« | »

The Weekly S&L ‘Hive’ – Please Talk Among Yourselves

Here is our weekly discussion thread, where comments on the general topics of the day are very welcome.

But please remember to post and comment on specific news items in the ‘Reader Selected News’ thread below or via the ‘News Selected By Our Readers’ link found in the sidebar.

This article was posted by Steve Gilbert on Friday, August 15th, 2014. Comments are currently closed.

5 Responses to “The Weekly S&L ‘Hive’ – Please Talk Among Yourselves”

  1. Media doing EVERYTHING THEY CAN to dirty-up Ferguson Police Officer.

    thegatewaypundit
    UK Daily Mail (same link) uncovers fraud by officer’s deceased mother as well. Why are they trying to character assassinate the officer’s family?

    Lazy Media Fails to Inspect Lesley McSpadden (Mike Brown’s mother)
    Missouri Courts
    2006 Loses Credit Issue. Case#: 2106TJ-01138
    2003 Loses Landlord Complaint. Case#: 2103AC-10501
    1999 Loses to Loan Company. Case#: 2199AC-06110
    1998 Warrant for arrest. Case# 2198T-08782
    (also not exactly a model citizen)

    Father, Michael Brown Sr. Hard to evaluate as there are many people named Michael Brown in Missouri Website. There is a Michael A. Brown (36 years old) living in Ferguson, MO.

    Micheal Brown Jr., DIDN’T HAVE AN ADULT CRIMINAL RECORD. How about a juvenile criminal record? Why not be honest and get that out of the way?

    The fool was walking down the middle of the street blocking traffic (with stolen cigars). Anyone who has driven through depressed areas, know that people there hog the side walks, and block traffic as an act of defiance, trying to provoke and annoy people. The officer was right to approach them to get the heck out of the street!

  2. captstubby

    8 Things to Know about the Iraq Crisis.

    Dear MoveOn member,

    “U.S. bombing strikes are now well under way in Iraq in a military mission that President Obama said could go on for months.1 U.S. military planes have also been delivering vital humanitarian assistance to civilians fleeing the violence, including Yazidis who were forced onto Iraq’s Mount Sinjar by ISIS militants laying siege on the mountain.2

    MoveOn members across the country have weighed in with thoughts on what’s happening in Iraq. There are varying opinions on different aspects of this crisis, but there are some common threads. Our hearts break for the people of Iraq who are living through this conflict. We know there are no simple solutions. And we’re united in our opposition to America sliding down the slippery slope to another war in Iraq.

    As we all try to make sense of the events that are unfolding, here are eight things that you should know about the Iraq crisis.

    Please read on and then share the list on Facebook or Twitter, or just forward this email. It’s vital that we engage the country in a conversation about the U.S. role in Iraq.

    8 Things to Know about the Iraq Crisis

    1. Right-wing war hawks are pushing for another full-blown war in Iraq.
    Senator John McCain, Senator Lindsey Graham, other Republicans in Congress, and right-wing figures—who blindly led America into invading and occupying Iraq—are now demanding more military action that could drag us back into full-scale war in the region.3,4,5

    2. The slippery slope is real.
    Mission creep can too easily occur—along with unintended consequences and new problems created by the use of U.S. military force.6,7 History shows us that many big wars start out looking small, including the Korean War and the Vietnam War.8 And we are now dealing with a prime example of unintended consequences: Bush’s war of choice and military occupation of Iraq set the stage for Iraq’s troubles today, including the rise of ISIS.9,10,11,12

    3. Voters elected President Obama to end the Iraq war that George W. Bush recklessly started.
    President Obama’s opposition to the Iraq war before it began and his pledge to end it—as part of the contrast between him and those who pushed for war—were key to his success in both the Democratic primary election and the general election in 2008.13 He continues to pledge that he “will not allow the United States to be dragged into fighting another war in Iraq.”14,15

    4. Ultimately, Iraq’s problems can be solved only by an Iraqi-led political solution.
    President Obama has said that there is no military solution to the crisis in Iraq and that there can only be “an Iraqi solution.”16 As this Vox explainer lays out:

