Trending Topics:

New survey shows Americans want a more progressive foreign policy and, yes, that includes Israel

News
on 94 Comments

During the recent Democratic debate in Ohio, Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard asked Senator Elizabeth Warren if she would join her in calling for an end to “the regime change war in Syria.”

“So, look, I think that we ought to get out of the Middle East,” Warren responded. “I don’t think we should have troops in the Middle East. But we have to do it the right way, the smart way.”

Warren’s answer was enough to rankle Democratic frontrunner Joe Biden. “I was surprised last night in the debate,” he told a crowd in Iowa the next day. “One of my colleagues said we should remove all troops from the Middle East.”

A new report released by the progressive think tank Data for Progress shows that Warren’s sentiment is more in line with voters than Biden’s is. The group polled over 1,000 people on issues of foreign policy. “We found that voters’ attitudes stand in stark contrast to the hesitation demonstrated by elected leaders to enact major shifts in national-security policy,” it concludes, “Many progressive proposals have bipartisan support, and some have particular resonance among Democratic voters.”

Here are some of the report’s major findings:

• 50% of voters support a repeal of the Muslim Ban (74% of Democratic voters)

• 52% support closing the detention center at Guantanamo Bay (74% of Democratic voters)

•  67% want a negotiated peace agreement with North Korea (63% of Democrats, 76% of Republicans, and 64% of independents)

What about military aid to Israel, the supposed third rail of politics that neither party can effectively challenge? 46% support conditioning aid to Israel in an effort to stop its inhumane treatment of Palestinians. That includes 65% of Democratic voters.

The Israel statistics fall in line with another report that Data for Progress put out last month that generated similar numbers over the topic of leveraging military aid to the country. “These results suggest that Democratic voters are not holding Israel to a different standard than they would hold any other recipient of US military aid dollars,” Emma Saltzberg, a Data Progress fellow who is also a co-founder of the Jewish, anti-occupation group IfNotNow, wrote in announcing those findings. “They also suggest that Democratic politicians who float the possibility of changes to the US–Israel aid relationship do so with the support of their party’s voters.”

Data for Progress isn’t the only group that put out a foreign policy report this week. The Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) released research detailing how Medicare for All could be funded by slashing the United States military budget. Medicare for All was also a hot topic during the debate as Warren and Senator Bernie Sanders were both criticized by the other candidates for endorsing such a plan despite its costs.

Addressing the findings in a New York Times op-ed, IPS’ National Priorities Project director Lindsay Koshgarian writes that the necessary money for Medicare for All could be freed up via moves like a nuclear weapon ban, the end of military partnerships with private contractors, and production cuts for the F-35. “Over 18 years, the United States has spent $4.9 trillion on wars, with only more intractable violence in the Middle East and beyond to show for it,” points out Koshgarian. “That’s nearly the $300 billion per year over the current system that is estimated to cover Medicare for All (though estimates vary). While we can’t un-spend that $4.9 trillion, imagine if we could make different choices for the next 20 years.”

There’s certainly indications that such a plan might be more popular among voters than most lawmakers might think.

Michael Arria

Michael Arria is the U.S. correspondent for Mondoweiss.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

94 Responses

  1. Citizen on October 18, 2019, 7:03 pm

    Tulsi Gabbard has been making your point all along.

    • Sibiriak on October 18, 2019, 10:20 pm

      Yeah, well, Gabbard is being groomed by the Russians as a third party candidate to keep Trump in power. ““She’s the favorite of the Russians. They have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her so far.”

      https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/oct/18/hillary-clinton-hints-russia-is-grooming-tulsi-gabbard-as-third-party-candidate

      • Citizen on October 19, 2019, 1:26 am

        Hillary’s insane.

      • RoHa on October 19, 2019, 1:56 am

        I like the way you keep a straight face while saying that.

      • snaidamast on October 19, 2019, 10:03 am

        And you believe anything the Witch Hillary Clinton says? How dumb…

      • Misterioso on October 19, 2019, 10:03 am

        @Sibiriak

        “Yeah, well, Gabbard is being groomed by the Russians as a third party candidate to keep Trump in power.”

        Sigh. And I’ve got a couple of bridges for sale.

      • Keith on October 19, 2019, 11:04 am

        MISTERIOSO- “Sigh. And I’ve got a couple of bridges for sale.”

        Sibiriak is, once again, being sarcastic. You Too?

      • Mooser on October 19, 2019, 1:50 pm

        Perhaps Tulsi Gabbard gave us the answer when she appeared on Tucker Carlson’s FOX show yesterday.

      • Keith on October 19, 2019, 5:32 pm

        SIBIRIAK- “Yeah, well, Gabbard is being groomed by the Russians as a third party candidate to keep Trump in power.”

        Russiagate. Ukrainegate. And now Cohngate. Isn’t it strange that suddenly there is all of this interest in Roy Cohn, Trump’s alleged mentor? What do we know about Trump-Cohn that we didn’t know 4 years ago? Why not then? For starters, Hillary WANTED Trump to be the GOP nominee. Secondly, There is enough filth to tar everyone, not just Trump.

        So they are gambling that without Hillary as a candidate, they can surgically isolate Cohn and Trump as the consummate bad apples. That is what “Where’s My Roy Cohn” tries to do. It zeroes in on Cohn and his “protege” Donald Trump. What Matt Tyrnauer says about these two scumbags is more-or-less true. What he leaves out constitutes lying by omission. No mention about Cohn’s sexual blackmail operations and his relationship to the FBI, CIA, Mossad, and numerous Jewish Zionist organizations. Perhaps that is why Tyrnauer is alive and the film released. The reality is that Roy Cohn was an extreme example of the essential systemic rot. Can the Democrats/CIA pull it off without the toilet overflowing? Who knows? Perhaps Trump will hang himself like Jeffrey Epstein. Some quotes for you.

        “While President Trump is clearly connected to both Epstein and Cohn, Cohn’s network also extends to former President Bill Clinton, whose friend and longtime political advisor, Richard “Dirty Dick” Morris, was Cohn’s cousin and close associate. Morris was also close to Clinton’s former communications director, George Stephanopoulos, who is also associated with Jeffrey Epstein.” (Whitney Webb) https://www.mintpressnews.com/shocking-origins-jeffrey-epstein-blackmail-roy-cohn/260621/

        “Among Cohn’s closest friends were Barbara Walters, to whom Cohn often referred as his “fiancee” in public, and whom he later introduced to the head of the U.S. Information Agency, Chad Wick, and other high rollers in the Reagan White House. Yet, Walters was just one of Cohn’s powerful friends in the media, a group that also included Abe Rosenthal, executive editor of the New York Times; William Safire, long-time New York Times columnist and New York Magazine contributor; and George Sokolsky of The New York Herald Tribune, NBC and ABC. Sokolsky was a particularly close friend of both Cohn and former FBI director J. Edgar Hoover, whose involvement in Cohn’s sexual blackmail operation is described in Part I of this investigative series. Sokolsky ran the American Jewish League Against Communism with Cohn for several years and the organization later named its Medal of Honor after Sokolsky.” (Whitney Webb) http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51999.htm

