@bcglorf
you left out that anwar had worked for the CIA and NSC as a consultant,and that in his earlier days as an imam was critical of al qeada and was very pro-american.

look,i am not arguing the fact that anwar did become radicalized,nor am i denying that his shift in attitudes (which was mainly due to americas handling of the iraqi war) had become not only critical,but had gone from condemnation to calls for violence,and praise for violence.

which brings us to the fort hood shooter nidel hasan who was an avid fan of anwar al awlaki,and DID have a correspondence with awlaki.which when examined,was pretty fucking one sided.it was apparent that hasan was attempting to get in the good graces of awlaki who,evidenced by the email correspondence,had no real relationship with hasan.though awlaki did praise hasan,and his violent actions.

so i do not get where 'the emails are closed".just google nidal hasan and anwar al awlaki emails,and you can go read for yourself.

and as for these emails as justification..i really do not see your logic in this respect.

so if someone becomes a huge fan of mine,and emails me constantly because we met ONCE and now they think we are buddies and share common interests (which,maybe we do),and that person perpetrates a violent act.

am i responsible for that act?

and here is where the crux of the discussion REALLY is:
maybe i AM responsible.
maybe i am guilty of inciting violence.
maybe i should be held accountable,because not only did i keep this mans violent intentions to myself,which resulted in death,but then praised his actions afterwards as being the will of god.

there are ALL possibilities,and they are valid questions.
they are legal questions,and maybe there should be a legal accountability.

should the proper pathway to a legal conclusion be:
a.a remotely piloted drone that targets my phone and launches a missile murdering (assasinating0 me,along with innocent by-standers?

or.

b.working with the yemeni government to bring me into a secure facility to be questioned,and possibly charged with inciting violence and prosecuted in an international court of law?

do you see what i'm saying?

the question isn't if anwar al awlaki,as a prominent imam,was vocally against american foreign policy,or that he openly supported violence in the form of terrorism.

the question is:
how do you address that situation,and prosecute the legalities?

because as scahill posited:how do you surrender to a drone?

could anwar al awlaki be guilty of EVERY charge the US accused him of?
quite possibly.
but we will never know because he was assassinated,as was his 16yr old son.

even your counter argument is speculation based on loose affiliations,and tenuous connections.

you will NEVER be able to supply a concrete,and verifiable accounting of anwar al awlaki's guilt,because you CAN'T..he was assassinated.

and THAT is the point.

now let us take this a step further.
let us examine how this can be abused,and watching trump consolidate executive power by surrounding himself with departmental loyalist,loyal only to him,we can begin to see the beginnings of trumps "soft fascism".

now lets take how you made your argument,and supplant a different scenario,but using the same parameters.

do you SEE how easily the drone program could be used to quickly,and efficiently remove opposing political players from the board? dissenting and opposing voices simply painted as violent enemies of the state that were in need of removal,because of the "possibility" that they may one day actually incite or cause violence?

the state can now murder a person for simply what they say,or write but NOT what they actually DO.

anwar al awlaki didn't actually kill anyone,didn't perpetrate any acts of violence.he simply talked about the evils of american empire,the mishandling of the iraq war (which he was originally in support of) and praised those who DID engage in violent acts of terror as doing the work of god.

should he have been held accountable in some fashion?
i think there is case to be made in that regard,but instead of going through proper channels,and adhering to the protocols of international law,he was outright assassinated.

and just how easily this can be abused is incredibly frightening.

again,i understand we approach things from different angles,but you have to see the danger in this practice,and how easily it can be misused to much darker and sinister purposes.

"well,he said nasty things about us and had a lot of friends who were on the terror watch list"

is simply NOT a valid enough excuse to simply murder someone.

there are protocols and legal procedure for a REASON,and anwar al awlaki may certainly have been in breach of international law and therefor possibly SHOULD have been prosecuted under those terms.

but we will NEVER know,because he was killed.
by an american president.
a nobel peace prize winner and constitutional law professor.

anwar al awlaki was an american citizen,his SON was an american citizen,but due to those abominations:MCA of 2006 and the NDAA of 2012.obama had the power and authority to assassinate them both.

where was there right to face their accuser?
habeas corpus..gone...a legal right that dates back to 1205 a.d by the BRITISH..gone.
innocent until proven guilty....gone.
the right to provide evidence in your defense...gone.

all the president has to do..and DID in this case,is deem you an "enemy combatant" and BOOM..dead.

i really hope you reconsider your attitude in this case my friend,because this shit is fascism incarnate,and now trump has his chubby little fingers on the "fire" button.

god help us all......

