SATURDAY, JUNE 21, 2025
All except for this: "The universe’s darkest mysteries are coming into focus."
That's what the New York Times headline said. Inevitably, we were intrigued.
For better or worse, here's the fuller pair of headlines. The headlines sit atop a lengthy report for the section called Science Times:
The Universe’s Darkest Mysteries Are Coming Into Focus
As the Vera C. Rubin Observatory surveys the night sky, astrophysicists expect to unlock the secrets of dark matter, dark energy and cosmic phenomena that go “bang!”
Inevitably, the report leads readers into the mysteries of so-called "dark energy" and "dark matter." Into things that go "ou-boum" in the night—as in Forster's Marabar Caves in A Passage to India.
As far as we know, nothing in the Times report is scientifically invalid in any way. But to our ear, reports of this type take us where the vast bulk of Times readers can't possibly hope to follow.
Such reports tend to go boom in the night. They make us readers feel that we're coming to understand the cosmos when we're actually doing no such thing. It's a way of replacing religious forms of cosmology with their secular first cousins.
All in all, whatever! A larger mystery has been unfolding right before our American eyes, to the extent that we're willing to look. For starters, it's captured in these headlines from the latest batch of news reports at Mediaite:
Trump Complains He Should Have Won FIVE Nobel Prizes By Now But ‘They Only Give Them To Liberals’
‘Listen to Her Spew Off!’ Jessica Tarlov Sends Trump Into Full Fox Meltdown, Claims ‘MAGA is Complaining BIG LEAGUE!’
‘That’s a Serious Crime’: Musk Accuses Top Trump Aide of ‘Breaking the Law’ – Maybe Being Russian Spy
Trump Calls for Special Prosecutor for Alleged Election Fraud in 2020—Claiming He Won in a ‘LANDSLIDE!’
Trump Fumes the U.S. Has ‘Too Many Non-Working Holidays’ On Juneteenth: ‘It Must Change’
New Smartmatic Filing Reveals Fox News Staffers Admitted Election Claims Were ‘So F***ing Cray’ and ‘MINDBLOWINGLY NUTS’
President Trump and Elon Musk and Fox News staffers oh my!
Is it real or is it Memorex? With respect to President Trump, do these tirades stem from actual beliefs, or are they simply examples of the latest (deliberate) distractions?
As you learn from that Mediate report, Elon Musk made his latest inaccurate claim as he blared about that alleged Russian spy. Beyond that, he's the key player in this new column from Nicholas Kristof:
The Waste Musk Created
[...]
I’ve been traveling through Sierra Leone and Liberia to gauge the impact of Trump’s closing of U.S.A.I.D., to see how bad things have gotten since an earlier trip through South Sudan and Kenya. Here’s what I see: Children are dying because medicines have been abruptly cut off, and risks of Ebola, tuberculosis and other diseases reaching America are increasing—while medicines sit uselessly in warehouses.
After Elon Musk boasted about feeding U.S.A.I.D. “into the wood chipper” over a weekend, he claimed that no one had died as a result. Secretary of State Marco Rubio repeated that claim just last month.
So I challenge them both: Come with me on a trip to the villages where your aid cuts are killing children. Open your eyes. And if you dare to confront actual waste and abuse—the kind that squanders lives as well as money—join me in the village of Kayata, Liberia, where in April a pregnant mother of two, Yamah Freeman, 21, went into labor...
And so on from there. With respect to that young Liberian woman, we'll have more information below.
Kristof's unusual values and unusual degree of dedication take him into parts of the world where few major journalists go. Just to refresh you, Elon Musk—who plainly seemst o be disordered—isn't just the guy who made that prophetic "wood chipper" remark."
He's also the guy who said the following to Joe Rogan this, earlier in the year:
“The fundamental weakness of Western civilization is empathy..."
Has that statement been taken out of context? For fuller context, click here.
To our own (non-medical) eye and ear, it seems fairly obvious. It seems fairly obvious that something seems to be fundamentally wrong with Elon Musk.
Such situations always involve a tragic loss of human capability and potential. Such situations are always tragic—but still and all, there it is.
Is it possible that "something is wrong" with President Trump? How about with Vice President Vance, but also with at least one member of his staff?
Vance Blames L.A. Violence on California Democrats and Disparages Padilla
Eight days ago, Senator Alex Padilla was forcibly removed from a news conference and handcuffed by federal agents after he interrupted Kristi Noem, the homeland security secretary, at the Wilshire Federal Building in Los Angeles.
At the same building on Friday, Vice President JD Vance disparaged Mr. Padilla for engaging in “political theater” and called him by the wrong name.
“Well, I was hoping Jose Padilla would be here to ask a question, but unfortunately, I guess he decided not to show up because there wasn’t the theater,” Mr. Vance said during a news conference in response to a reporter. “I think everybody realizes that’s what this is. It’s pure political theater.”
Mr. Vance’s spokeswoman later said that he misspoke when he said the senator’s name.
[...]
Later Friday, a spokeswoman for Mr. Vance said the vice president misspoke when he said Mr. Padilla’s name.
“He must have mixed up two people who have broken the law,” said Taylor Van Kirk, the spokeswoman.
Jose Padilla is the name of a man who was convicted of terrorism conspiracy in 2007 after being arrested in Chicago on suspicion of planning to set off a radioactive dirty bomb.
Did Vance (accidentally) misspeak when he misstated Senator Padilla's first name?
Everything's possible, even that! Later, Vance's spokeswoman sought to make things right by comparing the California senator to a convicted terrorist, while seeming to say that each of the two Padillas have (somehow) broken the law.
Where do creatures like these come from? What explains their astonishing conduct?
We've got your "darkest mystery" right there! That mystery is all around us as the American nation continues to come apart.
The mystery is all around us! It has spread all over the conduct on Fox. It escapes the White House through a fire hose which leads to President Trump.
What explains the unusual behavior of the people in question? What explains the behavior of Vice President Vance? Of his astounding spokeswoman?
For better or worse, our big news orgs have agreed not to ask. Within two weeks, one of the people we've mentioned today has a major decision to make.
Regarding Kristof's column: Yamah Freeman, age 21, went into labor in Liberia. Because of some of the things Musk has done, she never made it to the hospital.
Because of some of the things Musk has done, there was no longer an ambulance to take her there. As neighbors tried to carry her there, she died along the way.
Is something wrong with Elon Musk? Our journalists still refuse to approach that mystery from the (fairly obvious) medical / mental health point of view.
Next week: Even as we adopt a new focus, we'll show you what was said on the Fox News Channel about last weekend's horrific events in Minnesota. (Remember them?)
We'll show you what was said last Sunday. That will include two of the dumbest presentations we've ever seen on a TV "news" program.
Mistakes happen.
ReplyDeleteConfusing a pile of dogshit for the Republican Party, happens all the time.
Where's the mistake in that?
DeleteThat headline is an exaggeration. The article says, "astrophysicists expect to unlock the secrets of dark matter, dark energy and cosmic phenomena that go “bang!”"
ReplyDeleteAstrophysicists don't even know for sure that there are such things as dark energy and dark matter. They only know that these things, if they exist, would account for certain astronomical observations.
E.g., the universe's expansion should be slowing down due to gravity, but it's apparently speeding up. That's assuming that the methods of measuring the speed of universal expansion are correct -- that they don't have some glitch.
ReplyDelete"“Well, I was hoping Jose Padilla would be here to ask a question, but unfortunately, I guess he decided not to show up because there wasn’t the theater,”"
Now, that's one great putdown, ain't it?
Oh, and speaking about the theater: "Because of some of the things Musk has done, she never made it to the hospital. "
Yeah, right, we all know: but think about the children!!!
We've heard all your fantasy dramas. As you're still trying to rob the taxpayers, invent something new now, old man.
"An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure." But, the value of prevention can't be measured. The value of cure is visible.
ReplyDeleteHow many lives are saved by preventing a war that dpesn't happen? There's no way to know. In retrospect we can see that preventing WW2 would have saved tens of millions of lives. But, if WW2 had been prevented, say by an earlier Allied attack against Germany, there would be no way to know this.
A war between the nuclear powers of India and Pakistan could kill millions of people. Did Trump's peace efforts save millions of lives? How many lives did the Abraham Accords save? How many lives did the Rwanda–Congo peace deal save? There is no way to know. But, these look like big deals to me. YMMV
“In a Tuesday phone call, India's Modi told Trump that the U.S. did not play a role in de-escalating tensions between India and Pakistan.”
DeleteTrump and India's Modi split over U.S. role in Pakistan ceasefire
https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2025/06/18/modi-trump-india-pakistan-ceasefire.html
Trump is known for lying, joking, embellishing, hyperbole, etc.
What is the truth in the Trump era, David, other than what trump, you and other MAGAs want it to be?
@12:09 - for some, the truth in the Trump era is that Trump is the embodiment of evil. So, nothing he does can be good. The lack of goodness is a given. So, any seemingly good action must be a lie, inconsequential, or "Hey, look a squirrel!"
DeleteTrump has contributed nothing to peace throughout the world, just the opposite, Trump is a neocon obsessed with dominating others.
DeleteTrump mishandled the pandemic, causing several hundred thousand unnecessary American deaths. Trump was pro Iraq War which killed thousands of Americans and a million innocent civilians in Iraq. Trump icing out Palestinians from the nothingburger "Abraham Accords" led directly to Oct 7. Trump bends the knee to Putin, which emboldened Putin to invade Ukraine as a way to restart Russia's imperial ambitions. Trump is an old friend to Netanyahu, and has encouraged Netanyahu to "finish off" the Palestinians. Trump indiscriminately bombed Yemen, killing children while achieving nothing. Trump loosened rules of engagement during his first term, leading to a massive increase in drone attacks on civilians, but also leading to an increase in American military troop deaths (which Biden quickly lowered).