        “Cohn, whose influence over the press has already been detailed, forged close ties with the director of the U.S. Information Agency, Chad Wick, even hosting a luncheon in Wick’s honor that was widely attended by influential figures in the conservative press, as well as senators and representatives. Soon after, then-CIA Director and Cohn friend William Casey was spearheading an extensive PR campaign aimed at shoring up public support for Reagan’s Latin American policies, including support of the Contra paramilitaries.” (Whitney Webb) http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51999.htm

        “Two years later, in 1983, Ronald Lauder — whose only professional experience at that point was working for his parent’s cosmetics company — was appointed to serve as United States Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for European and NATO Affairs. Soon after his appointment, he served on the Dinner Tribute Committee for a dinner hosted by the Jewish fraternal and strongly pro-Israel organization B’nai B’rith, the parent organization of the controversial Anti-Defamation League (ADL), in Roy Cohn’s honor. Cohn’s influential father, Albert Cohn, was the long-time president of B’nai B’rith’s powerful New England-New York chapter and Roy Cohn himself was a member of B’nai B’rith’s Banking and Finance Lodge.” (Whitney Webb) https://www.mintpressnews.com/mega-group-maxwells-mossad-spy-story-jeffrey-epstein-scandal/261172/

      • Keith on October 19, 2019, 6:58 pm

        MOOSER- “Perhaps Tulsi Gabbard gave us the answer when she appeared on Tucker Carlson’s FOX show yesterday.”

        Since you didn’t provide a link, I can only assume that your primary purpose was to dishonestly conflate Tulsi Gabbard with Tucker Carlson and FOX News. Gabbard was on Tucker Carlson’s show to respond to Hillary Clinton’s preposterous assertion that Gabbard and Jill Stein are Russian assets. It appears that Hillary has morphed into a female version of Roy Cohn in a pantsuit. “Are you now or have you ever been an anti-imperialist peacenik?” Below is a link to Hillary’s podcast smear and Tulsi’s response on Tucker Carlson.
        http://thesaker.is/hillary-accuses-both-tulsi-gabbard-and-jill-stein-of-being-russian-agents-tulsi-gabbard-fires-back/

      • Misterioso on October 19, 2019, 7:14 pm

        https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/10/democratic-hopeful-criticises-clinton-russia-remarks-191019074533344.html

        “US Democratic hopeful criticises Clinton over Russia remarks” Al Jazeera, Oct. 19/19

        EXCERPT:
        “Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard fires back at former first lady over comments suggesting she was being groomed by Russia.”

        “US Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard has fired back at Hillary Clinton after the former secretary of state appeared to call her ‘the favourite of the Russians’ in the 2020 elections race.

        “‘I think they’ve got their eye on somebody who’s currently in the Democratic primary, and they’re grooming her to be the third-party candidate,’ Clinton said on the ‘Campaign HQ’ podcast that first aired on Thursday.

        “‘She’s the favourite of the Russians. They have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her so far.’

        “Clinton, the 2016 Democratic presidential candidate, did not name Gabbard directly, but the Hawaii congresswoman essentially acknowledged she was the target by blasting out a stunning Twitter thread against the former first lady on Friday.

        “‘Great! Thank you @HillaryClinton. You, the queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party for so long, have finally come out from behind the curtain,’ Gabbard ranted at her fellow Democrat.”

      • Another Dave on October 20, 2019, 8:35 am

        The thing is…

        Hillary didn’t mention Gabbard in her tweet. She said the Russians were hoping to groom a Democrat to run as a third party candidate. It was at that point that Gabbard spoke up to deny that she would do such a thing. Like a cheating spouse with a guilty conscience. Then the other Russian assets spoke up; Jill Stein and Donald Trump…

        I know there are some on this site who hate her as much as the Republicans do… But she was right about Donald Trump being utterly unfit for the job of president.

      • annie on October 20, 2019, 11:55 am

        she was right about Donald Trump being utterly unfit for the job of president.

        she, along with millions of other people. are you suggesting clinton has some predilection for accurate prediction in comparing trump being a shitty president w/the ridiculous highfalutin allegation gabbard is groomed by russia?

        She said the Russians were hoping to groom a Democrat… It was at that point that Gabbard spoke up to deny..Like a cheating spouse with a guilty conscience.

        really?

        “They have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her so far,” Clinton said.

        is that your idea of “hoping to groom a democrat”? before gabbard affirmed she wasn’t running 3rd party she blasted clinton showing no hesitation, guilt or fear whatsoever. she nailed her for what she is, just like she nailed harris. not at all like a cheating spouse with a guilty conscience! in fact quite the opposite.

        Clinton’s team also noted that some of Gabbard’s foreign policy views align closely with Russian interests.

        everyone knows exactly who clinton was talking about, don’t try to weasel out of it because clinton didn’t name her by name. only propagandists pull like that.

      • annie on October 20, 2019, 12:02 pm

        has everyone seen this idiocy? this msnbc panel is sitting around discussing how gabbard didn’t actually deny she was a russian agent. this is how glaringly propagandizing our media has become

        https://twitter.com/MarkAmesExiled/status/1185701901637165056

      • Mooser on October 20, 2019, 12:45 pm

        “Gabbard was on Tucker Carlson’s show to respond to Hillary Clinton’s preposterous assertion…”

        Oh gosh, I don’t blame her for it. Where else could she go for a fair hearing and to make her views known to her base?

      • eljay on October 20, 2019, 12:54 pm

        || Another Dave: … Hillary didn’t mention Gabbard in her tweet. She said the Russians were hoping to groom a Democrat to run as a third party candidate. … ||

        Sounds like the Russians haven’t yet finished grooming Hillary so that she can add her name to the list of Democratic candidates.

        || … But she was right about Donald Trump being utterly unfit for the job of president. ||

        I wonder when she’ll conclude that she’s unfit for the job.

      • Mooser on October 20, 2019, 1:52 pm

        And as Ms. Gabbard keeps telling me in her ads, she has “a soldier’s principles”. That’s the ad which keeps turning up.
        She may have ‘principles’, but she sure ain’t got no algorithm.

      • Keith on October 20, 2019, 5:51 pm

        MOOSER- ” Where else could she go for a fair hearing and to make her views known to her base?”

        Not CNN or MSNBC, that’s for sure! What? Three years after neoliberal warmonger Hillary lost to Donald Trump because of her abysmal record, she is still running against Putin and the Russians! And she can count on your support even as she now begins channeling Roy Cohn! Incredible! The Democrat’s main problem is that since they have completely abandoned their traditional base, they cannot even think about running on the issues, hence, they have to create villains to run against. Below is a link to Aaron Mate interviewing Max Blumenthal in regards to this matter. It is a 22 minute video well worth watching. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRp7iEVZD6c

      • RoHa on October 20, 2019, 8:25 pm

        Moser, we know she’s got her man, so the big question is whether she’s got music.