And what prize he is, eh comrades? Upvote so I can designate this claptrap as *terrible

@newtboy
you were not the only one who put me on the defensive for supporting chis hedges.
so if you feel singled out,i apologize.

the point of this post is put into light an adored spokesperson for the left,and a commentator who is also left leaning (and many of his upvoted videos can be found on the sift) to make a point.

and by your comment,you are struggling to reconcile the two.
but you DID reconcile,and you did so by giving maddow a tacit pass and condemning kyle for being a "complete bombastic liar".

when the truth is:
they both are...kinda..sorta..

they both are approaching,and making their points by using biased and slanted data to influence you,and i for that matter,into adopting their viewpoint.

these are not outright and pernicious lies.they are lies that serve a purpose and i find maddows far more egregious,because it is far more subtle..and you appear to have bought it.

she did so by using the innocuous word "might",yet her inferrence cannot be mistaken.they call it the "dog whistle".this is a wink and a nod that those dirty ruskies own our new president.

wink wink...nudge nudge..know what i mean?

now kyle is not exactly lying either.
he is using russias reaction to the new deployment from putin himself.who has stated that there was an agreement that there would be no new encroachment after the GDR,but that simply reveals the cleverness and political saavy of putin.

the real truth is this:
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2014/11/06/did-nato-promise-not-to-enlarge-gorbachev-says-no/

or is it?
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/nato-s-eastward-expansion-did-the-west-break-its-promise-to-moscow-a-663315.html
from 2009?

maybe this is the truth?
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-shifrinson-russia-us-nato-deal--20160530-snap-story.html
from 2016.

well,personally i am going with the LAtimes and der spiegel.
brookings is a right wing think tank with deep tentacles in the pentagon and DoD.

but CNN reports that poland LOVES the new troops:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/14/europe/poland-us-troops-nato-welcome/

look,
while i will agree that putin is a vicious thug,who murders political opponents and tortures dissidents.that he is ruthless and relentless political player.

i do not see any evidence of russian hacking influencing our elections,nor do i see a new russian empire pushing for those cold war expansionism days.

the only entity/country i see pushing for expansion and a renewal of the cold war..is us..the pentagon and the department of defense,and those juicy juicy defense contracts!

i feel my time on the sift is coming to a close.
having to defend my admiration for a pulitzer prize winning,war correspondent and author is just...weird.

at least i know i am biased,but i do my best to self-correct.

@bcglorf
i hear ya,but that is our responsibility,not the journalist or speaker.

for example i am reading david cay johnstons book "the making of trump".
johnston is a pulitzer prize winning journalist from the la times and the washington post.who also happens to be a republican.

the fact that he is republican does not automatically equate to his investigations being rightwing,slanted or biased.

the time for putting the onus on the outlet,or the individual was destroyed by FOX and it's "fair and balanced" bullshit.

we can lament the passing of walter cronkite,wooward and bernstein and I.F stone,or edward morrow.

but those days are gone,and it is up to us..all of us..to push back the ever increasing avalanche of propaganda and fake news.

The non-Damon Albarn singer is Benjamin Clementine for anyone curious. He won the 2015 Mercury Prize for his first album.

@asynchronice @Engels
this is opinion that just happens to be on RT.
the opinion is coming from chris hedges,a pulitzer prize winning,war correspondent for 20 years for the NYT.who has been extremely vocal in his criticism of american neoliberal policies.

he also has a show on RT called "on contact".

as always,the answer is discernment,and for that to happen there has to be a basic understanding of what propaganda actually is,and to dismiss hedges analysis simply due to the venue,is intellectually dishonest.

example:
it has been known for years that FOX news is a meme machine,a message of the day producer of misinformation and obfuscation.

does this mean that every story FOX covers is false? or manipulated?

of course not.

conversely,does this mean that every story RT posts should be taken at face value?

again,the same calculus applies.

i find that when RT deals with the russian state,and stories regarding putin,they tend to lean towards state "message of the day",but when they cover stories that are critical of american foreign policy,they tend to source and back their conclusions in a solid journalistic manner.