    “ISIS isn’t just a terrorist group rampaging through Iraq (though they definitely are that). It’s in many ways an expression of the Sunni Muslim minority’s anger at the Shia-dominated government. . . Some Sunni grievances get to more fundamental issues within the Iraqi state itself, beyond what even a better government could easily fix.”17

    These are not problems that more U.S. bombings can solve. That’s why experts are saying that “any lasting solution has to be regional in nature and must address the political interests of all the major factions in an equitable and inclusive manner.”18

    5. Members of Congress, including Democratic lawmakers, are insisting that the president come to Congress for authorization.
    MoveOn members have long opposed endless war in Iraq. Earlier this summer, before the current bombing strikes began, MoveOn members made more than 15,000 calls to lawmakers, urging them to oppose U.S. military intervention in Iraq. In July, the House of Representatives listened to them and the rest of the American people to require, by a bipartisan vote of 370-40, the president to seek congressional authorization before deploying or maintaining a sustained combat role in Iraq.19 Congress should continue to assert its authority under the Constitution to authorize and oversee U.S. commitments to open-ended war overseas.

    6. The Middle East is a complicated place where U.S. military intervention has a troubling track record.
    The Middle East has many armed actors whose motivations often compete with each other and conflict with American values, and U.S. military intervention there has a track record of often making things worse.20,21 One tragic absurdity of this moment is that the U.S. military is now using U.S. equipment to bomb U.S. weapons wielded by enemies the U.S. didn’t intend to arm against the U.S. and U.S. allies.22 That’s a good reason to be concerned about the U.S. arming rebels in nearby Syria, which experts say wouldn’t have stopped the rise of ISIS anyway.23 Experts further warn that U.S. military force in the region only tends to create more problems, including the risk of terrorist retaliation.24

    7. Military action could lead to even more innocent civilians getting caught in the crossfire and suffering.

    The Iraq war that Bush started didn’t just cost America the lives of nearly 4,500 service members, plus $2 trillion according to modest estimates.25,26,27 Approximately 500,000 Iraqi civilians also died in the armed conflict—possibly more.28 In the current conflict, ISIS militants are persecuting various minority populations of Iraq, such as the Yazidis who had fled to Mount Sinjar.29 Escalating military action, including drone strikes, risks catching more civilians in the crossfire.30

    8. Opposing endless war isn’t the same as being an isolationist. The Iraq crisis, including the humanitarian disaster, demands an international, diplomatic response.
    We have options to support the people of Iraq, as well as tackle this crisis in a way that reflects America’s best interests and 21st century realities. For one, the U.S. can work through the United Nations and other multilateral organizations to support a major global diplomatic initiative.31

    In the face of the current crisis, the Friends Committee on National Legislation also recommends a number of steps instead of U.S. bombings, such as working with other nations through the United Nations to organize humanitarian evacuations of stranded and trapped civilians, pressing for and upholding an arms embargo in Iraq and Syria, engaging with the UN to reinvigorate efforts for a lasting political solution for Iraq and Syria, and increasing humanitarian aid.32,33

    It’s critically important that we engage the nation in conversation and debate to avoid endless war in Iraq. Can you share this “8 Things to Know about the Iraq Crisis” list with your family and friends?

    Thanks for all you do.
    –Anna, Jo, Alejandro, Justin, and the rest of the team

    Sources: Click here to view the citations.

    Want to support our work? MoveOn Civic Action is entirely funded by our 8 million members—no corporate contributions, no big checks from CEOs. And our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way. Chip in here.
    This email was sent on August 17, 2014.

    in summery;

    ITS BUSH’S FAULT.

    • Rusty Shackleford

      Not only that, it’s quite clear that the leftists care more than the righties.

      Therefore, the righties are wrong and the leftists are right. Or something.

      But then, do the leftists care so much more than us that they are actually willing to do anything about it?

      (rhetorical)

  3. captstubby

    This Day In History

    Fascists, Communists, and Progressives, Oh My.

    Aug 18, 1941:
    Hitler suspends euthanasia program.

    On this day in 1941, Adolf Hitler orders that the systematic murder of the mentally ill and handicapped be brought to an end because of protests within Germany.