Trump avoids peace like the plague, few people have been as responsible for more unnecessary deaths or deaths from aggressive militaristic operations.
Trump is old and frail and will soon no longer walk the earth, spending the rest of his existence in that lake of fire that people like him wind up in.
"Trump is the embodiment of evil." You said it David, and how can I argue with you given all the years of your close scrutiny of the felon.
DeleteThanks @2:05 for illustrating my point.
Delete2:15 detailing the horrific things Trump has actually done in no way illustrates your point.
DeleteYour point was to spread misinformation in order to falsely praise your Dear Leader.
In fact, with this comment, you are proving 2:05's point.
Face reality, the Democratic Party has left the American people behind. Americans with common sense and love for other Americans are leaving as well as voting for Republican candidates.
DeleteOnly 16% of Americans think going to war against Iran is a good idea. But the Democrats still can’t come out against it. Instead, they have allowed the resistance to be led by the likes of Tucker Carlson, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Alex Jones, Matt Gaetz, Rand Paul, Steve Bannon, and Thomas Massie.
DeleteThe republicans have the power to stop it. Trump has now said we have bombed Iran.
DeleteHow do the Republicans have the power to stop it?
DeleteThey control congress, 10:52.
DeleteNever before have I agreed with DiC, "the truth in the Trump era is that Trump is the embodiment of evil." Thanks for the gift of your brilliant assessment David.
Delete"This study doesn’t just expose Trump fandom as a cult of personality—it lays bare a frightening link between disinformation, cognitive rigidity, and political loyalty."
ReplyDeleteMissing - weirdos, the whole lot of you. Also the less educated the more likely a Trumper humper. Weird, stupid, and intolerant is a hell of a way to go thru life son. But it is the shameful path you have chosen.
“Nobody will give me the Nobel prize, and I really really deserve it. WAAAAAH” Orange Baby in Chief
ReplyDelete"Trump Whining About Nobel Prize Reaches Dangerous Levels"
ReplyDeleteUS citizens advised to cover ears, avoid internet.
"Eligibility for Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) is limited to citizens and certain lawfully present immigrants."
ReplyDelete"19 million or one in four children in the U.S. has an immigrant parent"
Healthcare is a human right, profit motive should play no role in it.
The role conservatives in Project 2025 want to play is grim reaper. The faster the poor die the less we have to pay to maintain their lowly existence. Their dying is a win win!!!
Delete@2:08 - You seem to be confusing the profit motive with the need to pay one's bills. Even non-profit organizations need to pay for their expenses.
DeleteCHIP needs to have enough income to pay its expenses and benefits. This is true no matter who provides the care.
2:24 you seem very confused.
DeleteHealthcare in America is primarily an operation run by the profit motive.
About one third of all healthcare costs go to the administration of private health insurance, whereas government provided healthcare has an operating cost of about 2% - substantially more efficient than private insurance.
The US government has more than enough money to fund universal public healthcare for everyone, not just citizens or certain lawfully present immigrants. If you want the government to pay for other things, like all the conflicts neocon Republicans engage in throughout the world, then we can raise taxes on the wealthy, which is what Republicans traditionally did until Reagan.
"The US government has more than enough money to fund universal public healthcare for everyone, not just citizens..."
DeleteSorry @2:35, the US government doesn't even have nearly enough money just to pay for the current level of benefits. Quite the opposite. It had to borrow $2 TRILLION to pay its bills in 2024! And, the projection for 2026 is even worse!
The US government has more than enough to pay for universal healthcare, but it does not have enough to pay for the Republican ballooning defense spending and tax cuts for the wealthy.
Delete2:48 you are badly misinformed.
@3:00 - The meaning of your snark is unclear. If you mean the government also doesn't have enough money to pay for increased defense spending and tax cuts, then I agree. In fact the government doesn't have enough money for the current level of defense spending and taxes and other spending.
DeleteSnark is an attitude of mockery or sarcasm. 3:00's post contains neither.
Delete"It had to borrow $2 TRILLION to pay its bills in 2024! And, the projection for 2026 is even worse!"
DeleteIf only the government had a way of raising the necessary revenue. If only....
Raining taxes when you're running a deficit makes as much sense as getting a second job when your children go to bed hungry.
DeleteFrom Wikipedia on Jose Padilla:
ReplyDelete"In August 2007, a federal jury found him guilty of conspiring to commit murder and fund terrorism. Government officials had earlier claimed Padilla was suspected of planning to build and explode a "dirty bomb" in the United States, BUT HE WAS NEVER CHARGED WITH THIS CRIME." [emphasis added]
Trump is horrible but let's not memory hole how Trump is merely a continuation of Republican fascism, with Bush torturing and jailing people for what are essentially thought crimes.
You sound like an idiot, 2:22. Do you understand your own drivel?
