Democrats, Zionism Target Liberty in Wisconsin

Over 850 people hit the streets in Ashland, Wisconsin
No Kings march. (Image from Ros Nelson, Facebook). 

Democrats Give Up Ship to Zionists

Commentary

Madison, Wisconsin — Wisconsin remains peace-and-liberty-minded. Peace movement flourishes here as exemplified in No Kings protests across the state last Saturday, seeing Jewish Voice for Peace and Vets for Peace folk, for example, as well as 1,000s of anti-ICE folks.

But elected Wisconsin Democrats in the state Capitol and Congress don't get the message of the people. 

In fact, Wisconsin Democrat politicians reject peace-and-liberty commitments of the people whom they represent, and Zionist work abounds among elected officials.

Wisconsin Democrat Pols Equal Zionists

The day before the No Kings demonstrations, Gov Tony Evers (D) signed into law Zionist-pushed legislation, (Assembly Bill 446; 2025 Wisconsin Act 143). 

The Zionist Act adapts absurd political definitions of anti-Semitism to further anti-liberty, thought-control purposes of aiding criminal sanction, codifying Zionist tenets, right as Zionist movement commits Genocide and annexes land, ala Nazi Germany, South Africa, and other totalitarian movements, (Wisconsin Examiner; The Capital Times; The Progressive Magazine).

The anti-Semitism definitions were adopted by the ironically self-defined International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, a project advocating punitive criminal sanction worldwide for voicing thought at variance with Apartheid-Zionist thought. 

For example, the anti-Semitism definition would bring criminal sanction for, "drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis," (International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance), if a legal claim is made of discrimination, or prejudicial action.

Some 37 states adopt some manner of Zionist thought control, as countries across the Western world even criminalize slogans calling for peace and human rights.

In practice, the new Zionist codification of alleged hate speech would empower Wisconsin municipalities' police, for example, to walk up to a citizen holding a sign condemning Israeli Apartheid, or torture, or rape, or Genocide, write a citation for disorderly conduct or some other bullshit municipal ticket, then under color of, and with aid of anti-Semitism statute, pursue hate-crime enhancer charges.

Notes Howard Schweber, UW-Madison First Amendment scholar, "But they’re [Wisconsin speech-code advocates] saying in all the contexts in which we already have laws that … target racist or prejudicial actions, where the claim is that the action is anti-Semitic, this is the definition we’ll use to test that claim," (Jacobs, The Capital Times).

And the hell with the First Amendment. Wisconsin already has a hate crime statute on the books.

In Wisconsin, municipal citations are first litigated in municipal courts, kangaroo courts in which Due Process rights are virtually non-existent. [See an illustration of mass politically motivated police actions and adjudication in action when 1,000s of citations from 2011-12 at the Wisconsin Capitol were written for singing or walking by and listening during anti-Gov. Scott Walker thought actions. All citations, after years of litigation, were thrown out and found violative of the First Amendment.]

All criminal prosecutions of lawful speech require is a dishonest cop and a crooked district attorney. As a lifelong Wisconsinite, I can assure such people exist.

Zionist work is about crushing dissent and liberty, just as Gov Scott Walker did.

UW-Madison Takes Aim at Anti-Genocide Student Government

The University of Wisconsin at Madison last week officially condemned a student government resolution advocating a Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions action against the Apartheid entity of Israel.

Reports the Badger Herald daily student newspaper: 

"The University of Wisconsin said Wednesday that it is disappointed with the passage of an Associated Students of Madison (ASM) resolution, according to a UW press release. The resolution issued a number of flawed, unrelated and illegal demands, according to the press release."

The ASM resolution, introduced by Students for Justice in Palestine, calls for the Universities of Wisconsin to divest from BlackRock index funds, which contain holdings in weapons manufacturers that supply weapons and military technology to the Rapid Support Forces in Sudan and the Israeli Defense Force, according to the resolution."

Wisconsin Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D)

Tammy Baldwin offers her Zionist perspective on a recent PBS Wisconsin interview, by omitting mention of Israel altogether in her discussion of the Israeli-U.S. war against Iran.

Sen Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisconsin) leads 
the Wisconsin congressional delegation in 
accepting Israel Lobby funds. Baldwin is a
reliable vote for the Israeli Lobby, and is
known as calculating and mealy-mouthed.

This apes a recent trend in which writers absurdly minimize or obscure Israeli involvement in the Israeli-U.S. war against Iran, (Foreign Policy; Jewish Currents; CounterPunch; ScheerReport). 

Iran War? Who? Israel?

From social media, to columns in weekly newspapers such as the Mount Horeb Mail, Baldwin takes the Zionist line on anti-Semitism and Israeli wars. [Full disclosure. I wrote in a reply to Baldwin's PBS Wisconsin interview: "Typical Baldwin. Not one word about Israel (Baldwin took $700,000 from Israel Lobby), national security state, a moral assessment. Baldwin was vacuous and clueless. How can you address the Israeli-U.S. War against Iran, and not mention Israel?"]

Meanwhile, fellow Zionists in Congress such as Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla) work with the police to target anti-Zionist thought, lest the American people put a stop to American support for the Zionist entity, Israel. 

In Miami Beach, police visit the homes of those citizens who dare voice disapproval of Israel.

The aim is intimidation. Now, one woman is suing. 

Wasserman Schultz and similarly-minded Zionists will not stop.

As antisemitism rises, I helped coordinate local law enforcement and Jewish leaders to keep our communities safe.

We need to come together and fight hate in all forms. pic.twitter.com/Yzn7GrobI2

— Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (@RepDWStweets) March 29, 2026

---
Wisconsin people remain tied to best traditions, but we face a time when virtually all state and federal elected representatives are First Amendment illiterates and pro-Zionist cowards, preferring passive compliance over active thought. 

The country witnesses Zionist attempts to criminalize lawful public dissent, disregarding liberty and open discussion of governments—human work that remains not just personal liberty but an essential part of our free society, and simple decency.

But not if  Zionists and allies get their way. 

