RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Weissman writes: "Clinton continues to play down the Saudi, Qatari, and covert parts of her plans for Syria. What she plays up is her focus on Vladimir Putin and the Russians. She does this to discredit Donald Trump as a Putin puppet, shamefully echoing America's long history of red-baiting."

Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham-Clinton. (photo: AP)
Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham-Clinton. (photo: AP)


Why President Hillary Will Not Stop the Slaughter in Syria

By Steve Weissman, Reader Supported News

23 October 16

 

'm going to continue to push for a no-fly zone and safe havens within Syria,” Hillary Clinton repeated again in the third presidential debate. “Not only to help protect the Syrians and prevent the constant outflow of refugees, but to, frankly, gain some leverage on both the Syrian government and the Russians so that perhaps we can have the kind of serious negotiation necessary to bring the conflict to an end and go forward on a political track.”

Clinton has pushed a no-fly zone and safe havens in Syria since the early days of her campaign in the Democratic primaries. But over the last month her remarks have revealed why these measures have little chance of ending the slaughter in Syria, whether in Aleppo or elsewhere in the hideously ravaged country.

“The situation in Syria is catastrophic,” she said in the second debate. “Every day that goes by, we see the results of the regime, by Assad in partnership with the Iranians on the ground and the Russians in the air, bombarding places, in particular Aleppo, where there are hundreds of thousands of people, probably about 250,000 people still left. And there is a determined effort by the Russian Air Force to destroy Aleppo in order to eliminate the last of the Syrian rebels who are really holding out against the Assad regime.”

Clinton was telling part of the truth, and masking the rest. Crushing Aleppo as it earlier crushed the Chechen rebels in Grozny, Russia and its Syrian allies were refusing to pull their punches just because the rebels were using a quarter of a million civilians in east Aleppo as human shields. But Clinton never mentioned that American and coalition air forces similarly killed thousands of human shields in conquering Fallujah and will likely kill many thousands more in their current attempt to capture Mosul. The Saudis have been doing the same in Yemen, enabled by weapons, refueling, intelligence, and increasingly direct participation from Britain and the United States. Horrific in the extreme, the medieval-like siege of Aleppo follows the modern logic of asymmetric warfare ‒ the rich and powerful have air forces while the rebels generally do not, though they are beginning to use drones.

Like most mainstream American pols and pundits, Clinton also failed to mention that the rebels – armed and supported by the US, Qatar, and the Saudis ‒ have fired back, killed civilians, cut off the water supply, and done extensive damage to west Aleppo, which Assad’s forces now hold. Nor did she admit that as many as 900 of the rebels “holding out” in east Aleppo were militants of the former Jabhat al-Nusra, which ostensibly separated from al-Qaeda in July and rebranded itself as Jabhat Fatah al-Sham. Nor did she explain why Washington’s Saudi and Qatari allies had also funded the Islamic State (ISIS), or how her making the fight against Assad a priority over fighting ISIS ensured that the slaughter would go on and on, as the Sunni kingdoms of the Gulf continue to pursue their Washington-backed campaign to force regime change in Syria.

Wrapping herself in the holy cloth of humanitarianism, Clinton has also kept a tight lip about one of the more telling aspects of the campaign. The White Helmets, who were loudly touted for this year’s Nobel Peace Prize, turn out to have a highly suspect relationship with the jihadis, as the tireless Max Blumenthal recently documented. The White Helmets also played a central role in providing the heart-rending photograph of five-year-old Omran Daqneesh and eyewitness testimony and other purported evidence that the Russians and/or Syrians bombed the UN’s humanitarian aid convoy.

As most Western media have conveniently failed to report, a “former” British intelligence officer, James Le Mesurier, created and still runs the White Helmets operation, and most of the funding comes from USAID, the British Foreign Office, and a host of Western nations. Welcome to the world of humanitarian aid.

Clinton continues to play down the Saudi, Qatari, and covert parts of her plans for Syria. What she plays up is her focus on Vladimir Putin and the Russians. She does this to discredit Donald Trump as a Putin puppet, shamefully echoing America’s long history of red-baiting. But even more disturbing, she is building public support for either a new Cold War with Russia, or a very hot one.

In the third and final debate, host Chris Wallace asked Clinton about her plans to impose a no-fly zone in Syria. “President Obama has refused to do that because he fears it’s going to draw us closer or deeper into the conflict,” Wallace reminded her. “And General Joseph Dunford, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, says you impose a no-fly zone, chances are you're going to get into a war ‒ his words ‒ with Syria and Russia.”

“If you impose a no-fly zone and a Russian plane violates that,” asked Wallace, “does President Clinton shoot that plane down?”