DeleteAw look, the 2:48 troll got triggered.
Deletewomp womp
Trump is a continuation. As I had posted on this blog a little while back, it was during the Bush administration that the US started kidnapping people and stashing them in various blackhole sites, including Gitmo. The difference: they were kidnapping people from foreign countries. Trump has breached that divide and has endeavored to kidnap people from US soil. Next step: kidnapping US citizens from US soil.
DeleteICE is already detaining citizens.
DeleteKristof carpet-bagging through Africa to write a performative article designed only to burnish his reputation with the naive morons that read his paper (his personal ambitions for political office is what really drives his lazy work), is hardly something to write home about.
ReplyDeletePure ad hominem. Has nothing to do with the actual claim/argument being advanced, which is almost certainly true - that Musk's actions resulted in the deaths of some of the world's most disadvantaged people. And Musk refuses to own up to it.
DeleteIt's OK with me if Bob and commenters stop writing about Bolter's motivation. But IMO they should acknowledge Boelter's letter.
ReplyDeleteIn a rambling, conspiratorial letter addressed to the FBI, alleged assassin Vance Boelter claimed Gov. Tim Walz instructed him to kill U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar so that Walz could run for the U.S. Senate, according to two people familiar with the contents of the letter.
The letter is the clearest evidence yet of Boelter’s mindset after the targeted violence against Minnesota politicians last week. It is incoherent, one and a half pages long, confusing and hard to read, according to two people familiar with the letter’s contents. It includes Boelter alleging he had been trained by the U.S. military off the books, and that Walz, who is not running for Senate, had asked him to kill Klobuchar and others.
https://web.archive.org/web/20250621073037/https://www.startribune.com/vance-boelter-letter-klobuchar-walz-mn-assassination/601376682
What are you trying to say, David?
DeleteThe assassinations turned out not really to be political. The discussions here about how political connections of various parties turned out to be off the mark and not very relevant.
DeleteThere was a low IQ poster here, presumably Mao, who claimed that Walz could've been behind these assassinations. Other than that, I don't recall anyone saying that it was overtly political.
DeleteThere are MAGA people on social media demanding investigations into Walz.
Delete"The assassinations turned out not really to be political."
DeleteI see. That explains why there were Republicans and pro-lifers sprinkled throughout his hit list.
"As you learn from that Mediate report"
ReplyDeleteThe name is MediaITE not Mediate. Somerby gets this wrong as often as he gets it right.
Somerby thinks Vance just made an innocuous mistake when he called Padilla (one of 100 US Senators) Jose instead of Alex. People who are good journalists or who care about theirs jobs as VP take extra care to get things right. In particular, salesmen and politicians work hard to get names right because they know that it is insulting to the person your begging to donate to your campaign or buy your product when you dis them by failing to get their name right. Beyond that, it has always been part of civility and general politeness to get people's names right. All it takes it caring enough to put in the effort to make sure you have such names right.
Somerby wants to say Vance just made a mistake. Sure, but that makes Vance a lousy politician. In this case, Vance's job is to chair joint sessions of Congress. He should know the names of those who serve there.
Somerby has been quoting Mediaite more often lately. His self-imposed job is to monitor the media. That means knowing the names of the various sources.
Vance was a senator before being elected VP. Of course he knows Padilla's name. Vance's slur was deliberate: Padilla said:
Delete"Given a chance to respond to the deliberate misnaming on MSNBC, since the two served in the Senate together, Padilla told the hosts, "He knows my name. Look, sadly it’s just an indicator of how petty and unserious this administration is. He’s the vice president of the United States. You’d think he’d take the situation in Los Angeles more seriously.”
Somerby’s willingness to ascribe to mistake what is clearly deliberate is getting kind of ridiculous. He wants to find innocent good faith in people who don’t deserve it. He is an apologist for authoritarians.
DeleteDidn't Somerby originally ascribe Vance's claim about Haitians eating pets to a misunderstanding?
DeleteBob doesn't think that it was an innocuous mistake and it's quite clear from his writing. Nor did Bob ascribe Vance's pet eating claim to a misunderstanding.
DeleteInstead of calling Vance a liar, Somerby tried to delve into Vance’s upbringing to see … something.
DeleteYes, he did.
DeleteSomerby, Jan 8, 2025:
Delete"In our view, a fact-checking site should be careful about using a problematic term like "lie."
That said, there's no doubt about it at all—that repulsive claim by Trump and Vance was one of the most repulsive, repeated misstatements of this or any year. Their repulsive and repeated misstatements about Springfield, Ohio's Haitian residents dragged the American discourse down about as far as a nation's discourse can go."
Sept 25, 2024:
"Sad! Adopting a braindead formulation which largely comes from within Blue America's tribe, the candidate said that the people of Springfield have been "stating their truth" about the eating of their city's cats and dogs. Even Pilate didn't stoop to that level when he posed his famous question, "What is truth?"