    In 1939, Dr. Viktor Brack, head of Hitler’s Euthanasia Department, oversaw the creation of the T.4 program, which began as the systematic killing of children deemed “mentally defective.” Children were transported from all over Germany to a Special Psychiatric Youth Department and killed. Later, certain criteria were established for non-Jewish children. They had to be “certified” mentally ill, schizophrenic, or incapable of working for one reason or another. Jewish children already in mental hospitals, whatever the reason or whatever the prognosis, were automatically to be subject to the program. The victims were either injected with lethal substances or were led to “showers” where the children sat as gas flooded the room through water pipes. The program was then expanded to adults.

    It wasn’t long before protests began mounting within Germany, especially by doctors and clergy. Some had the courage to write Hitler directly and describe the T.4 program as “barbaric”; others circulated their opinions more discreetly. Heinrich Himmler, head of the SS and the man who would direct the systematic extermination of European Jewry, had only one regret: that the SS had not been put in charge of the whole affair. “We know how to deal with it correctly, without causing useless uproar among the people.”

    Finally, in 1941, Bishop Count Clemens von Galen denounced the euthanasia program from his pulpit. Hitler did not need such publicity. He ordered the program suspended, at least in Germany. But 50,000 people had already fallen victim to it. It would be revived in occupied Poland.

    Aug 18, 1991:
    Coup attempt against Gorbachev begins.

    Hard-line elements of the Soviet government and military begin a coup attempt against President Mikhail Gorbachev. The coup attempt signified a decline in Gorbachev’s power and influence, while one of his most ardent opponents, Boris Yeltsin, came out of the event with more power than ever.
    Since coming to power in 1985, Gorbachev had pressed forward with significant reforms on two fronts. First, he called for a liberalization of the Soviet government’s economic and political policies. He pushed for an economy that would rely more on free market policies and argued that the closed communist political system would need to be democratized. Second, he strenuously pursued better relations with the West, particularly the United States. His efforts were acclaimed in the West, and President Ronald Reagan, an avowed anticommunist, came to consider Gorbachev a friend and respected colleague. In the Soviet Union, however, Gorbachev found his policies attacked twofold.
    On one side were hard-line communists who believed that Gorbachev’s policies were leading the Soviet Union to ruin and a status as a second-class world power. On the other side were more radical reformers such as Boris Yeltsin, who served as president of the Russian Soviet Socialist Republic. Yeltsin constantly complained that Gorbachev was not moving fast or far enough with his reforms; in July 1990, Yeltsin demonstrated his dissatisfaction by announcing that he was resigning from the Communist Party.

    By August 1991, hard-line elements of the Soviet government and military decided to act and staged a coup against Gorbachev. Gorbachev was put under house arrest, and his enemies demanded that he resign as leader of the Soviet Union. Gorbachev refused, but many outside of Russia began to feel that his government could not survive. Yeltsin and many of his supporters, who had taken refuge in the Russian Parliament, then stepped in. Yeltsin correctly perceived that if the coup were successful, even the limited reforms begun by Gorbachev would be destroyed. He called on the Russian people to strike and take to the streets to oppose the coup. The people responded by the thousands, and the poorly organized coup collapsed only a few days later. The damage to the Gorbachev regime was nonetheless disastrous. In December 1991, with the Soviet Union crumbling around him, he resigned as leader of the nation.

    Yeltsin emerged from the crisis as Gorbachev’s heir apparent. When Gorbachev announced his resignation in December, Yeltsin immediately removed all flags of the former Soviet Union from government buildings in the state of Russia and continued to serve as the leader of the most powerful of the former soviet socialist republics.

    Martha’s Vineyard, MA, US
    Aug 18, 2013,
    President Obama is playing another round of golf at Vineyard Golf Club on the final day of his Martha’s Vineyard vacation .

    August 18, 2011
    The Affirmative Action President

    Claim: Matt Patterson wrote “The Affirmative Action President,” an opinion piece critical of Barack Obama, for the Washington Post.

    Amazing that the Wash. Post would actually print this. Amazing!

    The Washington Post

    August 18, 2011 Obama: The Affirmative Action President by Matt Patterson (columnist — Washington Post, New York Post, San Francisco Examiner)

    Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world’s largest economy, direct the world’s most powerful military, execute the world’s most consequential job?

    [Rest of article here.]

    Origins: The opinion piece referenced above was penned by Matt Patterson and was published (under the title “Obama: The Affirmative Action President”) on the American Thinker web site on 18 August 2011. Although the important “who” of the attribution is correct, however, the “where” is incorrect: despite the mention of the Washington Post in the example cited above, this item was never published in either the print or online version of that newspaper (nor, as claimed in later versions, was it published in Newsweek magazine). A possible explanation for the confusion is that someone viewed the list of publications in which Matt Patterson’s work has appeared and mistakenly assumed this piece was syndicated to all of them. (Mr. Patterson isn’t a “columnist” for any of the newspapers mentioned, but rather an occasional contributor of opinion pieces.)

    Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics.....bTKz45b.99
    http://republicanssucks.org/ne.....ward-hoax/

    http://www.americanthinker.com.....ident.html
    http://mattpattersononline.com/welcome/About.html

  4. captstubby

    Reality Bytes: What is truth?

    took me a few days to remember where i read the following .
    I had them in the IRS Documents to save folder.

    “What is truth?”
    “Pilate’s question, “What is truth?” has reverberated down through history.
    Was it a desire to know what no one else could tell him, a cynical insult, or perhaps an irritated, indifferent reply to Jesus’ words?”
    “Pilate and the Jewish leaders thought they were judging Christ, when, in reality, they were the ones being judged.
    In a postmodern world that denies that truth can be known, the question is more important than ever to answer.”
    What is truth?

    “In defining truth, it is first helpful to note what truth is not:
    Truth is not simply whatever works. This is the philosophy of pragmatism – an ends-vs.-means-type approach. In reality, lies can appear to “work,” but they are still lies and not the truth.
    Truth is not simply what is coherent or understandable. A group of people can get together and form a conspiracy based on a set of falsehoods where they all agree to tell the same false story, but it does not make their presentation true.
    Truth is not simply what is believed. A lie believed is still a lie.”
    1. Truth is that which corresponds to reality.
    2. Truth is that which matches its object.
    3. Truth is simply telling it like it is.
    In short, truth is simply telling it like it is; it is the way things really are, and any other viewpoint is wrong. A foundational principle of philosophy is being able to discern between truth and error, or as Thomas Aquinas observed, “It is the task of the philosopher to make distinctions.”
    http://www.gotquestions.org/what-is-truth.html

    The Truth of History

    C.Behan McCullagh
    1998

    “The case against objectivity in history is most famously made by Peter Novick in That Noble Dream: The ‘Objectivity Question’ and the American Historical Profession (1988). Having described the variety of interpretive approaches adopted by American historians, he concludes that history is clearly not objective, although objectivity has served the profession as an inspiring myth .

    Keith Jenkins has denied the objectivity and truth of history in his popular little book Re-thinking History (1991). He admits that historians study sources, but remarks that

    the historian’s viewpoint and predilections still shape the choice of historical materials, and our own personal constructs determine what we make of them. The past that we ‘know’ is always contingent upon our own views, our own ‘present.

    Jenkins says that historians only retain the idea of truth to add weight to their preferred accounts of the past:

    ‘truth’ and similar expressions are devices to open, regulate and shut down interpretations. Truth acts as a censor—it draws the line. We know that such truths are really ‘useful fictions’ that are in discourse by virtue of power …and power uses the term ‘truth’ to exercise control: regimes of truth.

    Jenkins declares ‘Epistemology shows we can never really know the past’…he goes on to admit, inconsistently, that some historical facts, such as dates of events, are ‘“true” but trite’

    Causal explanations of historical events are seldom so neat and uncontentious. Even if the relevant facts are well established, there are often quite a lot of events which affected the outcome, and there is sometimes disagreement as to their causal significance. Historians choose those causes which they judge to have been very influential in bringing about the effect.
    For positivist explanations to be satisfactory, they cannot state just circumstances which would have made an event of the kind being explained very probable. They must also describe causes of such an event, events or states of affairs which were necessary in the circumstances for its occurrence.

    In practice, historians sometimes have a rather hazy idea of what an adequate explanation requires, so that their explanations are somewhat haphazard, often reflecting their personal interests.”


« Front Page | To Top
« | »