cost of using coal. Indeed, industry’s complaints about earlier, stronger proposals from the EPA were that they would hobble the coal industry. Exactly — and that would have been a good thing.

“One of the reasons that coal has been such a fixture in our electric sector is they have huge loopholes that they don’t have to deal with pollution the way other sectors of the economy do,” says Hitt. “This is another one of the egregious loopholes that the industry has secured for itself.”

And make no mistake, this weak rule comes from the White House, not apolitical bureaucrats at EPA. As a ProPublica investigation in July demonstrated, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, which is part of the White House Office of Management and Budget, used its review of the proposed regulation to weaken it. From the story:

The EPA sent OIRA its proposed new rules in January 2013. The agency submitted five options from which it would choose the final rule. In its draft, the EPA indicated it would likely pick one of two options, which it listed as “preferred.” Both set relatively tough standards on power companies.

In the weeks leading to OIRA’s completed review of the coal ash limits, a number of utility industry lobbyists and lawyers met with the office. While OIRA makes public a list of attendees and documents given to the office’s representatives at meetings, it does not disclose the substance of their discussions. …

When the rule on coal ash effluent emerged from OIRA, three more options had been added, a diluting of the two options the EPA favored. OIRA’s draft dropped the tougher of EPA’s preferred rules and identified those new, less demanding options as favored.

The office also recast the EPA’s scientific findings. The agency initially stated that using ponds for storing the most toxic form of coal ash, the emissions captured in the smoke stack’s final filter, did “not represent the best available technology for controlling pollutants in almost all circumstances.” Revisions made during OIRA review recommended eliminating this conclusion, giving no explanation why.

Why do the coal and utility industries have such influence in a Democratic administration? What was Obama afraid would happen if he cracked down on them? That he’d be accused of fighting a “war on coal”? That his approval ratings would tank in coal country? That Democrats would lose Senate races in Kentucky and West Virginia? What, exactly, did he have to lose?

Obama has rewarded his enemies, screwed over his friends, and blown one of his precious few chances to help move us to a clean energy future.

View original post here – 

Obama Just Blew A Chance to Crack Down on Coal

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, ProPublica, Radius, Safer, solar, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Obama Just Blew A Chance to Crack Down on Coal

Carnivorous plants benefit from meatless Mondays

by VickieMaio Posted on December 23, 2014

green4us

Shield of Baal: Exterminatus (Interactive Edition) – Games Workshop

From the radiation washed plains of Tartoros to the ruined cityscapes of Asphodex and the cloud mines of Aeros, the Tyranids are winning their war of annihilation. The arrival of the Blood Angels and their Flesh Tearers allies carves a bloody rent in the xenos invasion, but are the Emperor’s finest too late to save […]

iTunes Store
White Dwarf Issue 47: 20 December 2014 – White Dwarf

A fantastic issue 47 of White Dwarf brings more than a little reason for seasonal cheer. We’ve got an exclusive minigame featuring Smaug the Dragon and Bilbo Baggins, a new entrant to the Hall of Fame, the latest from Forge World, Codex: Apocrypha, four exclusive datasheets for some of the forces engaged in the bloody […]

iTunes Store
The Life-Changing Magic of Tidying Up – Marie Kondo

This New York Times best-selling guide to decluttering your home from Japanese cleaning consultant Marie Kondo takes readers step-by-step through her revolutionary KonMari Method for simplifying, organizing, and storing. Despite constant efforts to declutter your home, do papers still accumulate like snowdrifts and clothes pile up like a tangled mess of noodles? Japanese cleaning consultant […]

iTunes Store
The Drunken Botanist – Amy Stewart

Sake began with a grain of rice. Scotch emerged from barley, tequila from agave, rum from sugarcane, bourbon from corn. Thirsty yet?  In The Drunken Botanist , Amy Stewart explores the dizzying array of herbs, flowers, trees, fruits, and fungi that humans have, through ingenuity, inspiration, and sheer desperation, contrived to transform into alcohol over […]

iTunes Store
Secrets of an Organized Mom – Barbara Reich

Mom’s Choice Awards Gold Award Recipient Professional organizer Barbara Reich offers a life-changing program—focused on decluttering and streamlining your home—that helps families live simpler, less chaotic lives: “Everyone should Barbarafy,” raves The New York Times . Mothers can feel like life is one never-ending loop. Just when one problem or responsibility is overcome, another one […]