      • eljay on October 20, 2019, 8:27 pm

        || Another Dave: … eljay; there were two choices in 2016, are you seriously suggesting that Trump was the better person for the job?

        Nope. I didn’t suggest it, say it or imply it.

        || … I think the both of you aren’t very happy with how things have gone, but will never admit you were wrong. ||

        Wrong about what? That neither Trump nor Clinton is fit to be president? There no wrong to admit.

      • RoHa on October 20, 2019, 8:42 pm

        I have to say that I’m very impressed with the Russians.

        They have been able to suborn Americans and sneakily manipulate the American political process so as to get one Kremlin agent into the presidency, and set up another agent to split the opposition so as to ensure a second term for the first one.

        Is there no limit to their fiendish cunning?

        Since their evil plotting is so successful, it might be easier for the Americans to simply hand the keys to the White House direct to Mr Putin. Why waste any more time on a battle of wits for which the Americans are clearly ill-equipped?

      • RoHa on October 20, 2019, 9:04 pm

        Sorry, Mooser, I accidentally left out an o. No insult intended.

      • Keith on October 21, 2019, 10:22 am

        ROHA- “Is there no limit to their fiendish cunning?”

        Yes, and all at a fraction of the cost Goldman Sachs paid Hillary for worthless speeches, not to mention the $millions that Ukrainian oligarchs paid to the Clinton Foundation. Cunning and frugal.

      • pjdude on October 21, 2019, 11:56 am

        so how do you all deal with the fact that russian state media is overreporting on gabbard for a candidate with like 2% of the vote and has zero chance of the nomination?

      • Mooser on October 21, 2019, 12:29 pm

        Tulsi heard me! She is offering me a platform of “aloha and love”.

      • Mooser on October 21, 2019, 12:48 pm

        “Sorry, Mooser, I accidentally left out an o. No insult intended”

        None taken. “RoHa”! In fact that was probably the original spelling. Until it was changed to honor and celebrate North America’s largest member of the deer family. Our family motto: “Nos omnes greges” ( “All have herd of us!”)

      • eljay on October 21, 2019, 12:54 pm

        || pjdude: so how do you all deal with the fact that russian state media is overreporting on gabbard for a candidate with like 2% of the vote and has zero chance of the nomination? ||

        Maybe they appreciate an American politician who doesn’t blindly call for war with Russia? Dunno. I suspect they also appreciate(d) Ron Paul.  :-)

      • Mooser on October 21, 2019, 12:58 pm

        “has everyone seen this idiocy?”

        Maybe MSNBC could apply some of its vast investigatory resources and get to the bottom of this. I would think Ms. Gabbard’s financing would be as transparent as any Democrat’s.

      • Keith on October 21, 2019, 2:24 pm

        PJDUDE- “so how do you all deal with the fact that russian state media is overreporting on gabbard for a candidate with like 2% of the vote and has zero chance of the nomination?”

        RT America or the Russian speaking media inside Russia? If RT America, they provide a platform for alternative media for those who otherwise would be restricted to MSN lies and propaganda. Chris Hedges, for example. In any event, RT America’s influence is slight, Russian domestic media nil. And attacking Third Party candidates and alternative websites highlights Hillary Clinton’s totalitarian mindset.

      • Tuyzentfloot on October 21, 2019, 4:50 pm

        so how do you all deal with the fact that russian state media is overreporting on gabbard for a candidate with like 2% of the vote and has zero chance of the nomination?

        This is interesting really, because this idea is a natural consequence of generally distrusting Gabbard. An intuitive link is made behind Russian scheming and local media paying attention to Gabbard.
        But in fact if there would be russian scheming does it make sense to pay attention to her in the local media? You can just as well turn it around. Claim the opposite. Russia is remarkably quiet about Gabbard. Aha! That tells something!
        In fact it is no use trying to combine Russian scheming and russian media.
        I would postulate that there has been no study about how often Gabbard is being discussed in Russia. Someone searched for her, found her being mentioned and quickly came up with the claim that they are all talking about her. Nobody ever checked. Because that is how it works. Eventually they’ll be talking about her of course, self fullfilling prophecy.

      • Tuyzentfloot on October 21, 2019, 5:06 pm

        Here I find one of these sources saying everyone is extolling Gabbard, and a reply. https://twitter.com/DrRadchenko/status/1186169336983146501
        Oh, and only flemish people would understand why the name Ratchenko is funny.

      • pjdude on October 21, 2019, 5:19 pm

        this is laughable. you all hate that israel interferes in us affairs but are perfectly ok with russian interference. now im not saying she is directly working with the russians. but its a fact that there is russian bot activity assciotated with her campaign in trying to promote her. the fact remains tulsi gabbard is ok with authortarianism so long as they are anti muslim. she has ties to the sangh parivar groups that are responsible for politcal violence and alledgedly terrorism. all the “enhanced interogation” things israel does, she supports. she has flat out defended torture.

      • fyrebird on October 21, 2019, 11:02 pm

        Hillary Clinton seems to be a believer in her own fantasies. Putting aside dark Russian conspiracies and the memory of Hillary Clinton’s violent threats and world crimes, Tulsi Gabbard may well be the new American false prophet. First we had liberal – including liberal ‘no fly zone over Libya but not Gaza’ Zionist opportunists – pine after Brand Obama. Then Hillary Clinton, who actively recruited women radicalised by Brand Trump. After Liberals, it’s the Left’s turn to believe in Tulsi Gabbard – a former and proud member of the imperial guard – radicalised in a weird mixture of right-wing nationalism, manifest destiny and Hindu supremacy with her Aloha chants and dangerous opportunism. Seems the ridiculousness will never end. The new left is the old liberal in terms of make-believe. The way I see it, despite all his weaknesses, Bernie Sanders is a far more human figure than Gabbard. Realistically speaking I see him unleashing less damage.

      • echinococcus on October 21, 2019, 11:36 pm

        “Bernie Sanders is a far more human figure than Gabbard”
        and an inveterate Zionist warmonger, a devious sheepdog openly employed to gather back to the imperial Democrat fold the people who suddenly wake up and decide to end the 2-party comedy, and an unshakable advocate of Empire. Only some propaganda drudge or a total ignorant who cannot even read newspapers would be able to promote that “human” figure.

        Not saying Gabbard is effectively better, I don’t know. She hasn’t, however, been seen — yet — promoting imperial war and death for over 40 years like old mountebank Sanders has. That being said, she is a Democrat: there is no chance on earth that someone in that situation can produce anything against the express will of the Owners of the Country.

      • Keith on October 22, 2019, 12:36 am

        FYREBIRD- ” The way I see it, despite all his weaknesses, Bernie Sanders is a far more human figure than Gabbard.”

