[Peace-discuss] Hillary smears Tulsi as "Russian asset"

[C. G. Estabrook]

As part of the 'anti-abortion crowd' and an opponent of US 'regime-change wars’ (like Obama’s in Syria), I don’t think the government should arrange for the ending of human lives, in the womb or out of it. 

I support Gabbard as the best of the Democratic candidates on these issues.

These are of course political questions. Che Guevara is supposed to have said, “It’s easier to kill a guerrilla in the womb than in the hills."

Class and racial wrongs are committed by a society that does not provide for pregnant women and their children while it "goes ... abroad in search of monsters to destroy.”  

It’s clear which one is the agent of these crimes, Clinton or Gabbard. —CGE


> On Oct 18, 2019, at 4:46 PM, David Green via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
> 
> Look at what the "Oakland Socialist" says, also a link on the Marxmail website: 
> 
> Syria, Tulsi Gabbard and red-brown alliance
> One of the most spirited subjects to be discussed was foreign policy, specifically Syria, and here is where the truly dangerous nature of Tulsi Gabbard emerged. All the candidates but her strongly condemned Trump’s actions. While Gabbard mildly criticized it, her main point was to call for an end to “the regime change war that we are waging in Syria”. She repeated this phrase – “regime change wars” – time and again. This is the term the overt and covert Assad supporters use. They claim that the revolt in Syria is just a US effort at regime change. Along the way, they dismiss or ignore Assad’s absolutely criminal repression. So Gabbard was making a dog whistle to them. (At least Biden attacked her for this lie of hers.)
> 
> The issue of Syria is the key nexus where the “left” and the far right, including outright fascists, meet, and Tulsi Gabbard is playing the role of the magnet for this tendency within the Democratic Party. She seems to be very conscious of that, as she was the only one to be fairly restrained also when the issue of a woman’s right to choose, a woman’s control over her own body, came up. In the few minutes allotted to her, Gabbard chose to talk against third trimester abortions. Regardless of whether she is right or not, this again is a dog whistle for the anti-abortion crowd.
> 
> 
> On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 4:38 PM Robert Naiman via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
> 
> Tulsi hits back: 
> 
> https://mobile.twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1185289626409406464
> 
> <image.png>
> 
> 
> On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 1:06 PM Robert Naiman <naiman.uiuc at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> This is breathtaking. There must be pushback. Hillary doesn't use Tulsi's name but as you can see from the responses everybody is assuming that Tulsi is who she is talking about. 
> 
> https://twitter.com/aaronblake/status/1185196559941722113
> 
> <image.png>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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