Bernie Sanders’s Refreshingly Sane Foreign Policy
In his speech last week, Sanders said what every presidential candidate ought to
say about ISIS and the Middle East.
By Sean Illing * Salon via Alternet * November 28, 2015

Bernie Sanders’s economic populism and domestic agenda receive a lot attention, and they should – he’s a unique and important voice on these fronts. But Bernie’s refreshing sanity on foreign policy gets overlooked far too often. This is especially problematic given the most recent Paris attacks and the renewed emphasis on national security.

Sanders gave a major speech last week at Georgetown University, the central theme of which was democratic socialism. Understandably, much of the coverage focused on Sanders’s efforts to situate his brand of socialism in the broader American tradition. However, Sanders also used his speech to talk about our foreign policy dilemma in the Middle East.

His remarks were what we’ve come to expect from Sanders: honest.

Because he doesn’t spin the way other politicians do, Sanders brings a kind of clarity to this conversation, a clarity that’s desperately needed in our current climate. Conservatives will likely dismiss Sanders as a dovish liberal who doesn’t understand foreign policy, but that’s because they don’t want to hear what he has to say.

In the speech, Sanders makes clear that he both understands the crisis and the complicated political realities on the ground. “The United States must pursue policies to destroy the brutal and barbaric ISIS regime,” Sanders said, and we must “create conditions that prevent fanatical extremist ideologies from flourishing. But we cannot – and should not – do it alone.” [Emphasis mine].

The part about not doing it alone is critical. To begin with, unlike most candidates, Sanders concedes that we’ve being going it alone for decades now, with disastrous results.

Our response must begin with an understanding of past mistakes and missteps in our previous approaches to foreign policy. It begins with the acknowledgement that unilateral military action should be a last resort…and that ill-conceived military decisions, such as the invasion of Iraq, can wreak far-reaching devastation and destabilize entire regions for decades. It begins with the reflection that the failed policy decisions of the past – rushing to war, regime change in Iraq, or toppling Mossadegh in Iran in 1953, or Guatemalan President Arbenz in 1954, Brazilian President Goulart in 1964, Chilean President Allende in 1973. These are the sort of policies that do not work, do not make us safer, and must not be repeated.

http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/bernie-sanderss-refreshingly-sane-foreign-policy

What a great 'problem' for Bernie to have. Bodes very well for Sanders in the GE.

https://www.facebook.com/NowThisPolitics/videos/1059180537446769/?fref=nf

Is this an issue worth raising in the Primary?

I honestly have feel mixed about it, because these donations are -- after all -- to the Clinton Foundation, not to Hillary's 2015/6 Primary campaign. On the other hand, it does seem to point to her 'coziness' with the mega-corporate world of high finance, military-industrial connections, big pharma, Monsanto, and the M$M. Also, there is some overlap with her list campaign donors (the ones we know about that aren't 'dark money').

My question is: is this a fair issue to raise? Re: that while serving as SoS, the Clinton Foundation was receiving these donations, while at the same time many of these same corporations were lobbying her State Dept. for 'favors'.