This was one of the most consequential questions of the debate, and Clinton ducked it completely, sounding more like Trump and his hopes of doing a deal with Putin. “I think we could strike a deal and make it very clear to the Russians and the Syrians that this was something that we believe was in the best interests of the people on the ground in Syria, it would help us with our fight against ISIS,” she said.

Is Clinton suddenly pulling back from the war-like ways that our country’s foreign policy elite and some of our military mavens, like Gen. David Petraeus, now favor? Or, as seems far more likely, is she simply side-stepping any discussion of a likely military conflict with a nuclear-armed Russia? Either way, the American people need to know, as do the Syrians.



A veteran of the Berkeley Free Speech Movement and the New Left monthly Ramparts, Steve Weissman lived for many years in London, working as a magazine writer and television producer. He now lives and works in France, where he is researching a new book, Big Money and the Corporate State: How Global Banks, Corporations, and Speculators Rule and How to Nonviolently Break Their Hold.

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+59 # librarian1984 2016-10-23 17:06
Oh my goodness, THANK YOU, Mr. Weissman!

Is something going on at rsn? I'm LOVING these truth-based articles! Now the follow-up: How do we hold her in check?

She will probably be president. How do we stop these military actions? Protests don't work. Bernie doesn't seem too interested in this side of Clinton. What do we do? Ideas?
 
 
+62 # librarian1984 2016-10-23 18:04
Here is the opening from General Smedley Butler's War is a Racket:

War is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems for the majority of the people. Only a small 'inside' group know what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.
 
 
+1 # Robbee 2016-10-24 14:01
Quoting librarian1984:
War is a racket. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

- smedley forgets the american healthcare industry - otherwise smedley's point is well taken
 
 
+8 # dbrize 2016-10-24 15:33
Quoting Robbee:
Quoting librarian1984:
War is a racket. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

- smedley forgets the american healthcare industry - otherwise smedley's point is well taken


Says the guy who supports the healthcare industries current written and approved profit enriching farce and supports the candidate most in favor of continuing and expanding the money making "war racket".

Blather with another dose of blither.
 
 
+9 # Vardoz 2016-10-24 16:35
There is a port in Syria that Russia has depended on for years and Russia has been working with Syria for years. Now HRC wants to impose a no fly zone and has made claims that the Iranians are involved too while we were backing the so called rebel forces that may have in fact been ISIS that Saudi Arabia supports behind the scenes as shown on the VICE series. Insisting on a no fly zone will mean more money for the military because we feel so bad for the Syrians that are being killed but we did not feel so bad for the tens of thousands of Iraqis that were killed by our bombs or for the thousands who died because of the chemical weapons that we sold to Saddam. This port is important to Putin and always has been. How would we feel if he tried to block one of our important ports? Somehow I think this originated through our Military and now HRC wants to make an already dangerous situation even worse. One that could lead to using nukes in a I dare you conflict. As our environment is in deep shit this is the big priority, make more money for the military.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." - A. Einstein
 
 
+8 # Anonymot 2016-10-24 05:25
Well, yes, Librarian, Oh, Goodness, Goodness Heaven Sakes.

WE, that is progressive members of the public who think, can do zip since WE have been completely hoodwinked as usual. We keep thinking this is a democracy, that the game is played straight, that no crook is manipulating the game, that the dice aren't loaded.

It's even possible that Bernie showed little interest in foreign policy, because he knew that the President and the public have no voice in matters of war. Joe McCarthy and Osama bin Laden fixed that. Those matters are no longer in the administration' s control - nor the voters'.

We will go to war with Russia, among others. The choice is shrink or expand. The answer has been chosen, perhaps pre-destined by the nature of those who decided for us exactly one hundred years ago.

See below where I try to elaborate in 1500 words on what requires a book.
 
 
+14 # wrknight 2016-10-24 08:18
"Oh dear, what can we do about it?"

There's an old saw that goes "when the cat's away, the mice will play". Well, in fact, the mice have been playing for a long time because the American electorate, the intended overseers of our republic, have been on vacation way, way too long.

American voters are clearly off in never, never land. The U.S. Congress was granted authority by the Constitution to declare war but has delegated that to the President with little reservation or oversight. Congress should repeal the war powers act and all other acts allowing the President to take pre-emptive military action against anyone he/she chooses. Additionally, Congress can and should cut funds for war. But will they?

No. Because those in Congress today are mostly the same ones who abrogated their responsibility in the first place, and American voters won't get rid of them. Yet, polls show that the approval rating of the U.S. Congress is down to 11%, and still the vast majority of them are re-elected year after year after year (95% of House members were re-elected in 2014 and 82% of the senators were re-elected).

