You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: 540

PLAYS: 336

(Brian Jenkins - in 1977 terrorism was an abstract concept to most Americans)

As part of its weekly program "Options", National Public Radio in 1977 ran a lecture given by terrorism expert Brian Jenkins of The Rand Corporation on the new dimension of power garnered by the terrorists of the world. How technology had made it possible in the recent decade to make bolder and more costly strikes possible, hinting at how America was no longer isolated from these attacks.

Of course, in 1977 it seemed an abstract concept. Terrorism was something that happened in Europe or the Middle East, or even Japan. But not the U.S. - no, we were too powerful and too isolated for that. That's what we thought. Naturally, we were wrong - we just didn't know how wrong at the time.

Brian Jenkins: “What really are the major sources of the terrorist power today? First, it is the value, the high value that society places on human life. Faced with the option, faced with any sort of an option, governments are extremely reluctant to allow hostages to be killed. Despite, in many cases, popular pressure that a line must be drawn, that the thing must stop here, governments are extremely reluctant to have people killed, to have the blood on their hands. So the tremendous value we place on human life, and certainly I would not argue for the contrary, is one of the vulnerabilities in our society, and a vulnerability that terrorists can exploit and one which gives them tremendous power. That terrorists recognize and exploit this can be seen in the frequency in which the terrorists use the tactic of seizing hostages. Indeed, approximately a third of all incidents of international terrorism involved taking hostages. By hijacking airliners, taking over embassies or kidnapping individuals. Terrorists seize hostages whether diplomats, corporate executives, tourists; sometimes just anybody handy, to deliberately heighten the drama of the episode by placing human life in the balance, and thereby increasing their own leverage. In return for the release of hostages, terrorists have received millions of dollars in cash. In one single episode in Argentina they received sixty million U.S. dollars. I want to point out that is the equivalent to one third of that country’s national defense budget.”

Something that happened somewhere else, under someone else's watch, with someone else's government. The irony is that, in less than two years, we would be in the same situation so many else had been for so long. And a little over twenty years later, we would suffer the shock and horror of 9/11.

But in 1977 it seemed too absurd to imagine. Even though there were warning signs back then.

In which Andrew Bacevich schools David Frum on strategic defense policy issues. David Frum asks Dr. Bacevich how he would advise Obama (just around 11 minutes in):

What I would say is, Mr. President, you need to stop having meetings about Afghanistan. You need to start having meetings in which your national security team will help you identify what are the core principles that are informing US strategy that will deal with the problem of jihadism. And Mr. President, if you indeed give into this impulse to obsess about Afghanistan, ... then your administration will continue to have no strategy. You'll have a "Long War,"  so-called, he certainly going to run for re-election based on his record in Afghanistan, assuming that he does some variant of the options that are on the table, but he won't have a strategy. And I think that that's a tragedy, for the United States of America, at this stage of the game, to not have a strategy.

From his lips to Obama's ears. Highly recommended, if not only to watch Bacevich calmly and confidently destroy Frum, as Frum wriggles uncomfortably in his seat.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (1371)

PLAYS: (2466)

It didn't take Lou Dobbs long to appear on Fox News, and Bill O'Reilly was the joyful host. He initially tried to get Dobbs to slime over his departure, but Dobbs said that in all his years he was never told what to do or say and was never "talked to" about how he ran his show. As the interview wound down, Bill needed something a little juicy, so instead of asking Dobbs how he felt about Obama's policies so far, he phrased it as if President Obama will eat your babies, corrupt your spirit and lure you to sell your soul.

O'Reilly: Barack Obama, is he the devil?

Dobbs: He's not the devil, but he is certainly the man who is not making it easy to understand why he is making the public policy choices that he is. There has to be a better understanding from and can only from his expression to the American people, what is taking so long for his decision on Afghanistan. Why is it so necessary to turn 1/6th of the economy into the United States government, which has not showered itself with glory.

O'Reilly: So you don't think he's Satan, but you think he's mismanaging the country at this point.

Dobbs: I think, absolutely.

O'Reilly: OK, sorry I put words in your mouth.

Dobbs: No, I was excited. It was a pretty good choice.