Israel doesn’t just bomb small Palestinian children in their homes or snipe them in their skulls

It tortures them until their parents confess

The apartheid regime continues to do the unspeakable and our rulers force us to pay for it https://t.co/Ucc0aPGO8z

— Max Blumenthal (@MaxBlumenthal) March 29, 2026

#
MICHAEL LEON is a writer living in Madison, Wisconsin. His writing has appeared nationally in The Progressive, In These Times, and CounterPunch.

Trump Invades Venezuela; Arrests President Maduro and Wife

US President Donald Trump speaks at press conference at 
Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida, January 3, 2026.
(Photo by Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images) 
"We are going to run the country," Trump said.

Trump Declares U.S. 'In Charge' of Venezuela

Democrats Offer Weak Response

Netanyahu Calls Trump 'Bold and Brilliant'

Commentary

UPDATED - Madison, Wisconsin — President Trump launched another illegal U.S. regime-change war and invasion of a sovereign country — Venezuela.

Israel's radical Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar praised the invasion that followed the latest U.S. visit by Israeli Prime Minster Benjamin Netanyahu with Trump, and Christian Zionists.

Netanyahu dubbed Trump a leader for Peace this week.

Congressional Democrats' reaction is muted, often veering into legality and calls for Congressional movement, avoiding moral condemnation prominent among the American people.

Wisconsin's Democrat Senator Tammy Baldwin (D) is silent today, obeying her political instinct to gauge the political terrain first before commenting.

Jake Johnson in Common Dreams reports on exceptions to Baldwin's timidity:

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) said he will force a Senate vote next week on a bipartisan War Powers Resolution to block additional US military action in Venezuela.
'Where will this go next?' Kaine asked in a statement. 'Will the president deploy our troops to protect Iranian protesters? To enforce the fragile ceasefire in Gaza? To battle terrorists in Nigeria? To seize Greenland or the Panama Canal? To suppress Americans peacefully assembling to protest his policies? Trump has threatened to do all this and more and sees no need to seek legal authorization from people’s elected legislature before putting servicemembers at risk.'

Quagmire Seen

Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wisconsin), an AIPAC political foe, writes:

Trump continues to ignore the US Constitution and lie to Congress and the American people. Bombing and occupying Venezuela is an illegal act of war against a sovereign nation.

Only Congress has the ability to declare war, but Speaker Johnson and the Republican majorities in the House and Senate have rolled over and gave up our Article One powers. 

Secretaries Rubio and Hegseth told Members of Congress their illegal attacks on boats was not about regime change, but capturing a sitting leader is the literal definition of regime change. Trump and his band of misfits seem to have no endgame to this potential quagmire.

— Rep. Mark Pocan (@RepMarkPocan) January 3, 2026

House Democrat Minority Leader, Hakeem Jeffries, and Israel-first supporter, put out a mealy-mouthed statement this morning.

This is so fucking weak. https://t.co/rwOQsqt0wQ

— Krystal Ball (@krystalball) January 3, 2026

Mainstream corporate press and social media have blacked out Israel, which controls U.S. foreign policy, and its political work with Trump for this latest military action.

🇻🇪 Venezuela President Maduro on Israel:

“They have sown an ideology more dangerous than Nazism.

They justify raids, extermination, genocide, and atomic bombs"

they'll come for the Christians, Catholics."

This is why he had to go.
pic.twitter.com/lyFDd60kxG

— ADAM (@AdameMedia) January 3, 2026

The Democratic governor of Colorado joins several Democratic House members in praising Trump's regime change operation in Venezuela.

Nothing unites the two parties like new wars and regime changes. It's beautiful DC bipartisanship at its most inspiring: https://t.co/9TL5KENuaj

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) January 3, 2026

Congratulations, President @realDonaldTrump for your bold and historic leadership on behalf of freedom and justice. I salute your decisive resolve and the brilliant action of your brave soldiers.

— Benjamin Netanyahu - בנימין נתניהו (@netanyahu) January 3, 2026

 

Macklemore's Defiaint Song Against Genocide and Joe Biden

Palestinian girl Hind Rajab poses for photograph in this
undated handout picture obtained by Reuters on February 10,
2024 [Palestine Red Crescent Society/Reuters]

Genocide Machine and Joe Biden Under Fire

Singer-songwriter Macklemore just released a powerful opus against Israeli-American genocide in Gaza and the West Bank.
Macklemore's song, Hinds Hall, is named after Hind Rajab joined in song title with Columbia University’s Hamilton Hall.
The six-year-old Gazan girl's family was slaughtered by Israeli Defense Forces, trapping the girl in a car begging for help in her cell phone to the Red Crescent Society.
Israel proceeded to slaughter the rescue party sent by Red Recreant, then murdered  Hind Rajab in a horrid act much of which is caught on audio.
Macklemore's Hinds Hall is below.

Israel Is Sadistic State-Movement Committing Genocide — Time to Detach America from Annilation Machine

Pietà (Mother with dead Son), 1937-1939
In 1937, on the anniversary of her son
Peter’s death in WW I, the anti-fascist
artist Käthe Kollwitz wrote in her diary:
"The mother is seated, her dead son lying
on her lap between her knees.
-- Käthe Kollwitz, Diaries, 22 October 1937
Käthe Kollwitz Museum Kollwitz was
adored by the German people; even the
Nazis minimized their harassment.
---
Notes Käthe Kollwitz Museum:
"In 1993, a version of the Pietà
sculpture, executed by Harald Haake
four times its original size, was installed
on the initiative of Helmut Kohl,
the German Chancellor at that
time, at the Neue Wache in Berlin, which
is the central memorial site of the
Federal Republic of Germany for the victims
of war and dictatorship."
--
In the brilliant 2017 anti-war movie, War
Machine (David Michôd), United States Army
General Stanley McChrystal, is played by Brad
Pitt, and memorably featured in a powerful
scene saluting the Pietà sculpture in Berlin.
Artist Käthe Kollwitz never recovered from
the death on her son in WW I.
See Brad Pitt below.

Joe Biden, Democrats Lead U.S. into Moral Oblivion

Commentary

 

Like any sentient, post-World War II American, at an early age, I developed an ethic to oppose totalitarianism, fascism, anti-Semitism, creeping authoritarianism where it slithered its way onto our liberties.

Zionism and supporting Israel seemed natural.

