Well as I'm sure you know, they say you can't trust a Con as far as you can see, or spit. For they lie and cheatContinue reading
As you may know, Stephen Harper has proclaimed that next Friday should be a National Day of Honour. The Government of Canada has set aside thisContinue reading
“An investigation is being carried out into why the U.S. military spent $34 million constructing a building in Afghanistan that has never been used” andContinue reading
Dirty energy isn’t just dirty because of the carbon dioxide pollution it releases into our atmosphere. It’s polluted the global geopolitical landscape – and increasinglyContinue reading
A group of military “heroes” in Afghanistan demonstrate their bravery in the field: There may be some background “context” to this film that may explainContinue reading
If you were planning to work with or for them in any capacity, risking life and limb to do so, think very carefully. No matterContinue reading
Great victory eh! Once U.S and NATO forces leave, not only will Afghanistan fall back in the hands of the Taliban but also Pakistan and maybe Iran. Pakistan is becoming more fanatic religiously. Since 1978 Pashtuns from Afghanistan have taking refuge i…Continue reading
As the world marks ten years of war in Afghanistan, it is instructive to remember, as Michel Chossudovsky has observed, that the war started long before, in 1979, when the United States sponsored an insurgency against the Afghan government. Chossudovsky calls it “genocide”; I think he’s understating the situation. In 1979, President Jimmy Carter, known […]Continue reading
Wikileaks has uncovered a mystery worthy of a Hitchcock film, involving a Canadian, the infamous Bagram prison, schizophrenia and the disappearance of a man into thin air.
Khaled Samy Abdallah Ismail is an Canadian-Egyptian mistakenly captured in Kandahar in 2006 and detained for 18 months in Bagram while authorities decided what to do with him.
. . . → Read More: What happened to What happened to Khaled Samy Abdallah Ismail??Continue reading
Last week, BP America hired former Department of Defense spokesman, Geoff Morrell, as its head of communications.
The move sheds light on the central tenet of American natio…
The following cartoon says it all.Continue reading
There’s obviously no need to rehash what was written about General Stanley McChrystal and his aids in the now infamous Rolling Stone article that shook DC more than the very real earthquake that rattled Ontario and Quebec today.
McChrystal is out. A political no-brainer for Obama.
The other shoe that dropped, however, is that Petraeus is in.
And what did candidate Obama have to say about the man he just nominated to head the ISAF surge?
By ELI LAKE, Staff Reporter of the Sun | September 11, 2007
WASHINGTON — Senator Obama, the Democrat from Illinois seeking his party’s nomination for the presidency, is giving the Iraq progress report of General David Petraeus low marks, going so far as to claim the one clear success in Iraq in recent months — the rout of Al Qaeda in Anbar — has nothing to do with the military surge the general in Washington is defending.
“I’m not sure that the success in Anbar has anything to do with the surge,” Mr. Obama said today at the first of two hearings featuring General Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker. “You yourself said it was political.”
And yet president Obama bowed to McChrystal when he publicly shamed him to send tens of thousands more troops to Afghanistan for yet another military surge that’s bound to end in failure – something even McChrystal now acknowledges.
He urged the Senate to confirm Petraeus swiftly and emphasized the Afghanistan strategy he announced in December was not shifting with McChrystal’s departure.
“This is a change in personnel, but it is not a change in policy,” Obama said.
That policy is killing record numbers of soldiers.
Same war. Different commander. Same policy. Different outcome?
It wasn’t McChrystal’s policy implementation that Obama had a problem with. It was his insubordination.
Candidate Obama would have told president Obama not to have nominated McChrystal in the first place considering his track record. But candidate Obama and president Obama are two very different people – as we all know by now.