        Perhaps so, but as someone who claims that the Russians “interfered” in our elections and democracy and that Hugo Chavez was a “dictator,” Bernie is an imperialist to the core. Is this what you support? Bernie is a sheepdog, nothing more. Or, if you prefer, a Pied Piper, working to corral the disaffected into the Democratic tent of neoliberal warmongers. Tulsi Gabbard? A sheep puppy perhaps? A vote for either the Democratic or Republican candidate is a vote for neoliberal imperialism. A vote to legitimize the global empire and all that it does.

      • Sibiriak on October 22, 2019, 12:48 am

        Keith: Three years after neoliberal warmonger Hillary lost to Donald Trump because of her abysmal record, she is still running against Putin and the Russians!
        ———————————————————

        Btw, Hillary’s vile McCarthyistic tactics significantly predate her loss to Trump. Back in 2014 she was portraying anti-fracking environmental groups as part of a Russian plot.

        ———————————————————-
        Hillary Clinton Expresses Support For Fracking In Wikileaks Document

        […] In one excerpt of a speech to Deutsche Bank in April 2013, according to the document, Clinton boasted about the federal government’s support for fracking and her own work to promote the process across the globe.

        “Fracking was developed at the Department of Energy,” the document shows Clinton saying. “I mean, the whole idea of how fracking came to be available in the marketplace is because of research done by our government. And I’ve promoted fracking in other places around the world.”

        In another excerpt of the same speech, Clinton outlines why she supports a continued push for fracking.

        “The ability to extract both gas and oil from previously used places that didn’t seem to have much more to offer, but now the technology gives us the chance to go in and recover oil and gas,” the document shows her saying. “Or with the new technology known as fracking, we are truly on a path — and it’s not just United States; it’s all of North America — that will be net energy exporters assuming we do it right.”

        She added: “We ought to be committed enough to ensure that we set the example for the world about how to do it with the minimal amount of environmental damage.”

        In a purported excerpt of another speech in 2014, the document shows Clinton portraying some environmental groups’ opposition to fracking and pipeline construction as a Russian plot.

        “We were up against Russia pushing oligarchs and others to buy media,” the document shows her saying.

        “We were even up against phony environmental groups, and I’m a big environmentalist, but these were funded by the Russians to stand against any effort, oh that pipeline, that fracking, that whatever will be a problem for you, and a lot of the money supporting that message was coming from Russia.”

        The excerpts contrast with Clinton’s statements during the Democratic primary, in which she depicted herself as an opponent of fracking.

        * * * * *

        [….]Oil and gas industry donors have given more than $1 million to Clinton’s political campaigns and millions more to the Clinton Foundation. As a senator, Clinton broke with other Democrats such as then-Sen. Barack Obama to cast some key votes to expand offshore drilling.

        Later, the Clinton-led State Department promoted fracking, approved a tar sands pipeline, and cemented a pact to potentially expand drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. Her 2016 campaign has been financially supported by those with ties to fracking, and her transition team chairman, Ken Salazar, has been an outspoken proponent of fracking.

        https://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/hillary-clinton-expresses-support-fracking-wikileaks-document-2428659

      • Keith on October 22, 2019, 10:05 am

        SIBIRIAK- (Hillary quote)- “I’m a big environmentalist, but these were funded by the Russians….”

        When it comes to lying, Trump has nothing on Hillary. The Democrats are phony environmentalists who talk green while pursuing brown. And Russiagate/Ukrainegate is an insult to the intelligence. Notice how this was revealed in a Wikileaks document. Now poor Assange is paying a heavy price for revealing the truth.

      • Mooser on October 22, 2019, 12:32 pm

        Tulsi Gabbard is like a “two-fer” deal. Elect Tulsi, and get Chris Butler along with her!

      • Mooser on October 22, 2019, 8:02 pm

        Well;, it turns out the Hillary quote is a mis-quote “New York Times changes story admitting they misquoted Clinton saying ‘Russians’ were ‘grooming’ Tulsi Gabbard” She said “Republicans”, not Russians, and they’re not the same thing. No, really, they’re not.

        Obligatory

      • echinococcus on October 22, 2019, 9:48 pm

        “Misquote my *$$, Mooser.
        Listen to the Harpy’s own words on the podcast:

        https://edition.cnn.com/2019/10/18/politics/hillary-clinton-tulsi-gabbard/index.html

        Looks like even for the best Dim propagandists, it’s no longer enough to play the irrelevant quips, distortions, oblique snarks etc. Time for outright lies…

      • RoHa on October 22, 2019, 10:00 pm

        “She said “Republicans”, not Russians, and they’re not the same thing.”

        Which ones are worse?

      • fyrebird on October 23, 2019, 12:25 am

        ‘That being said, she is a Democrat: there is no chance on earth that someone in that situation can produce anything against the express will of the Owners of the Country.’

        Gabbard is a former & proud storm trooper for empire – not just a Democrat. She is radicalised and a bigger Zionist than Sanders any day and the word ‘torture’ lights up her face as she recites from the Alan Dershowitz playbook over its justification (premised on an impossible scenario). I’ve got to hand it to her tho: she seems to have converts in all areas of the spectrum – left and right. She is playing the long game, appeasing the left and appeasing the right – it’s a buffet

      • Keith on October 23, 2019, 12:29 am

        MOOSER- “She said “Republicans”, not Russians, and they’re not the same thing.”

        Have you really sunk this low? Previously, I provided you with a link to the podcast in question where Hillary says that Tulsi is a favorite of the Russians. An asset. Like Jill Stein. I don’t know what she said previously, but the notion that she DIDN’T infer that Tulsi was a Russian asset is extraordinarily dishonest. Your steadfast loyalty to warmonger Hillary does you no credit. http://thesaker.is/hillary-accuses-both-tulsi-gabbard-and-jill-stein-of-being-russian-agents-tulsi-gabbard-fires-back/

      • Keith on October 23, 2019, 12:42 am

        ECHINOCOCCUS- “Looks like even for the best Dim propagandists, it’s no longer enough to play the irrelevant quips, distortions, oblique snarks etc. Time for outright lies…”

        Depressing isn’t it? This wilful misrepresentation of reality. The Democrats have become the preeminent party of imperial warmongering, their loyal supporters turning reality on its head to pretend otherwise.

      • fyrebird on October 23, 2019, 5:18 am

        Keith, I’m not a Sanders supporter any more than you are a Gabbard supporter. I view her support for the war on terror / nationalistic drumbeat of 9/11 scars to have an ugly vehemence. She is not even anti-war and lacks empathy for victims of wars. Her whole silly platform is based on ‘regime-change wars’. She views Uncle Sam as a noble world cop who must stay his baton. Only to fire up the drones. Her statements calling for bombing Syria, because of big bad al-Qaeda, were murderous. I don’t view her as a sheep puppy but a wolf in sheep’s clothing if Sanders happens to be a sheepdog.

      • Keith on October 23, 2019, 11:14 am

        FYREBIRD- “Keith, I’m not a Sanders supporter any more than you are a Gabbard supporter.”

        You are correct that I am not a Gabbard supporter even though I strongly approve of her anti-war statements. If Gabbard were to resign her commission and begin referring to the US military as imperial stormtroopers then I would reconsider. I will not in all good conscience vote for any candidate from the two corporate, imperial parties.

