It's about the babies!

BULLY BOY PRESS &    CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE

FIRST FAMILY AVOIDS PREGNANT CONSPIRACY NUT AND IT IS LEAVING ROBERT PARRY DISTRESSED AND THREATENING THE PREGNANCY.

"I WAS AT THE DOCTOR'S TODAY," A SHAKEN ROBERT PARRY EXPLAINED TO THESE REPORTERS --  BULLY BOY PRESS &    CEDRIC'S BIG MIX   EXCLUSIVE  MUST CREDIT BULLY BOY PRESS &    CEDRIC'S BIG MIX   --  "AND MY HEALTH HAS TAKEN A TOLL -- FROM THE PREGNANCY AND FROM THE STRESS OF BEING SHUNNED.  MICHELLE NEEDS TO GRASP THAT BARACK IS MY BABY DADDY TOO.  AND I NEED TO BE WITH MY BABY DADDY -- FOR MY BABY AND FOR ME!"

AT THIS POINT, PARRY PULLED OUT A SCARF AND BLEW HIS NOSE ON IT REPEATEDLY.

COMING UP FOR AIR, HE SAID, "WHEN I TOLD THE DOCTOR I WAS PREGNANT HE SAID IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE.  AND I GET IT.  I'M NOT A TEENAGER ANYMORE.  A MAN MY AGE, PREGNANT?  AT MY AGE?  IT JUST DOESN'T HAPPEN.  BUT I AM KEEPING THIS BABY.  AND MICHELLE NEEDS TO GET WITH THE PROGRAM.  SOON THERE WILL BE ANOTHER OBAMA AND SHE JUST NEEDS TO DEAL. AT THE END OF THE DAY, THIS AIN'T ABOUT HER AND IT AIN'T ABOUT ME.  IT'S ABOUT THE BABIES.  THE BABIES!"


FROM THE TCI WIRE:




As Barack Obama's nonplan continues in Iraq, there are whispers of another plan (a post-mid-term election one).   Karen DeYoung (Washington Post) reported yesterday that the White House thinks it has another 'plan' for addressing the Islamic State in Iraq.  This one would be termed a "battle plan" and a sure sign of its weakness can be found in the belief that it will take place "gradually."  DeYoung explains:

The plan, described as methodical and time-consuming, will not begin in earnest for several months and is designed to ensure that Iraqi forces­ do not overextend themselves before they are capable of taking and holding territory controlled by the militants.

It may also include U.S. advisers in the field with the Iraqis, should that be recommended by American military commanders, said the official, who updated reporters on administration strategy on the condition of anonymity under rules imposed by the White House. The advisers, the official said, would not participate in combat. President Obama has said repeatedly that no U.S. ground forces would be deployed to Iraq.

You can be sure that the "may"s will disappear after the start of the next month when Barack will no longer have to worry about the immediate voter fallout.

Bill Van Auken (WSWS) offers:

And, as for Obama’s promise about no “ground forces,” this term is used in a manner that does not apply to special operations troops, advisers and other smaller units, but rather to the deployment of full combat brigades.
The announcement that the topic was discussed by US and Iraqi officials almost certainly indicates that preparations are being made to substantially increase the number of US military personnel deployed in Iraq, which, according to official figures, now stands at over 1,400.

Leaving what's around the corner to take a look at what's on the road now, Lolita C. Baldor (AP) notes, "The Pentagon says Iraq's new defense minister says his troops will go on the offensive against Islamic State militants who have taken over large sections of the country."

They'll go on the offensive, will they?


Anytime soon?

Sunday, World Bulletin noted the Iraqi military's efforts to retake Baiji ended when a bomb blew up "an armored vehicle" killing 4 Iraqi soldiers and leaving seven more injured.  The military insists the vehicle blown up was driven by a member of the Islamic State and that the military mistook it for one of their own vehicles and, most importantly, they'll try again to retake Baiji.  Real soon.  But still not yet, not as of today.