The people of Springfield have been "stating their truth" about the eating of cats and dogs! So said this apparently damaged young man, formerly a vastly mistreated child.
In fact, as the two people who triggered this frenzy have continued to speak their truth, they've apologized for misstating "the" truth in their original claims. But it seems that nothing is going to stop the very young man who was apparently damaged by the highly disordered upbringing he described in a best-selling book. "
Jan 3, 2025:
"To be honest, it seems a bit flyweight to us when PolitiFact adopts such practices. That said, a nation has essentially ceased to exist when a high-profile pair of jugglers and clowns can traffic in statements about the eating of pets in the way Trump and Vance repeatedly did.
There and elsewhere, Trump and Vance did engage in the ultimate act of squalor. But Page goes on in his piece to roll his eyes about a different view—about an alternate view advanced from within the ranks of the other tribe."
So, we see that (1) Somerby will not call this a lie by Vance, (2) Somerby says the fact checkers shouldn't call it a lie either, (3) Somerby repeats that the people of Springfield were speaking their truth about the cats/dogs, (4) Somerby says the left and the fact checkers are just as bad, if not worse than what Vance/Trump said about the pets. Look at Somerby's extreme effort to rescue Vance's obvious lie with equivocation. Somerby did everything but acknowledge that Vance told a lie.
Using the term "lie" is problematic. Stating that something is false and that no evidence supports it is better.
DeleteVance so much as confessed that it was a lie. Didn't help. To imagine somehow that tossing around the "lie" word would create a watershed moment is naïve.
The question was whether Somerby claimed Vance misunderstood or not. If Somerby won't call a statement a lie, then what it is?
Deletecorrection: what is it?
DeleteIt is what it is, man.
Delete10:27 - Some people are careful with their words; some not. Vance's statement was a falsehood. A lie is a knowing falsehood, and Somerby doesn't pretend to know whether Vance knew his falsehood was false. On the other hand, you do pretend to know, so you feel free to be more careless with your words.
DeleteVance was a senator in the Senate along with Padilla. Of course Vance knew his name.
DeleteTrump has bombed Iran.
ReplyDeleteI assume Miller is behind that. Trump can't put a coherent thought together. Hegseth is probably still sobering up from his latest bender. Someone is running the show there and it's not Vance.
DeleteTrump left NJ to return to the White House at 6 pm this evening, after playing golf, so it seems likely he wasn’t involved in the operation.
DeleteI’m glad that only congress has the power to declare war. LOL.
DeleteThe success of the Iran bombing shows that either
Delete1. Trump and Hegseth are actually competent, or,
2. The attack was designed and led by some hidden, hypothetical, unknown person, who is extremely competent in military affairs..
Occam's razor suggests #1 is more likely to be correct.
I don't think Occam's razor means what you think it means.
DeleteThe level of mental fog that would lead one to believe that because pilots were able to bomb a facility using sophisticated weapons somehow demonstrates that Trump and Hegseth are competent are beyond any comprehension.
DeleteHow does that demonstrate competence? Do you not understand, David, that you're spouting utter gibberish. Are you really not embarrassed to put it all out there, for everyone to see?
The competence would be demonstrated by avoiding a conflict.
David in Cal is a Right-winger. He'll claim to believe anything, as long as it leads to suffering for minorities.
DeleteBased on history, yesterday's attack was within the President's accepted powers. E.g., it was considered acceptable use of Presidential power when Obama was President. Fourteen years ago, a joint US-EU bombing campaign decapitated Qaddafi’s regime.
Delete“ The success of the Iran bombing ”
DeleteYou’re willing to immediately judge the operation a success, DiC? Are you sure?
Yea the Obama Libya bombings based on UN resolutions and prior Congressional authority was a lot of bullshit that should never be used to justify more bullshit. And the lesson never learned from the bomb first crowd, Libya become a cesspool of suffering and birthed ISIS after the bombing, causing way more problems than solved. Shit never works out like the idiots in charge plan in their closed minded US centric heads.
DeleteYes it’s bizarre when DiC uses Obama as a justification for Trump, rather than questioning the decisions by either Obama or Trump. Or who knows? Maybe DiC criticized Obama at the time. Wouldn’t surprise me.
Delete"The success of the Iran bombing..."
DeleteMost impressive was how they avoided all the anti-aircraft fire coming at them.
Oh, there was none? So basically they just had to fly over the target and let go of the bombs?
Wow. Awesome.
I don't understand why Somerby objects to science reporting that provides summaries of research topics for people without a science background. The news aspect is to let the public know what researchers are working on. I don't see a problem with that.
ReplyDeleteThere are a lot of other topics that researchers pursue in the social sciences that Somerby has no clue about, but he doesn't seem to recognize how little background he has in those areas either. Somerby has no background in psychology or psychiatry or neuroscience but he uses articles about Trump's psyche without realizing that he doesn't understand them, because he agrees with the idea that Trump is crazy or sociopathic (as opposed to criminal, demented, ignorant and incompetent). Somerby similarly bought the age-related attacks on Biden's competence because he wanted to see Biden off the ticket, ignoring that he has no background at all to understand the difference between normal aging and cognitive decline.