If American voters won't take charge of their government by making the appropriate personnel changes, elected officials will do as they please.

As they say, "when the cat's away, the mice will play".
 
 
+15 # wrknight 2016-10-24 08:23
Having said that, here's a specific action that each of us can do.

Un-elect every member of Congress and demand that their replacements repeal the war powers and other acts giving the President unbridled war making power, cut the war budget and rein in the president as the Constitution gave them the power to do. And give them two years to accomplish that or they too, will be un-elected.

Let's make this year one a 100% turnover year in Congress.

Additionally, we can all vote for Jill Stein.
 
 
-9 # Robbee 2016-10-24 14:50
Quoting wrknight:
Having said that, here's a specific action that each of us can do.

Un-elect every member of Congress and demand that their replacements repeal the war powers and other acts giving the President unbridled war making power, cut the war budget and rein in the president as the Constitution gave them the power to do. And give them two years to accomplish that or they too, will be un-elected.

Let's make this year one a 100% turnover year in Congress.

Additionally, we can all vote for Jill Stein.

- state office term limits work out very poorly in my "blue" state - where dems tend to vote once every 4 years - so repugs dominate state politics

moreover a revolving door magnifies the influence of big money attack ads in politics - sorry!

next! - folks who say vote out 100% are either stupid - or predators

stupid - they vote out progressives

predators - they con stupid folks to vote out progressives
 
 
-13 # Robbee 2016-10-24 14:54
Quoting Robbee:
Quoting wrknight:
Having said that, here's a specific action that each of us can do.

Un-elect every member of Congress and demand that their replacements repeal the war powers and other acts giving the President unbridled war making power, cut the war budget and rein in the president as the Constitution gave them the power to do. And give them two years to accomplish that or they too, will be un-elected.

Let's make this year one a 100% turnover year in Congress.

Additionally, we can all vote for Jill Stein.

- state office term limits work out very poorly in my "blue" state - where dems tend to vote once every 4 years - so repugs dominate state politics

moreover a revolving door magnifies the influence of big money attack ads in politics - sorry!

next! - folks who say vote out 100% are either stupid - or predators

stupid - they vote out progressives

predators - they con stupid folks to vote out progressives

- jillie? don't get me started!

stupid - they vote out progressive hill -

predators - they con stupid folks to vote out progressive hill
 
 
+9 # wrknight 2016-10-24 17:13
The number of true progressives on Capitol Hill I can count on one hand. Bernie is one. I can make an exception for Bernie and the others, but the remaining 533 (that's 538 minus the 5 true progressives) can go (no harm done, no love lost). Now that may be less than 100%, but hey, it's 99%. (Close enough for government work.)
 
 
+7 # wrknight 2016-10-24 17:20
Quoting Robbee:
- state office term limits work out very poorly in my "blue" state - where dems tend to vote once every 4 years - so repugs dominate state politics...

It sounds to me like your problem is that your state reps don't get un-elected. Did it ever occur to you that poor voter turnout might be your real problem? Perhaps if voters bothered to vote, the repugs might get un-elected and your problem would be solved.
 
 
+9 # GoGreen! 2016-10-24 18:45
She is not yet elected and I don't think she will be. All the tales of Donald's bad manners is her whole campaign. Yes, he is not good, but he is better than Hillary and the plans of the United States to attack Russia that Hillary supports. I'd rather have a sexist in office than have the last world war that will kill all life on earth.

I am not 'throwing my vote away' by voting for the Green Party candidates. I'm voting for Jill and Ajama and asking you to look them up on the internet. The big money boys will neither let them on the debates or on the mass media. You can learn about them at www.jill2916.com
 
 
+5 # Oyster 2016-10-25 06:28
Quoting GoGreen!:
... You can learn about them at www.jill2916.com


Typo! That's www.jill2016.com, not www.jill2916.com.
 
 
+19 # guomashi 2016-10-23 21:04
Two questions:
What took Mr. Weissman so long?
and
Where are the parrots now?
 
 
+30 # harleysch 2016-10-24 02:12
The only problem I have with an otherwsie excellent article -- nowhere does Weissman mention that the only differnce between Hillary and Obama is her insistence on a no-fly zone. Otherwise, in the provocations against Putin, the danger of a possible war with Russia over Syria, the alliance with the pro-terrorist Saudis and Qataris, Saudi, protecting Al-Nusra/Al Qaeda in Aleppo, etc., Hillary is going with the Obama gameplan.

The last two Presidents are guilty of war crimes. Will we, the American people, mobilize to stop a third consecutive President from committing mass murder?
 
