Libya And Other Middle East Issues
Again, sorry for not posting. Taking down Guttenberg is very important for my country. Our work on that is quite successful, but he is stubborn and we'll need another day or two helping to get it done. (I am involved in some of the technical issues on this.)
Please use this thread to post news and views on Libya and other Middle East countries that currently try to throw out their dictators.
Thanks.
Posted by b on February 21, 2011 at 03:02 PM | Permalink
« previous pagePray, do not mock me:Quadaffi is not in his perfect mind; but unlike Lear in the recognition scene with daughter, Cordelia, it is Libya's dictator who resembles the rash King (earlier in the play) who does not understand that he has been deposed, and still wants to mete out retribution, and make his former subjects tremble, when he is in a rage.
I am a very foolish fond old man,
Fourscore and upward, not an hour more nor less;
And, to deal plainly,
I fear I am not in my perfect mind. --King Lear
I am more in sympathy with r'giap's dispassion in this matter; and I agree with b, in that interference from the West would spoil what chance the people of Libya have, to come out of this with their destiny in their own hands.
night owl
*For military implementation we'd most likely be talking NATO via the French or the Brits.*
Best for the US (and Italy and Turkey) not to be involved directly*
yet another call for criminals to hold court ?
and whats the point of excluding uncle sham while welcoming his poodle uk n nato in as *liberators* ?
Posted by: denk | Feb 22, 2011 10:23:36 PM | 103
sloth, don't you dare talk shit on william carlos williams.
Posted by: lizard | Feb 22, 2011 10:26:05 PM | 104
denk,
If you have a better idea of how to stop the bloodshed in Libya, you let me know.
Posted by: Night Owl | Feb 22, 2011 10:30:21 PM | 105
owl
assuming there's *bloodshed* in libya
i've a win win solution
let the uk/nato forces in, their appetite would be sated, these guys are always itching for some *action* u know ;-)
......but the forces should be overseen by officers from iran, libya, malaysia, china , russia etc
this is what i call a neutral command, as opposed to ur anglo led posse, whose record of *peacekeeping* is better left unsaid if u know what i mean
better still, there should be a similar *peace keeping force* despatched to brhrain etc to prevent further BLOODSHED
Posted by: denk | Feb 22, 2011 11:10:18 PM | 106
i actually love carlos. I know three of his poems by heart.
the pure products of america go crazy.
Posted by: slothrop | Feb 22, 2011 11:47:35 PM | 107
assuming there's *bloodshed* in libya
right now, foreign nationals are pouring out of Libya by any exit and means possible. The beginnings of refugee camps are starting to appear on the Egyptian border. The US & European countries are arranging evacuation flights and ferries, but bad weather* and chaos at the Tripoli airport is making escape by air and boat difficult, assuming of course the evacuees can actually get to the embarkation points in the first place.
There is a flotilla of Libyan ships gathering off Malta.
A lot of people appear to be running for their lives right now, but in your reality Q may not have already attacked his own people and this may all simply be part of some elaborate CIA pantomime.
Yeah, I buy that.
*one good break: the bad weather may have grounded the attack aircraft today and bought the Libyans some time.
Posted by: Night Owl | Feb 23, 2011 12:49:49 AM | 108
owl
why are u still bickering about the alleged bloodshed
i already say that i'm not aversed to letting in a NEUTRAL force to keep peace n find out whats going on there, so ?
matter of fact, since u talk abou the *international communities*, it set me thinking.
u've the right idea, but its woefully indequate as it is
why stop at libya ?
when is the *ic* going to do something about the daily wanton slaughtering of civilians in afpak, somalia etc by our twin champions of hr [sic] ?
there's absoultely no ambiguity about the crimes committed by these twin terrors
but where's the god damned *ic* ?
where's the call for sanction, boycott, bombing, nfz n all that jazz ?
Posted by: denk | Feb 23, 2011 1:23:32 AM | 109
westerners should try this in their home countries...gather in large numbers and demand the govts step down, and be replaced by something the protestors want...If the police seek to move un on, fight back...up the pressure and see how long before they employ the military.
So far the armchair revolutionaries have not tried this at home, why not see if their govts behave like Libyas real or imagined
Posted by: brian | Feb 23, 2011 2:07:52 AM | 110
Gaddaffi and his govt have committed no war crimes at all. What we are seeing in Libya look like insurrections..
as ive said try doing the same thing in your countries and see how your govts respond
Posted by: brian | Feb 23, 2011 2:09:24 AM | 111
early info from italians returning from Lybia:
"gunshots at night, during the day it was calm"
"no bombings"
returning because all shops closed, dangerous situation, etc, but no bloodshed witnessed
we probably can't understand anything if we don't distinguish between Bengazi (civil war there, probably) and Tripoli
this would explain why there are refugees on the Egyptian border, not elsewhere, it seems - at least for now
I believed the MSM against Saddam 1991 (the Kuwaitian ambassador's daughter at the Us Congress, remember?), against Milosevic (the Kossovo genocide that never was), that's when I started opening my eyes
caution, fellow barflies, caution
Posted by: claudio | Feb 23, 2011 2:14:58 AM | 113
Night owl.
'What they refuse to acknowledge is that in the last decade Q sold them and their ideological brethren out to BP and is now the BFF of neocon corporatists like Tony Blair and Silvio Berlusconi.