But Somerby thinks the media shouldn't tell the public anything about what is happening in the physical sciences! I would bet that is because Somerby has no biased axe to grind when it comes to dark matter, other than denigrating science, education and the idea that there are experts who do understand such reports, and some of them inevitably will read the NY Times.
So now we just bombed a country we're not...that we WEREN'T at war with.
ReplyDeleteQuaker- Were we wrong to bomb the three Irani nuclear installations? What do you think we should have done?
DeleteNothing? Tell Israel they are on their own? On the balance, that would've contributed a lot more to the world peace and the image of the US as an honest force for good.
DeleteJon Stewart did an excellent takedown of Netanyahu's claims, which go back more than a dozen years, that Iran is on the cusp of obtaining nuclear weapons. Israel has nuclear weapons and I trust their current regime less than Iran not to use them.
Illegal as fuck. AOC has posted an impeachment. Won't go anywhere with the fascist party in charge, but you gotta make a stink. Expect the morons and weirdos think everyone will fall around the flag and their cult leader. Not this time little crimmin' donnie.
DeleteTrump's only rationale for this attack (so far) has been that he won't permit Iran to have a nuclear weapon. His own intelligence team, headed up by Tulsi Gabbard, told him that Iran was not posing a nuclear threat to the US, and that its leaders have not authorized a resumption of a nuclear weapons development program.
DeleteSo if that's all he's got--that there was a suspicion that Iran was trying to develop a nuclear weapon, then he has made the United States an aggressor in this conflict. He has completely erased the rules of international diplomacy and cooperation and ended our role as a force for stability in the world.
I take the trouble to say that has been his only rationale so far. Will we see some evidence in the days ahead that Iran really was pursuing nuclear weapons? It could happen, but I don't think it will.
Shorter: Yes, David. Based on what little we know, bombing the Iranian nuclear sites was wrong. I expect Trump will tell us it was justified, but we'll never see the proof.
Sorry, David. I didn't address your second question, "What should we have done?"
DeleteThere were several initiatives already in progress. The Trump team had been touting its ongoing negotiations with Iran as well as its continuation of economic sanctions. Iran had allowed IAEA inspectors onsite, and those inspectors had recently reported that they "could not confirm" that Iran's nuclear program was strictly for peaceful purposes, something they had committed to under the 2015 JCPOA.
So there were more than a couple of possibilities, like NOT pulling the US out of an agreement with Iran that had been negotiated along with our allies; even with a pullout, we could have continued negotiations to establish a new, replacement agreement and allowed the IAEA to do its job.
I know there will be those who will reply to say, "But Iran *still* could have built a bomb! And we KNOW they'd use one if they can!"
For the past 80 years, "nuclear deterrence" has been achieved by clearly communicating the consequences of using a nuclear weapon. I've seen nothing that convinces me that even the most radical of Iranian leaders would accept annihilation of their country as an acceptable cost for using a nuclear weapon against Israel or any other country. This justification assumes a recklessness on the part of Iran's leadership that isn't evidenced by anything they've ever done.
Delete"What do you think we should have done?"
We should've stopped giving money, weapons, and diplomatic support to the followers of a form of Nazism that is Zionism. Long time ago.
4:32 Yup.
Delete"What do you think we should have done?"
DeleteYou mean "he", not we, fuckface Dickhead. How about following the Constitution and asking Congress for the authority, you fucking fascist freak? As I said before, Netanyahu is the defacto president of this country.
Top Democrats on the intelligence committee were not informed of Trump’s decision. The republicans were.
DeleteThe Dems were not trusted to not leak anything. IMO the lack of trust was unfortunately justified.
DeleteIn your opinion, DiC? Well, that should suffice as a reason, I guess.
DeleteAnonymouse 8:14am, that’s why there wasn’t a leak.
DeleteThe lack of a leak mattered. Not a single shot was fired at the attacking planes. Iran was completely in the dark.
DeleteYour assumption that the Democrats would have leaked as an excuse not to keep them informed is another step down the road to totalitarianism. The fact that you believe the Democrats would have intentionally put American troops in danger is of course chef’s kiss anti-Democratic propaganda.
DeleteLet me guess: hegseth wasn’t on signal this time around?
DeleteDavid, I can’t find information that any other country detected their movements. Do you know?
DeleteYes, Cecelia. Ask David. He is full of totally not propaganda/misinformation.
DeleteIt sure would be nice if you both admitted the problems of believing an administration filled with liars and led by a liar with “something wrong” (according to Somerby).
OK @1:50 — I admit that I don’t trust the word of the Trump Admin. I distrust all politicians. Biden and Harris were particularly flagrant. They promoted two big lies
Delete—the border is under control
— Biden has full intellect.