No more. Israel is a sick, fiest pack slaughtering 10,000s, with sights on 100,000 more.

Here is the United States, a moral person must abandon the Democrats, all the Democrats.

How many more mothers must endure the gruesome deaths of their children?

From susan abulhawa in The Electronic Intifada:

It’s 8 pm in Gaza, Palestine right now, the end of my fourth day in Rafah and the first moment I’ve had to sit in a quiet place to reflect.

I’ve tried to take notes, photos, mental images, but this moment is too big for a notepad or my struggling memory. Nothing prepared me for what I would witness.

Before I made it across the Rafah-Egypt border, I read every bit of news coming out of Gaza or about Gaza. I did not look away from any video or image posted from the ground, no matter how gruesome, shocking or traumatizing.

I kept in touch with friends who reported on their situations in the north, middle and south of Gaza – each area suffering in different ways. I stayed current on the latest statistics, the latest political, military and economic maneuverings of Israel, the US and the rest of the world.

I thought I understood the situation on the ground. But I didn’t.

Nothing can truly prepare you for this dystopia. What reaches the rest of the world is a fraction of what I’ve seen so far, which is only a fraction of this horror’s totality.

Gaza is hell. It is an inferno teeming with innocents gasping for air.

But even the air here is scorched. Every breath scratches and sticks to the throat and lungs.

What was once vibrant, colorful, full of beauty, potential and hope against all odds, is draped in gray-colored misery and grime.
#

Richard Falk on Life and Writing of Robert Fisk in Time of Neo-liberal Lies

There was not much discussion of foreign policy in the 2020 general elections.

That's because Donald Trump and Joe Biden agreed on most everything from U.S. support for right-wing coups in South America to slaughter of that designated sub-human race known as Palestinians.

The Hillary Clinton-Joe Biden-John Kerry promotion of authoritarians and dictators will continue of course in the new administration.

The passing of Robert Fisk merits continual regard for his rigorous critique of Middle Eastern policy, American imperialism, Israeli human rights atrocities and propaganda.

The scholar and human rights advocate Richard Falk recalls Fisk in an interview with Daniel Falcone this weekend, The Life of Robert Fisk.

Here's an extended excerpt:

Richard Falk: Fisk was a vivid writer with a startling ability to observe, comment, and interpret. Fisk could be read for literary satisfaction as well as for a kind of episodic journalistic autobiography that brought together his experience of contemporary wars and strife. What his published books establish is the extent of Fisk’s illuminating understanding of turmoil in the world, and the degree to which the blood being spilled can be traced back to European colonialism and forward to American imperial ambition in both Asia and the Middle East.

Daniel Falcone: Can you explain how in your view Robert Fisk’s reporting and writings shaped understandings and perceptions of the Middle East? Do you recall any professional and personal interactions with him over the years? How do you categorize his journalistic reputation and writing style?

Richard Falk: Robert Fisk was one of the few journalists in the world relied upon to give first-hand reports from the fields of strife on the conflicts occurring throughout the Middle East. His reportage seemed guided by an overriding commitment to truthfulness as to facts, brashness and vividness of reporting style, and an interpretative understanding that got it right from perspectives of human consequences.

He was given the most dangerous combat assignments in several of the most challenging hot spots in the world, including Northern Ireland during The Troubles, Lebanon (declaring Beirut as his home) during its decade-long civil war, and Afghanistan during the period when the West was arming Afghan extremists to oppose the Russian presence. In the latter role, he was badly beaten by Afghans enraged by the Western interventions and yet Fisk explained to the world while still bloody that he empathized with Afghan anger as their villages and homes were being devastated by U.S. air attacks and a combat role that escalated the violence.

Specifically, in the Middle East, Fisk gave the world a truly independent, informed, and critical understanding of the struggles occurring throughout the region, including an unsparing exposure of Israeli abusive policies and practices toward the Palestinian people. Fisk’s departure from the region left a journalistic gap that has not been filled. It is important to appreciate that there are few war correspondents in the world that combine Fisk’s reporting fearlessness with his interpretative depth, engaging writing style, and candid exposures of the foibles of the high and mighty.

Fisk never sought refuge by hiding behind curtains of political correctness. On the contrary, he prided himself on a commitment to what might be called ‘judgmental journalism’ in his professional demeanor, which is best understood as portraying reality as he saw and experienced it, which in Middle East contexts meant stripping away the geopolitical delusions peddled by powerful government to hide their true motives. He was particularly controversial in recent years by depicting the U.S. anti-Damascus combat role in Syria as not really about the future of Syria or even counterterrorism, as Washington claimed, but was mainly motivated, with prodding from Tel Aviv and Riyadh, by anti-Iran, anti-Shi’ia containment and destabilization goals.

Can you imagine a Biden administration official or a corporate journalist calling for human rights in South America or the Middle East next year?

Such calls would incur the wrath of the increasingly ridiculous woke, politically correct crowd and its ally, the foreign policy blob.

Robert Fisk (and Richard Falk) never falter from forthright declaration that human beings are human and their insistence that foreign policy recognize this fact.

For a dose of sanity the next four years, Falk notes:

In journalistic and academic circles there are a few bright spots in the United States. As online sources of information, insight, and reportage sympathetic to the Palestinians I would mention Mondoweiss, Middle East Eye, and the Electronic Intifada, each well edited, online publishers of quality material. Among individuals who have been outspoken and influential I would mention Marwan Bishara, Phyllis Bennis, Norman Finkelstein, Noam Chomsky, Ilan Pappe, Noura Erakat, Lawrence Davidson, and Virginia Tilley.

One hopes the Democratic Party recognizes the commitments of its betters.

Wisconsin Newspaper That Fought McCarthism Ignores Democratic Party - Corporate Media Smears Against Pres Candidate Tulsi Gabbard

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) is a candidate for the
presidential nomination of the Democratic Party.
Gabbard is pictured above in 2008, training at Fort Hood
for her second combat deployment in Iraq. Gabbard took
lessons of war to heart, becoming along with Sen. Bernie
sanders the leading peace candidate for the presidency.
Reads Rep. Gabbard's candidate website:
The first day Tulsi arrived at her camp in Iraq, she
saw a large sign at one of the gates that read,
"Is today the day?" It was a blunt reminder that today
may be the day that any  of the soldiers would be called to
make the ultimate sacrifice for their country. It caused her
to reflect on her own life and the reality that each of us could
die at any moment.