iTunes Store
Codex: Blood Angels (Enhanced Edition) – Games Workshop

Forged in the flames of the Horus Heresy, the Blood Angels are among the greatest of the Emperor’s warriors. Revered on a million worlds and feared by Mankind’s myriad foes, for over ten thousand years they have fought in the Emperor’s name, earning countless honours and vanquishing his enemies. Yet for all their nobility and […]

iTunes Store
War Dogs – Rebecca Frankel & Thomas E. Ricks

Under the cover of night, deep in the desert of Afghanistan, a US Army handler led a Special Forces patrol with his military working dog. Without warning an insurgent popped up, his weapon raised. At the handler’s command, the dog charged their attacker. There was the flash of steel, the blur of fur, and the […]

iTunes Store
White Dwarf Issue 46: 13 December 2014 – White Dwarf

The Blood Angels go to war in this issue’s epic Battle Report, to coincide with Shield of Baal: Exterminatus, the concluding chapter of the Shield of Baal campaign – can Mephiston defend Phodia from the predations of the Swarmlord? Plus: How to paint the Necrons of the Mephrit Dynasty and the Flesh Tearers. About the […]

iTunes Store
How to Raise the Perfect Dog – Cesar Millan & Melissa Jo Peltier

From the bestselling author and star of National Geographic Channel’s Dog Whisperer , the only resource you’ll need for raising a happy, healthy dog. For the millions of people every year who consider bringing a puppy into their lives–as well as those who have already brought a dog home–Cesar Millan, the preeminent dog behavior expert, […]

iTunes Store
Mephiston: Lord of Death – David Annandale

The Blood Angel once known as Calistarius is no more. In his stead lingers a remnant of that proud scion of Sanguinius. He is a wraith, a dark tale to chill blood, an inscrutable enigma. He is Mephiston, Lord of Death. As Chief Librarian of the Blood Angels Chapter, his powers are formidable, his legend […]

iTunes Store

Link:  

Carnivorous plants benefit from meatless Mondays

Posted in eco-friendly, Everyone, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, Monterey, ONA, organic, PUR, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Carnivorous plants benefit from meatless Mondays

How Will We Look Back on Drone Strikes in 2019?

by NielPostma231 Posted on December 18, 2014

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

This story first appeared on the TomDispatch website.

It was December 6, 2019, three years into a sagging Clinton presidency and a bitterly divided Congress. That day, the 500-page executive summary of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s long fought-over, much-delayed, heavily redacted report on the secret CIA drone wars and other American air campaigns in the 18-year-long war on terror was finally released. That day, committee chairman Ron Wyden (D-OR) took to the Senate floor, amid the warnings of his Republican colleagues that its release might “inflame” America’s enemies leading to violence across the Greater Middle East, and said:

“Over the past couple of weeks, I have gone through a great deal of introspection about whether to delay the release of this report to a later time. We are clearly in a period of turmoil and instability in many parts of the world. Unfortunately, that’s going to continue for the foreseeable future, whether this report is released or not. There may never be the ‘right’ time to release it. The instability we see today will not be resolved in months or years. But this report is too important to shelve indefinitely. The simple fact is that the drone and air campaigns we have launched and pursued these last 18 years have proven to be a stain on our values and on our history.”

Though it was a Friday afternoon, normally a dead zone for media attention, the response was instant and stunning. As had happened five years earlier with the committee’s similarly fought-over report on torture, it became a 24/7 media event. The “revelations” from the report poured out to a stunned nation. There were the CIA’s own figures on the hundreds of children in the backlands of Pakistan and Yemen killed by drone strikes against “terrorists” and “militants.” There were the “double-tap strikes” in which drones returned after initial attacks to go after rescuers of those buried in rubble or to take out the funerals of those previously slain. There were the CIA’s own statistics on the stunning numbers of unknown villagers killed for every significant and known figure targeted and finally taken out (1,147 dead in Pakistan for 41 men specifically targeted). There were the unexpected internal Agency discussions of the imprecision of the robotic weapons always publicly hailed as “surgically precise” (and also of the weakness of much of the intelligence that led them to their targets). There was the joking and commonplace use of dehumanizing language (“bug splat” for those killed) by the teams directing the drones. There were the “signature strikes,” or the targeting of groups of young men of military age about whom nothing specifically was known, and of course there was the raging argument that ensued in the media over the “effectiveness” of it all (including various emails from CIA officials admitting that drone campaigns in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Yemen had proven to be mechanisms not so much for destroying terrorists as for creating new ones).

Continue Reading »

Continued:  

How Will We Look Back on Drone Strikes in 2019?

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, Everyone, FF, GE, Green Light, LAI, LG, ONA, oven, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on How Will We Look Back on Drone Strikes in 2019?