"Not a single shot was fired at the attacking planes."
DeleteSounds like somebody got included in the Signal chat!
A civilian on the ground in Missouri saw them take off.
DeleteDiC, here is what Trump's Director of National Intelligence testified to Congress less than three months ago:
Delete"The [Intelligence Community] continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme leader Khomeini has not authorized the nuclear weapons program that he suspended in 2003."
I feel certain, DiC, that you'll readily disappear this testimony in your own cosmology. But for someone like me who doesn't share your ideology, how am I supposed to feel when the Intelligence Community says Iran has no nuclear weapons program at all, but Trump sneak-attacks Iran on the pretext that it does? I mean, Republicans have already lied us into one war in the middle east, isn't this just a reprise?
Japan initiated a sneak attack on the United States, and we consider that day to be a day that lives in infamy. But I guess sneak attacks on other countries are OK if we are the attackers, right? And I guess that's so even if the other country is not threatening us in any way, right? And even if we have to lie to find a pretext to justify the sneak attack, right?
DeleteCC at 1:28 - The sentiment that "The other tribe's Congressional leaders are untrustworthy and so should be kept in the dark!" seems like a particularly dangerous and authoritarian sentiment to me.
DeleteAKA DG, if Pres. Trump had wanted the Iranians to know we were coming, he could have told them directly. That’s not what Trump wanted, so he didn’t need the Democrats to let CNN know.
DeleteDemocrats handle sensitive info all the time without leaking it. This accusation is ridiculous given Trump and Hegseth’s mishandling of classified info.
DeleteYou didn’t address DG’s point, Cecelia.
DeleteActually, Trump ought to worry more about Hegseth on signal inviting reporters into the chat. Your smug belief that Democrats would have revealed the operation and endangered our troops is despicable, but typical authoritarian justifying shit.
Once again Trump has further isolated us from our allies in an unconstitutional act of war that puts targets on the backs of Americans at home and abroad. Iran posed zero threat to the United States. It is really that simple. Dragging us into further conflict in the Middle East while offering up a deficit wrecking economic plan that benefits the rich. We have seen this play out before. Only not with the upcoming drag that will hit the economy by late summer when the inflationary tariffs hit the middle and lower wage earners. This country is fucked. It is exactly what was to be expected with a Republican party that never ever learns from its mistakes. We can only hope that the Iranians the ones assholes like Lindsey Graham have forever told us are ruled by madmen show the kind of restraint that a mentally unstable old man at the helm here didn't , along with his war hawk cabinet.
ReplyDeleteTrump at his inauguration: “We will measure our success not only by the battles we win but also by the wars that we end — and perhaps most importantly, the wars we never get into.”
ReplyDeleteTrump at his inauguration: "Iran cannot have unclear weapons."
DeleteWhat happened to the negotiations Trump was trying to carry on with Iran? We all thought he was the deal maker. He attacked Biden for the wars he allegedly allowed to happen on his watch.
DeleteTrump gave Iran 60 days. Iran didn't agree to de-nuclearize. Israel did not begin the attacks until the 61st day. Trump also gave Iran time before using the MOPs. Iran indicated no intention of giving up their nukes.
DeleteSo, you’re saying he sucks as a deal maker, DiC. Because he touted his ability to make deals and avoid wars.
DeleteSo you are saying is all the idjut had to do was not tear up the treaty in 2017, or listened to Gabbard in 2025? Got it.
Delete'Trump at his inauguration: "Iran cannot have nuclear weapons."'
DeleteNope. Didn't say it at his inauguration. You've been snookered again.
Dems seem to again embrace the 20% side in an 80-20 issue. Well, I haven't any polls but my guess is that around 80% of Americans support destroying Iran's nukes. Dems automatic response is to disparage and criticize anything Trump does or says.
ReplyDeleteThe NY Times has a typical article entitled We Have No Idea Where This War Will Go. It's behind a pay wall, but the headline sums it up. The article consists of just speculation of possible bad consequences to yesterday's bombing. What makes it particularly galling to me is the article they chose not to write, We have no idea of what would happen if Iran gets a nuclear arsenal. The possible bad consequences of that outcome are a lot more potentially catastrophic than the consequences of the attack.
There is something wrong with Donald Trump.
DeleteAre you stupid? That is not a NY Times article. Opinion pieces are often “just speculation”. It’s almost certain the Times has carried opinion pieces exploring ‘What if Iran goes nuclear?’ just as they are running pieces now that support the war.
DeleteStop wasting people's time making complaints about journalistic balance based on opinion pieces or please develop a minimal familiarity with how newspapers and media work before confidently making biased accusations based on a misunderstanding of journalistic genres. (As well as many many other logical errors I have not bothered to point out.)
80-20 issue. Yes. Prior to the bombing YouGov polled for the Economist whether the US should get involved in the conflict; 1500 respondents. 16% favored involvement. WaPo poll prior to the bombing was slightly better for bombing the nuc sites: 25%. The president unilaterally, without congressional approval, and with polling strongly against, ordered the bombing, irrespective of how much the Zionist element in this country wanted it.