        FYREBIRD- “I don’t view her as a sheep puppy but a wolf in sheep’s clothing if Sanders happens to be a sheepdog.”

        I disagree. Look at the Democratic candidates. Sanders, an Askenazi “socialist.” Harris, a Black woman. Booker, a Black man. Buttigieg, a gay white man. Warren, an “anti-Wall Street” white woman. Biden, a Clinton Democrat. Gabbard, an “anti-war” Hindu. And so forth. Is there any group that the Dems are not trying to lure back into the fold? And referring to Gabbard as “a wolf in sheep’s clothing” indicates to me that you are part of the Democratic anti-Gabbard hit squad.

      • Mooser on October 23, 2019, 12:44 pm

        “…indicates to me that you are part of the Democratic anti-Gabbard hit squad.” commissar “Keith”

        @ “fyrebird”: Don’t drink any tea unless you have made it yourself.

      • Mooser on October 23, 2019, 1:05 pm

        Don’t worry about those prelude-to-a-lynching hearings, “Keith”! Matt Gaetz has your back!

      • Keith on October 23, 2019, 2:20 pm

        MOOSER- “@ “fyrebird”: Don’t drink any tea unless you have made it yourself.”

        Moosey, Moosey, Moosey, get a grip. Stop. Think. Collect your wits! Once I began paying attention to this Clinton-Gabbard situation, I began to see a pattern. To make a long story short, Tulsi is a Sandernista who is trying to attack the prevailing Clinton/New Democrats control of the Democratic Party. Biden, Harris and Booker are Clintonites. Warren might go either way. About a week prior to Hillary’s attack, much of the “liberal” media (see the NYT article linked below) launched an attack on Gabbard. Tulsi’s response to Hillary’s smear went way beyond the smear itself and was a frontal assault on Clinton (quote & link below). I would be amazed if Gabbard was acting alone in this without significant support from anti-Clintonites. If you are for Biden, Harris or Booker, you will logically attack Gabbard. Also, fans of Hillary, like you.

        “Among her fellow Democrats, Representative Tulsi Gabbard has struggled to make headway as a presidential candidate, barely cracking the 2 percent mark in the polls needed to qualify for Tuesday night’s debate. She is now injecting a bit of chaos into her own party’s primary race, threatening to boycott that debate to protest what she sees as a “rigging” of the 2020 election. That’s left some Democrats wondering what, exactly, she is up to in the race, while others worry about supportive signs from online bot activity and the Russian news media. (Lisa Lerer) https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/12/us/politics/tulsi-gabbard.html

        “Gabbard fired back by calling Clinton “the queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party.” In Gabbard’s telling, her party’s 2016 nominee was behind “a concerted campaign to destroy my reputation … through your proxies and powerful allies in the corporate media and war machine.” (Zack Beauchamp) https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/10/22/20924999/hillary-clinton-tulsi-gabbard-fight-explained

      • echinococcus on October 23, 2019, 4:27 pm

        Keith,

        I’d suggest that the individual players here, ie majority dims and liberals, are no longer in control of their own thoughts. It looks like a big, contagious wave of madness of the crowds, started and then amplified postwar by the Zionists, now spreading uncontrollably to the rest of Zionists’ home turf US/UK. Logic and fact have been definitely suspended just as in the times of witch burners, the unctor and poisoner hunts, and so on. We used to know Mooser in times past; compare to now.

        It’s also obvious in the censoring of most criticism of Dim follies by this site here; for example, the “Extinction” rabbi is clearly untouchable. The reader who believes that he hears an honest discussion has got another think coming.

      • echinococcus on October 23, 2019, 4:39 pm

        Fyrebird,

        “… she seems to have converts in all areas of the spectrum – left and right”

        Dont give us that “left / right” nonsense in a time where only war of aggression counts.
        Anyone who stops it is welcome. Period.

        As for Gabbard, no, she is not comparable at all to that old warmongering mountebank Sanders. The difference is, Sanders openly speaks for war of aggression and Gabbard has clearly expressed a wish to stop it, at least in some places.

        That said, no Democrat can ever put an end to, or even modify the Empire policy of war of aggression, so we’re well-advised not to believe her. But please spare us that “right or left” nonsense.

      • Keith on October 23, 2019, 6:28 pm

        ECHINOCOCCUS- “We used to know Mooser in times past; compare to now.”

        Indeed, compared to now, perhaps we didn’t know Mooser in times past, only thought we did.

      • fyrebird on October 24, 2019, 3:11 am

        ‘But please spare us that “right or left” nonsense.’

        I think you had it right at ‘I don’t know’. Here you miss the point again and peddle the same by-hook-and-crook fallacy from our earlier encounter on the topic of Kashmir.

        Also it’s you, not us.

        See Robbie Martin on Tulsi Gabbard regarding her playing both the left and right:

        https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WMUF-GYMJsY

        It has nothing to do with what you think it does.

      • fyrebird on October 24, 2019, 3:25 am

        ‘And referring to Gabbard as “a wolf in sheep’s clothing” indicates to me that you are part of the Democratic anti-Gabbard hit squad.’

        Keith, if the ego got better of me, I could make elaborate inferences, includes romantic ones, about ‘sheep puppy’ Gabbard.

        This paranoid accusation – hit-squad – is no different than ‘The Russians are coming’ and false anti-Semitism. There are many like me who have no loyalty to the Democratic Party – like you I believe Jill Stein is the only sane one. Even Glenn Greenwald acknowledges the reservations of those against Gabbard. Some of us can’t stand her just like you can’t Hillary for her war crimes. Gabbard is a self-described hawk and has no moral disagreement with wars. She is against ‘regime-change’ not drones so I view her response to Clinton based on political capital than anti-war goodness.

        See: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WMUF-GYMJsY

      • echinococcus on October 24, 2019, 8:52 am

        Fyrebird,

        Again, who’s that “left”? We’re in the US of friggin A. There’s no “left” in any direction. We’re All Right All the Time. There is a two-wing War and Imperialism Party, entirely Reactionary Right, with its two wings pretending to fight over totally irrelevant nonsense for the benefit of the boobies.

        None of the intestinal amenities inside the Imperial homelands have any importance at all in the so-called bigger scale of things, just in case you intend to shake your rattle at those to convince me that there is anything but Extreme Right in these here States.

        In such an environment, any even minimal retreat from war is Good and needs full support. Some spotty isolationism is the best thing one can expect from Empire. But of course no Democrat, even if called Gabbard or Kucinich or whatever, can ever do it. At all. So let’s not waste too much time on irrelevant stuff.

      • Mooser on October 25, 2019, 10:58 pm

        “Indeed, compared to now, perhaps we didn’t know Mooser in times past, only thought we did.” “Keith”

        Well, you know what the old saying says: “Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can’t get fooled again.”

    • Keith on October 24, 2019, 2:39 pm

      FYREBIRD- “This paranoid accusation – hit-squad…”

      Paranoid?