While serving in a base in the Sunni Triangle at the height of
the war, Tulsi had the heart-wrenching daily responsibility
of going through the list of every injury and casualty in the
entire theatre of operations, looking to see if any soldiers in her
unit were on the list, so she could ensure they received the
care they needed and their families were notified.

She was hit with the enduring pain and hardship of her
brothers and sisters in uniform, and  the stress and pressure
on their families. She wondered if those who voted to send
soldiersto Iraq really understood why they were there
—if lawmakers and the President reflected daily on each
death, each injury,and the immeasurably high cost of
war.

Having experienced first-hand the true cost of war, she
made a personal vow to find a way to ensure that our
country doesn’t continue repeating the mistakes of the
past, sending our troops into war without a clear
mission, strategy, or purpose.

Updated - Madison, Wisconsin — "It's been a while since Wisconsin sent Joe McCarthy to the U.S. Senate where he became our 20th century embarrassment," writes The Capital Times editor, Dave Zweifel, in a November column. "We're still living down McCarthy's disregard for Americans' constitutional rights and his witch hunt [.]"

Zweifel takes Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson (R) to task for the senator's attacks against enemies of Pres Donald Trump among the executive branch:

"Before Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman even appeared before the Intelligence Committee's public meetings last week, Johnson disparaged the Iraq War hero and security council specialist and questioned his credibility.
'A significant number of bureaucrats and staff members within the executive branch have never accepted President Trump as legitimate and resent his unorthodox style and his intrusion onto their 'turf,' Johnson declared in a letter to committee members. ... "

"Not a scintilla of proof. Just innuendo the way Joe McCarthy mastered it."

Thing is, Ron Johnson is right and his fact statement (right or wrong) is not innuendo. Few non-political national security and foreign policy staff in the executive branch appear to be political fans of the lunatic in the White House, a fact acknowledged by those who rightfully challenge Trump's many counter-punches against such opponents.

Consider as well that McCarthy's smears against so-called Reds are hardly the same as noting anti-Trump sentiment, the existence of which is surly to the credit of those holding to these viewpoints, though our senator does not believe so, (Timpf, The New Republic). See also the new book, A Warning, by Anonymous.

But Zweifel's use of McCarthyism is preposterous when considered under the light of the McCarthyite work of the political party for which The Capital Times fronts — the Democratic Party.

Johnson's stated opinion regarding anti-Trump bias in the executive branch is invisible next to the sustained bombardment of presidential candidate Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D) by the Democratic Party establishment and its major media allies, MSNBC, CNN, the New York Times and the Washington Post.

The Capital Times like every other Democratic Party organ is silent on the real perpetrators of neo-McCarthism today.

Consider Rep. Gabbard (D-Hawaii), a military combat Army veteran, is a fierce opponent of war and American empire, positions that have provoked defamation and character assassination on a level that Ron Johnson could not approach in 1,000 lifetimes.

Writes James Carden in The Nation:

The war of words between former secretary of state Hillary Clinton and current 2020 presidential aspirant Tulsi Gabbard has been, in some respects, clarifying. Clinton’s insinuation that Russia is 'grooming' the Hawaiian Democrat for a third-party run in order to influence the outcome of next year’s election, instead of provoking a 'have you no shame' response from the establishment media, was gleefully repeated by such establishment fixtures as the journalist Jonathan Alter and the scholar Norman Ornstein. In other words, McCarthyism has gone mainstream. ...

Left-leaning outlets and think tanks like MSNBC (Hardball host Chris Matthews has decreed that loyal 'Americans don’t go to Russia'), The Daily Beast, New York magazine, Think Progress, the Center for American Progress, and The New Republic have all recklessly accused scholars, journalists, and activists with whom they disagree of being Kremlin 'toadies' and 'useful idiots' — this last, of course, having been a common trope marched out by the John Birch right during the Cold War, and even in the years following.

So, where are the Dave Zwiefels and other Democratic Party allies? They are either silent or complicit.

For a critical piece of reporting on the topic, see the interview with Glenn Greenwald on Rising, The Hill.tv with Krystal Ball and Saagar Enjeti. [For more continuing coverage of the topic, see also the Jimmy Dore Show, Secular Talk with Kyle Kulinski, and the Rational National with David Doel.]:

Said Saagar Enjeti in the interview with Greenwald: "Glenn, one of the things that really struck me yesterday [Nov 19 hearing before the House Intelligence Committee] was that there was actually a particular question from the Democratic [Party] counsel in which they asked Lieutenant Colonel Vindman, they said: 'Were you aware that the president was departing from official U.S. policy?'"

"It struck me very much that the national security state was the one that was setting official U.S. policy and the duly elected president was departing from that?"

Replied Greenwald in part:

That's been one of the primary themes of the Trump presidency. This idea that's what's most dangerous about Trump is that he believes in a whole set of foriegn policy beliefs that he actually campaigned on and that therefore were ratified by the American people, that are dangerous because the CIA, and the Pentagon and the bipartisan military and think-tank class in Washington doesn't accept.

What I find actually dangerous, independent of those debates, is the idea that it's not the elected president, but the whatever you want to call them — Dwight Eisenhower called them the 'military-industrial complex,' people have called them the 'national security blob,' the 'permanent power faction' in Washington — the idea that they and not our elected officials determine foreign policy.

Obviously, there's this narrow question in impeachment about whether Trump did typical Trumpian things in kind-of linking the investigation of the Bidens to military aid, but the much broader and more important theme is anger over Trump for his foreign policy views about Russia and Ukraine. ...

That's the real issue driving the impeachment hearings, and this much narrower issue is just a pretext.

The idea that Sen Johnson, Greenwald, Krystal Ball and Saagar Enjeti share is skepticism that a  permanent-power faction in D.C. should determine foriegn policy, national security and empire. Departure from the permanent-power faction's policy is exemplified by Rep. Gabbard and to a lesser extent in practice — Trump.

Tulsi Gabbard, along with Bernie Sanders, is the preeminent peace candidate. For their stands on war and peace, Gabbard and Sanders are near-constanly derided as doing 'Russia's work.'

That's McCartyite and this deserves challenge from those claiming fighting McCarthism as political heritage.

Shalala, Death Squad Supporters and Dems Target Bernie Sanders' Foreign Policy

Rep. Donna Shalala (D-Miami) hits Bernie Sanders
for foreign policy stand focusing on democracy,
human rights, diplomacy and peace. (Twitter)

No surprise to read Rep. Donna Shalala (D-Miami) is extolling the virtues of United States intervention in South America and Central America, and trying to blast Bernie Sanders in light of Sanders' expressed hesitation to invade Venezuela and his lifelong work for peace and human rights.

Shalala is hyping the newest invade-now-everyone-wants-to piece in Slate Magazine.

Shalala was never an opponent of death squads in El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Brazil, and Chile.

Shalala is close to the Queen of Chaos, Hillary Clinton, who ran against Bernie Sanders' foreign policy too, with Clinton championing Henry Kissinger.

We all lost the subsequent 2016 general election in which Trump actually endorsed peace over Clinton and her policy of invading, bombing and intervening in other countries.

Now, Shalala is promoting an attempted Sanders hit job in Slate Magazine, (always hot for an invasion and a war), in which Shalala tweets:

I’ll make it clear, @SenSanders does not reflect the majority of the Democratic Party and our support for Venezuela’s interim president @jguaido and the Venezuelan people. Maduro is a dictator and must go. https://t.co/Q1GDp9q2Tw #VenezuelaLibre

— Rep. Donna E. Shalala (@RepShalala) February 21, 2019

The piece Shalala promotes is written by León Krauze.

Krauze's thesis is: If a presidential candidate does not want to invade, bomb and destabilize another country today, then the candidate, Bernie Sanders, per force, has a "soft spot" for "three dictators" and all of the social defects of three respective countries—still recovering from decades of American intervention, intervention that is long opposed by Bernie Sanders and most of the American population.

Krauze has discovered that Bernie Sanders said, "I think the United States has to work with the international community to make sure that there is a free and fair election in Venezuela."

Get him. Stop Bernie Sanders! Bernie wants our country to be like Venezuelan socialism.

And, notes Krauze, Donald Trump has already spoken against socialism, so again we must stop Bernie Sanders.

Writes Krauze:

'Socialism has so completely ravaged this great country [Venezuela] that even the world’s largest reserves of oil are no longer enough to keep the lights on. This will never happen to us,' Trump said, continuing a theme he had broached during his State of the Union address. 

With decades of illegal intervention and human rights atrocities defining American foreign policy since post-World War II, Shalala, Clinton and Trump all assure us we need to intervene now.

And domestically: Stop the campaign of Bernie Sanders because somehow, someway Sanders is just like those socialist dictators, and Donald Trump, whom Hillary and the hawks bequeathed to America, is going to say the same things and Trump never makes a political miscalculation.

Concludes Krauze:

If he wins the nomination, Sanders’ old (and not so old) videos praising failed socialist experiments and tiptoeing around recent cruelties in Latin America will surely resurface, playing on a loop while Trump warns about the long-dreaded socialist takeover of the United States of America. This may be fearmongering, but Democrats dismiss its effectiveness at their own peril.

I'll let the reader unpack that (above) one because Krauze's piece, as hit jobs go, isn't that good.

It is just 17 years ago that former-Slate editor, Jacob Weisberg, dismissed another anti-interventionist, international-law-supporting peace movement socialist, Noam Chomsky, as a "malnourished left-wing straggler," suffering from "clinical symptoms that have been obvious to everyone else for years" in a better-written hit job.

Chomsky's illness? Chomsky warned about the consequences to civilians from the invasion of Afghanistan, and cautioned death and destruction, including catastrophe to the invader, were likely to follow.

As of October 2018, conservative estimates put the civilian death toll in excess of 200,000, over 2,400 U.S. deaths, 10,000s wounded, and Afghanistan is an unmitigated disaster.

In 2002, I wrote Chomsky about Weisberg's hit piece against the peace movement, echoed today in the liberal-corporatist-Democratic Party campaign against Bernie Sanders, who keeps criticizing armed insurrections and illegal American interventions.

Wrote back Chomsky to me in 2002:

(L)iberal intellectuals have lined up in support of the war machine in the familiar style—discussed, for example, by Randolph Bourne in classic essays—and since they know they do not have the intellectual competence to deal with those who refuse to go along, resort to what comes natural to the educated classes: hysterical tantrums, lies, and abuse. Why become involved? There are more important things to do—such as continue to falsify their increasingly desperate claim that everyone is following them in their depraved subordination to power.

Today's propaganda offensives against Sanders evokes the campaign against the peace movement 17 years ago,

As Shalala says: "I’ll make it clear, @SenSanders does not reflect the majority of the Democratic Party ... ."

Actually, Shalala, Clinton, Trump, Krauze, and the whole bunch of liberal war hawks are wrong again.

Bernie Sanders, Noam Chomsky and the majority of the American people are correct. As Bernie put it on Feb. 20:

The U.S. must lead the world in improving international cooperation in the fight against climate change, militarism, authoritarianism and global inequality. I'm running for president because we need a foreign policy which focuses on democracy, human rights, diplomacy and peace.

— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) February 20, 2019

I'm going with Bernie Sanders.

If the United States is ever to reclaim a moral center in international relations, then we need to stop trying to overthrow elected foreign leaders, make human rights the basis for our foreign policy, and the Democratic Party must stop demonizing domestic human rights workers such as Noam Chomsky and Bernie Sanders.

Trump to Launch Missiles Somewhere and then Strut into World War

The American Sec. of Defense, Jimmy Carter, and CodePink
are united with the world, trying to talk Trump down.

A story this morning features military leaders warning about the war spasms of the cornered child in the White House.

"Defense Secretary Jim Mattis sought on Thursday to slow down an imminent strike on Syria, reflecting mounting concerns at the Pentagon that a concerted bombing campaign could escalate into a wider conflict between Russia, Iran and the West," (New York Times).