Yeah, Bill. You only asked him if Obama was the Devil. What a jackass. And Dobbs just loved Obama being compared to Satan. Well, Dobbs should try and be the teabagger King. He'll fit right in. Maybe Tancredo can help on his campaign. he mimics every anti-Obama slur there is.

I think BillO is watching the CW's show "Supernatural". What a despicable way to ask Dobbs about Obama. Hey Lou, is President Bush the savior? Well, he sure is. If only those evil liberal devil worshipers would go away and let him blow up the entire Middle East, I believe the country would be better off, Bill.

During the 2008 presidential campaign, I documented 10, then 10 more and yet another 10 moments in the extremism of Mike Huckabee. Now, fresh off his victory in the straw poll at the so-called Values Voters Summit, the one-time Baptist minister and former Arkansas governor turned Fox News host called for the United States to leave the United Nations. Following his use of the late Ted Kennedy to fight mythical "death panels" and his tacit endorsement of ethic cleansing in the Middle East, the 2012 White House hopeful's latest statements can mean only one thing.

It's time for still another 10 moments in the extremism of Mike Huckabee:

31. Huckabee Calls for the U.S. to Leave the UN
32. Huckabee Uses Ted Kennedy to Push Death Panels Myth
33. Huckabee Warns of "Union of American Socialist Republics"
34. Huckabee Says Governors Should Ignore Court Rulings
35. Huckabee Sees "Hand of God" in Prop 8 Victory
36. Huckabee Claims Civil Rights of Gays Not Being Violated
37. Huckabee Opposes Two-State Solution in Middle East
38. Huckabee Calls for Abolition of IRS and Putting Politics in the Pulpit
39. Huckabee Parrots GOP's "Club Gitmo" Talking Point
40. Huckabee Headlines Electromagnetic Pulse Conference

31. Huckabee Calls for the U.S. to Leave the UN
The United Nations has been a favorite right-wing punching bag for generations, the bogeyman of Birchers and Birthers alike. At this weekend's "How to Take Back America" shindig (an event which featured sessions such as "How to Recognize Living under Nazis & Communists"), Mike Huckabee added his name to the list.

Looking to top John Bolton's hypothetical about lopping off 10 floors of the United Nations building, Huckabee called for casting the whole institution into the sea. To a standing ovation, Huckabee declared:

"It's time to get a jackhammer and to simply chip that part of New York City. Let it float into the East River, never to be seen again."

32. Huckabee Uses Ted Kennedy to Push Death Panels Myth
In their ever-escalating effort to derail health care reform, Republicans from former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin to Obama's ersatz negotiating partner Chuck Grassley warned of mythical government "death panels" which would "pull the plug on grandma."

To make his version of the case, Governor Huckabee turned to the example of the late Senator Kennedy. Just moments after criticizing Democrats for defying "good taste" by claiming "Congress must hurry and pass the health care reform bill and do it in his memory," Huckabee announced:

"It was President Obama himself who suggested that seniors who don't have as long to live might want to just consider taking a pain pill instead of getting an expensive operation to cure them. Yet when Sen. Kennedy was diagnosed with terminal brain cancer at 77, did he give up on life and go home to take pain pills and die? Of course not. He freely did what most of us would do. He chose an expensive operation and painful follow up treatments."

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: 48

PLAYS: 11

(Jerusalem 1948 - Same as it ever was - Same as it ever was)

With the recent news of the attempted kick starting of talks between Israelis and the Palestinians, I was reminded just how long this entire odyssey has been going on - a lot longer than many people have been on the planet, for one thing.

But it seems there was a time when the U.S. had actually considered sending troops over to the region, acting as a sort of buffer between factions. The notion that we'd still be over there, some sixty years later gives pause as to how it could end up with us now in Afghanistan. When, during the election John McCain entertained the possibility of the U.S. being in Iraq for a hundred years, everyone recoiled. But in retrospect, it appears we're rather good at suggesting those sorts of things. Thank God we don't act on our instincts all the time.

But in 1948, with the British getting ready to leave the region and fighting between Jews and Arabs going full tilt, the Chicago University Roundtable hosted a discussion, featuring several pundits (aka: "experts"as they were called at the time) to venture an opinion on whether our involvement in the Middle East was a good idea or not.