      “Tulsi has in fact been attacked relentless by the Establishment since she announced that she would be running for the Democratic nomination. Shortly before last Tuesday’s Democratic candidate debate the New York Times ran an article suggesting that Gabbard was an isolationist, was being promoted by Russia and was an apologist for Syria’s Bashar al-Assad. In reality, Gabbard is the only candidate willing to confront America’s warfare-national security state.” (Philip Giraldi) http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/52432.htm

      “This was the second such article the Times had written. An August piece, “Tulsi Gabbard thinks we’re doomed,“ hit nearly all the same talking points, quoting Clint Watts, an ex-spook from the same think-tank, calling Gabbard “the Kremlin’s preferred Democrat” and a “useful agent of influence.” The Times article echoed earlier pieces by the Daily Beast and NBC.com that said many of the same things.” (Matt Taibbi) http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/52426.htm

      “Other mainstream news outlets chose to ignore reporting on Gabbard’s demolishing of the official propaganda about American wars. Earlier this week, CNN and the New York Times smeared her as a “Russian asset” and an “apologist for Assad”, referencing a visit she made to Syria in 2017 when she held talks with President Assad.” (Finian Cunningham) http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/52415.htm

      “It is no coincidence that the corporate media operates in lock step as an offensive October 12th NY Times article was immediately followed by a CNN commentary as well as other media sycophants, all tagging Gabbard as a Russian asset.” (Renee Parsons) https://www.globalresearch.ca/hillary-russian-assets-and-realignment-the-dems-morph-into-neocons/5692873

      FYREBIRD- “Gabbard is a self-described hawk and has no moral disagreement with wars.”

      Got some quotes, videos and references/links to back that up? I repeat a quote for you: “Gabbard fired back by calling Clinton “the queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party.” Which of those three charges do you disagree with?

      FYREBIRD- ” I don’t view her as a sheep puppy but a wolf in sheep’s clothing….”

      “Wolf” in sheep’s clothing? More like a sacrificial lamb, says I. After this, I have to believe that her future in politics is over. She sounded a hell of a lot better than the other Democrats in calling attention to imperial warmongering and she is going to pay a price for opening Pandora’s box.

      • RoHa on October 24, 2019, 10:39 pm

        If you’re not paranoid, you haven’t been paying attention.

      • Sibiriak on October 25, 2019, 8:05 am

        American politics is sick, really sick.

        https://twitter.com/search?q=%23tulsistein&src=trend_click

      • Keith on October 25, 2019, 6:32 pm

        SIBIRIAK- “American politics is sick, really sick.”

        More than just politics I think. What exactly is #tulsistein? One of the problems with the social media is that it creates a sort of virtual mob effect with people being swept along by emotional manipulation. As for Tulsi not seeking reelection to the house, it was a logical decision. As I indicated in my previous comment, in taking on Hillary, et al, she effectively ended her political career. Let us just hope that the Deep State isn’t overly vindictive. As an aside, Tulsi indicated that if she was President she would drop charges against Assange and pardon Snowden. Not going to happen, of course, but the thought was nice.

      • RoHa on October 25, 2019, 9:36 pm

        “American politics is sick, really sick.”

        If Parliament ever gets the Brexit mess sorted out, Americans could try asking the Queen to take them back.

        But if they don’t want to wait forever, I am available as King.

      • fyrebird on October 26, 2019, 3:31 am

        A simple search will tell you if are inclined to know about this self-proclaimed ‘hawk’ and not swept up by Gabbard’s little play acting. I’m making observations – you have a right to vote for ‘Tulsi’, defend her, go to her Tea Party etc etc.

        This future ‘commander-in-chief’ shares one important thing with Hillary Clinton: membership to the neocon Council of Foreign Relations. Parts of that history are scrubbed out. My view is that the tide against regime change was already turning in factions of imperial think tanks and Gabbard is just another jar of snake oil. She is controlled opposition and the new imperial candidate to represent new forms of warfare and control. So no she hasn’t ‘effectively ended her political career’. The career of your future ‘commander in chief’ may have just begun.

      • fyrebird on October 26, 2019, 7:12 am

        The ‘aloha’ candidate wants to forgive George W Bush while channeling a celebrity with almost 80 million followers:

        https://mobile.twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1181742715177852928

        Maybe she’ll do an aloha for Hillary Clinton next year too. Or maybe it’ll be part of some grand karma strategy.

      • Keith on October 26, 2019, 3:17 pm

        FYREBIRD- “The ‘aloha’ candidate wants to forgive George W Bush while channeling a celebrity with almost 80 million followers:”

        Since the link you provided (the only link/citation you have EVER provided) was to Ellen Degeneres defending her meeting with George W. Bush, there is nothing to discuss. Unless you document your assertions, keep them to yourself. In a previous comment, I suggested that Tulsi’s political career was effectively over. The next day she announced that she wouldn’t seek reelection. I then commented that I hoped that the Deep State wouldn’t be overly vindictive. Since then I have reluctantly concluded that Tulsi is in for a world of never ending hurt. She is going to be screwed for a long time. Not as bad as Julian Assange, but she will be made an example of. My guess was that she was the tip of Bernie Sander’s spear, saying things he couldn’t. Goodbye spear. Message to Bernie: remain a good little sheepdog or else. Why then are you continuing your ongoing assault on a moot candidate unless to partake of these efforts?

      • fyrebird on October 27, 2019, 6:57 pm

        “Since the link you provided (the only link/citation you have EVER provided) was to Ellen Degeneres defending her meeting with George W. Bush, there is nothing to discuss.”

        That’s because I don’t want to do your homework. All the information is in the public domain and can be easily verified – from Gabbard’s self-description of herself as a hawk to the Council on Foreign Relations membership. However, since you are so disappointed I left you a special link at the end – a present.

        From her bloviating on torture., Hindu nationalist rhetoric, posing with Boteach one day, attending Council on Foreign Relations meetings on the next, and at Standing Rock on the other, ugh..

        It’s easy for you to prove me wrong but I feel your arguments here largely recoil into themselves. I also provided you with the Robbie Martin link that details a lot of the issues, including examples. It is also amusing that you couldn’t acknowledge through the second link to note Gabbard’s subtle re-habilitation of a war criminal. Those not blinded didn’t miss the meaning.

        “In a previous comment, I suggested that Tulsi’s political career was effectively over. The next day she announced that she wouldn’t seek reelection. I then commented that I hoped that the Deep State wouldn’t be overly vindictive.”

        It’s hard for the Deep State to be vindictive against its own. If anything the Deep State has cast off Hillary Clinton and Gabbard is the new buzz in town with The Guardian, The Foreign Policy Journal, New York Post, CNN International all in Gabbard’s camp in that little scripted move. Like I said before – an observation that you are welcome to argue against – the regime-change idea is old news. The Deep State has factions in it that Gabbard represents and was able to make political moves based on the changing currents within. There was nothing brave in these positions.