President* Trump remains a wanna-be dictator running from a federal investigation, looking for the American military to rescue him from his slow-motion suicide, as the Pentagon appears desperate to stop the nut from starting a world war.

The lunatic is making up policy day-by-day, without a clue, in a desperate gamble Trump can wag the dog and look presidential, supported by the British prime minister, but not his own Secretary of Defense, James Mattis.

Trump is a dangerous child, and the world awaits what destruction is wrought.

From Common Dreams:

Former President Jimmy Carter has added his voice to those urging President Donald Trump to refrain from launching an illegal military attack on Syria, warning of the serious dangers—including nuclear conflagration—that could result.

At this point reason and life do not matter in the White House, and Trump is just trying to stop the bleeding from his criminal enterprise about which we were all warned.

Forthcoming rightwing rallies, military strikes, insane tweets, a world mostly aligned against the nut will follow. But this is mere conversation as Donald Trump wants to destroy the Constitution, and start World War III.

Meanwhile, "a group of international law experts, noted in a statement, 'an act of violence committed by one government against another government, without lawful justification, amounts to the crime of aggression: the supreme international crime which carries with it the evil of every other international crime as noted by the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg in 1946.'"

Nuremberg, Trump likely has likely seen a movie about NAZI Germany, his kind of people.

"It would be wrong for Congress to allow any president, on his own authority, to launch an attack on Syria that potentially puts the U.S. in conflict with Russia, Iran, or both. But granting that power to Trump—as he contemplates a second Saturday Night Massacre—is utter lunacy," writes Peter Beinart.

Usually, American liberals can be countered on to line up in "support of the war machine in the familiar style — discussed, for example, by Randolph Bourne in classic essays," noted Noam Chomsky presciently in 2002.

Not today. As Trump signals he will use the presidency for the objective of creating catastrophe, the world is lining up against him, only feeding Trump's paranoia and growing isolation.

Wall Street is pretending an adult is supervising, but that will not last.

🚨URGENT🚨 Sign and RT now to tell Congress to stop an unconstitutional strike on #Syria https://t.co/4JyKClU9pq pic.twitter.com/dGKfevdIPX

— CODEPINK (@codepink) April 11, 2018

Trump Will Hit Hillary on Nicaraguan Contras, Human Rights Violations, and Wars

Political curve balls will be flying off the lectern at the great debate as the blank slate to many that is Donald Trump offers a human rights-based critique of Hillary Clinton, (Mal Contends).

That Trump is a fascist is not of the moment in the theater.

The political world won't know what to make of human rights from Trump, nor for that matter will the American people.

Human rights are no concern to Trump of course. Nor are American minorities.

Trump will assure us dangers lurk, and he is the guy who will protect our families at home and abroad from the dark-skinned dragons.

Still, Trump will strike out tonight and Hillary will be acclaimed the victor.

No politician ever went broke by overestimating the militaristic fervor of the American people, and militarism has never cost Hillary Clinton and this won't change for the foreseeable future.

Hillary Clinton and Her Support for the Nicaraguan Contras

What about it, Hillary Clinton: You agree Reagan's training and support for the Nicaraguan Contras were a disgrace and a human rights violation, correct?

Most who came of age during the age of Reagan, (1981-89), remember the creation of the CIA, the Nicaraguan Contras, remnants of the U.S.-supported dictator, Anastasio Somoza.

The Contras, a group of U.S.-financed terrorists went after soft targets—schools, daycare centers and healthcare facilities—and were among the most vile death squads in 1970s-80s Latin America, terrorists drawing bi-partisan but not unanimous American support, (Greenwald, The Intercept).

Among the supporters of the Contras were the politically ambitious Hillary and Bill Clinton, and last month at a debate Hillary Clinton sounded precisely like Ronald Reagan, (and not unlike Henry Kissinger), (Greenwald, The Intercept).

Love to see a question posed of Hillary asking if the Contras, Latin American death squads and dictators were repulsive terrorists that no decent American should have ever supported.

As noted by Glenn Greenwald after a March 10 debate co-sponsored by Univision, the Washington Post, and Facebook at Miami-Dade College:

Vehement opposition to Reagan’s covert wars in Central America, as well as to the sadistic and senseless embargo of Cuba, were once standard liberal positions. As my colleague Jeremy Scahill, observing the reaction of Clinton supporters during the debate, put it in a series of tweets: 'The U.S. sponsored deaths squads that massacred countless central and Latin Americans, murdered nuns and priests, assassinated an Archbishop. I bet commie Sanders was even against Reagan’s humanitarian mining of Nicaraguan waters and; supported subsequent war crimes judgment vs. U.S. Have any of these Hillarybots heard of the Contra death squads? Or is it just that whatever Hillary says must be defended at all costs? The Hillarybots attacking Sanders over Nicaragua should be ashamed of themselves.'

So, what about it, Hillary Clinton: You agree Reagan's support for the Nicaraguan Contras was a disgrace and a human rights violation, correct?

On Wisconsin—Walker's Budget Mired in Disaster, Sanders Moves Ahead of Clinton

Donald Trump trashed Scott Walker over Wisconsin's declining fiscal health under Scott Walker, saying "[Walker] is not doing a good job ... ," (Vitali, NBC News).

Actually, Wisconsin's fiscal health is much worse; Jake the macro-Econ man, has the breakdown in a piece entitled, February revenues collapse, Wisconsin budget even more on the edge.

Meanwhile in the 2016 presidential Democratic primary, Bernie Sanders is plowing ahead of Hillary Clinton who has left Wisconsin for a fundraiser from the Wall Street crowd.

While Sanders was in Madison on Wednesday for several appearances including a town hall meeting, Clinton was scheduled to be in New York City at a fundraiser hosted by former Morgan Stanley Chief Financial Officer Ruth Porat.

Sanders' campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, noted the candidates' divergent approaches in an email to supporters on Wednesday. 'Hillary Clinton left the campaign trail for yet another high-dollar fundraising event on Monday,' he wrote, 'but she shared some news about the state of the race that we agree with: she said the trail to the Democratic nomination 'goes through Wisconsin.' (Fulton, Common Dreams).