in regards to the washington post and their latest appeals to power and influence,is just a symptom of a much larger problem.

if you recall back in 2003.when the bush administration was pushing for an invasion of iraq,the washington posts editorial board was possibly the biggest cheerleader.they outshine even the new york times in their desire to please their masters in the white house and pentagon,and because at that time print news still had credibility and washpo was,indeed,considered a beacon of stellar journalism (remember watergate?).they almost single handedly handed the war powers to president bush to execute an illegal war,based on lies.

so in my opinion,the washington post last it's credibility over a decade ago.this is also a main,driving factor why i abandoned corporate news media.

i prefer independent news outlets.the very same outlets that washpo,and their un-sourced propornot,targeted.

lie to me once...shame on you.
lie to me twice..shame on me.

Medal of Freedom for a guy who supported several useless wars, from a guy who started several useless wars (and holds a Nobel peace prize).
How deep the US has fallen...
1984 looks like a picture book for children, compared to the real thing.

Some movies just need you to not be 100% logical. Actually a lot.
Ive seen it and it was actually pretty good. Reminded me of similar movies from the 80s and they did well implementing that into a modern movie.

But I guess if you live in a world where so called peace loving people (actually nobel peace prize winners) start wars, break international laws, support terrorists, blame other parties that werent even involved until the end for the whole war and who are just trying to defend a sovereign country, and then bring those people, they brought war to, into their own countries out of "humanitarianism", then a movie like this just cant make sense at all.

Ok, I'll play.

I have two boys, 19 months and three years old. I'm in my late thirties, wife in mid thirties. We waited until we were in a decent position financially before having kids. I saw my brother bring up my nephew who is now six so I knew what babies are like and toddlers are like before we had kids ourselves. I took a year and a half off to be a stay at home dad for our first child.

But there's this massive taboo in the UK, and I'm going to guess in America too. Having kids is good, and you're not allowed to say otherwise. I knew that there would be sleepless nights, that on occasion I'd be covered in vomit, or poo, or both. I knew that kids could be annoying.

But I didn't really understand what all that meant. To hear anyone talk about having kids it makes it seem like these things are just background noise for all the wonderful, giggly happy times.

No one told me how relentless it would be. While you can know that you'll be tired if you have a kid that wakes at night you don't really understand it until you haven't had a full night's sleep for three years. Not a single one.

Yes, somehow I should have fully understood everything before actually experiencing it. And of course I shouldn't say anything bad about it, it's all good.

But that's bullshit.

Having kids can be amazing, and getting to know my children's personalities as they've grown has been one of the most incredible experiences of my life. If I had my time again I would do it again.

But seeing some sanctimonious arse bitching about other people's experiences, which could be very different to their own, just makes my skin crawl. You're saying that because you made a decision you're not ever allowed to moan about it? Even if your whole life leading up to it was full of misleading misinformation? Even if the experience you chose turned out to not be typical through no fault of your own?

Pretty much any path a person takes in life can be framed as a result of a decision somewhere along the line. It's like saying that no one can complain about anything, anytime.

Despite what you say having kids is different to what just about anyone expects. If it wasn't for you then well done, you're in the tiny minority. You probably deserve some kind of prize for being so amazing. Here, I've got a little cup around here somewhere. Wait, I'll find it. Here it is. It's engraved. It reads 'Fuck you, you sanctimonious prick'.

Life is full of ups and downs. For me having kids has made the highs higher and the lows lower. I've never felt as amazing as I have when my kids do something brilliant. But I've never felt as down as I did about three months into my second child who was very colicky and just cried almost constantly and at night slept for an hour or so then was awake and screaming for an hour then slept and so on. For three months solid.

No one told me about that. No one made it clear that this was to be expected. My first was a reasonable, average baby. He had his moments but we thought we really understood what we were getting into.

But there's the rub. All kids are different. Even two boys, close in age to the same parents are like chalk ad cheese. To think you understand someone else's situation enough to bitch about them like you have is just stupid. So your child is good and you've enjoyed being a dad? Good for you. You were lucky. Others aren't so lucky and arses like you bitching about them doesn't help. Stop patting yourself on the back and realise that a large part of you having a good experience is nothing more than luck.

So, there you go. I'm sure I fit into your bad parent category. But at least I don't belittle the experiences of others and don't assume that I fully understand their experience.