 
+14 # Radscal 2016-10-24 12:08
The consistency of US Foreign Policy, regardless of President suggests that these decisions are made elsewhere, by powers over which we have no electoral control.

If the reporting is true (not a given), then Presidents may at times have some tactical oversight. For instance, President Obama neglected to follow through with the promised air support for our "rebel" boots on the ground in 2013, as we had previously done in Yugoslavia and Libya.

The strategic goal of toppling Assad and breaking up Syria remained, but having to wait for the appearance of ISIL to begin the bombing seems to have bought the Syrians, Russians, Iranians and Hezbollah the opportunity to provide the greatest resistance the US has faced since Vietnam.

I don't know if the huge public and Congressional resistance to Obama's call for aerial bombing is really what prevented it, but building such anti-war pressure today seems to be the best chance we have to stop war against Russia, Iran and China.
 
 
+3 # Anonymot 2016-10-24 05:38
Screech, screech. I have an ms for your cruise. Want to send me a gmail, guo?
 
 
+14 # economagic 2016-10-24 08:09
Quoting guomashi:
Two questions:
What took Mr. Weissman so long?
and
Where are the parrots now?

And why are we still supposed to be voting for her, or if not, why not say so directly?
 
 
+30 # joejoe 2016-10-23 21:39
This website censors you - despite what it says above. I noted that Marc (person who operates the blog) tends to post pro Hillary material and almost never discusses Jill Stein. The slant is definitely biased. On occasion I would post something like "Never Hillary and Never Trump." with a explanation as to why. I would also ask that people not donate to Marc as he is biased and probably gets donations from the DNC in any case. I think the worst word I used was "crap." I did not insult anyone except Marc for the sites clear Bias. All my posts were removed. I never got into any heated exchange with anyone on this site. My handle was jomo1. I call this censorship. I did not post often, no trolling at all. I though you should know. I suspect this will be pulled shortly as well.
 
 
-5 # LionMousePudding 2016-10-24 00:31
Ok if you are going to troll with your comment I'll tail you with mine:

How dare you tell people not to fund this site! If these articles are worth nothing to you then get the heck out and never read them again. Certainly don't comment.

You have a sense of entitlement which says you may use a service for free and then cause it damage because there are some articles you don't like and others you don't see. It is disgusting.

Marc Ash owes you NOTHING. He does not owe you the articles you want. He puts out this incredible news site that I guarantee you are happily reading about other topics but hey, you deserve those for free because the rest of the articles aren't exactly what you want.

You disgust me. Telling people not to donate to something so important.

Who SHOULD pay? Or is your actual goal to make RSN disappear because it wasn't perfect?

You don't deserve this. I hope I never see your name again.
 
 
+11 # Radscal 2016-10-24 12:11
I read and responded to a jomo comment, and got a message box saying the comment had been deleted. When I reloaded the page, it was indeed gone.

Unlike normal deletions, it was not replaced with the "Comment Removed by Administrator" box which normally appears even when the original poster deletes a comment.

So yeah. A covert censorship has arisen.
 
 
+8 # joejoe 2016-10-24 13:18
Thanks for verifying that. So why would anyone want to support a site that does that. This site has a clear pro-hillary, fear-Trump bent. Jill Stein is invisible here - barely even token mentioning (she does not exist except in the comment section - which are censored.)

I hope others keep the message alive that this site behaves this way and continue to call it out.

NEVER HILARY and NEVER TRUMP!
 
 
+5 # ptalady 2016-10-23 22:33
"she plays up...her focus on Vladimir Putin and the Russians. She does this to discredit Donald Trump as a Putin puppet, shamefully echoing America’s long history of red-baiting." Huh? Putin is not a communist as far as I am aware. What i read is that the communist party is opposing him and starting to win in local elections. I don't think it is accurate to accuse someone of "red-baiting" just because they criticize an alignment with a Russian leader.
 
 
+18 # guomashi 2016-10-23 23:18
First of all, the article didn't say she was red-baiting, it said she was "echoing America's long history of red-baiting" by focusing on Putin and the Russians.

Secondly, the subject of your quote is the use of a deflection argument to criticize Trump, not red-baiting itself in any way.

This tactic of misrepresenting the topic and responding to something that was not said is typical of the so-called 'Clinton trolls' that show up here.

Your comments are without merit.
 
 
+12 # lfeuille 2016-10-23 23:58
"First of all, the article didn't say she was red-baiting, it said she was "echoing America's long history of red-baiting" by focusing on Putin and the Russians."

That is red-baiting.

"Secondly, the subject of your quote is the use of a deflection argument to criticize Trump, not red-baiting itself in any way."

She used red-baiting to deflect.
 
 
+19 # lfeuille 2016-10-23 23:53
It is red baiting. The American public still associates Russia with communism and Putin is ex KGB. The establishment is missing the cold war and a ready made scape-goat for whenever their idiotic schemes go wrong or, in this case cover for their real intentions. They figure Russia will do as well as the USSR.

The Russian economy is still has much more state control than the US does. Their experiment with unbridled capitalism was not very successful so the partially reverted. To a lot of Americans this equals communism.
 
 
+6 # RLF 2016-10-24 06:17
Are you sure that Russia's economy has more state control? Seems like we have both gone done the oligarchic rabbit hole...most people saying "Where are we?" and pissed.
 
 
+7 # lfeuille 2016-10-24 17:26
In Russia, the government has some control over the oligarchs. If they do not follow certain rules they end up in jail.
 
 
+19 # lfeuille 2016-10-24 00:04
Mr. Weissman,

Does this mean you a done with trying to convince us to vote for her or are you just taking a reality break?
 
 
+22 # hereandnow 2016-10-24 03:44
Be that all as it may be, it could very well be that Ms. Clinton is the last president of the US in it's present configuration.
If she follows the lead of her hard core neo-con supporters and does start a direct military conflict with the RF the result will be so beyond what anyone can imagine.
To be brutally honest, if the people in power in DC decide that that is what they want to do, there is little to nothing we or anyone else can do to stop it. Look at the massive protests leading up to W's war on Iraq and the refusal of the French, German and Russian governments to endorse it ... didn't stop them.
Check out what is going on on Diego Garcia right now.
 
 
-13 # ericlipps 2016-10-24 04:45
I think even the neocons are aware of the risks of a war with Russia.

They surely know that the likely winners of such a war are China and the Islamists of the Middle East.

I'm sure Clinton knows it too. She may engage in saber-rattling, but pick a out-and-out military fight with Russia. No. She'll find a way to avoid going that far.
 
 
+7 # Radscal 2016-10-24 12:23
Agreed.

But does anyone remember the Vietnam war question, "What if they gave a war, but nobody came?"

What if we could reach sufficient numbers of people in the military and convince them to refuse to train their weapons on Russia?

Even a General claims to have refused to provide our "moderate rebels" with the weapons Obama had ordered sent.

We have to develop a 99% against the 1% ethic if we are to take power.
 
 
+23 # Anonymot 2016-10-24 05:09
"Clinton was telling part of the truth, and masking the rest."

She doesn't know the rest, Steve. Her knowledge begins and ends with the subjects of women's rights, LGBT, and getting elected. What she says about foreign affairs is what she is briefed to say by her CIA handlers.

I don't exculpate her for a minute. A President is supposed to know more, but she has a record, not words that we may count on. As Secretary of State of America this mini-brain did exactly what she was told to do: via USAID, NED, and the CIA (which involves other "Intelligence" services & DOD) she and Obama (who knows even less than HC about foreign affairs) set up groups of regime protestors. The minute a real protestor appeared in Tunisia they lit the fuse of regime change plans that ran through N. Africa and the Middle East right up to the Ukraine like an arrow.

Her neo-fascist Deputy, Victoria Nuland, organized much of it while Hillary was getting selfies with world leaders for this candidacy.

The intention from the beginning has been to provoke Russia into a situation where US forces can justify attacking.

Hillary, and even Bill, are not initiators of foreign activities. That's not their area of expertise or even interest. That's Deep State.

Unless and until the mindset of Deep State is changed, we're back to the Dulles bros and Joe McCarty squared. And she can't/won't fight it.

She's getting what she wants out of her "job": daily ego rubs, power, and rich.
 
 
+11 # librarian1984 2016-10-24 05:57
How do we even reach DS to make our case, that there is a better way forward that doesn't involve killing most of us? If they've decided that war is their moneymaker, how do we convince them otherwise?
 
 
+5 # Douglas Jack 2016-10-24 12:13
librarian. RE: "Convince them otherwise?" Deep State = Hillary's Rothschild (Israel 1st), Windsor & Vatican aristocrat trillionaire masters who own the: Bank of International Settlements, US Federal Reserve & Bank of England. 'Money' (Greek 'mnemosis' = 'memory') is the core value, unfortunately without 'memory' for all the world's 7 billion contributors & biosphere who give $ its substance & energy. They understand when the money, 7 billion of us carry in our pockets circulates among us without getting back to them.

They are despondent schizophrenic psychopaths, typically raised in wealthy boarding schools without intimate contact with close or extended family nor with neighbourhoods. Institutionally raised in imposed hierarchy, they don't understand culture & 'indigenous' (L 'self-generatin g') collaborative human relations. They aren't 'educated' (L 'educare' = 'to-lead-forth-from-within').

Their trickle-down servitude to mammon is based in 2-D extractive-expl oitive industrial machines which destroy biosphere, soil, water & air. Greater Israel's Oded-Yinon-Plan & US daughters Project-for-a-N ew-American-Cen tury aka New-World-Order spends trillions to finance, arm & supply mercenaries refugees to tear-up neighbour countries. This 'Jetson' thinking group plan to die with all their toys in artificial bubble environments on a destroyed planet. Learn about your ancestral worldwide 'indigenous' heritage. https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/relational-economy
 
 
+8 # Radscal 2016-10-24 12:31
That is THE question.

I think the only way we might be able to influence TPTB is through their wallets. Organized mass strikes and targeted boycotts could hurt them enough to steer them away from their goals.

Otherwise, as I mentioned above, if enough members of the military refuses to follow those orders, it could prevent them from carrying out their plans.
 
 
+6 # Majikman 2016-10-25 04:07
Agree with DJ and Radscal. STOP SHOPPING! Buy stuff at good will, yard sales, the classified section instead of the chains. If you must buy new, go to your locally owned small biz store. Keep the $$ in your town. Of course it won't work until the populace has a main paradigm shift and realizes who their enemy is. When you see an empty Walmart parking lot, we're winning.
 
 
+3 # librarian1984 2016-10-25 09:16
When big corporations have things so sewn up it's difficult for people to stop shopping, and some can only afford Wal-Mart. I shop as much as possible at small and local businesses but it's not always feasible.

What COULD have an impact and make a statement is if Americans refuse to shop AT ALL on one given day or one week, just to flex OUR muscle.

ONE DAY where Wal-Mart doesn't make a penny, where Amazon doesn't sell a thing.

It would be more doable and could still send a powerful statement, a warning shot across the bow of big business.

(This still doesn't reach TPTB though, who are in banking and arms manufacturing. THAT's who needs to change.)
 
 
0 # Douglas Jack 2016-10-25 22:43
librarian, RE: "one given day or one week". The problem being is that oligarch multinationals are still in the drivers-seat with your hope for 'shock' boycotts. You're talking lobbying & protesting TPTB, with destabilization boycott. I'm active in organizing boycotts (UFW Grape Boycott etc) since the 1960s. I'm aware of the tremendous cost of human resources over decades which it takes to achieve these goals & without assurance. There are many 1000s of issues before us which absolutely need to be addressed.

Rather than reacting against corporations, India & Mohandas Gandhi employed 'Swadeshi' (Hindi 'indigenous' or 'self-sufficien cy'). Swadeshi is a positive organizing of people & essential goods & services, exactly where they live in multihome dwelling complexes. Under Swadeshi, India with full participation of only 5% of Indians was able to: 1) meet India's livelihood needs individually & collectively & 2) affect British empire corporations economies into bankruptcy. Humanity's worldwide 'indigenous' (Latin 'self-generatin g') ancestors organize 100 person critical-mass habitation collectively with privacy but as well with proximity for intergeneration al, interdisciplina ry female-male collaboration in economies-of-sc ale.

70% of us live in multihome-dwell ing-complex apartment, townhouse & village with average of 32 dwelling units or 100 people. https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/relational-economy/extending-our-welcome-participatory-multi-home-cohousing
 
 
+9 # RLF 2016-10-24 06:19
Hillary will only start war with Russia if there is money in it for her and Billbo.
 
 
+17 # RMDC 2016-10-24 07:31
I'd vote for anyone before this self-proclaimed mass murderer. At least GW Bush and Obama entered the white house without blood on their hands. They got plenty soon enough. But now there's the prospect of putting a certified and bloodthirsty killer into the white house.

Killery will pursue the US war against Syria because it is part of the neo-con plan for a "new middle east." This plan serves the interests of Israel. Once Syria is reduced to the conditions of Libya and Iraq, Killery will turn her attention to Iran and try to get a war started there.

Weissman mentions that the Russians are treating ISIS much as they treated Chechans some years ago. This is because after Arabs Chechans make up most of the fighters in ISIS. Chechnya is a favorite recruiting ground for the CIA when it needs mercenary terrorists, Putin knows that and he's said it. He's fighting ISIS because he knows ISIS will come back into southern Russia. He's fighting them over there so he won't have to fight them at home -- sound familiar? Only this time it is true.
 
 
+6 # librarian1984 2016-10-24 11:46
Two killers and a rapist -- THAT's what we are supposed to vote for. It's like putting the mafia in the WH -- but PROGRESSIVES are the unreasonable ones?!

