[Peace-discuss] Let's not fight between Bernie supporters and Tulsi supporters
C G Estabrook
cgestabrook at gmail.com
Wed Mar 20 16:07:37 UTC 2019
I championed [sic] Jill Stein.
I did try to understand why people voted for Trump. It was a populist phenomenon.
He attacked the neoliberal and neoconservative policies (more war and austerity) of the Obama administration.
> On Mar 20, 2019, at 7:24 AM, Robert Naiman via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
>
>
> I apologized for what I wrote in my email to Keven Zeese after he attacked me, which he then spread all over.
>
> Where's your apology for championing Trump, Snarl?
>
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 7:20 AM C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
> [Jeffrey St. Clair, editor of Counterpunch (& a friend), wrote correctly in <https://www.counterpunch.org/2016/08/19/roaming-charges-prime-time-green/> as follows.]
>
> ...It so happens that Naiman, an alleged peace activist, is also the board president for the liberal website Truthout. Veteran readers of CounterPunch will recall Truthout from John Pilger’s acrid account of his head-on collision with their editors, who peevishly tried to cleanse his essay, “A World War Has Begun: Break the Silence,” of passages which might prove uncomfortable for the Democratic Party establishment.
>
> In a nasty email exchange with longtime Green organizer Kevin Zeese, who is now co-director of Popular Resistance, a group which grew out of the Occupy movement, Naiman sunk even further into the slime and threatened to expose Jill Stein as “a Trotskyite cancer.”
>
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 2:56 PM, Robert Naiman wrote:
>
> Oh, is today my day to be harassed by Green Party thugs?
> I’ll make you a deal: call off your dogs and I won’t further expose Jill Stein as a Trokskyite cancer.
>
> Robert Naiman
> Policy Director
> Just Foreign Policy
> www.justforeignpolicy.org
>
> Slandering Stein and the Greens for being “Trotskyites” (or “Trokskyites,” in Naiman’s quaint verbiage) is as intellectually vapid as it is vile. Everyone knows that most of Leon’s former disciples in the US have long since morphed into neocons and thus can be spotted in Georgetown cafes polishing their resumés for slots on Hillary’s foreign policy team.
>
> “Robert Naiman epitomizes the attitude of the paid, professional Democrat progressives attacking the Green Party and Jill Stein,” John Stauber told me. “These shills see no hypocrisy in embracing a candidate supported by Wall Street, the Koch brothers and the neoconservatives who with Hillary lied America into attacking Iraq. So there it is, Hillary is his champion while a woman running on the most progressive platform in America is just a damned Communist. Rather than back down when he himself was exposed, he doubled down with a smear befitting the worst of American politics. Naiman is not an aberration however; indeed, he embodies the funded progressive elite who since 2000 have become a front group for the Democrats liberal oligarchs such as George Soros and his Democracy Alliance.”
>
> The hypocrisy of the Clintonoids is almost as audacious as their dissemination of lies about Jill Stein. Of course, their champion, the “pro-science” Hillary Clinton, ignores scientific facts and assessments whenever such considerations prove to be an even minor inconvenience to the headlong pursuit of her corporate agenda (cf, fracking).
>
> “People may wonder why suddenly everyone was saying Jill Stein is anti-vax — now we know it was a coordinated campaign,” Zeese told me. “Obviously, it also happens in the media because all of a sudden multiple news outlets were reporting the same thing. Had Stein said something that all these media outlets saw and ‘reported’ on — no, she had not said anything anti-vax, but they were coordinated. It was a planned slander attack.”
>
> Despite Clinton’s apparent lead in the polls, there’s a palpable sense of desperation in the air, as if her support is so soft that Hillary could sink another 10 points in the wake of one more email dump from Wikileaks or Guccifer 2.0. This explains why her surrogates are reaching so deeply into their bag of dirty tricks. The red-baiting of Stein and Baraka is a perfect expression of the Clinton machine’s political and moral bankruptcy...
>
>
>
> > On Mar 20, 2019, at 7:08 AM, Robert Naiman via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> > If I said that Jill Stein was a Trot, that was a mistake and I apologize. That's a harsh charge. Trots have done a lot of damage to the Left in the United States.
> >
> > Will you, Snarl, now apologize for supporting Trump?
> >
> > ===
> >
> > Robert Reuel Naiman
> > Policy Director
> > Just Foreign Policy
> > www.justforeignpolicy.org
> > naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
> > (202) 448-2898 x1
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 6:59 AM C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
> > You have a history of spreading lies about Greens, Bob (e.g., Jill Stein is "a Trokskyite [sic] cancer”):
> >
> > <https://www.counterpunch.org/2016/08/19/roaming-charges-prime-time-green/>.
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Mar 20, 2019, at 6:43 AM, Robert Naiman <naiman at justforeignpolicy.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > As I said before, anyone can check the archive, for all the times that Snarl championed Trump.
> > >
> > > ===
> > >
> > > Robert Reuel Naiman
> > > Policy Director
> > > Just Foreign Policy
> > > www.justforeignpolicy.org
> > > naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
> > > (202) 448-2898 x1
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 6:40 AM C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
> > > Cooking sherry already this morning, Bob?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Mar 20, 2019, at 6:34 AM, Robert Naiman <naiman at justforeignpolicy.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > You actively supported Trump by name, Snarl.
> > > >
> > > > The prosecution rests and asks the court for summary judgment.
> > > >
> > > > ===
> > > >
> > > > Robert Reuel Naiman
> > > > Policy Director
> > > > Just Foreign Policy
> > > > www.justforeignpolicy.org
> > > > naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
> > > > (202) 448-2898 x1
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 6:29 AM C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
> > > > No, I supported (and voted for) Jill Stein - even tho’ some people thought that to do so was ‘objectively' to help Trump.
> > > >
> > > > I did (and do) think it important to recognize the populist upsurge that made Trump president.
> > > >
> > > > That hasn’t subsided, although Trump has betrayed it by adopting the last administration’s neolib and neocon policies (more war and more inequality) - which he attacked in the campaign.
> > > >
> > > > —CGE
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > On Mar 20, 2019, at 6:12 AM, Robert Naiman via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On this very list, Snarl, you openly campaigned for Trump. Anyone here can verify this for themselves by checking the archives.
> > > > >
> > > > > Why aren't you willing to take responsibility for Trump starving children to death in Yemen, given that you openly campaigned for him?
> > > > >
> > > > > ===
> > > > >
> > > > > Robert Reuel Naiman
> > > > > Policy Director
> > > > > Just Foreign Policy
> > > > > www.justforeignpolicy.org
> > > > > naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
> > > > > (202) 448-2898 x1
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 5:57 AM C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
> > > > > Actually, I voted Green in the last presidential election - as I expect to do in the next - against the advice of people whose opinions I respect, like Chomsky.
> > > > >
> > > > > I don’t regret it, but we Americans have a great deal to repent, notably not constraining the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Mar 20, 2019, at 5:24 AM, Robert Naiman <naiman at justforeignpolicy.org> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Let's not forget that Snarl supported Trump. The blood of Yemeni children is on Snarl's hands.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ===
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Robert Reuel Naiman
> > > > > > Policy Director
> > > > > > Just Foreign Policy
> > > > > > www.justforeignpolicy.org
> > > > > > naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
> > > > > > (202) 448-2898 x1
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 5:19 AM Robert Naiman <naiman at justforeignpolicy.org> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Look up the estimates for how many civilians have been killed in U.S. drone strikes in all theaters since 2001.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Then look up the numbers for the number of children who have starved to death in Yemen alone as a result of the U.S.-Saudi war and blockade since 2015.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Come back and report when you've finished your homework.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ===
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Robert Reuel Naiman
> > > > > > Policy Director
> > > > > > Just Foreign Policy
> > > > > > www.justforeignpolicy.org
> > > > > > naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
> > > > > > (202) 448-2898 x1
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 5:16 AM Robert Naiman <naiman at justforeignpolicy.org> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But there is no reason to do that, unless you don't understand anything about how life on Planet Earth works, and you don't care to learn, because you actually don't care about the consequences of your actions.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ===
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Robert Reuel Naiman
> > > > > > Policy Director
> > > > > > Just Foreign Policy
> > > > > > www.justforeignpolicy.org
> > > > > > naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
> > > > > > (202) 448-2898 x1
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 5:11 AM C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
> > > > > > “Practical’ as this advice is, re-read it, imagining oneself at the appropriate time and place - and substituting 'concentration camps’ for ‘drone strikes.’