Sorry to break it to you guys, but Q's just not that into you any more.'
hate to break it to u but Mandela had a different view as recently as 1997:
"This man (Gaddafi) helped us at a time when we were all alone, when those (Britain and the US) who say we should not come here (Libya) were helping the enemy."
Nelson Mandela, 1997
Posted by: brian | Feb 23, 2011 2:19:03 AM | 114
night owl:
'While you wait for your smoking gun, people are getting gunned down in the streets. Apparently denial is also a river in Libya'
gunned down by whom? and what are they doing that gets them gunned down?
Posted by: brian | Feb 23, 2011 2:23:15 AM | 115
denk:
'night owl
*For military implementation we'd most likely be talking NATO via the French or the Brits.*
Best for the US (and Italy and Turkey) not to be involved directly*'
well the US IS involved both directly and indirectly..
Turkey is not involved at all...just the US
Posted by: brian | Feb 23, 2011 2:26:13 AM | 116
Linh Dinh is right:
'There are basically two kinds of mass protest overseas. Those that are orchestrated by America, as rigged by our CIA, or those that are supposedly against us. I say supposedly because a protest or coup d’etat against one of our dictators may usher in yet another one of our dictators.'
the US has dictators flowing out of its pockets
Posted by: brian | Feb 23, 2011 2:28:29 AM | 117
Tarply on it all
http://tarpley.net/2011/02/18/mubarak-toppled-by-cia-because-he-opposed-us-plans-for-war-with-iran/
'As already noted, the main US diplomatic gambit of the first year of the Obama administration was the creation of a Sunni-Arab bloc centered on Egypt, together with Israel, under the protection of the US nuclear umbrella, for purposes of regional confrontation and possible war against Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, and their associates. One of the by-products of the scheme would have been to force Egypt and Saudi Arabia into a military alliance with the Israelis against Moslem Iran. The first Gulf War had shown the lasting aversion of Arab leaders to participating in the military enterprise shoulder to shoulder with the Israelis, who therefore had to stay out of Kuwait. Nevertheless, an alliance with Israel was precisely what Obama and Hillary Clinton were demanding. Saudi Arabia, which has no diplomatic relations with Israel, would very likely have been obliged to open them. As for Egypt, even though the Camp David peace treaty with Israel has been in place for three decades, there are still many aspects of Egyptian-Israeli bilateral relations which are far from being normalized down to the present day. Mubarak had no intention of allowing such an automatic normalization, and of course did not want Egypt to become cannon fodder in the US attempt to smash and partition Iran.
The “nuclear umbrella” plan would also have necessitated the creation of US military bases in Egypt, which Mubarak has always rejected'
interesting
Posted by: brian | Feb 23, 2011 2:35:20 AM | 119
Colour Revolution 101: from Gene Sharps play book:
for those keen to demonise Gaddaffi and see him removed...the goal of an colour revolution is to get the govt to use violence against protestors...then the govt loses support and falls naturally...
this is what renders it a superior method,...esp when you train locals...and so can distance yourself from the crime scene.
BUT we will never see this sort of thing happen in the US or US client, except where the clients time has ended.
Forget Wisconsin,...that is no revolution.
Posted by: brian | Feb 23, 2011 2:40:20 AM | 120
reports by foreigners:
Tourists and expatriate workers who arrived in Vienna on Monday evening on a flight from Tripoli say shooting could be heard even in the Libyan capital during the night on Saturday and Sunday. They say almost the entire town of Gharyan had been evacuated by the police and military, and police barracks in the town were burning.
One Austrian man who was on a tourist tour in Libya said he saw a video in which police were shooting people in the back of the head.
[Herbert Suchy, Austrian Tourist]:
"There was shooting all night, molotov cocktails were thrown onto a neighboring house. We have seen handycam videos where the police were shooting people in the back of the head. Today at 6 a.m. almost the entire town of Gharyan was evacuated by the police and military, everything was set on fire, police barracks were burning. Horrible."
[Zoltan Nagy, Romanian Tourist]:
"We were living in Medina. We had a hotel in Medina in the old centre, the streets are narrow so we had no problem there, but in the city there was shooting in the night. But during the day it was calm where we lived."
When asked if Americans or Europeans had any problems with the pro Gaddafi forces a Croatian businessman said:
[Gjuro Petres, Croatian Businessman]:
"There was no any reaction of the local people or local police, for example, when we were going through the border or to customs that they were anti European or anti non-Arabic people, we were treated nicely."
Many countries have already urged their citizens to avoid travelling to Libya or recommended that those already there leave on commercial flights.
http://english.ntdtv.com/ntdtv_en/ns_me/2011-02-22/970542395576.html
Posted by: brian | Feb 23, 2011 2:43:54 AM | 121
what would happen if Libya were to happen in the US?
would the govt:
1) roll over and accept demands;
2) attack the protestors and put them in jail or hospital;
3) use riot control to disperse protestors;
4) end govt and push for elections?
5)other
Posted by: brian | Feb 23, 2011 2:47:03 AM | 122
brian
we certainly cant let pass the posibility of another cia/ned ops in libya ala tibet , xinjiang, kosovo, myanmar, tam, iran etc.
there're many anglos who make a living outta setting off fire all over the world to further their nefarious agenda
*The CIA has developed great expertise in undermining the governments of other countries. They use a great variety of methods, including propaganda, disinformation, fabricated incidents, infiltration of labor unions and other organizations, using the Agency for International Development or the National Endowment for Democracy as conduits to funnel money to opposition groups and so on.
