Should someone who threatens war crimes and pardons war criminals be allowed to have a Twitter account?

POLL:
If you were @Jack, would you use your power to permanently block future posts from the @Twitter account of @realdonaldtrump* (while archiving past posts for use by prosecutors and historians)?

*impeached

— True Blue Liberal (@TrueBlueLiberal) January 7, 2020

Has the True Blue Liberal blog's raison d'être been resurrected?

Yesterday I posted here for the first time in a while. With war drums beating again and one of America's most prominent war drummers, John Bolton, again in a position of power, it seemed necessary.

Today I went back and looked at one of the earliest posts on this blog from December 2004, while we were still dealing with the trauma of George W. Bush's re-election and I felt the need to jump into the leading social media of the time. I titled the post "Peace Bloggers." It had occurred to me when I decided to start a blog of my own to look up "Weblog" on Wikipedia. That article placed a lot of emphasis on the role of organized "War Bloggers" in the run-up to the Bush/Cheney war on Iraq as a key factor in the history of blogging (the current Wikipedia entry no longer even mentions "War Blogging"). So I proudly proclaimed that this little corner of the web would be a place for peace blogging, and that's why it's time for me to become more active again. If Trump thinks that war on Iran (or Venezuela or wherever) could help his popularity in the run-up to next year's election, does anyone believe that he would restrain the most hawkish of his advisors? Can some of us help to make war unpopular? Isn't it worth trying?

"...before 2019, we here will celebrate in Tehran..." --Mustachioed Chickenhawk John Bolton to M.E.K. terrorists on July 1, 2017

As we get closer and closer to the 2020 election, we should never forget that Donald Trump has selected the number-one cheerleader for war against Iran as his National Security Advisor, especially since Bolton's publicly-proclaimed deadline for meeting his terrorist allies in Tehran has already passed. This New York Times video from last year, "John Bolton Wants Regime Change In Iran. What's His Alternative?" should be seen by all Americans before the Trump Administration's gunboat diplomacy turns the Persian Gulf into another Tonkin Gulf with trumped-up reasons for yet another disastrous American war. There have already been many too many misguided military adventures carried out under our flag in my lifetime.

"I have said for over ten years, since coming to these events, that the declared policy of the United States of America should be the overthrow of the mullahs' regime in Tehran." -- Chickenhawk N.S.A. John Bolton speaking to the M.E.K., July 1, 2017

I haven't posted much on this True Blue Liberal blog in the past year, but with the current administration currently rattling sabers in Venezuela, Iran, Yemen, North Korea, and elsewhere, we should all be prepared to speak out loudly and immediately and publicly (especially since we have a Congress that has handed all of its constitutional war powers to an authoritarian executive branch elected by a minority of Americans) whenever military action seems imminent. It doesn't seem like it's enough to type #ImAlreadyAgainstOurNextWar on Twitter every day. I need to start stating my anti-war opinions more clearly than can be done in 280 characters.

It's not too early to start the #NoIranWar movement. (Poll)

As long as unhinged hothead General Michael Flynn and alt-right Crusader Steve Bannon have the attention of the ear leading to the Propecia-addled brain of Donald Trump, the chances of an unprovoked military attack on Iran continue to grow.

I know where I stand on this, and for the next seven days you can vote in this poll.

Flynn, Bannon, and Trump do NOT have my support for military action against Iran on trumped-up charges.#NoIranWar
Do they have your support?

— True Blue Liberal (@TrueBlueLiberal) February 4, 2017

The GOP Alternative to the International Iran Deal

The Republicans have had an alternative to the complicated nuclear deal agreed to by the US, UK, Iran, France, China, Russia, and Germany all along.

It has never changed.

John McCain even made their simplistic strategy the semi-official 21st-century theme song of the Grand Old Party when he sang "Bomb Bomb Bomb, Bomb Bomb Iran" at a South Carolina campaign appearance on April 17, 2007.

This is what a nation looks like before American bombs fall.

Meet some of the people whom John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Dick "Dick" Cheney, Bibi Netanyahu, et al. would like to bomb in our name as soon as possible:

I want to travel to Tehran just to have the psychic parakeet at the 3'50" mark of this video tell me my future.

Never Forget Who's Benefiting from America's Endless Wars.

This video from Fahrenheit 9/11 about the businesses that benefit from war is as relevant to the current saber rattling about Iran as it was to our Iraq invasion. (Halliburton isn't the only beneficiary, despite the title of the video.)


And here's your quote of the day from the 2'20" mark of the video:

"War is always good for certain companies, I mean, that are in the war busi...the business of war."  --Sam Kubba, American Iraqi Chamber of Commerce

Video proof that Iraq and Iran are still indistinguishable to some people.

If the US decides to be the volunteer police force for this guy again, maybe we can create another ISIS.

Remember Bush's War on Iraq when you think about who to vote for in 2012.

It's important for everyone to remember that the Bush/Cheney Administration was planning their attack on Iraq before 9/11/2001 and before they even took office. Don't believe anyone who now says they didn't know they were electing potential war criminals in November 2000.

There are four contenders left for the 2012 GOP nomination as the South Carolina primary results coming in  tonight. None of them has left any doubt about where stand on the question of war with Iran.

The Winner of Iowa, Rick Santorum, doesn't see any need to wait for formal US aggression to commence.  In the meantime, he's a supporter of terrorism within Iran. "On occasion, scientists working on the nuclear program in Iran turn up dead. I think that's a wonderful thing," Santorum says in the following video. Since Republicans hate science just as much as they hate Iran, this type of terrorism is especially satisfying to someone from the Neanderthal wing of the party like Rick.



The Winner of New Hampshire, Mitt Romney, who has been running for President for much of the last decade, is on the record in this debate from 2007 saying that he would not take tactical nuclear weapons off the table when dealing with Iran:


Tonight's Winner in South Carolina, Newt Gingrich, hasn't been running for President quite as long as the man he's beating tonight, but he has been just as bellicose as the men who won Iowa and New Hampshire:


There is a fourth member of the final four, Ron Paul, who hasn't won any GOP primaries, and probably won't win any.  I don't agree with him on many domestic issues (other than the civil liberties and drug law issues where he's 100% right), but he deserves to be heard putting his fellow Republicans in their place on the issue of war and peace.  He's schooling Rick Santorum in the following video, but he could be talking directly to Newt or Mitt just as easily: