Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Robert Parry: Who’s Telling the ‘Big Lie’ on Ukraine? [View all]Octafish
(55,745 posts)130. Weak of mind, yet strong in purpose.
What JackpineRadical found:
Obama Makes Bushism the New Normal
By Dan Froomkin, The Intercept
03 September 14
In a lot of ways, were worse off today than we were under George W. Bush.
Back then, Bushs extremist assault on civil liberties, human rights and other core American values in the name of fighting terror felt like an aberration.
The expectation was that those policies would be quickly reversed, discredited and explicitly outlawed once he was no longer in power.
Instead, under President Barack Obama, theyve become institutionalized.
There will be no snapping back to a pre-Bush-era respect for basic human dignity and civil rights. Thanks to Obama, its going to be a hard, long fight.
In some cases, Obama has set even darker precedents than his predecessor. Massively invasive bulk surveillance of Americans and others has been expanded, not constrained. This president secretly condemns people to death without any checks or balances, and shrugs as his errant drones massacre innocent civilians. Whistleblowers and journalists who expose national security wrongdoing face unprecedented criminal prosecution.
CONTINUED...
http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/25668-focus-obama-makes-bushism-the-new-normal
They buy time for the, uh, game to continue unabated.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
187 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Regarding your first paragraph...we sure do have a 'gaggle' of those around here.
Purveyor
Sep 2014
#1
Well, that doesn't refute anything in the article. What is he wrong about? He's not the only one
sabrina 1
Sep 2014
#33
We are talking about his excellent work throughout the BUSH years, which airc, were just a few years
sabrina 1
Sep 2014
#34
Great, so if I see a Waaahhhhhhhh in the Ukraine article I'll know where it came from.
NuclearDem
Sep 2014
#30
Why is the Kiev government killing its own people? The world is appalled at the carnage being
sabrina 1
Sep 2014
#35
I assume because the modern concept of a "good journalist" utterly precludes him
reddread
Sep 2014
#21
I assume you are being rhetorical. There were a lot of "good journalists" when they were critical
rhett o rick
Sep 2014
#24
What should have knocked some sense of reality into their heads was Biden fracking Ukraine.
Octafish
Sep 2014
#61
"What should have knocked some sense of reality into their heads", you are looking at it
rhett o rick
Sep 2014
#68
Like Robert Parry, Don Fulsom is a top journalist covering crimes of the State.
Octafish
Sep 2014
#70
He got it right on Bush/Cheney too. He has made enemies for his reporting on that criminal
sabrina 1
Sep 2014
#36
Depending how you mean that, it's a good assessment. The neocons are the Putinistas
stevenleser
Sep 2014
#44
Yes an unprovoked war of aggression. That term has a specific meaning in terms of international law
stevenleser
Sep 2014
#48
We didn't engage in one in the Ukraine situation. You are justifying GWb's invasion of Iraq if
stevenleser
Sep 2014
#50
No dancing. You are apologizing for an unprovoked war of aggression, just like in Iraq. nt
stevenleser
Sep 2014
#54
Nope, you are engaging in apologia for an unprovoked war of aggression. Simple as that. nt
stevenleser
Sep 2014
#76
Nope, you are engaging in fear mongering and jingoism. Easy peasy, works like a charm.
JEB
Sep 2014
#87
This is why you lose credibility on this subject. No one invaded Crimea. It is an insult to the
sabrina 1
Sep 2014
#38
That is a link to part of the Western MSM which is hardly a reliable source. Russia always had
sabrina 1
Sep 2014
#60
There's that condescension again. I am saying one thing, the Western Media is not reliable any more
sabrina 1
Sep 2014
#82
No media is totally reliable, and especially after they have been caught lying over and over again.
sabrina 1
Sep 2014
#69
Clearly you have no idea as to the events of the mob riots in Odessa...
Tommy_Carcetti
Sep 2014
#118
Exactly, thank you, at least YOU know why they didn't invade Crimea. Was that comment intended
sabrina 1
Sep 2014
#59
LMFAO! EU is to blame for Russia's war of aggression BC they proposed an association with Ukraine!
stevenleser
Sep 2014
#32
Yeah, they said that about him when he was writing about the Cheney/Bush criminal administration
sabrina 1
Sep 2014
#39
Your entire post is debunked by the Russians themselves admitting their troops are there.
stevenleser
Sep 2014
#81
Reading is fundamental. Ten soldiers were CAPTURED. Surely you understand the difference, right? nt
stevenleser
Sep 2014
#114
LMAO, the lies and sad justifications from Putin and his apologists are pathetic and
stevenleser
Sep 2014
#127
I don't post fiction. I have citations that prove the facts underlying my positions. nt
stevenleser
Sep 2014
#77
If one accepts all that at face value, it does not justify an unprovoked war of aggression by Russia
stevenleser
Sep 2014
#84
After reading Parry's piece again, I'm even more astonished how idiotic it is.
Tommy_Carcetti
Sep 2014
#63
You show me the evidence as to how the US actually executed the forcible removal of Yanukovych....
Tommy_Carcetti
Sep 2014
#79
The irony is, even if the US completely put the uprising up to it, it does not justify Russia's
stevenleser
Sep 2014
#85
If word out of the mouths of US State Department officials won't do it, perhaps you need new media.
Octafish
Sep 2014
#90
Someone in the State Department confessed to forcibly removing Yanukovych from power?
Tommy_Carcetti
Sep 2014
#92
You mean like the Iraq war that every DUer disagreed with including zappaman? nt
stevenleser
Sep 2014
#117
Check out Octafish's responses throughout the thread from #107 down. Its deliberate.
stevenleser
Sep 2014
#139
You are accusing some DUers of being in favor of the Iraq war? You need proof otherwise?
stevenleser
Sep 2014
#129
You accused Zappaman of not being against anything the BFEE does. Iraq was one of those things.
stevenleser
Sep 2014
#132
Your post #107 is only a few above this. Its not like its from another OP.
stevenleser
Sep 2014
#134
You suggested Zappaman didnt object to anything about the BFEE. Which he did and obviously so.
stevenleser
Sep 2014
#138
We both object to what the BFEE did with Iraq. As I have already told you and was proven.
stevenleser
Sep 2014
#142
Its in post #123 above. Once again, how many times do we have to post something before it sinks in
stevenleser
Sep 2014
#146
All I've ever seen is references to a phone call. One that happened weeks before Yanukovych left.
Tommy_Carcetti
Sep 2014
#111
When we source something, you ignore it and claim several posts later it wasnt sourced.
stevenleser
Sep 2014
#144
Really? Like... does a source become invalid if more than one person cites it?
stevenleser
Sep 2014
#151
What provides plausible deniability? The video of Yanukovych packing up and leaving?
Tommy_Carcetti
Sep 2014
#165
The CIA’S Mop-Up Man: LA Times Reporter Cleared Stories with Agency before Publication
Octafish
Sep 2014
#179
And that shows you exactly what's going on here. An unprovoked war of aggression by Russia they
stevenleser
Sep 2014
#115
Nothing about the US will justify an unprovoked war of aggression by Russia against Ukraine. nt
stevenleser
Sep 2014
#171