Yes, some parents can be annoying, but the vast majority who are moaning are genuinely stressed and down. A little empathy can go a long way. Or you could just be an arse hole and bitch about them.

All of the progress that's been made on so many fronts, decades long uphill battles in many cases ... soon to be gone or in serious jeopardy. One can *hope* that the myriad of impending lawsuits, the depositions etc. etc. against this acid tongued, classless carnival barker will have an impact of some import ... not that Pence would be any kind of prize in my mind either [sigh]. I am deeply embarrassed and ashamed for our Nation. Those who would compromise their morals and values to cast a vote in support of this man/child for *any reason* speaks volumes as to their lack of character and conviction. Never underestimate the power and sheer magnitude of the easily duped. Color me incredulous and sincerely grieving for future generations

That first one with the claw skill tester, I read somewhere with the modern machines, the owner can just input what the prizes cost and what return they want to make, and the machine will automatically calculate when to send full power to the claw!

It's a pretty obvious non-issue, and just more ammo versus Trump, but the suggestion is about like saying a champion prize-fighter should maintain top shape and the ability to take on any challenger in the street, at any time, as long as he holds the belt.

But even then we're giving a little too much credit to beauty pageants in the first place...

1. I tend not to like lists like these, so I always ensure that at least some answers are completely made up. In protest I will not reformat this list to make it more readable.
2. I was quite good at fencing. I was Irish national sabre champion, but that's a lot less impressive than it sounds.
3. I won Miss Fencing Intervarsities 3 years running. I'm male.
4. I'm a Monty Python fan to an unhealthy degree. I co-wrote the first Python FAQ online, based on actual questions that were asked frequently.
6. I have called every living member of Monty Python 'Michael' except Michael Palin. I called him Terry. None of them called me on it.
7. I have what amounts to a secret crush on someone here on the sift. They always say what I'm thinking, but far more eloquently than I ever can. I grin when they upvote me.
8. I have a Scaramanga-style extra nipple.
9. I have a son. My girlfriend's waters broke while I was watching Alien. I'm more proud of the second part than the first... lots of other people have tiny pet humans.
10. I was once kicked in the head by Armand Assante (a b-list-ish actor).
11. I can sing the names of about 20 particularly nasty diseases.
12. I'm batman.
13. I've been online since the 80s, but at this stage the web is pretty much read-only for me. I'm more active here on the sift than anywhere else, and that's not saying much.
14. I was in Russia during the 'invasion of Georgia' in 2008. In fact, I was in the mountains bordering the two countries and saw the situation almost first-hand. Before then I had little confidence in the news we get here in the west; now I have almost none. Stuff broadcast as fact was (to me) easily proven false at the time, and the subsequent UN report backs up my side of the story.
15. I teach tai chi.
16. One of my happiest memories is not sleeping with a hot (and very cool) Norwegian woman.
17. I once ran a marathon backwards. It's not as easy as it sounds.
18. My grandmother owned race horses, including one who holds a significant record in Cheltenham. She's quite famous here in Ireland (to a certain generation at least).
19. Online (and sometimes off) I tend to use anagrams of my name. The idea is that it's hard to find Noims from my real name (until someone ruins that), but not too hard to go the other direction. My avatar is based on the same principle. There are at least 3 other Noimses online, but I was the first.
20. My favourite piece of software is the vi editor (specifically gvim). I have no idea what my favourite book, music, or non-python film are.
21. I'm a keen gamer, but most offline. I hate Steam. I've been playing Nethack since the 80s, and still play in the devnull competition yearly... it's the longest running online game tournament there is.
22. I think one of the worst facts in the world is that marketing works.
23. I was in a metal band called the Bubonic Duck-Fuckers from Hell (BDF).
24. I used to be big into RPGs (role playing - not rockets). I once got first prize in 3 games in a single weekend convention with 4 game slots.
25. I love the number 12, and know all the powers up to 12^12. Consequently I dislike the number 5. I strongly tend to favour multiples/powers of 12 over those of 5.

You wouldn't associate Whisky with Japan, but last year (2015) there were several that were awarded "best in the world":
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/food-and-drink/news/best-whisky-in-the-world-prize-won-by-japanese-malt-for-first-time-as-scottish-distillerie
s-lose-out-9835583.html

I don't know anything about the awarding organization or review process, but it was a wide-spread enough story that it wasn't just a marketing blurb.

bonus prize!