Delete"Dems automatic response is to disparage and criticize anything Trump does or says."
DeleteYou have to admit that in general, it's not a bad rule of thumb.
Director General IAEA: There has been a lot of speculation about what the IAEA said.. I indicated very clearly that we did not have elements to prove that Iran had a plan or a systematic effort towards a nuclear weapon
ReplyDeleteIMO the burden of proof should go in the other direction. We should end Iran’s nukes unless there are clear elements to prove that Iran does NOT have a plan or a systematic effort towards a nuclear weapon.
DeleteYou cannot prove a negative, so the burden of proof is on the one asserting the presence of effort.
Delete3:37 Are you retarded? A lack of proof of innocence isn't a proof of guilt. Where did they dig you up? You're offering completely nonsensical, biased, one-sided arguments that don't make any sense. Would you like some more specifics? What is your problem?
DeleteStandards are different for nukes than for law enforcement. "Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer" is a principle often attributed to the English jurist William Blackstone. it's a reasonable standard.
DeleteBut, its analog with nukes is not so reasonable: "Better 10 cities blown up with nuclear weapons than Iran's nukes be destroyed when they didn't actually pose a threat."
A decision to start a war with another country should be made by Congress, not by a single president on his own without consultation of experts. I hope they actually impeach Trump this time.
DeleteI have repeated, time and time again, you will save a lot of time and effort by just telling Dickhead in Cal to go fuck himself. He is not an honest broker. He never makes arguments in good faith. He is a fucking fascist troll.
Delete4:44 - That would be a reasonable standard, but it was lost long ago. Any number of Presidents started wars on their own. E.g., Obama attacked Libya for three months without Congressional authorization.
DeleteDespite what Chicken-Little-in-Cal says, this is a war of choice.
DeleteBlackstone is a threshold for convicting people in a courtroom, not preemptive war. Good for you if you're happy about this preemptive strike but your rationalizations for it do not make sense and are not based on sound logic.
DeleteDiC - The Intelligence Community assesses that Switzerland, like Iran, has no active nuclear weapons program. But we should bomb the hell out of Switzerland based on your "better safe than sorry" rationale, am I right?
DeleteI agree @5:26. So, what? Barack Obama's war against Libya was also a war of choice. Clinton's bombing in the former Yugoslavia was a war of choice.
DeleteDiC - I'm curious about the principle
Deletethat governs our country's decision to attack Iran. Let's assume it's true (although it seems to be false) that Iran is developing nuclear weapons. Is that in and of itself a principled reason for bombing Iran? We didn't bomb Israel, or Russia, or China, or India, or Pakistan, or France, or England, or North Korea when they were developing nuclear weapons. What is the principle -- if there is one -- that justifies bombing Iran for (supposedly) doing so?
George - the principle is that the leaders of Iran are madmen -- religious fanatics who are committed to the destruction of Israel and of the United States. The evidence is that Iran says they're making war on the "Great Satan" as well as Israel. And, Iran and its proxies have committed many unprovoked murders of Americans and Israelis.
DeleteIran's response in the current war illustrates its irrationality. Iran has no defense. Israel and the US can attack at will from the air with little or no risk. A rational response would be to agree not to develop nukes. But, Iran keeps fighting a battle that's militarily hopeless.
Like the black knight in Monty Python, Iran merely says, "'Tis but a scratch." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmInkxbvlCs
The US bombed them without provocation in a sneak attack. In their eyes we’re playing right into the Great Satan stereotype, wouldn’t you agree?
DeleteHere's something misleading. Rawstory includes this headline:
ReplyDelete"'Finally, good news': Hillary Clinton has rare agreement with Trump admin's move"
When you read the article you discover that it is about a decision by Belarus to release opposition party members who were being held prisoner, not anything to do with Iran. The problem is that this headline about Hillary is included with a series of stories all about reactions to Iran, so it makes it appear that Hillary support's Trump's bombing, which I doubt she does.
Isn't it wild that the Republicans can run the same "WMD" scam to justify a war in the middle east -- against a country that poses no threat to us -- a second time?
ReplyDeleteLast time, at least, they had Colin Powell with cool-looking satellite pictures. This time, they've got nothing. That's how much contempt they have for us.
DeleteWell, they had a theory. It was that bombing the production sites would keep Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. The difference between Iraq and this conflict is that all out war was argued as an effective means of destroying the WMD (albeit fictional) capability. No such benefit can be argued here for yesterday’s bombing of Iran. Whatever enriched isotope the Iranians produced is highly unlikely in rubble now, and it’s been stated that they don’t need to make the stuff to acquire warheads.
DeleteYou make an interesting point about the ecological ramifications of bombing nuclear production sites. Are we looking at a radiological disaster zone comparable to Chernobyl, or worse?
Delete