.........................
They use agent provocateurs in demonstrations to create incidents and sometimes deaths that reflect unfavorably on the government*
these are two classic examples, but bear in mind they represent just the tip of an iceberg when it comes to the crimes of the evil twins
Posted by: denk | Feb 23, 2011 2:54:39 AM | 123
interesting article on Gadaffi, that tries to be fair:
http://www.counterpunch.org/prashad02222011.html
Posted by: brian | Feb 23, 2011 2:58:42 AM | 124
Fidel on Libya..sensible advice:
'One can agree with Qaddafi or not. The world has been invaded with all kinds of news, especially using the mass media. One has to wait the necessary length of time in order to learn precisely what is the truth and what are lies, or a mixture of events of every kind that, in the midst of chaos, were produced in Libya. For me, what is absolutely clear is that the government of the United States is not in the least worried about peace in Libya and it will not hesitate in giving NATO the order to invade that rich country, perhaps in a matter of hours or a few short days.
Those who with perfidious intentions invented the lie that Gaddafi was headed for Venezuela, just as they did yesterday afternoon on Sunday the 20th of February, today received an fitting response from Foreign Affairs Minister Nicolás Maduro when he literally stated that he was “wishing that the Libyan people would find, in the exercise of their sovereignty, a peaceful solution to their difficulties, that would preserve the integrity of the Libyan people and nation, without the interference of imperialism...”
As for me, I cannot imagine that the Libyan leader would abandon his country; escaping the responsibilities he is charged with, whether or not they are partially or totally false.
An honest person shall always be against any injustice being committed against any people in the world, and the worst of all, at this moment, would be to remain silent in the face of the crime that NATO is getting ready to commit against the Libyan people.
The leadership of that war-mongering organization has to do it. We must condemn it!
http://www.counterpunch.org/castro02222011.html
Posted by: brian | Feb 23, 2011 3:03:08 AM | 125
If you think that the developments on Egypt improve the chances of the US installing bases on Egypt or allying with Israel for the dreamed sunnie vs shiite Holy War of the crazy sionists you should quit smoking what you are smoking or step down from taking too seriously whatever conspiratorial theories are of your liking. There is some, very limited, risk that that would happen if the army performs a proper coup and overrides the whole Egyptian society that is very critical of US policies and doesn't support the Israel apartheid with plenty of blood (much more than in Libya).
The Gene Sharp books are just Ghandi anti-colonial resistance rewritten in conservative anti-communist language. A tool or a tactic is just a tool or a tactic. The important is who and why uses it.
I would find it very weird that after buying back Gaddafi with that post Iraq WMD charade and grooming for at least half of this decade his son and heir Saif as the new coming of the perfect neoliberal 'democracy-for-the-colonies' leader they would be preparing to not just gracefully drop them but prepare and fund a very dangerous insurrection with unknown results or consequences. And then to get all started after a poor Tunisian young burn itself out of desperation. The US ignores the British and other European interests when writing their bloody imperial plans but not to this silly and insane point.
Why do you can't accept that everything it's partly true at the same time? US is profiting from the revolt and spreading anti-Gaddafi propaganda for sure, they may even trying to get the army to work for them (or the insurrected parts of army calling the US to back them and get the upper hand). But I don't see the initial protests and revolts in the East as staged or being driven by 'foreigners' and 'drugged youth'. That's not what the videos and more confirmed information show. Of course this wasn't very peaceful from the start but with the Libyan regime it was expected that way (I doubt they have big anti-riot capable interior police forces like Tunis or Egypt, but they are likely to have revolutionary army units and militias). And Gaddafi, but not that much after rearranging himself as part of the war on terror, has a history opposing US/western colonial policies for his, many times selfish and messianic own reasons, but his current record (and the crazy speeches of him and his son don't help) doesn't look precisely positive or like they are much in control or with the support of the Libyan 'people'. The problem is that there doesn't seem to be a likable alternative at this unstable point for almost anyone, neither the US/western powers (but they have the money and power to try to manage the situation on their benefit) or those that support that hardly to define entity named 'the people'.
Gaddafi seems to be in control in Tripoli and the region around, the East seems to be controlled by 'the people' (whatever that means) and the regime has split with defections in all their institutions (army, air force, rumors about the navy, diplomatic corps, government). We don't know the amount of forces each sides has, an arranged solution seems very unlikely at this point so more bloodshed seems very likely. Civil war, insurrection, revolt just carry too much subjective meaning when trying to define what is happening. But even if I declared that most or everything that is surfacing is fabricated propaganda I don't see Gadaffi as a regime that I would keep defending.
What is better, let it unfold without external interference? What if it become a long civil war and what the neoliberals call a 'failed state'? Interfere? On which side? Some of the western powers may even want to support Gaddafi on a bloody repression as this mean to go back to the previous 'stability' if the alternative is an 'islamist regime' (or changes in the juicy oil contracts and economic relations). Perhaps it would be better to let the Arab-Muslim world handle the problem but their track record isn't precisely reassuring, Turkey has a lot to explain about their treatment of the kurdish minority. Do you really have confidence on this, unchanged, Egyptian Army handling this in a positive direction? There isn't anything like a neutral force in this world. The Russians? The Chinease? They don't have the assets at hand and well ... not precisely the shinning hill on freedom either and they seem actually to prefer Gaddafi to stay (or at least avoid any external interference from the western powers). India, Indonesia, Brazil? Too far away and don't have the capability. I'm just saying I don't have a valid answer about how this could be solved.
