Media Campaign Against Tulsi Gabbard
A personal note: I support no Republican or Dem candidates, haven’t for decades.
Whatever their personal views on major issues, they’re mostly swayed to toe the party line, supporting policies demanding opposition — especially things related to war, corporate empowerment and Israel.
I haven’t supported a presidential aspirant since Cynthia McKinney headed the Green Party ticket in 2008.
She’s one of the rarest of rare US people’s candidates, the real thing, on the right side of all issues that matter.
It’s why dark forces for dirty business as usual went all out to replace her, succeeding after serving six terms in the House.
Tulsi Gabbard is no Cynthia McKinney — yet deserves praise for being anti-war and on the right side of other major issues.
It’s why establishment media smear her, opposing any anti-war candidate for high office.
The NYT mocked her, saying “she believes (the US) has wrought horror on the world, and she wants its citizens to remember that.”
She believes correctly, what the Times won’t ever explain, supporting destructive US “horror(s)” instead of denouncing them.
An American Samoan by birth, her religion Hindu, Gabbard represents Hawaii’s 2nd district in Congress, elected in November 2012.
Demeaning her, the Times said “(s)he has a relatively bare-bones political operation and a history of outlier positions (notably) on foreign policy,” adding:
“(S)he appeals to…Howard Zinn fans, anti-drug-war libertarians, Russia-gate skeptics, and conservatives suspicious of Big Tech” — shamefully mocking them.
The Times cited unspecified critics calling her “un-American,” a longstanding misnomer. The term long ago should have been abandoned, referring to proponents of views diverging from mainstream ones, wanting them silenced.
No other nation uses this designation against critics of their policies. The notion of someone being un-Mexican, un-Canadian, un-Chinese would draw blank stares in these countries.
According to the Times and other Gabbard critics, her anti-war views make her un-American.
The self-styled newspaper of record is hostile to everyone unsupportive of policies serving US privileged interests at the expense of the vast majority of its citizens and residents.
The neocon/CIA-connected Washington Post ran a vicious anti-Gabbard hit piece, falsely saying her record on Syria (supporting peace over endless war) “shows why she can’t be president.”
WaPo is furious because she met with Assad, supports long-suffering Syrian victims of US aggression, and denounced US support for terrorists in the country.
WaPo considers cutthroat killer jihadists the “authentic opposition” in Syria. It calls al-Qaeda-linked White Helmets, connected to their atrocities, “volunteer rescue brigade” workers, the Big Lie suppressing dirty truths about them.
“Listening to Gabbard, one might think the United States initiated the Syrian conflict by arming terrorists for a regime-change war that has resulted in untold suffering,” WaPo roared.
That’s the dirty hard truth suppressed by establishment media that WaPo shamefully mocked. My readers know Syria is Obama’s war, escalated by Trump — ISIS and other terrorists created and supported by the US, NATO, Israel, Turkey, and the Saudis et al.
The WaPo piece read like it came straight from Langley to its pages — beginning-to-end bald-faced Big Lies, typical establishment media defamation of anyone supporting views diverging from the official narrative.
The Wall Street Journal called Gabbard a Dem with “surprising views” — because she opposes endless US wars the Journal and other major media support.
Last February, NBC News slandered her, saying “Russia’s propaganda machine discover(ed) 2020 (Dem presidential) candidate Tulsi Gabbard.”
To her discredit, she falsely accused Russia of “aggression” in Ukraine, supporting its US-installed putschist regime.
She’s on the right side of Medicare for all, ecosanity, a living wage for all workers, and other progressive issues.
Her “vision for America” states the following:
“Join me in ushering in a new century free from the fear of nuclear war. A world where there is real peace…”
She expressed support for “clean water to drink, clean air to breathe…access to nourishing food…everyone receiv(ing) the medical care they need…a roof over their head…education they need, and is able to find good paying, fulfilling work (without) worry(ing) about making ends meet in their old age.”
“Our children, and children for generations to come, (should) never worry again about nuclear war…Our economy is not dependent on war, but is driven instead by innovation, green technology and renewable industries.”
Political rhetoric is one thing, following through another entirely. Gabbard’s record is mixed — to her discredit for voting along party lines too often, including support for illegal sanctions on Russia, Iran and North Korea, while being on the right side of important issues like peace over war.
Her Stop Arming Terrorist Act calls for ending direct and indirect US support for ISIS and other jihadists.
“We have spent trillions of dollars on regime change wars in the Middle East while (US) communities…face a severe lack of affordable housing, aging infrastructure, the need to invest in education, healthcare, and so much more,” she stressed, adding:
“Under US law, it is illegal for any American to provide money or assistance to al-Qaeda, ISIS or other terrorist groups.”
“If an American citizen gave money, weapons or support to al-Qaeda or ISIS, he or she would be thrown in jail.”
“Yet the US government has been violating this law for years, quietly supporting allies and partners of al-Qaeda, ISIL, Jabhat Fateh al Sham and other terrorist groups with money, weapons, and intelligence support, in their fight to overthrow the Syrian government.”
“The CIA has also been funneling weapons and money through Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar and others who provide direct and indirect support to groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda.”
No Dem or Republican presidential candidate in memory said anything resembling the above remarks.
Whether Gabbard in the nation’s highest office would follow through on her lofty rhetoric will likely never be known.
Media-supported dark forces tolerate no president for peace over endless wars — nor anyone in congressional leadership positions with these views.
The US is a warrior nation for privilege over beneficial social change. No one running for high office has a chance to change what just societies consider abhorrent.
No matter who’s elected president and to key congressional posts in 2020 and thereafter, dirty business as usual will continue like always before — short of a national revolution changing things.
My newest book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”