And today Saif Sameer and Ned Parker (Reuters) report that the Islamic State seized Zauiyat albu Nimr Village in Anbar Province and that, during the battle, the Iraqi military began escaping via a helicopter.

They're going on the offensive when?

Do they understand what "offensive" means?


They just might be as confused as Valerie Jarrett who, two Sundays ago on NBC's Meet The Press, declared Mount Sinjar to be an important "success." Today,  Saif Sameer and Ned Parker (Reuters) also report, "U.S. President Barack Obama authorized air strikes on IS in Iraq in August, citing the duty to prevent an impending genocide of minority Yazidis at the hands of the jihadist insurgents who attacked them around Sinjar Mountain."


Air strikes on Mount Sinjar.  Just like the latest wave started August 8th.

What's really changed since then?

Nothing.

And I keep waiting for US Senator John McCain to haul out his whack-a-mole talk from the previous administration and point out that any minor victory in X leads to a loss in Y.


Mount Sinjar came up in today's US State Dept press briefing moderated by Jen Psaki:



QUESTION: Can you confirm reports or do you have any comment on the fact that Yezidis are once again trapped on Mount Sinjar and requesting help, expecting an assault again by ISIS fighters?

MS. PSAKI: Well, obviously, as you know, we had taken recent action, relatively recently I should say, over the course of the summer. I don’t have anything new to predict for you. We remain committed to addressing humanitarian crises as we see them and to continuing to assist those who are impacted by the threat of ISIL. But operationally, I would point you to DOD to see if there’s anything they would want to preview about anything they’re planning.

QUESTION: Just to follow up on that, the Administration has said repeatedly that, for example, Kobani in a city of itself doesn’t have a lot of strategic import in the overall fight. I’m wondering if you have any idea what ISIS’s – what their aim is in trying to get Sinjar. Why? Do you have any idea why Sinjar is such a prize? They keep going back to it, so --

MS. PSAKI: Well, I don’t think – I know this is not what you asked, but even on Kobani I can’t tell you why – we can’t tell you why, aside from their desire to have a propaganda victory, that they are focusing there either. The reason --

QUESTION: Well, the border. They could control the border there.

MS. PSAKI: But in terms of their focus on Sinjar, I don’t know that I have analysis on why strategically ISIL is going after it more.

QUESTION: But the reason that you undertook the action in the first place is because you thought that ISIS was trying to launch a genocide against the Yezidis.

MS. PSAKI: Right. That’s right.

QUESTION: So aren’t you still concerned about that?


MS. PSAKI: Well, we certainly remain concerned about any group that’s threatened by ISIL, and we’ve taken action in the past. I have nothing to preview for you in terms of future operations, as would be typically the case.





Saif Sameer and Ned Parker (Reuters) report, "U.S. President Barack Obama authorized air strikes on IS in Iraq in August, citing the duty to prevent an impending genocide of minority Yazidis at the hands of the jihadist insurgents who attacked them around Sinjar Mountain."  But AFP reports, "Islamic State group jihadists besieging Mount Sinjar in northern Iraq have killed a commander of forces from the Yazidi religious minority defending the area, a fighter said yesterday. The commander, Al Sheikh Khayri, had returned from Germany, which has large Yazidi community, to fight, and was killed on Wednesday night, Khalaf Mamu said by telephone."





RECOMMENDED:  "Iraq snapshot"
"Are U.S. Bioweapons Labs the Solution, or the Prob..."
"On Iraq and US voter apathy"
"An Archie TV show?"
"scandal finds its way back"
"Arrow"
"How To Get Away With Murder answers emerge"
"How To Get Away With Murder and love Conner"
"Sick f**k Mia Farrow"
"The Failed Match Up"
"I Love Trina"
"Mia Farrow can't stop embarrassing herself"
"Robert Parry carrying Barack's baby@"
"Parry talks of naming the expected First Child"
"THIS JUST IN! PARRY TALKS BIRTH NAMES!"