Also worrying is the uber-hawk, Hillary Clinton.

In the Huffington Post, Oliver Stone sets the record straight on Hillary Clinton and her foreign policy  earning Clinton elsewhere the moniker, the Queen of Chaos.

Notes Stone:

Hillary’s record includes supporting the barbaric 'contras' against the Nicaraguan people in the 1980s, supporting the NATO bombing of the former Yugoslavia, supporting the ongoing Bush-Iraq War, the ongoing Afghan mess, and as Secretary of State the destruction of the secular state of Libya, the military coup in Honduras, and the present attempt at 'regime change' in Syria. Every one of these situations has resulted in more extremism, more chaos in the world, and more danger to our country. Next will be the borders of Russia, China, and Iran. Look at the viciousness of her recent AIPAC speech (don’t say you haven’t been warned). Can we really bear to watch as Clinton 'takes our alliance [with Israel] to the next level'? Where is our sense of proportion? Cannot the media, at the least, call her out on this extremism? The problem, I think, is this political miasma of 'correctness' that dominates American thinking (i.e. Trump is extreme, therefore Hillary is not). 

Clinton's foreign policy is the same as the Cruz-Trump line, just delivered more delicately.

Clinton's domestic fiscal policy comes straight from Wall Street.

To the extent these facts are known, Clinton's political fortunes will decline.

President Obama Has Ended the War in Iraq

President Barack Obama talks with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki of Iraq
during a secure video teleconference in the Situation Room of the
White House, Oct. 21, 2011. Seated at the table, from left, are: Tony Blinken;
National Security Advisor to the Vice President;
National Security Advisor Tom Donilon; Puneet Talwar,
Senior Director for Iraq, Iran and the Gulf States;
Deputy National Security Advisor Denis McDonough; and Chief of Staff
Bill Daley. Pictured onscreen are: at left, Prime Minister al-Maliki,
along with two aides; in center, Vice President Joe Biden;
at right, General Lloyd Austin, Commanding General of U.S. Forces
- Iraq and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq James Jeffrey.
- Official White House Photo by Pete Souza

President Obama from the White House

Good evening,

I'm writing to tell you that all US troops will return home from Iraq by the end of December. After nearly nine years, the American war in Iraq will end. Our servicemen and women will be with their families for the holidays.

The war in Iraq came with tremendous cost. More than a million Americans served in Iraq, and nearly 4,500 gave their lives in service to the rest of us. Today, as always, we honor these patriots.

When I came into office, I pledged to bring the war in Iraq to a responsible end. As Commander in Chief, I ended our combat mission last year and pledged to keep our commitment to remove all our troops by the end of 2011. To date, we’ve removed more than 100,000 troops from Iraq.

This is a significant moment in our history. For more information, including video, please visit WhiteHouse.gov/BringingTroopsHome.

The end of the war in Iraq reflects a larger trend. The wars of the past decade are drawing to a close.

As we have removed troops from Iraq, we have refocused our fight against al Qaeda and secured major victories in taking out its leadership–including Osama bin Laden. And we’ve begun a transition in Afghanistan.

On the first day of my Administration, roughly 180,000 troops were deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan. By the end of this year that number will be cut in half, and we’ll continue to draw it down.

As we welcome home our newest veterans, we’ll enlist their talents in meeting our greatest challenges as a nation—restoring our economic strength at home. Because after a decade of war, the nation that we need to build is our own.

Today the United States moves forward, from a position of strength.

Thank you,

David Broder Gets Worse

Even the most dense of Washington political journalists is taking note of the American people's objection to more war from the Obama administration.

The Dean of the American political journalism, David S. Broder, has a piece out, though of course Broder being Broder manages to miss the point.

To Broder, the cheerleader of George W. Bush and Karl Rove, the ideological "left" needs to learn from the new president as he has learned to prolong the wars going so well. Unmentioned are the lies Bush and the neocons told the world with Broder in tow.

Writes Broder the banal:

In every instance, Obama heeded the advice of his uniformed and civilian defense leaders and in each case but Afghanistan, he abandoned a position he had taken as the Democratic presidential candidate.

The predictable result has been the first sustained outcry from the left, angry denunciations from leaders of constituencies that had been early supporters. They feel betrayed as they watch him continuing, with minor modifications, the policies and practices of his Republican predecessor. ...

Ever since Vietnam, the prevailing ideology of grass-roots Democratic activists has been hostile to American military actions and skeptical of the military itself. Iowa, where the Democratic nomination process begins, is famously tilted toward a pacifist view of war. Throughout the primaries, the pressures push forward candidates who do not challenge that mind-set. ...

Obama's liberal critics are right. He is a different man now. He has learned what it means to be commander in chief.

Peace and non-intervention are ideologies for Broder. More war and following the dictates of the neocons (whom Broder tries to align with the military) is what being president really means.

And Democrats need (like George W. Bush?) to become more acquainted with the military to really understand foreign policy and war, no mention of the chicken hawk neocons again.

It's all going so well in Iraq and Afghanistan and Obama just needs to listen and learn to become commander in chief and things will get even better.

And those lying chicken hawks, the $trillions in war costs, the 100,000s of innocents dead, and the constant pissing on the veterans.

That's just the griping left and the Defeatocrats that don't know better.

Listen to the wise men like Broder, Cheney and Bush who saved us from weapons of mass destruction being flown over America in unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) from the "Iraqi dictator (who) must not be permitted to threaten America and the world with horrible poisons and diseases and gases and atomic weapons," as George Bush assured us in the Oct. 7, 2002 speech in Cincinnati.

That was part of the freedom agenda that Broder applauded and cheerleaded without irony or ridicule.

Stephen Walt's 'The threatmonger's handbook'

From Walt' s How to Scare Your Fellow Citizens for Fun and Profit.

One reason Americans exaggerate security fears is the existence of an extensive cottage industry of professional threatmongers, who deploy a well-honed array of arguments to convince us that we are in fact in grave danger. (The United States is hardly the only country that does this, of course, but the phenomenon is more evident here because its overall strategic position is so favorable). Debunking these claims is easier once you know the basics, so I hereby offer as a public service.