The opinions ran the gamut, although it's interesting to note that no one actually from the region (i.e. Arab or Jew) was included. So there is something of a strange bias to be had going into this discussion, one of an "armchair" viewpoint rather than one actually on the ground, with the possible exception of Arthur Creech-Jones who was Colonial Secretary in charge of Palestine at the time. But times have changed. I don't think this type of discussion would take place today (unless it was Fox). But it's interesting to see what factors formed an opinion some sixty years ago.

John A. Wilson: “First, Palestine cannot survive economically if it’s carved into two zones. Second, a policing and occupying army does not bring a country together. It rather pulls it apart. Let’s look at the other countries which have been carved apart and held apart by force. Germany and Austria have been arbitrarily divided into zones, cutting off the normal and traditional flow of goods. Four enforcing armies hold Germany apart and prevent normal economic life. In Asia, Korea is in exactly the same situation, cut by an arbitrary line into two zones. A drastic surgical operation divided India into a Muslim state and a Hindu state at a cost of perhaps a quarter of a million lives. Partition is bad economy in Germany, Austria, Korea and India. It will be bad in Palestine. Imagine American and Russian military contingents inside Palestine. Would they bring the country together? Or would they push it further apart? How soon could they leave? It is not a pleasant outlook. American and Russian troops eyeing each other in Palestine for our lifetime. Everyone who argues a population increase in Palestine has done so on the basis of potential water power there. Well certainly, a Jordan Valley Authority like our TVA would be a marvelous asset to Palestine.

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: 159

PLAYS: 12

(Periodically getting up close and personal, even in the 1950's)

Most people lately have assumed our involvement in the Middle East (other than Israel), has been a thing of recent vintage. It goes back a long, long ways, certainly our military involvement extends back at least to the Lebanon situation of July 31, 1958 where religious and political factions lead to an overthrow of the government in Lebanon. Similarly, a wave of assassinations and overthrows also took place between Jordan and Iraq (the assassination of King Faisal of Iraq, leading to a series of military regimes, ending with Saddam Hussein in the 1960's). Cold War tensions, brought on by military maneuvers on the USSR/Iranian border and the rise of Gamel Abdul Nasser of Egypt and just a general shift in the political landscape of the Middle East, brought about considerable nervousness in some quarters, particularly in Britain, France and the U.S.

UN Ambassador Henry Cabot Lodge was quick to point out these tensions in a news conference during a quickly called UN Security Council session.

Henry Cabot Lodge: “What is really happening is plain for all to see if you but lift up our eyes. The overthrow of the lawful government of Iraq, beginning with the assassination of the Crown Prince, and which was followed by a wave of assassinations throughout that unhappy country, is one dreadful fact. Then the attempt to subvert and overthrow Jordan, of which we have just heard, is another. And of course the effort directed from without to subvert Lebanon is familiar to everyone. That there is in the Middle East a common purpose to take over, everywhere. All at once. Clearly, there is a purpose, masterminded from one source. You can read all about it in the Cairo newspapers, or listen to the incessant radio broadcasts from Cairo to other Arab countries.”

The culprit in this case appeared to be Egypt, as Nassar was emerging as a potent leader in the Arab world. Of course, underneath all of it was the question of oil. Wouldn't you know?

Obama will appear on the teevee tonight, further ramping up his push for healthcare reform. In the meantime, the Blue Dogs are sharpening their teeth in hopes of further weakening the bill. I'm trying to remember if they ever expressed similar concerns over funding Mr. Bush's little Middle East adventure, but I seem to be drawing a blank. Hmm.

(CNN) -- As President Obama prepares to address the nation in a primetime news conference, some sources say Democratic grumbling about his plan for health care is growing louder.

One Democratic senator told CNN that some congressional Democrats are "baffled," and another senior Democratic source told CNN that those members are frustrated that that they're not getting more specific direction from him on health care.

"We appreciate the rhetoric and his willingness to ratchet up the pressure but what most Democrats on the Hill are looking for is for the president to weigh in and make decisions on outstanding issues," the senior Democratic congressional source said.

"Instead of sending out his people and saying the president isn't ruling anything out, members would like a little bit of clarity on what he would support -- especially on how to pay for his health reform bill," the source added.

Yeah, I talked to one of the reform staffers last night, who told me the real battle now is over how to pay for it. My source tells me a lot of these "reasonable" proposals being floated in this phase have the potential to inflict long-term damage on the bill, that the work being done on the bill is so arcane and complicated that showboating congressmen don't have a clue - and don't bother to inform themselves.

The Democratic leadership had hoped the work going on behind closed doors for months could bear fruit in time for the president's news conference Wednesday night.

But multiple Democratic sources told CNN that's looking very unlikely, and one senior Democratic source said some Democratic leaders are frustrated that Senate negotiators have, "repeatedly missed deadlines."

The fiscally conservative Blue Dog Coalition of Democrats said Tuesday night that they reached one breakthrough on controlling the cost of health care at a meeting with Obama, House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman and other House Democrats.

Blue Dog Rep. Mike Ross, D-Arkansas, told reporters after the meeting that the group came to a "verbal agreement," to add a "some type of hybrid of an independent Medicare advisory council " that would set reimbursement rates for health care providers to the House Democrats' bill. He referred to the agreement as a "breakthrough."

But Ross cautioned it was only one of 10 items that the Blue Dogs wanted changed.

I read this really interesting piece on Blue Dogs by David Sirota that pretty much sums up the problem:

Continue reading »

From The Daily Show:

President Obama delivers a sensitive speech in the Middle East, and it doesn't play well with the extremists at Fox News.

"Congress is asked to rush through a momentous decision, as if great armies were already on the march. I hear no armies marching. I hear a world crying out for peace".

I wonder how history will eventually judge Henry Wallace. Certainly no household name, Wallace was first Secretary of Agriculture in FDR's first term. During FDR's third term he was Vice-President. He had a dramatic split with Truman in 1946 and ran on the Progressive third party ticket in 1948. Arthur Schlesinger Jr. has an interesting essay on Wallace (linked here) written for the L.A. Times a while back. The address I'm putting up today is from a rally sponsored by The Progressive Citizens of America in March of 1947. At the time a civil war was going on in Greece and tensions were erupting with neighboring Turkey. Iran was in the midst of a civil war. In fact, the whole Middle East region was on the brink of major changes. All of this and the fact that Europe was still struggling to get back on its feet after the war and Russia was emerging as a major world power.
Wallace was a firm believer in the United Nations and was afraid it would go the way the League Of Nations had only a few years earlier. The question of oil as a reason for going to war started coming to light, and it's interesting to see how this particular argument has been played out repeatedly the past 60 or so years.

Wallace has been dismissed as naive, an idealistic relic in a world slipping into Cold War. It's worth wondering if even he could have anticipated the turn of events that took place a few months after this speech was given. Probably more interesting to consider if he had stayed in favor with the Roosevelt administration and continued as vice-President for a fourth term, how the world stage might have changed if he had become President in April of 1945.

(Henry Wallace with running mate Sen. Glenn H. Taylor in 1948)

(the never-ending saga of the Middle East - going back as far as the memory can see)

Another warmup of the Wayback Machine - this time to March 14, 1978. A typical average day - nothing special - nothing earth shattering. The hostage drama in Holland just came to a close, an hour before this broadcast. The Middle-East was doing what it seems to endlessly do. Buenos Aires was the site of prison riots The Senate was debating the Panama Canal Neutrality Treaty. The latest International scandal, Koreagate was running through the halls of Congress (the players making a comeback in 2005 under the heading "Food For Oil"). The Dollar was nosediving against the Yen - and Pope Paul had the flu.

Just another day - we all got through it. The earth didn't go off its axis. People died, people went insane and people got born.

And so it goes . . . .

(Dallas Townsend and the CBS World News Roundup)

The Guardian is reporting that despite widespread disgust among their journalists both the BBC and Sky News are adamant in their refusal to show this video tonight.

Sky News and the BBC have stood firm on their refusal to broadcast an emergency appeal for Gaza tonight on the grounds that it would jeopardise their neutrality as the corporation faced a growing revolt against the decision among its own journalists.