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mar 20, 2019, at 3:24 AM, Robert Naiman via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I see no prospect of prohibiting the U.S. from using drones as weapons per se. There is no meaningful support for this idea anywhere in the United States, neither in Washington, nor in public opinion. Partly because it's fundamentally an irrational idea - there's nothing intrinsically worse about using a drone as a weapon than a cruise missile strike - in fact, the contrary is true, strike for strike, the cruise missile is worse. And there's no call to ban cruise missiles. So I'm not particularly scandalized by these words from Tulsi and Bernie - they're running for President of the United States, not student council at a Quaker college. There are things we could do to protect civilians from U.S. drone strikes, like ending the wars that the drone strikes are part of, but banning drones is not one of them in any future we can see. If I were advising Tulsi and Bernie - and in a way, I am, I'm talking to people who talk to them - I would not advise them to call for getting rid of drones. I would advise them to call for getting rid of wars that the drones are part of. The way to protect civilians from U.S. drone strikes in Afghanistan and Syria is to get the U.S. the hell out of Afghanistan and Syria.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We've made the progress we have on ending unconstitutional U.S. participation in the Saudi war in Yemen by distinguishing it from the war against Al Qaeda. If we hadn't done that, we wouldn't have gotten anywhere.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If we want to end any wars around here anytime soon, it seems likely that we will have to speak specifically to the wars. We need to talk about ending the Saudi war in Yemen, we need to talk about ending the war in Afghanistan, we need to talk about ending the war in Syria. We need to talk about preventing a military attack on Venezuela. We need to stop the U.S. from arming Ukraine. We need to cut off U.S. military and police aid to the government of Honduras. We need to be specific to the things that the U.S. is doing, in the places that the U.S. is doing them.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Think about Nancy Pelosi. Nancy Pelosi is going to AIPAC. How far do you think we're going to get, trying to ban drones, when Nancy Pelosi is going to AIPAC? Absolutely nowhere.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But ending U.S. participation in the Saudi regime's wars in the Middle East - that's something we could conceivably do. That's something we might even be able to force Nancy Pelosi to support. We did it in the case of the Saudi war in Yemen. We forced Nancy Pelosi to come out against it. It wasn't easy. It was hard. Much, much harder than it should have been. But we did it. That proves it's possible. Maybe, if we put more pressure on Nancy Pelosi, we could shake some more war-ending apples loose from the tree.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ===
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Robert Reuel Naiman
> > > > > > > Policy Director
> > > > > > > Just Foreign Policy
> > > > > > > www.justforeignpolicy.org
> > > > > > > naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
> > > > > > > (202) 448-2898 x1
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 8:38 PM J.B. Nicholson via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
> > > > > > > Robert Naiman wrote:
> > > > > > >> "Brothers and sisters, we must not fight each other between the Bernie
> > > > > > >> supporters and the Tulsi supporters. We must unite against the common
> > > > > > >> enemy: the Clinton-Pelosi-Harris-Booker supporters."
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sen. Sanders in his "Meet the Press" interview from 2016 --
> > > > > > > https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/video/bernie-sanders-would-use-drones-to-fight-terror-542522435844
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Chuck Todd: What does counterterrorism look like in a Sanders
> > > > > > >> administration? Drones? Special forces? Or what does it look like?
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Bernie Sanders: All of that and more.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Chuck Todd: You're okay with the drone, using drones--
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Bernie Sanders: Look, drone is a weapon. When it works badly, it is
> > > > > > >> terrible and it is counterproductive. When you blow up a facility or a
> > > > > > >> building which kills women and children, you know what? Not only doesn't
> > > > > > >> do us any -- it's terrible.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Chuck Todd: But you're comfortable with the idea of using drones if you
> > > > > > >> think you've isolated an important terrorist?
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Bernie Sanders: Yes.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Chuck Todd: So that continues?
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Bernie Sanders: Yes.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Rep. Gabbard in her "Intercept" interview from 2018 --
> > > > > > > https://theintercept.com/2018/01/17/intercepted-podcast-white-mirror/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Jeremy Scahill: I’m wondering what your position, I know that in the
> > > > > > >> past you have said that you favor a small footprint approach with
> > > > > > >> strike forces and limited use of weaponized drones. Is that still your
> > > > > > >> position that you think that’s the — to the extent that you believe the
> > > > > > >> U.S. military should be used around the world for counterterrorism, is
> > > > > > >> that still your position?
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Rep. Tulsi Gabbard: Well, when we’re dealing with the unconventional
> > > > > > >> threat of terrorist groups like ISIS, al Qaeda and some of these other
> > > > > > >> groups that are affiliated with them, we should not be using basically
> > > > > > >> what has been and continues to be the current policy of these mass
> > > > > > >> mobilization of troops, these long occupations and trillions of dollars
> > > > > > >> going in, really abusing the Authorization to Use Military Force and
> > > > > > >> taking action that expands far beyond the legal limitations of those
> > > > > > >> current AUMFs.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> So, with these terrorist cells, for example, yes, I do still believe
> > > > > > >> that the right approach to take is these quick strike forces, surgical
> > > > > > >> strikes, in and out, very quickly, no long-term deployment, no
> > > > > > >> long-term occupation to be able to get rid of the threat that exists and
> > > > > > >> then get out and the very limited use of drones in those situations
> > > > > > >> where our military is not able to get in without creating an
> > > > > > >> unacceptable level of risk, and where you can make sure that you’re not
> > > > > > >> causing, you know, a large amount of civilian casualties.
> > > > > > > So it appears that Gabbard and Sanders are united against one common enemy:
> > > > > > > anyone who objects to continuing the drone war.
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Peace-discuss mailing list
> > > > > > > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> > > > > > > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
More information about the Peace-discuss
mailing list