Comply comply comply, and the media glued to Trump's little hands.

How does a republic succeed when the press is so corrupt?
 
 
-5 # Robbee 2016-10-24 16:38
Quoting librarian1984:
How does a republic succeed when the press is so corrupt?

- as mayor coleman young used to say - read your republican rag with rubber gloves
 
 
+2 # Charles3000 2016-10-24 12:00
Russia, some 100 years ago, found a way to overcome rule by and for a minority. It wasn't pretty but it worked.
 
 
+17 # RMDC 2016-10-24 07:38
I'm not sure that supporters of Hillary understand just how corrupt she and Bill are. In the news this morning is a story about how the Clinton's gave about $500,000 to the wife of the FBI agent who directed the investigation of Hilary's emails? Could this be bribery? I think it is. This is how the Clinton political machine works. Everyone who plays their role gets paid. This is notoriously the way politics in small, third-world states like Arkansas. The Clintons have brought this kind of corruption to the big leagues in Washington DC. But I guess this kind of "pay to play" also works in big cities like New York and Chicago.

If voters were smart, they'd do anything to keep this sort of criminal enterprise out of the white house.
 
 
-12 # ericlane 2016-10-24 11:41
RMDC, are you a Republican or pro-Russian wacko? Inquiring minds want to know.
 
 
+12 # librarian1984 2016-10-24 11:54
Inquiring minds? You mean the know-nothings who turn a blind eye to every form of corruption because Trump?

Get off the high horse. Open your eyes. You are supporting a criminal, and it's increasingly difficult to say you "just didn't know". The evidence is everywhere, you sanctimonious a$$.

What are you idiot Clinton supporters going to do? Plug your ears and whistle for two weeks?

Neither Trump nor Clinton can become president and we need to figure out what to do.

Your willing ignorance is not helpful.
 
 
+9 # RMDC 2016-10-24 14:25
eric -- definitely not a republican. Not sure what a pro-Russian wacko is but I do admire Russian culture and society a lot. It is a great country and has had its share of problems, as do most nations. I do tend to defend Russia from the cold war American Russophobes when I see them spouting off. I don't defend republicans when I see then or anyone spouting off. I do not defend Trump. I only attack the bankrupt hypocrisy of the mass media which is now doing the job of destroying him after they built him up. Trump is not a professionial inside Washington politician like Hillary so he does not act or speak that way. Why can't the media see that. It is his status as an outsider that makes him popular with his supporters.
 
 
-13 # ericlane 2016-10-24 11:39
Steve, your argument lacks logic. What does Chechnya have to do with present day Aleppo? The Russians invaded Chechnya in 1994 and the war was supposed to take a couple of weeks. Thousands of Russian soldiers lost their lives and tens of thousands of Chechens lost theirs. In 1999, Russia invaded again, tens of thousands more were killed and that went on for a decade. What this proves is that Russia is as ignorant about starting wars as the Republicans were under George W. Bush. It has nothing to do with Hillary. Russian has acted without a care for consequences as evidenced in Crimea, Ukraine and now Syria. They have propped up Assad, one of the most vicious dictators in the Middle East. Syria is a disaster and the present Syrian government has used chemicals against its own population and barrel bombs against civilians. It is a fallacious argument to say that Hillary Clinton's policy in Syria is wrong and Russia's is right. Please tell us why.
 
 
+7 # librarian1984 2016-10-24 11:56
Do the work yourself. People on rsn have been making this case, with documentation and links, for months. Your decision to remain ignorant is not cute or funny. It's shameful.
 
 
-11 # ericlane 2016-10-24 12:56
librarian, you can be a Republican and live in a Fox world for decades and that still wouldn't stop you from being a moron. Oh, and they have documentation and links too. Your premise that because people have been making the case for months does not logically lead to my being ignorant. It leads to my disagreeing with your premise/s and conclusion.
 
 
+9 # librarian1984 2016-10-24 13:11
YOU said "please tell us why". We HAVE been telling you, to the point that these ridiculous requests for proof must be seen as mere diversions and disingenuous ploys.

There is plenty of evidence IN CLINTON's OWN WORDS on tape and in emails. Sure 'they' have links too. That's why you're supposed to actually read it and analyze it, which you obviously have NOT done.

You are parroting the msm narrative without any examination or skepticism. The people here who oppose your ideas are much better informed than you are -- and you seem to be proud of that.

I would be happy to let you wallow in your ignorance if it didn't mean the rest of us will be blown to smithereens as well.
 