The BBC insisted it would not show the appeal by the Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC), an umbrella group of humanitarian charities including Oxfam, Save the Children and the Red Cross, in spite of renewed pressure from the public, ministers and MPs.

Pressure is also growing among BBC journalists, with sources reporting "widespread disgust" within its newsrooms. Sources have said there was "fury" at the BBC News morning meeting today, with news editors saying they had not been consulted about the decision not to show the appeal, which will be broadcast tonight on ITV, Channel 4 and Channel Five at about 6.20pm.

BBC journalists will tomorrow vote on a resolution put forward by the National Union of Journalists condemning the move, which has prompted more than 15,500 complaints to the corporation. The NUJ and broadcasting union Bectu have already written to the BBC describing the corporation's decision as "cowardly" and urging it to change its mind.

The BBC director general, Mark Thompson, ruled out a change of policy, saying it had a duty to cover the issue in a "balanced, objective way".

DOWNLOAD (23)

PLAY (76)

From Bill Moyers Journal. Bill Moyers reflects on the recent violence in the Middle East as well as the under-reported protests taking place in DC.

Continue reading »

Over there.

A woman wearing an explosive belt blew herself up near the entrance of a revered Shiite shrine Sunday morning in Baghdad, killing at least 37 people, many of them Shiite pilgrims, according to the Ministry of the Interior. As many as 53 others were wounded in the attack, which occurred during a Shiite holy month.

The suicide bombing outside the Imam Moussa Al-kadhim shrine in the Kadhimiyah neighborhood came nine days after a Dec. 26 car bomb killed 24 people and wounded 46 others after it had exploded on a busy road near the same shrine.The timing and location of each bombing appeared to be intended to reignite sectarian violence, from which Iraq had shown signs of emerging in recent months.

We're gonna go ahead and report this story, even though we run the risk of the GOP suing us for "taking McCain's quotes out of context." </snark> At a town hall meeting today, Senator McCain made a stunning admission when he announced that his energy policy would aim to reduce our dependence on Middle East oil, which would in turn ensure that we never have to fight another war there again.

Download | play Download | play

"My friends, I will have an energy policy which will eliminate our dependence on oil from Middle East that will then prevent us from having ever to send our young men and women into conflict again in the Middle East."

Think about how amazing this is. McCain is essentially saying that our quest to "spread democracy" throughout the Middle East is a sham. It has nothing to do with freeing oppressed people, or protecting Israel, or defending ourselves against future attacks. It's about gaining control of foreign oil. Stunning. Will this get any significant media play?

Digg It!

Tweety gets this exactly right:

"You know, if somebody else were to say that, they would be accused of being a communist, or radical, or a leftist...for John McCain, a war hero, to say that we're fighting in the Middle East to protect our oil sources is an astounding development."

On FOX News today, host Jon Scott followed up on a report that Secretary Gates is sending another carrier to the Gulf to serve as a "reminder" -- not an "escalation" -- to the Iranians by bringing in retired Special Forces Commander Tim Haake to comment. After Scott asks "why don't we just blow those little speed boats out of the water," Haake appears to conflate the Iranian boats with the 2000 attack on the USS Cole, which was also committed by small watercraft, but had nothing to do whatsoever with the Iranians.

Download | play Download | play

Whether or not you believe the conflation was intentional and explicit, I think the clip speaks to a larger point. It's amazing that the FOX host can ask so flippantly "why don't we just blow those little speed boats out of the water"?

It's like saying "why don't we commit an act of war against Iran"?

It really goes to the heart of why our foreign policy is so screwed up. We station warships and hundreds of thousands of troops in other people's backyards and then threaten to attack them if they dare get close. Contrary to what many believe, we don't own the world. And idiots like this FOX host seem to think that there's no big deal with policing the world, "blowing out of the water" those pesky Iranians if they dare patrol their own neighborhood. Imagine if an Iranian news show was talking so openly about blowing up American ships. It would be treated as a full blown declaration of war.

And I'm sure that second carrier Secretary Gates sent to the Gulf as a "reminder" doesn't rattle the Iranians and increase tensions at all.