Obama, Be Bold

On Afghanistan and the economy, Obama needs to dump in toto the rhetoric and substance of the neocons who have brought us to this terrible place.

Repudiation is called for.

Militarism in Afghanistan won't work, nor will pretensions that economic elites, financiers on Wall Street, are well-intentioned actors.

Speak the truth boldly.

See Krugman today in the Times:

Simon Johnson. In an article in the current issue of The Atlantic, Mr. Johnson, who served as the chief economist at the I.M.F. and is now a professor at M.I.T., declares that America’s current difficulties are 'shockingly reminiscent' of crises in places like Russia and Argentina — including the key role played by crony capitalists.
In America as in the third world, he writes, 'elite business interests — financiers, in the case of the U.S. — played a central role in creating the crisis, making ever-larger gambles, with the implicit backing of the government, until the inevitable collapse. More alarming, they are now using their influence to prevent precisely the sorts of
reforms that are needed, and fast, to pull the economy out of its nosedive.'

And Juan Cole in Salon:

Obama's dark vision of the overthrow of the Afghanistan government by al-Qaida-linked Taliban or the 'killing' of Pakistan by small tribal groups differs little from the equally apocalyptic and implausible warnings issued by John McCain and Dick Cheney about an 'al-Qaida' victory in Iraq. Ominously, the president's views are contradicted by those of his own secretary of defense. Pashtun tribes in northwestern Pakistan and southern Afghanistan have a long history of dissidence, feuding and rebellion, which is now being branded Talibanism and configured as a dire menace to the Western way of life. Obama has added yet another domino theory to the history of Washington's justifications for massive military interventions in Asia. When a policymaker gets the rationale for action wrong, he is at particular risk of falling into mission creep and stubborn commitment to a doomed and unnecessary enterprise.

War on Terror Is Over If We Want It

The war on terror has always been a a propaganda device used by the mendacious Bush administration.

Matthew Yglesias asked in the American Prospect if Obama will jettison this exercise in lying writ large to the American people.

The notion of a 'war on terror' is a controversial one—British Foreign Secretary David Miliband recently critiqued it for giving the impression of a 'unified, transnational enemy.' Will Obama discard the phrase?

Our Children Are Not Cannon Fodder for John McCain

From MoveOn

Iraq Does Not Want US in Their Country

Al-Maliki: May Ask US Troops to Leave; Al-Sadr Forms Special Groups to Fight Occupation

It's like they don't want us there. Can we leave, now?

No WMD.

No Saddam.

No 911 conspirators.

Well, let's throw in a few $trillion more, sacrifice some more troops, and then maybe they'll like us this time.

Bush/Neocons Against Democracy; McCain Admits War Is for Oil

via mal contends

Update: John McCain: "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." Said Chris Mattews: "“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.”

Reading the James Kitfields, neocons, and chickenhawks of the world takes a dose of good humor.

That's because the humanitarian disasters that James Kitfield (along with other neocon cheerleaders, including McCain) excuses and his unseemly enthusiasm for defending the perpetrators tend to grate on the nerves of those for whom tyranny and authoritarianism are repulsive.

Consider James Kitfield in the cover story of the National Journal, Democracy Stalled.

Apparently mystified by the Arab peoples' utter rejection of the American imperial project, Kitfield in his 4,400-word piece references Bush's second Inaugural Address in which Bush, and you can look it up, mentioned "freedom" and "liberty" a whole bunch of times.

Writes Kitfield:

Remarkably, it was just three years ago that President Bush unveiled a new 'freedom' agenda in his second Inaugural Address, rallying the United States and its allies to a generations-spanning effort to transform the Middle East through democracy. In his soaring speech, Bush called the campaign to topple the forces of tyranny and authoritarianism a national security mandate and a moral imperative.
'America's vital interests and our deepest beliefs are now one,' Bush proclaimed. 'We will persistently clarify the choice before every ruler and every nation: the moral choice between oppression, which is always wrong, and freedom, which is eternally right.'

Well, remarkably it was just five years ago that Bush decided to invade Iraq in violation of international law (hey, come along UN if you want to be "relevant"), and proceeded to be forced into accepting direct election of local officials under threat by the Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani.

Now, as civil war continues, Bush is paying Sunnis millions of American tax dollars not to kill our troops, all the while insisting that we must keep the troops there as an occupation force against whoever Bush decides for the moment is the real threat to America.

Though Bush soared in his rhetoric, a quick examination of Kitfield's piece reveals a couple of deflating facts.

He mentioned the word "oil" not once.

Noam Chomsky cuts through this ideological oil constraint nicely in an interview from 2006.

"Doctrinal managers would like us to believe that the US and UK would have 'liberated' Iraq even if its major exports were lettuce and pickles and the major energy resources of the world were in the South Pacific. It takes really impressive discipline 'not to see' the obvious."

Also, Kitfield mentions "Abu Ghraib prison" not once.

These democratic idealists like Kitfield are just too busy analyzing to be bothered by such fare in their pieces.

As Kitfield delves into what What Went Wrong with Bush's idealistic democracy-promoting enterprise, it's worth noting that Kitfield, one has to believe, deliberately ignores the mission, vision, objectives and goals of Bush and his regime.

That would be controlling oil, not exporting democracy.

Carl Estrabrook sums it up nicely, though not on the pages of the National Journal.

Since the Second World War -- from which the United States emerged as the world's only undamaged major country and proceeded to organize the economy of the world -- a cornerstone of American policy has been control of Middle East energy resources, the greatest geopolitical prize in the modern world.

Kitfield ought to consider that no human blood is justified for American control of oil.

Instead he ponders:

Confronted with mounting internal instability, an ascendant Shiite Iran, and empowered Islamist groups throughout the region, authoritarian Sunni Arab governments allied with the United States have cracked down on opposition groups and the press, reversing their own modest democratic reforms. Each day seems to bring news of more opposition figures or government critics arrested and imprisoned, and more restrictions imposed on the press in Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and other countries.

You mean we're invading these countries next? Democracy-exporting sure can be hard work sometimes.

So it is with good humor that one must say to Kitfield and his ilk: Leave democracy and liberty out of it; you're out of your league. And you may wish to ask your editor for a new headline: Imperialism Stalled.