I would appreciate knowing your thoughts on pros/cons of this being an issue that is fair to raise in the Primary. Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

~~~~~ * ~~~~~ * ~~~~~ * ~~~~~ * ~~~~~ * ~~~~~ * ~~~~~ * ~~~~~ * ~~~~~ * ~~~~~ * ~~~~~


Top 100 Entities funding the Clinton Foundation
By Mark Wachtler * August 5, 2015 * Whiteout Press

August 5, 2015. New York. (ONN) Hillary Clinton has seen her poll numbers plunge in recent weeks. The causes include accusations of secret arms trafficking, support of brutal dictatorships, destruction of evidence, and governing in secret while heading the Obama State Department. But according to rank and file Democratic voters, the biggest reason for their dislike of the Party’s heir apparent is her Foundation’s receipt of nearly $2 billion in payments from the world’s wealthiest entities.

Selling influence
While millions of Americans ‘march against Monsanto’, Hillary Clinton is one of the most ardent supporters of the notorious purveyor of genetically modified foods. While Americans ‘occupy Wall Street’, Hillary Clinton has already earned the verbal endorsement of Goldman Sachs. And as Americans fight the destructive effects of corporate monopolies and outsourcing, two of the country’s most hated corporations coincidentally happen to be the two largest donors to the Clinton Foundation.

According to an investigation by the Washington Examiner, Hillary Clinton and her family were raking in tens of millions of dollars from multi-national corporations at the same time they were officially lobbying her and the US State Dept. In fact, a full 65 percent of the Fortune 100 corporations that gave Hillary Clinton and her Foundation money during her tenure as Secretary of State were simultaneously lobbying her and the State Dept for favors.

Naming names (MIC, Big Pharma, WallSt., Monsanto & Main$tream Media (the ones I know of) are in bold)
Who are these corporations? As compiled by Natural News, below are the top 100 corporations, dictatorships, unions and other entities that funneled money to the Clinton Foundation and also officially lobbied Hillary Clinton as the head of the State Department (from Natural News):

*The Clinton Foundation refuses to disclose exact donation amounts and instead only releases ranges.

Microsoft/Gates Foundation - $26,000,000 - (not disclosed)
Walmart/Walton Foundation - $2,250,000 - $10,500,000
Coca-Cola - $5,000,000 - $10,000,000
State of Qatar and its entities - $1,375,000 - $5,800,000
Goldman Sachs - $1,250,000 - $5,500,000
Dow Chemical - $1,025,000 - $5,050,000
Pfizer - $1,010,000 - $5,025,000
Duke Energy - $1,002,000 - $5,010,000
ExxonMobil - $1,001,000 - $5,005,000
Alliance for a Green Revolution - $1,000,000 - $5,000,000
Hewlett-Packard - $1,000,000 - $5,000,000
Nima Taghavi - $1,000,000 - $5,000,000
NRG Energy - $1,000,000 - $5,000,000
Open Society Institute - $1,000,000 - $5,000,000
Procter & Gamble - $1,000,000 - $5,000,000
Boeing - $1,000,000 - $5,000,000
OCP - $1,000,000 - $5,000,000
Nike - $512,000 - $1,035,000
Google - $511,000 - $1,030,000
Daimler - $510,000 - $1,025,000
Monsanto - $501,250 - $1,006,000
Arizona State University - $500,000 - $1,000,000
Chevron - $500,000 - $1,000,000
General Electric - $500,000 - $1,000,000
Morgan Stanley - $360,000 - $775,000
Intel - $252,000 - $510,000
Noble Energy - $250,000 - $500,000
Sony - $175,000 - $400,000
AstraZeneca - $150,000 - $350,000
Bloomberg Philanthropies - $150,000 - $350,000
Salesforce.com - $125,000 - $300,000
Verizon - $118,000 - $300,000
Yahoo - $125,000 - $300,000
Lockheed Martin - $111,000 - $280,000
Qualcomm - $103,000 - $265,000
TIAA-CREF - $103,000 - $265,000
JP Morgan - $102,000 - $260,000
Accenture - $100,000 - $250,000
American Cancer Society - $100,000 - $250,000
Applied Materials - $100,000 - $250,000
CH2M Hill - $100,000 - $250,000
Corning - $100,000 - $250,000
FedEx - $100,000 - $250,000
Gap - $100,000 - $250,000
Gilead - $100,000 - $250,000
Hess Corporation - $100,000 - $250,000
Humanity United - $100,000 - $250,000
Hyundai - $100,000 - $250,000
IBEW - $100,000 - $250,000
Johnson Controls - $100,000 - $250,000
Lions Clubs International - $100,000 - $250,000
Mylan - $100,000 - $250,000
Pepsi - $100,000 - $250,000
Sanofi-Aventis - $100,000 - $250,000
Starwood Hotels - $100,000 - $250,000
US Pharma Convention - $100,000 - $250,000
UPS - $100,000 - $250,000
Washington University - $100,000 - $250,000
Time/Warner - $75,000 - $150,000
Hunt Alternatives - $60,000 - $125,000
Ericsson - $51,000 - $105,000
Abbott Laboratories - $50,000 - $100,000
Anadarko - $50,000 - $100,000
BT Group - $50,000 - $100,000
Discovery Communications - $50,000 - $100,000
Earth Networks - $50,000 - $100,000
Feed the Children - $50,000 - $100,000
General Motors - $50,000 - $100,000
Hilton - $50,000 - $100,000
Marriott - $50,000 - $100,000
NextEra Energy - $50,000 - $100,000
NOUR USA - $50,000 - $100,000
Novozymes - $50,000 - $100,000
Oceana - $50,000 - $100,000
Starbucks - $50,000 - $100,000
Teck Resources - $50,000 - $100,000
American Institute of Architects - $50,000 - $100,000
Nature Conservancy - $50,000 - $100,000
Trilogy International Partners - $50,000 - $100,000
Unilever - $50,000 - $100,000
World Vision - $50,000 - $100,000
S.C. Johnson & Son - $50,000 - $100,000
Motorola - $35,000 - $75,000
Enel - $35,000 - $75,000
JCPenney - $27,000 - $60,000
Target - $27,000 - $60,000
Novartis - $26,000 - $55,000
Prudential - $26,000 - $55,000
3M - $25,000 - $50,000
AAR - $25,000 - $50,000
AFL-CIO - $25,000 - $50,000
APCO Worldwide - $25,000 - $50,000
AREVA - $25,000 - $50,000
Bayer - $20,000 - $50,000
Capstone Turbine - $25,000 - $50,000
Cemex - $25,000 - $50,000
CHF International - $25,000 - $50,000
Eli Lilly - $25,000 - $50,000
Georgetown University - $25,000 - $50,000
HBO - $25,000 - $50,000

http://www.whiteoutpress.com/articles/2015/q3/top-100-entities-funding-clinton-foundation/

BTW, Bernie gets roughly 21-25% of the Republican vote in Vermont, who choose NOT to vote for their GOP candidate.

The Lifelong Republicans Who Love Bernie Sanders
Some conservatives are defying expectation and backing the Vermont senator.
by CLARE FORAN * NOV 24, 2015 * The Atlantic

When Tarie MacMillan switched on her television in August to watch the first Republican presidential debate, she expected to decide which candidate to support.

But MacMillan, a 65-year-old Florida resident, was disappointed. “I looked at the stage and there was nobody out there who I really liked. It just seemed like a showcase for Trump and his ridiculous comments,” she recalled. “It was laughable, and scary, and a real turning point.”

So she decided to back Bernie Sanders, the self-described “Democratic socialist” challenging Hillary Clinton. MacMillan was a lifelong Republican voter until a few weeks ago when she switched her party affiliation to support the Vermont senator in the primary. It will be the first time she’s ever voted for a Democrat.

That story may sound improbable, but MacMillan isn’t the only longtime conservative supporting Sanders. There are Facebook groups and Reddit forums devoted entirely to Republicans who adore the Vermont senator.

These Republicans for Sanders defy neat categorization. Some are fed up with the status quo in Washington, and believe that Sanders, with his fiery populist message, is the presidential contender most likely to disrupt it. Others have voted Republican for years, but feel alarmed by what they see as the sharp right turn the party has taken.

“I have been a conservative Republican my entire life. But the Republican party as a whole has gotten so far out of touch with the American people,” says Bryan Brown, a 47-year-old Oregon resident. “I switched my registration so that I could vote for Sanders in the primary, but the day the primary is over I’m going to register as an Independent.”

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/the-lifelong-conservatives-who-love-bernie-sanders/417441/?utm_source=SFFB

An excellent clip of Bernie's passionate dismay that Americans are talking about blithely conceding our
civil liberties to ISIS.

https://www.facebook.com/senatorsanders/videos/10154355545292908/?pnref=story

5 People Shot At Site Of Black Lives Matter Protest In Minneapolis
November 24, 2015 * NPR

Five people were injured last night as gunmen opened fire near the site of a Black Lives Matter protest in Minneapolis.

According to a statement posted to the group's Facebook page, the men, whom they call "white supremacists," opened fire after they were asked to leave and were then escorted away from the encampment.

Mark Vancleave of the Minnesota Star Tribune tweeted this video of a protester recounting the event:
VIDEO at link: http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/11/24/457214142/5-people-are-shot-at-site-of-black-lives-matter-protest-in-minneapolis

In another report, more details are provided:


http://www.unicornriot.ninja/?p=2839

Pretty damned amazing, especially since Time/Warner is one of Hillary's biggest supporters & donors

Beating Trump, Clinton, the Pope, and Adele... Sanders Leads All for TIME 'Person of the Year'
Though the announcement of TIME magazine's 'Person of the Year' designation isn't until next month, it was reported on Monday that the leading contender—at least among the magazine's readership—is Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), the Democratic presidential candidate calling for a 'political revolution' with his grassroots-driven campaign against establishment candidate Hillary Clinton.
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/11/23/beating-trump-clinton-pope-and-adele-sanders-leads-all-time-person-year

deserves to be on the Greatest Page IMHO. "I'm not here to help elect another Margaret Thatcher..."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1017&pid=310336

I've been thinking this for some time, that I wished he would anchor his 'socialistic' message
squarely into FDR's New Deal and 2nd Bill of Rights, rather than tying it solely to Scandinavian
socialism.

FDR is not only a towering historic President, but also a true Democrat who stood up for workers
and their families, who pioneered Social Security and other Federal programs that still to this day
benefit almost every US citizen.

It's one thing to snipe at Bernie by quibbling about "all that's wrong" with Denmark or whatever
other Scandinavian nation you want to find something wrong with; it's an entirely different thing
to try to besmirch FDR's remarkable achievements on behalf of the American people, Federal
programs that still are functioning just fine and that people immediately recognize and deeply value.

I say hat's off to Bernie for this absolutely remarkable and potentially historic speech today.

Very Well Done Bernie!!!

Anonymous calls on Web firm to stop protecting pro-ISIS sites
Nov. 19, 2015 * The Hill * By Cory Bennett

The hacking group Anonymous is going after Internet services firm CloudFlare for letting pro-Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) sites use its tools to help them thwart cyberattacks.

The loosely affiliated collective recently renewed its declaration of cyber war on ISIS in the wake of the group’s terrorist attacks in Paris last week. Anonymous hackers have since taken credit for removing thousands of ISIS-linked Twitter accounts, Facebook pages and websites.

But Anonymous says CloudFlare is standing in the way of greater action. The group claims ISIS-affiliated sites are using the company’s services to help them thwart cyberattacks, such as distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks that shut down a Web page by flooding it with traffic. “Anonymous demands @CloudFlare to remove their protection for pro #ISIS websites,” one of the major Anonymous Twitter accounts tweeted late Wednesday. “If you do not, we will do it for you.”

CloudFlare hasn’t denied the allegations, instead pointing out that it doesn’t police the content its tools are protecting. In addition to its paid services, CloudFlare also offers free tools that anyone can download.
http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/260739-anonymous-calls-on-web-firm-to-stop-protecting-pro-isis-sites