 
-12 # ericlane 2016-10-24 16:18
Nice, librarian. You know the truth and I don't. I don't buy into all your e-mail, Benghazi and what ever else crap you think is horrible. Benghazi is a non-story. E-mails are equally a non-story. How shocking to discover that Hillary and her crew were discussing political strategy. Just a shock I tell you. I can't think of a politician I would rather have as president (other than Bernie or the Mayor of New York) than Hillary Clinton. You've drunk the 'I hate Hillary' cool-aid so there is nothing I can say that will take some of that self righteous venom from you. Thank god we live in a democracy. We are almost over with this idiocy.
 
 
+11 # lfeuille 2016-10-24 17:49
It is not about Benghazi. The incident itself was no big deal, but the reason the ambassador was there was that it was a CIA staging area for sending arms covertly to Syrian rebels before the administration made that official policy. That was purposeful deception of the American people who were told we were staying out of it. The locals, of course knew about it and it contributed to their anger that finally exploded. Incidentally, this came from Seymour Hersh, not Fox News or the emails.

From the emails, we learned about the rigging of the primary, the corruption in the Clinton Foundation and other organizations controlled by the Clinton among other things and the list keeps growing. It's all documented. You just refuse to accept it.
 
 
+9 # librarian1984 2016-10-24 19:53
The criticisms of HRC by progressives do not overlap with the claptrap of the GOP. Do you see anyone here talking about Benghazi or Vince Foster?

We are worried about war and Wall Street and climate change -- none of which the GOP gives a rat's arse about.

You don't have to "buy into" my thinking Clinton's emails are horrible. You can read them yourself, or are we supposed to digest that for you and deliver it to you wrapped in bacon?

"Emails are equally a nonstory"

See? This gets back to my original point -- you CHOOSE to be ignorant. You seem proud of it. There is a thread of anti-intellectu alism that runs through US history; it never leads to anything good, and you are just the latest incarnation.

If, rather than refusing to open your eyes, you would read what she thinks of people like you, even you might change your mind. Maybe not. You seem pretty calcified. But I have to admit, even Hillary Clinton gets it right once in a while.

I hate Hillary less than I fear her, and if you had two brain cells to rub together, so would you.

mmm, bacon.
 
 
+4 # Oyster 2016-10-25 07:14
MMMMmmm bacon! Oops, I forgot this is my third day being vegetarian...
 
 
+3 # librarian1984 2016-10-25 09:20
Ha! And I've stopped buying pork after that article a while back. No ribs, no bacon .. sigh.

Sympathy.
 
 
+3 # Radscal 2016-10-25 16:02
You're doing good for the planet and all the peoples and other life on it.
 
 
+8 # hereandnow 2016-10-25 01:20
Mr. Eric Lane is either a disinformation agent of some three letter organization or a very badly informed citizen who drinks a lot of kool aid. I'll go with the former. And he has now been tasked with setting up a kool aid stand on the few remaining sites such as this where reality still has room to breathe.
Chchnya has been and is Russian longer than the country which pays your salary to disinform became the enforcing arm of the British Empire. War in Chechnya was the result of Chechens returning from being a part of the Wahabi/US war in Afghanistan and wanting to do the same there ... thank you Brzezinski. There brothers in arms also started the wars in Yugoslavia and Algeria after being trained by you, fighting in Afghanistan and returning home to continue ... thanks Brezezinski. Now there are thousands of Russians from the North Caucusus in the ranks of ISIS, Al Nusra etc fighting in Syria. Russia does not want them to come home as they did in 89/90 after Afghanistan. You know nothing about the Ukraine, this is all the work of the NED. To get a good idea of present day Ukraine, go to the Waldfriedhof in Munich, stand in front of your hero, who is by your doing again a hero held high by the powerful fascistic forces you unleashed there through your NGO's over the last 25 years.
Both the Ukrainian problem and the Syrian problem are a direct result of US policy. You should be thankful that this time Russia is stepping in to clean up your mess in Syria.
 
 
+8 # elkingo 2016-10-24 14:07
"Let's make this year one a 100% turnover year in Congress.

Additionally, we can all vote for Jill Stein."

Right on, Wrknight!
 
 
+10 # lamancha 2016-10-24 17:37
Stop Hillary's "no fly zone" plan for Syria. It's a recipe for disaster - nuclear war! There will be no place to run or hide.
 
 
0 # Skyelav 2016-10-26 16:04
My son reads this and tells me the Russia-Syria thing is about a pipeline for natural gas. Putin plays around with gas for European heating and cooking whenever he feels like it. We want to open something up so they aren't dependent any more. Russia doesn't like that. They like being the main source of gas for Europe.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN