« The Battle for Mosul: IS' swansong or yet another shapeshifting ? (part 2) | Main | McCain and Graham's heros at work ... »

03 January 2017


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


Sounds good to me. But this seems like an astonishing concept to the many courtiers in Versailles on the Potomac, as if it is somehow gauche to be concerned if the gov't is getting the proper value for it's money.

Loved how Trump went after the F-35 program :)


Former Senator Dan Coats as DNI.

robt willmann

This morning (5 Jan.) a hearing is going on before the Senate Armed Services Committee about Foreign Cyber Threats to the United States , with witnesses including DNI James Clapper, NSA director Mike Rogers, and Marcel Lettre II (undersec. of defense for intelligence)--


The most interesting part of the hearing is looking at the people sitting behind the witnesses. To Clapper's right and the viewer's left is Robert Litt, the main in-house lawyer at the Office of the Dir. of Nat'l. Intelligence. He put on his dancing shoes after Clapper's infamous statement before a Senate committee that large amounts of data were not being collected on U.S. persons, and of course said with a straight face that Clapper's statement was actually not false.

SAC Brat

How stretched thin is the BS that it can be threatened by a Twitter message?



What sealed indictment?


Fred -

As I said above: a "reported sealed indictment". Whether true or false, Assange seems to believe it. Or does he just use the ghost of that indictment to avoid the rape charge in Sweden.


The kleptocracy is unaccustomed to a leader who does not follow the unwritten rules and customs.

David Habakkuk

Fred, Mike,

I have read what Craig Murray writes for some years, on and off.

Our backgrounds are rather different. Mine is Anglo-Welsh, with a strong element of old Tory cynic.

So, a lot of me thinks him a kind of ‘Scots prig’, who rubs me up the wrong way.

But people’s virtues and vices are mixed up.

In my view, it would be extraordinarily unlikely that Murray would ‘cover’ for Assange, if he thought he was a rapist. Or, indeed, ‘cover’ for the Russian security services.

That does not mean that Murray could not be involved in ‘covering tracks’ for Assange and others.

That would be perfectly possible – but only if he believed in what he was doing.

(I say this with feeling. Some of my Tory ancestors, I suspect, would have felt that drastic measures were required to deal with people like Murray.)


No, sorry Babak I don’t buy that, one can’t just go around brag and show off to the rest of the world, how free and democratically they elect and change their governments but yet disown what actions the elected government takes, they can’t have it both ways. How could you claim democracy and free elections electing your government yet take no action for this same government when it supports and supplies the Saudis kill poor Yemeni children. IMO, and in my observed experience, the western citizenry knows well, what their elected governments do, done, and will do, before they get elected by majority vote. They are raised with a sense/ mentality that the world belonging to them, and they are all exceptional, average citizen don’t even realize or understand they are practicing a double standard against the rest of the world.

Babak Makkinejad

You wrote:

"How could you claim democracy and free elections electing your government yet take no action for this same government when it supports and supplies the Saudis kill poor Yemeni children."

The man-on-the-street in London or Paris or Madrid or Milan does not care one whit about the Near East or anywhere else. That is at is should be; if Poland is over-run by Russia again, no one in Tehran would care either.

On the theoretical question of the relationship of Representative Government & Rule of Law to foreign policy; I think there is no connection whatsoever.

The purposes of foreign policy is the aggrandizement of power; "Power" being defined as the capacity to force other people to do things that they would not normally wish to do.

The Perfidious Albion, her (his ?) side kick, the Perfidious Minor of Lisbon and others sought that power for making money. In that, they were not any different than the Romans, the Ottomans - or, why go far, Nader Shah when he attacked the Mughals of India.

(Nader Shah actually helped the Perfidious Albion since his war against the Mughals weakened them even more and made them vulnerable to the extension of English Power.)

The same argument that you are making was made by many ex-communists when USSR crushed popular movements in Hungary and in Czechoslovakia; arguing, in essence, that True Socialism was incompatible with Imperialist Foreign Policy.

But I think the theoretical basis of such a position does not exists; either in the discourse of socialism or in the discourse of democracy. I do not say that such a case could not be made but I do not believe that is has been made.

Just consider the American Civil War.


Babak, no actually I am not claiming that they can't do it, or they shouldn't do it, (imperialistic hubris) and I am not claiming the man in Tehran or the man in Madrid will give a damn about Polish guy being crushed. What I am saying is that the western man is claiming high moral ground on having democracy and human rights and free elections on choosing their leaders, but majority refuses to take responsibility for what actions this same free democracy brings to others.

Babak Makkinejad

I see that I had misunderstood you. Yes, I agree. But then that would bring about the issues of Collective Guilt and Collective Responsibility that so many are uncomfortable to admit, let alone discuss.

A French officer in Occupied Germany stated: "If we wanted to put all the NAZIs in jail, we would have had to build a wall around the country."

But closer to the Anglo-Saxon World; one could ask: "Who was responsible for the Famines in Ireland and in India?"

In the United States, one could ask: "Who bore responsibility for the lynching of African-American men all over the United States during the so-called Jim Crow period?"

I suppose there was not a Human Rights Watch or an International Criminal Court or the Foundation for Defense of Democracies to take Her Majesty's Government to task and demand nothing less than regime change in the British Empire.

Likewise for the United States under Jim Crow.

I recently had to remind a European friend again: "Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones."

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

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
Blog powered by Typepad