« San Jose | Main | PUTIN TAKES THE GLOBAL LONG VIEW IN NEXT MOVES IN SYRIA by Harper »

04 June 2016

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

David Lentini

As for Albrights comments on "Russian aggression" my response is unprintable. Perhaps the most likeable comment I have seen is "How dare Russia move her country so close to our NATO bases!".

This "his nose ran smack into my fist, so it's his fault" reasoning is almost beyond belief, but I emphasize "almost". Albright was also the one who complained to Gen. Powell that there was no point in having an army if we didn't use it occasionally. And of course, she was ready to define the occasion.

alba etie

Walrus
Lord Preserve These United States - I voted for Sen Sanders in our primaries.
I had hoped Sen Paul would have had a better showing in the Republican nominating melee. Mr Trump could have been our electoral answer to the neo cons ; We Shall See

F5F5F5

Madeleine Albright?!

I thought she'd been boxed and stored next to the Lost Ark of the Covenant.

Christopher Fay

How dare AllBright move our country so close to insanity.

Chris Chuba

Ms. Albright further went on, 'I am more concerned with Trump's admiration for Putin'.
I would reply, no one ever died, declining to insult the head of a nuclear armed state.

Seriously, what is to be gained by Hillary and other politicians who insist on calling Putin, Hitler, a thug, a gangster, a murderer, bully, ... Putin isn't going to launch a nuclear attack as a result of these juvenile attacks but it reveals such a petty and unprofessional state of mind in camp Hillary (and like minded Republicans).

I heard Donald Trump on O'Reilly say months ago that he wouldn't engage in these insults because it is pointless, because it needlessly creates a gulf before you even meet the person the first time and it's ground you have to make up before you can even try to get anywhere. This is by far the most reasonable thing that I have heard from any of the candidates in this election cycle.

Cvillereader

I hadn't heard that Trump said that ( about creating gulfs), but that gives me hope.

Although there is much I don't like about Trump's public persona, I don't by the press characterization of him as either unsophisticated or unintelligent. His educational background and business career suggest otherwise. In fact, it probably says more about the sophistication and intelligence of those who are making such claims about Trump.

I also appreciate Trump's candor --there ARE a lot of sleazy journalists out there. But it does seem that the Donald could benefit from exercising some restraint over his tongue. I do think most Americans expect their president to act with a dignity befitting the office.

HDL

Mr. Obviousman checking in to the net.

What's wrong with these people? Don't they know anything? "Every schoolboy knows..."* that two main pillars of Russian national interests are (1) a warm water port and (2) buffer states between the Motherland and the predominant military land power, whether France, Prussia, Nazi Germany or NATO and has been so since the Tsars. Take those two things into consideration and the rest is easy. I don't anyone since that 'amiable dunce' Reagan has understood that.

*This antiquated phrase was used to avoid 'every sentient human whoever lived' or lately 'every bloody idiot'.

Dubhaltach

In reply to David Lentini 04 June 2016 at 08:08 AM

That would be the same Madeline Albright who thought ½ a million dead children was "worth it".

She seems determined to make America as many unyielding enemies as possible.

MRW

I heard him say that as well.

Stephen Cohen, eminent Russian analyst and professor and husband of The Nation's publisher and editor,, said during a weekly appearance on the John Batchelor Show that Trump was the only presidential candidate who was talking reasonably about Putin and how to engage him.

MRW

People forget that Russians, the citizenry, know what war is. We don’t. We never had it on our shores in the 20th C. We think it’s a fucking video game where we always win. Russians know what it tears apart, know its destruction, the immeasurable human cost. They have “Never Again!” seared into their DNA. Don’t poke The Bear is an apt phrase. Look what we did to the world because 3,000 people died here in 2001. They lost tens of millions, and they beat Hitler. We didn’t.

YT

My exact "sentiments".

fasteddiez

HDL
I will add Reagan's successor, the Poppy Bush/Scocroft/Baker musketeers to that list (Maybe). There is talk that this trio engineered a Three Card Monty John style swithcheroo that undermined the understanding that NATO would not expand eastward towards Russia, Belarus borders. At least Poppy's advisors were serious men.
if any mo moves of theirs surreptitiously undermined the agreement, I rescind my vote.

Bobo

Have no fear as there are more Arms, Ammo etc amongst the citizenry of the USA than its military or any other military on earth.

Colin Brace

I cannot vouch for the site where this was published; I simply offer it for what it may be worth:

A damning report from the State Department yesterday added new fuel to a fire that was already a problem for Hillary Clinton. Now, a former military adviser to the State Department has broken ranks, saying that Clinton’s “sloppy communications with her senior staff” may have compromised counter-terrorism operations.

Speaking to Newsweek, Bill Johnson, the State Department’s adviser to US special forces in the Pacific in 2010 and 2011, claimed Clinton’s lax security “may have compromised at least two counterterrorism operations.” He said that operations to “eliminate the leader of a Filipino Islamist separatist group and intercept Chinese-made weapons components being smuggled into Iraq were repeatedly foiled.”

The targets were said to be “one step ahead of us” on a constant basis. Johnson said that his team considered other sources for a security breach, but settled on Clinton’s unencrypted phone calls to senior staff as the only option. There’s no concrete evidence, so of course the Clinton camp is calling the allegations “patently false.”

The circumstantial evidence is pretty strong, however. When the special operations command became tired of botched missions, it stopped giving advance warning to the State Department officials in Manila. Once they did that, they finally had missions start to go to plan.

Even if Clinton’s phone calls weren’t responsible for counter-terrorism ops going wrong, Johnson’s stories of Clinton knowingly using unsecured phone lines to discuss military matters in worrying. The State Department report into Clinton’s email use highlighted the fact that Clinton knew she was bypassing security rules; the fact that she also disregarded protocol for phone conversations isn’t going to help her case at all.

https://bgr.com/2016/05/26/hillary-clinton-emails-phone-military-terrorism/


Colin Brace

I cannot vouch for this site. FWIW:

A damning report from the State Department yesterday added new fuel to a fire that was already a problem for Hillary Clinton. Now, a former military adviser to the State Department has broken ranks, saying that Clinton’s “sloppy communications with her senior staff” may have compromised counter-terrorism operations.

Speaking to Newsweek, Bill Johnson, the State Department’s adviser to US special forces in the Pacific in 2010 and 2011, claimed Clinton’s lax security “may have compromised at least two counterterrorism operations.” He said that operations to “eliminate the leader of a Filipino Islamist separatist group and intercept Chinese-made weapons components being smuggled into Iraq were repeatedly foiled.”

The targets were said to be “one step ahead of us” on a constant basis. Johnson said that his team considered other sources for a security breach, but settled on Clinton’s unencrypted phone calls to senior staff as the only option. There’s no concrete evidence, so of course the Clinton camp is calling the allegations “patently false.”

The circumstantial evidence is pretty strong, however. When the special operations command became tired of botched missions, it stopped giving advance warning to the State Department officials in Manila. Once they did that, they finally had missions start to go to plan.

Even if Clinton’s phone calls weren’t responsible for counter-terrorism ops going wrong, Johnson’s stories of Clinton knowingly using unsecured phone lines to discuss military matters in worrying. The State Department report into Clinton’s email use highlighted the fact that Clinton knew she was bypassing security rules; the fact that she also disregarded protocol for phone conversations isn’t going to help her case at all.

https://bgr.com/2016/05/26/hillary-clinton-emails-phone-military-terrorism/

BabelFish

Right between the Ark and her best bud, Jessie Helms.

Freudenschade

Expect a moderate fine for Clinton and Powell.

Jack

Madeleine Albright, IMO, epitomizes the Borg apparatchik. A committed true believer. Someone that reminds me of the stereotype type of a Soviet commissar. Behind that veneer of liberal rhetoric there is that mean, vindictive streak. Best exemplified by her statement about young women supporting Bernie that “there’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help other women,”. Meaning that all women should discard their principles and vote Hillary since they share the same gender.

But....there's something up with this election. I see more people engaged. More people talking politics in watering holes where folks seldom discussed the topic. I don't think the American people are fooled by all the happy talk. They know there's a problem. That they're falling behind while the elite prosper at their expense. The people that Joe Bageant wrote about know they're being screwed. Even some of the bi-coastal liberals have the angst as seen in this story by Yves Smith - http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/06/wall-street-2016-donald-trump-hillary-clinton-213931

The Borg will respond to this mood with a campaign of fear. That's all they have to preserve the status quo. Crooked Hillary's San Diego speech is that shot against the bow. It's exactly how the campaign against the Greek referendum and the Scottish referendum and Brexit is being run. Fear mongering and scaring the population is a powerful campaign tactic. We saw how effective that was when Dubya and Crew ran the mushroom cloud scam. Once the conventions are over the entire Borg will be in Defcon 1 scaremongering mode. Let's hope it doesn't create the violent reactions they hope it will.

robt willmann

Madeleine Albright is another face of the gangster U.S. foreign policy. But it is not just the undeclared war on Serbia / Yugoslavia and the 500,000 dead Iraqi children from sanctions on Iraq, it is also the money; you know, Madeleine Albright: entrepreneur, investment advisor, money manager, etc.--

http://www.albrightcapital.com

http://www.adviserinfo.sec.gov/IAPD/IAPDFirmSummary.aspx?ORG_PK=133613

http://www.adviserinfo.sec.gov/IAPD/Content/Common/crd_iapd_Brochure.aspx?BRCHR_VRSN_ID=369897

http://albrightstonebridge.com/

http://albrightstonebridge.com/about-us

Oh, and please do not forget Wendy Sherman, she of the Iran nuclear program deal--

http://www.albrightstonebridge.com/team/wendy-r-sherman

The Securities and Exchange Commission disclosure statement above for "Albright Capital Management" does include, of course, a part on fees and compensation starting on pdf page 5. Does the term, "2 and 20", mean anything to you, as in 2 and 20 percent? And for you income tax buffs, there is "carried interest" and "carried interest allocation".

As Dubhaltach mentioned above, there is the obscene exchange in the CBS 60 Minutes program on the Iraq sanctions in which Ms. Albright says that the death of 500,000 Iraqi children is "worth it"--

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omnskeu-puE

A little sidelight is that since Ms. Albright made the statement that helping cause the death of 500,000 children is/was worth it (and since she was not in custodial interrogation when she said so on the 60 Minutes program), then her statement is not hearsay and can be admitted against her in court. See, Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(A), and even 807, and Texas Rule of Evidence 803(24)--

https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_801

https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_807

Sometimes, there is a little poetic justice, and in Ms. Albright's case, she walked into a room of the Albanians during the discussions on Kosovo / Serbia in Rambouillet, France, and the participants thought she was the maid or cleaning lady and told her to leave and give them five more minutes, whereupon the self-important Ms. Albright came un-glued:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/jan/28/nicholaswatt

ex-PFC Chuck

re: “there’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help other women,”

Just like Hilary Clinton supported Zephyr Teachout in her primary challenge last year of Democratic governor Cuomo and has endorsed Teachout for the Congressional nomination she is seeking. Oh wait .. ..

LeaNder

Didn't Poppy already have some "crazies in the basement"?

LeaNder

"of course, a part on fees and compensation starting on pdf page 5. "

Curious, admittedly not having taken a closer look, were would I find the "2 and 20" or which link leads to the respective doc?

But interesting. Thanks robt.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendy_Sherman#Chief_US_nuclear_negotiator_with_Iran

Rd

"Madeleine Albright is alleged to have said on Friday on CNN of Hilary

I personally find this to be the most breathtaking stupidity"


What 'Maddy" is suggesting is, "We are the elites and we do no wrong". This has been the case for way too long, perhaps since Nixon got whacked. The question should be, "Where are the people"? So long as the American people are misinformed, ill-informed and detached, this will only get worst. Wait till the next administration regardless of his or hers.

rjj

Biden might be a better target for a War on Fatuity. Albright is only a danger to herself at this point.

robt willmann

LeaNder,

The "2 and 20" refers to a way in which people who own and operate a "hedge fund" or "venture capital fund" or certain types of funds pay themselves. The '2' is 2 percent of the amount invested in the fund by the investors, and the operators of the fund get that each year, whether the fund makes any money or not. So if there is $200 million in the fund, 2 percent of that is $4 million; if the fund has $500 million, it is a $10 million fee for the year; if the fund has $1 billion, the 2 percent is $20 million; and the more the merrier. Then, if the fund makes money, the operator gets 20 percent of the profits or net realized gains for the year, which is the '20'. Here is an article that describes it, and VC means "venture capital" and LP means "limited partner"; an investor in a fund can be a person, a partnership, a pension fund, and so forth--

https://hbr.org/2014/08/venture-capitalists-get-paid-well-to-lose-money

How the people operating the large pools of money pay themselves should be talked about in detail, especially during national elections, but politicians do not like to talk about it or investigate it, as you might expect.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
Blog powered by Typepad