        “Since then I have reluctantly concluded that Tulsi is in for a world of never ending hurt. She is going to be screwed for a long time. Not as bad as Julian Assange, but she will be made an example of.”

        All these new predictions based on prior false prediction – see my earlier paragraph reply – are false on the whole. Her political career hasn’t ended any more than dumping the DNC did. To even put her and Assange in the same sentence is an insult against a genuine anti-imperialist like Assange.

        “My guess was that she was the tip of Bernie Sander’s spear, saying things he couldn’t. Goodbye spear. Message to Bernie: remain a good little sheepdog or else. Why then are you continuing your ongoing assault on a moot candidate unless to partake of these efforts?”

        Sanders could well be connected and a sheepdog – his working with Gabbard and poor policy history show him to be certainly worthy of skepticism and critical monitoring than branding. Speaking of brands, Brand Gabbard just hit Wall Street, maybe they’ll give her something to dry those crocodile tears:

        https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/tulsi-gabbard-hillary-clinton-wall-street

      • Keith on October 28, 2019, 12:49 am

        Fyrebird- “That’s because I don’t want to do your homework.”

        What a preposterous insult to the intelligence! You obviously don’t provide links and/or references because none exist! The notion that I should have to prove you wrong before you have even established a minimal possibility that you are right is outlandish! What a joke! What a jerk! And the link you provide (your second, grudgingly) shows what? That Tulsi attended a fundraiser by Republican contributors. What a shocker! Does anyone who is sane suppose that the Democrat mainstream is going to provide funds for this critic of Hillary and interventionism? Where is your link to the Council on Foreign Relations? I see no evidence that Tulsi is not what she appears to be. Everything that you have said up to this point is nothing more than a political hit-job. How many days have you spent preparing this nothingburger with so little to show for your time spent? And we are still left with the mystery of your fixation on a minor candidate with no chance of victory if not a part of Hillary/Democrat vengeance. A quote from your “shocking” link.

        “During the off-the-record dinner, Gabbard didn’t take any direct shots at Clinton, one person told FOX Business. She merely laid out some of her policies, which don’t easily fit in any ideological framework. The 38-year-old congresswoman is a supporter of the Second Amendment and against what she described in an interview with the New York Times as “regime change wars,” though she is considered progressive on other issues such as health care.” (Fox Business) https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/tulsi-gabbard-hillary-clinton-wall-street

      • echinococcus on October 28, 2019, 12:55 am

        Fyrebird,

        Most of that may be true — a good part of it is obviously correct. Additionally, she is running with the Democrat party, which guarantees total treason even if the impossible came true and she won. But the fact that you train all your guns on Gabbard only, ignoring the fact that at least in words, and partly also in deeds, she is the closest thing to any hope of stopping some of the wars of aggression suggests that you may have another axe to grind.

      • Mooser on October 28, 2019, 2:19 pm

        “What a preposterous insult to the intelligence!”

        Yeah, who needs ‘homework’ when there is Fox News to do it for you.

      • Keith on October 28, 2019, 5:18 pm

        MOOSER- “Yeah, who needs ‘homework’ when there is Fox News to do it for you.”

        So says the diehard Hillary loyalist.

        “The class divide in evidence raises fundamental questions for the American left that has spent its political energy ‘resisting’ Donald Trump. In class terms, ‘resistance’ has been a bourgeois pursuit. The DNC insiders now intent on replacing Bernie Sanders with a Clintonite neoliberal hack as winner of the Democratic primary absolutely support ‘resisting’ Mr. Trump and impeachment. What they don’t support is Medicare for All, a real and robust Green New Deal, a Job Guarantee or progressive taxation. If they did, they would be supporting Mr. Sanders.

        How precisely destructive the Democrat / left / CIA / NSA / FBI / and establishment press alliance has been— and still is, since Donald Trump won office seems to be a mystery to the American left. George W. Bush’s war against Iraq was a political turning point against the national security state by the working class that fights and dies in American wars. Through their embrace of neoliberalism, Democrats destroyed the livelihoods and economic prospects of the working class, and thereby made themselves class enemies of their historical constituents.” (Rob Urie) https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/10/25/the-dnc-versus-democracy/

  2. RoHa on October 19, 2019, 1:59 am

    “67% want a negotiated peace agreement with North Korea”

    What do the other 33% want?

  3. JustJessetr on October 20, 2019, 3:41 pm

    I stopped paying attention to polls and surveys after they predicted that Trump wouldn’t be elected.

  4. Tuyzentfloot on October 20, 2019, 4:15 pm

    Gabbard has been impressive. She’s been kept out of the limelight pretty successfully though. I’m surprised Clinton draws attention to Gabbard. Moving on from the ‘dismissive’ strategy then ?

    I have a strong conviction that propagandists aim to nurture and nudge the bubble of groupthink to pull it in the desired direction, but that however cynical they are they almost always have one leg in the bubble. Clinton was cynically involved in launching the Russiagate story. I consider it all opportunistic rubbish but I don’t expect her to be entirely outside of that bubble.

  5. Another Dave on October 20, 2019, 4:29 pm

    I find it strange that 3 years after 2016, there are still people who won’t admit they were wrong about Clinton.

    Pity that I can’t figure out how to reply to the two above, but the reply button was missing. So…

    eljay; there were two choices in 2016, are you seriously suggesting that Trump was the better person for the job? You’re happy with how things have worked out for the USA, and the west?

    annie; You were wrong about Clinton in 2016, and you’re still wrong about her mentioning anyone in her “j’accuse” tweet. She didn’t. I’ll ask you the same thing I asked eljay, are you happy with how things have worked out since you refused to vote for a decent human being for the highest office in your nation?

    I think the both of you aren’t very happy with how things have gone, but will never admit you were wrong.

    • RoHa on October 20, 2019, 8:59 pm

      I can’t admit that I was wrong about Hillary, because I don’t know that I was wrong. I thought that, as president, she would be a disaster and probably start a war with Russia. She failed to become president, so there is no way of telling whether I was wrong or right.

      I thought that Trump would be a disaster and probably not start a war with Russia. I’ve been right about that.

      So far.

      Of course, since I’m an Australian, I think all US presidents are disasters as a matter of course.

      (Quite unlike our own brilliant and sagacious Prime Minister, whoever that happens to be.)

    • Keith on October 20, 2019, 9:06 pm

      ANOTHER DAVE- “I find it strange that 3 years after 2016, there are still people who won’t admit they were wrong about Clinton.”

      Hillary Clinton was and is a neoliberal warmonger. Why am I wrong about that? I voted for Jill Stein. The Democrats used to be considered the lesser evil. Not any more. In the competition for corporate funding, the Democrats have moved way to the right of the Republicans in regards to militarism and empire. The Clintons banished all trace of Roosevelt’s New Deal from the party to make it more competitive with the Republicans. I refuse to vote for either of these imperial parties. In capitalism, the fat-cats rule. You delude yourself if you think otherwise.

    • echinococcus on October 20, 2019, 11:29 pm

      “… there are still people who won’t admit they were wrong about Clinton.”

      Sure. All those who were crazy enough to consider her a decent human being were and are still wrong. As La Clinton herself keeps reminding us — see the last outburst re “Russians”.

      • pjdude on October 22, 2019, 12:53 am

        why do you think its ok for russia to interfere in our elections?

      • echinococcus on October 22, 2019, 2:47 pm

        PJ Dude,

        You surely mean the Zionist entity, who does this every hour on the hour, in plain daylight.
        If heavens would deign give us even a little bit of adult guidance by the Russian government we’d be much better off, of course, but I (or any sentient person) don’t see it. You provided no proof at all — hallucinating, I take it.

      • Mooser on October 22, 2019, 4:51 pm

        “If heavens would deign give us even a little bit of adult guidance by the Russian government we’d be much better off”

        Yeah, Russia is a regular socialist paradise.

      • Sibiriak on October 23, 2019, 7:58 am

        Mooser: … Russia is a regular socialist paradise.
        _________________________________________

        Perhaps you’d feel more comfortable in post-coup neoliberalized Ukraine.

        America Sponsors Far-Right Holocaust Revisionist Exhibit in Kiev

        A year ago, I did a bunch of reporting in Ukraine. It was the first time I had been back there since 2014 and I was disturbed by what I saw.

        While America’s foreign policy experts talked about a Ukraine that was moving in the right direction — towards democracy and integration with Europe and the free world — I saw a deeply impoverished country, a place where oligarch-backed fascist groups attacked people with total impunity, and where people had almost completely retreated from political life. I also saw widespread government-funded Holocaust revisionism that kept popping up where I least expected it.

        […]I was in the center of Kiev on October 8, 2018 — just few steps away from Maidan Square, the site of the Ukraine’s 2014 “Revolution of Dignity.” It was a sunny Saturday and the street was swarming with people.

        As I approached the square, I noticed that a small crowd had formed in front of an outdoor exhibit. As I got closer, I saw that it was showcasing some kind of old timey symbols of Ukrainian nationhood: cossacks, soldiers, and ornate medals and crosses and tridents. A few people stopped to read the captions, while a couple posed for a selfie in front of one of the black and yellow panels.

        From a distance, the exhibit looked unremarkable — one of those harmless national heritage displays you can find in any European historic city center. But as I got within reading distance, I saw that there was nothing harmless about it. The exhibit wasn’t just showcasing historical Ukrainian symbols, it was celebrating and promoting one of the bloodiest fascist movements in Eastern Europe: the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists and its paramilitary offshoot, the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (OUN/UPA) — groups that had played a central role in the genocide of over a million Ukrainian Jews during World War II.

        These groups were notorious for their savagery. Their goal was to create a racially pure, fascist state that was free from Poles, Jews, and Russians. To achieve their aims, their leaders pledged allegiance to Adolf Hitler and received training from Nazi Germany. Many of their members had volunteered for the Ukrainian Waffen-SS division, joined Nazi auxiliary police battalions, and helped the Nazis administer occupied Ukraine. Aside from killing Jews, the OUN/UPA organized the slaughter entire Polish villages. Survivors of their atrocities told gut-wrenching tales. They cut babies from wombs, smashed children against walls in front of their mothers, hacked people to death with scythes, flayed their victims, and burned entire villages alive.

        * * * * *

        […]Naturally, all this dark and bloody history was left out of the exhibit. Instead it spun a superficial revisionist tale, presenting Nazi collaborators and mass murderers as heroes and liberators. A big component of the whole thing was a series of agitprop woodcuts that glorified the struggle of OUN/UPA soldiers against both the Nazis and the Reds and pushed the fiction that these groups were not bent on genocide but were involved in liberating all the peoples of the Soviet Union from totalitarian oppression.

        * * * * *

        […] So why is a major federal agency [Radio Liberty] funded by Congress helping push this revisionist Nazi bile on the Ukrainian people?

        There’s been so much fear-mongering in America about Russia sponsoring the far-right, yet here is an example of an American government agency (one that had been spun off from the CIA, no less) involved in pushing a far-right narrative of Holocaust revisionism in a country that’s being overrun by far-right and fascist movements. This exhibit has stood in the heart of the city for all to see for months on end. Hundreds of reporters must have walked by it time and time again. So why haven’t western journalists working in Kiev written about it? […]

        https://yasha.substack.com/p/america-sponsors-far-right-holocaust-000

      • Keith on October 23, 2019, 11:35 am

        SIBIRIAK- “Perhaps you’d feel more comfortable in post-coup neoliberalized Ukraine.”

        First of all, thanks for the comment/quote. Why is it that you and I seem to be alone among Mondoweiss commenters in condemning the return to power of Ukrainian neo-Nazis brought about by the imperial coup? A coup instigated and supported by the Democrats. And why do Jewish Zionists support the coup even as they complain about European anti-Semitism? Is there no limit to the hypocrisy of those seeking power? There is a sort of insanity underlying this support for anti-Russian neo-Nazis. Where is the Jewish opposition to this madness? Kolomoisky may be cosy with Svadoda and Pravy Sektor now, but those who play with fire risk getting burned. And the rise of the Right has imperial support, not the least of which is the Democrat expansion of NATO eastward. These are dangerous times.

      • Mooser on October 23, 2019, 1:13 pm

        “Perhaps you’d feel more comfortable in post-coup neoliberalized Ukraine.” “Sibiriak”

        Oh, I was with Russia all the way, but then I heard about the 1939 pact and lost my faith in socialism.

      • echinococcus on October 23, 2019, 4:59 pm

        Well, Mooser, to repeat a couple of obvious ground facts that everyone who can read gets outside the nuthouse called US; first, the 1939 pact is the only thing that ended British-German collaboration (that would probably have won), and two, today’s Russia, especially its government, is not socialist — in fact it is definitely anticommunist. Just reciting the alphabet.

      • Keith on October 23, 2019, 6:47 pm

        MOOSER- “Oh, I was with Russia all the way, but then I heard about the 1939 pact and lost my faith in socialism.”

        What has that got to do with the imperial coup in the Ukraine? Do you feel that the Ukraine is better off because of the coup? Do you feel that the rise of neo-Nazis as a consequence of the coup is a wholesome development? Are you a Hillary fascist? Seriously. In the past you were funny. You might think that you are still funny, but you are not. Trying to make imperial warmongering “funny” is despicable.

      • Sibiriak on October 23, 2019, 9:14 pm

        Mooser: Oh, I was with Russia all the way, but then I heard about the 1939 pact and lost my faith in socialism.
        —————————————–

        Oh, you’re talking about the USSR. Thanks for the clarification.

  6. Mooser on October 22, 2019, 1:20 pm

    “why do you think its ok for russia to interfere in our elections?”

    Russia doesn’t care if it’s “okay” or not, they just go ahead and do it. (As the US has done in many foreign elections, worse, fomented coups)

    What mystifies me is why they think it is OK for Trump to accept and engage the Russian (and etc.) help.

Leave a Reply