Posted by: ThePaper | Feb 23, 2011 3:56:39 AM | 126
Western power/democracies have a long history of suppressing 'violent' dissent with as much violence as required. That small detail about the 'state monopoly of violence'. It hasn't been really required much lately (western people hasn't really come revolting either) and people may have forgotten. But I expect a state to act as a state (and the elites that form and rule that state) when confronted with the people it's supposed to represent or work for.
In theory as the society and people becomes more educated, 'civilized', 'morally superior' (that's crossing in racist territory) the state or the armed institutions of the state are less unlikely to give or follow some kind of orders. But I wouldn't bet my life on it (the Egyptian bet on that and it seems they won ... at least some initial breach). And for good or bad the current western style representative democracies have more mechanisms to release the 'steam' from aggravated parts of 'the people' than dictatorships or more autocratic systems that can't accept even smallest dissent or challenge on their legitimacy. And of course much more riches that make most of the population reluctant to risk all 'what they have' on the risky business of Revolution (and I guess that's why ultra-conservative and even fascist forces are on the rise all through the western democracies and I see a bleak future but perhaps I'm just being way too pessimistic).
Posted by: ThePaper | Feb 23, 2011 4:17:01 AM | 127
the paper
*There isn't anything like a neutral force in this world. The Russians? The Chinease? They don't have the assets at hand and well ... not precisely the shinning hill on freedom either and they seem actually to prefer Gaddafi to stay (or at least avoid any external interference from the western powers). India, Indonesia, Brazil?*
an anlgo led posse is definitely NON neutral
but like i say,
when its overseen by a panel of officers, [not forces mind u] from russia, china , iran etc., who definitely have their own egenda, the result is a more equitable observer.
dont u think that its much more desirable to the hitherto arrangement where the anglo hegemon always have the field all to themselves....like the last time when they imposed a *nfz* in iraq ?
btw, the chinese definitely never claim to be the *shining light on the hill*, this is a trade mark patented by our twin *champions of hr*, us/uk ;-)
Posted by: denk | Feb 23, 2011 4:36:17 AM | 128
The CounterPunch article basically reads as what I suspected, a revolution for the people that eventually becomes a regime for the elites. The Nasser revolution from which the Mubarak regime descends has some similarities. And to top it a clear neoliberal, fuck the people for the good of the 'economy', drive after the 80s.
Perhaps someone has written the manual for revolutions that don't become the next regime to topple but so far few seem to have read it. Another issue is that 'revolutions' that require an entrenched leadership that can't change or be replaced to keep the revolution going will by definition end failing. The interests of the leadership and the people will eventually diverge because they become closed entities with reduced communication between each other. Revolutionaries overstaying their day eventually become the new strongman or dictator to bring down. Sad but we have too many examples.
The western democracies have some mechanism for this communication and leadership replacement but the post-USSR noliberal trend has destroyed some of those mechanisms. In many countries already left/right blue/red are just the same elites with different dresses/color and few new blood or ideas. But we are far from reaching the point a revolution is likely (and an inverted population pyramid won't help either when the time comes).
Posted by: ThePaper | Feb 23, 2011 6:11:57 AM | 130
AngryArab opinion on the matter is pretty clear:
Qadhdhafi will go down violently: as I have said for weeks now. He is so loathed by his people. None of his ideas or schemes or gimmicks would stay. The ugly green that he promoted will soon disappear from Libya. Shame on all the leftist groups and quasi leftist leaders who gave support to Qadhdhafi over the years: especially George Hawi, Muhsin Ibrahim, Walid Jumblat, and others. Do you know when he fought his war in Chad, he asked those leaders to send him fighters and they actually did in return for his dollars. What about that US tenured professor who wrote a book in English in praise of Qadhdhafi's Green Book? He told me that wrote it in return for Libyan money. The ball is rolling: it does not seem to stop.
Posted by: ThePaper | Feb 23, 2011 6:47:34 AM | 131
It seems the majority of posters here think the U.S. CIA is in some way instigating/coordinating this revolution even to the point that the bloodshed is propaganda or if real, then purposeful for U.S. evil designs as they believe the U.S. has its next dictator already lined up to replace Qaddafi. If you think the bumbling fools in the U.S. government are that proficient, any further debate here is useless.
I feel bad that I have not had time to support Night Owl in some of his arguments further. He appears to be alone as his first concern is for the people.
Even after Qaddafi's lunatic speech yesterday, the apologists keep their prejudice views. There is always the argument “Well the U.S/West is worst.” Again I say, such an argument is irrelevant.
”The "west" should stay out of this.”
The Libyan people, and their ancestors, have been integrated with the "west" for over 2000 years.
In the last decade, the "West" has been working with the 'Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya' more than ever - the oil exports from Libya are among the highest in the world. The crude oil quality is among the best. The Libyan people survive in a large part from this export to the “west”.
http://yfrog.com/h0nl56j
http://www.democracynow.org/2011/2/22/headlines
In recent years, Libya has strengthened its ties to the United States and many European nations. Two years ago, the U.S. firm General Dynamics signed a $165 million contract to arm the Libyan Armed Forces’ elite second brigade. Halliburton, Shell, Raytheon, Dow Chemical and Chevron are all members of the U.S.-Libya Business Association. And in 2009, it was revealed that British forces were training Libyan special forces in counterterrorism techniques.
No need to worry. The "West" has not directly supported the Libyan people - not now - not ever. The dead cannot be brought back by the West, nor by the East, nor by the North, nor by the South.
Revolution will not be televised....I believe many people don't grok it.
What I gather from this is that a real Revolution, one that is truly effective and meaningful, will be so organically pervasive and ubiquitous, so overwhelming in its manifestation, that it cannot be contained and/or controlled by the very system that led to its purposeful, unintended...yet perfectly predictable existence.
That is an oldie but goodie. But I don't grok it. Reason and judgment of a “real Revolution” based upon a quaint poem, on such a fundamentalist level, is not logical. These are true revolutions and they have all been televised. You must have seen some of the videos. I am as spiritual as the next guy but fundamentalism is to each his own.
Posted by: Rick | Feb 23, 2011 6:48:33 AM | 132
I am more in sympathy with r'giap's dispassion in this matter; and I agree with b, in that interference from the West would spoil what chance the people of Libya have, to come out of this with their destiny in their own hands.
Speaking for myself, I abhor any form of Tyranny, regardless of whether that tyranny is in alignment with Western goals, or not. Even though the Marvelous Mug may have once cosied up to Socialism and Socialistic forces, and even embraced such, I believe it was always as an opportunity to obtain, and hold on to power. The Marvelous Mug is ultimately an opportunist whose self-interest comes before all else. He's no different in that regard then the West who he opposed at one time, but later changed his colors when it was no longer opportunistic to be oppositional.
Tyranny derives from hierarchical structures which manifest from a socio-economic system, Civilization if you will, based off of production and accumulation. This has been the history of Civilization, regardless of how whitewashed it is written by the vaunted Historians.
Either way, I don't see these uprisings in the Middle East and North Africa as Democracy breaking out all over, or even as self-determination movements. I see them as vented angst from people who have been backed into a corner. I see this vented angst being co-opted, or attempts being made to co-opt it, at every corner, and I see many well-meaning "Liberal/Progressive" commentators in the West trying to graft their projections upon all this and make it appear as something it is not.
It is 2011, not 1911. A lot has happened in 100 years. The world, although much the same in general respect, is very different when you get specific. Uprisings, rebellions, and attempted revolutions will not mean the same thing, nor have the same effect, that they had 100 years prior in a world which still had virtually unlimited resources. The world is running out of everything that has thus far supported a population of 6.5 billion people, to include oil, fresh water, and oxygen that allows us to breath. The old power structures of Civilization, the Tyranny, won't just lay down and dissolve their vested interests. They hold the cards....and the Nukes. If there are real threats to their power, they will circle the wagons, as they have always done, but even aside from that, there is no longer any time left for people to "self-determine," whatever that means. We are all inhabitants of this planet that feeds and nourishes us, and we have abused it practically beyond repair. There is no room left for experimentation in human self-determination. Collectively, the human race needs to come together and devise a system of social and economic interaction that allows for the maximum quality and diversity of life for all the Earth's inhabitants, not just a select few. Anything short of this is doomed to failure, and at this point, I'm left shaking my head when I hear things like "demands." I will say it again. Demand from who, or whom? By demanding, one, or all, acknowledge the legitimacy of the Paternalistic system of Civilization that has befouled the planet and left humankind on the brink of extinction. Instead of "demanding" this or that like a petulant teenager, it's time for "this we believe" and "this we will do"......because we must, in order to survive, and thrive.
Posted by: Morocco Bama | Feb 23, 2011 7:23:05 AM | 133
brian #118
info from interviews on italian tv at the airport (Fiumicino - Rome)
Posted by: Claudio | Feb 23, 2011 8:04:05 AM | 134
the idea of a No Flying Zone is interesting; why don't we experiment it on Gaza first?
Posted by: Claudio | Feb 23, 2011 8:07:52 AM | 135
That would be the start of an idea. I vote for another one above Lebanon. And then someone teaching some western politicians why dropping a missile from an 'unmanned' plane (like there isn't an human controlling it) on some 'terrorists', civilians or who the hell knows who or what, on a country where you are not even at war with is plain murder and terrorism and liable on international crime courts.
In any case Revolutions are not a peaceful party that ends when everyone comes back to home with a hangover.
Posted by: ThePaper | Feb 23, 2011 8:30:15 AM | 136
angry arab has a short memory as well as a short fuse..he forgets who supported Mandela and antiapartheid...yes..Gaddafi...How do we know?
'"This man (Gaddafi) helped us at a time when we were all alone, when those (Britain and the US) who say we should not come here (Libya) were helping the enemy."
Nelson Mandela, 1997'
so did Angry conveniently forget this?
Why have so many clueless left wing bloggers jumped on this rolling colour revolution bandwagon? Where will it end up?
Now why dont we see similar revolutions in UK or US...? Will wisconsin oust the US govt?
Posted by: brian | Feb 23, 2011 8:35:21 AM | 137
'The Libyan people, and their ancestors, have been integrated with the "west" for over 2000 years.'
well, no..Libya has managed to stay liberated from the West...thats why Libya is being regime changed.
I keep seeing how the left or even nominally free bloggers are easily manipulated by media perceptions: mercenaries, jets shooting civilians..thats all to get us to abandon Gaddafi and send him into a paranoid spin.
Posted by: brian | Feb 23, 2011 8:40:26 AM | 138
weve had lies that Gaddafi fled to Venezuela..that clearly came from the anti venezuelan neocon playbook...you lot would have believed that because it was in the media.Now its been refuted by Venezuela...
How many more lies are being spun by gaddafis enemies and being printed up as media reports for you to uncritically believe?
Posted by: brian | Feb 23, 2011 8:43:37 AM | 139
All the Mediterranean and all the Middle East has been part of the 'western' (like most of the western culture didn't come from the East) 'world' (other continents have been ignored as irrelevant by western rewriting, China and India coming to the rescue soon, hope Africa will join through the century) history since the concept of history started. The division between western, meaning white European and Christian, and everyone else is historically recent (four centuries at most) and mostly colonial revisionism. Tunis is Carthage. Libya was part of the Egyptian Ptolemaic Empire and later a Roman province, Libyan 'pirates' were spreading havoc on all these proud white Christian navies up to the XIX.
We had lies that Mubarak had fled to UAE or whatever other country in Arabia and multiple rumors of him stepping down one day and the other. There are loads of propaganda and disinformation at any revolution. The last two and the hundreds through the centuries. Now it has become cheaper and easier to produce and spread it so we have more and from more actors. Do we need to believe just the bits that fit our ideology? Obviously AJ (liberal capitalists) wasn't about to start defending socialism and the power of the proletarian so I thought that some of the desires of the more radical Egyptian protesters were wishful thinking. All the information that comes from AJ becomes invalidated? We need to learn the bias of every font and make our best judgement. I didn't really believe the information about the Libyan revolt I was seeing on Twitter the firsts two days because it seemed too bombastic and too fast, but many was confirmed (later by the regime media itself). I highly doubted the bit about Gaddafi fleeing to Venezuela (and was false), then I believed about the plane bombing protesters, that was a manipulation with later information. So it's not easy.
Whatever is the case Gaddafi is done deal, likely in a bloody way. Or in a somewhat unlikely event western powers (I guess mostly Europeans at this point, US has other interests) decide that better keep the known bloody dictator than 'chaos' and arrange (covertly of course) the conditions for his regime to retake Libya. And that will be even bloodier. And yes, I don't know the situation there, but there is a good chances that Libya emerges either as a fragmented country, 'islamic' (as it wasn't islamic already) or just as a redrawn military dictatorship. That's not justification for an intervention to fulfill the needs of western powers.
Posted by: ThePaper | Feb 23, 2011 9:12:14 AM | 140
Brian @141, who are you referring to when you say "you" and "you lot?"
I don't follow the MSM, period, and that includes AJE. It's why I visit/frequent sites like this, because the commentary is much more cogent, coherent, honest and intelligent than anything the gamed MSM has to offer.
I value everyone's opinion here, including slothrop's, because he/she/it helps keep me honest.
Posted by: Morocco Bama | Feb 23, 2011 9:13:18 AM | 141
gaddaffi may be gone earlier than friday
Posted by: remembereringgiap | Feb 23, 2011 9:32:17 AM | 142
...to pile on... Kadhafi was a self-proclaimed revolutionary. To that tune he supported other 'revolutionaries' or minorities (eg. Mandela, the non- aligned, as r giap points out). Bit by bit he became less politically oriented, and withdrew from larger issues, as the world around him did as well - or bent under economic pressure, and turned to the West with a double aim: economic survival and saving his own regime or clan power. Not more complicated than that! He never understood economics at all, imho, and that will have contributed heavily to his downfall.
@ Morroco Bama. In the West, the standard for spelling Kadhafi vary, one authority that is commonly consulted is the Library of Congress, which lists 72 variants. Picking the name (full name, different versions, include El or not, just one word or more, etc.) and the spelling of it should rest on:
a) the stance, origins, etc. of the author. His or her instincts about it!
b) the presumed audience, conventions or usual spelling of the publisher
No matter how he is spelt he is toast.
The question isn’t whether Gaddafi, Mubarak, et al should be replaced, but what should replace them. - Watson.
Yes.
sloth William Carlos Williams is a lovely author, if you want to mix poetics or literature in you have to make it clearer what your point is
Posted by: Noirette | Feb 23, 2011 10:14:07 AM | 143
noirette
the point he is attempting to maken in brief, is that i am monstrous like gaddaffi
Posted by: remembereringgiap | Feb 23, 2011 10:23:35 AM | 144
i don't understand slothrop at all, can't grasp the underlying stance, certainly there are a lot of red herrings and obfuscation, cheap digs, weird references, etc. in the recent chomsky discussion he said the was a structural marxist, but that doesn't translate to his posts, he should inform.
Posted by: Noirette | Feb 23, 2011 10:37:20 AM | 145
Bush and now Obama jaw on about democracy and freedom and people’s rights, total lying fakers, and they imposed ‘democracy’ (in their discourse) on Iraq and Afgh. at the cost of trillions of dollars, literally at least a million deaths, millions of displaced, blood, more blood, torture, depleted uranium, destruction of agriculture, infrastructure, schooling, reducing ppl to prostitution and grinding poverty, death from preventable illness, huge prisons, etc. to little effect. A joyous jubilant jamboree of mindless sadism let loose with other ‘western’ agreement or participation.
Now Egypt can do it on its own at zero, or very little, cost.
The hypocrisy is not going unnoticed.
Posted by: Noirette | Feb 23, 2011 11:50:32 AM | 146
The USuk(ers) aren't really leftists in the sense that they have an interest in ruthlessly critiquing the present system of capitalist accumulation. Hell, b is basically a rightwing economic libertarian. What they are interested in is compiling a long laundry list of grievances and finding the cause of every one of them to be an abstraction: USuk.
And what does he abstraction mean in concrete terms? frankly, it falls into conspiracy mongering. According to USuk, the US & its Atlantic lackey, impose a senseless domination on the rest of the world for the interest of a few Anglo-American bankers and arms peddlers. I'm inclined to say that USuk consigns the contours of the global capitalist exploitation to the nefarious deeds of USuk, but I don't really have any proof, because the USuk(ers) don't seem to care about criticisms of capital accumulation.
That is to say, the USuk(ers) universalize all particulars in order to make the world fit in to the USuk straightjacket. Contrary to what debs said, there is no grey at all in the USuk enterprise. As for the world historical eventes occurring in the Mideast and North Africa, for the USuk(ers) it's simple: so long as the protests can vaguely be interpreted as remotely anti-American, then furbjious day.
Posted by: slothrop | Feb 23, 2011 12:40:25 PM | 147
Rick,
If you think the bumbling fools in the U.S. government are that proficient, any further debate here is useless.
My thoughts exactly.
Posted by: Night Owl | Feb 23, 2011 12:49:41 PM | 148
Post quantity has gone up here lately, post quality has gone down.
Most CIA/bankster revolutions are plainly obvious if you are paying close attention, e.g. Orange Revolution, Cedar Revolution, Iran 2009, etc. The evidence is all there and well-documented. Unless you are into deep spook theories, the current wave does not fit the profile.
The Libya-bashing in the US this week has been good for a laugh. The bad guys realize that their favorite straw man Qaddafi is about to be blown away by the winds of change, so they're having one last go at him.
Posted by: Tom | Feb 23, 2011 1:04:44 PM | 149
i have never claimed in these posts on libya that the cia has anything to do with it. they have proved their incompetence on many counts - organizing popular resistance is quite beyond them. for all their effort in iran they failed miserably & i don't think in the final analysis they will be able to to protect their bahrain without a use of force
that being said - u s imperialism remains the principal enemy of humanity
all the autocrats who are falling, i'm glad of it - there's no tears here for them but the conflicts that will be confronting all these countries in their immediate future are extremely complex - with u s imperialism wanting to play an important role but hopefully the hatred of that empire by the arab people is something deep in their consciousness; they can be anti gaddaffi & anti imperialist. that is not mutually exclusive
all these newly liverated countries need to understand deeply what role u s imperialism played in their subjugation, & the subjugation of the entire middle east.
they need to look no further than the occupied territories to see what u s imperialism actually thinks & how the empire defends the gul states will be a lesson the people will learn once again
slothrops quite silly sense of politics & of economy are quite addled. addled to the extreme
why is it so important for slothrop to create an empty space around the slaughter of the people of iraq, of afghanistan, of lebanon, of pakistan - of many many countries before that - why is that calculus of loss never mentioned, ever - if you go back through all the posts of slothrop you will find no mention of the deaths, of the massacres of the slaughters. none
because they upset the applecart of his idiotic ideological posturing - because he who possesses the monopoly of force & uses it - is a central fact of empire
no he's happy to go on with his racist jibes at the arab people knocking down this or that tinpot dictator - because for him it is a kind of cartoon, a kind of carelessless & negligence that he attempts to build a misbegotten theory around
those people who wrote on imperialism in the 20th century, notably fanon, have much to teach us
Posted by: remembereringgiap | Feb 23, 2011 4:00:40 PM | 151
lets take a look at some real monsters, see how quiet and methodical they are, and how unchatisted by the west east media or anyone:
'They said Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, dismissed allegations by Karzai's office and the provincial governor that civilians were killed and said residents had invented stories, or even injured their children, to pin the blame on U.S. forces and force an end to the operation.
"I was dizzy. My head was spinning," said one participant, referring to Petraeus's remarks. "This was shocking. Would any father do this to his children? This is really absurd."
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article27542.htm
Posted by: brian | Feb 23, 2011 4:09:03 PM | 152
'The Libya-bashing in the US this week has been good for a laugh. The bad guys realize that their favorite straw man Qaddafi is about to be blown away by the winds of change, so they're having one last go at him'
yes, but colour revolutions are rarely the winds of change....what we are seeing looks like a orchestrated campaign against Gaddaffi.
as ive said the goal of any colour revolution is to get the govt to behave violently and o lose support...
Go ahead..try it in the US...get the US govt to crack down violently...keep it up long enough and see what happens.
Posted by: brian | Feb 23, 2011 4:11:19 PM | 153
morroco bama:
'Brian @141, who are you referring to when you say "you" and "you lot?"
I value everyone's opinion here, including slothrop's, because he/she/it helps keep me honest.
=======================
just how honest and intelligent are you? 'You lo't refers to those who are played on by the media...false statements blown up in the media and used to justify real atrocities. If you value every opinion that shows lack of discernment.
Posted by: brian | Feb 23, 2011 4:17:56 PM | 154
it would seem that greece & portugal are going to find out
Posted by: remembereringgiap | Feb 23, 2011 4:47:32 PM | 155
i don't entirely agree with his thesis & he says little about aj completely reactionary coverage of latin america, of africa & sometimes even of what is happening in the occupied territories
in general, 'journalism' is so polluted, so compromised to power that i take all of it with a pinch of salt -so poverty stricken was most wester media that in its first year it was intriguing to see some intelligent commentary, some more intense focus
since that time - it has embraced all the hacks from other conglomerates, caricatures of caricatures, their presenters for the most part as cretinous as their confreres elsewhere
it's quite simple for me & it started with billmon but mostly with b was to realise that on most questions there were serious scholars i respected who had blogs or whom i could access with relative ease - that the work was above all dialectical, work research as i would when i was younger, go to unfamiliar areas, take their sources, their reading & their links & it is possible on most questions to arrive at a relatively ample comprehension
the world is such a butchershop that the media is nearly always hysteric in its response
yes all these tyrants are monsters - but they are nothing, nothing in comparison to the butchers who work from & for washington
Posted by: remembereringgiap | Feb 23, 2011 6:55:36 PM | 156
'The indispensable allies of this Obama-Brzezinski policy are ignorance, stupidity, gullibility, and the willingness to be blinded by hatred. During the first phase of the Egyptian destabilization, Brzezinski boasted to Newsweek of his ability to manipulate the youth bulge across the Arab world, using them to accomplish at low cost what Bush and Cheney failed to do through direct military attacks, with extravagant military and financial losses. Like a Mephistopheles, Brzezinski gloated that his destabilization cohorts, his revolutionaries, are the “somewhere between 80 million and 130 million young people around the world who come from the socially insecure lower middle class and constitute a community of mutual infection with angers, passions, frustrations, and hatreds. These students are revolutionaries-in-waiting. When they erupt at volatile moments, they become very contagious. And whereas Marx’s industrial proletariat more than a century ago was fragmented in local groups, today these young people are interacting via the Internet. '
http://tarpley.net/2011/02/18/mubarak-toppled-by-cia-because-he-opposed-us-plans-for-war-with-iran/#more-2170
Remember Colour Revolution 101 or the lessons of a demonic Gandhi: get the govt to crack down violently: that way it loses support
'First they ignore you, then laugh at you then they fight you then you win' is now a US covert strategy
Posted by: brian | Feb 23, 2011 7:25:21 PM | 157
brian
*Go ahead..try it in the US...get the US govt to crack down violently...keep it up long enough and see what happens*
Posted by: denk | Feb 23, 2011 7:43:28 PM | 158
I usually don't understand Slothrop's posts. I gather his main point of late is that some here don't support revolutions against bad regimes solely because the U.S. supports them or initiated them in some non-open way. Being fairly familiar with the usual MOA bar patrons, I think Slothrop is totally wrong about this. Quite simply, r'giap is clear and correct: Slothrop ignores the people in every instance. This was particularly obvious during the Iraq War. It was true then and it is true now that the Iraqi people have suffered the losses of dignity, family, property, health and life itself. For what? In this respect also, r'giap is probably correct; that is, U.S. imperialism is the #1 problem facing humanity. And I include the humanity of the American people in this also. It is hard to compare something often ubiquitous to immediate pressing problems such as food shortages, water shortages, energy shortages, etc. However, these problems are intertwined with U.S. imperialism, pushed by corporate interests and greed.
I believe it may have been r'giap who hinted that these Arab revolutions are related to U.S. imperialism, especially the War/Occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan. We saw the Egyptian people unwilling to accept their new VP, Suleiman, as even a temporary leader. From reading young Egyptian posters on the Internet, it was apparent that the youth were well aware that this man was not only too close to Mubarak, but was too close with the U.S. and Israel. In contrast, the American youth have been a disappointment in their interest and knowledge of U.S. and World situations. However, positive changes are beginning to be seen in the last two or three years. Ron Paul's support, even though he is an older man, comes from the youth because they realize the folly of our foreign endeavors, and the folly of our Federal Reserve. Many threads ago, after one of the U.S. representatives and other bystanders were shot, some of them fatal, there was a discussion on the value vs. horror of gun ownership. Most posters said that gun ownership was a bad thing and is not helpful, even in times of invasion or revolution. I believe it was Debs who pointed to the Iraqis who widely owned guns and yet offered no match to high tech weapons. I never had time to post my final thoughts on this but I believe the reason the U.S. was successful in the early stages (surely not a "cakewalk" but initial resistance was surprisingly minimal) is not related to weaponry. The average Iraqi person did not fight, not because of weapon technology, but because they actually thought positive change was coming to their lives, though "Shock and Awe" played a role to be sure. In some respect, the propaganda was not totally unlike the American people being fooled, both the young and the old, both the “left” and the “right”, that positive change was coming with Obama. Yet here, we find the Arab world wiser and maybe not so easily misled. And although I remain optimistic, the new Arab world may still find it difficult to escape the lure of shiny objects inside the modern prison of corporate greed.
Posted by: Rick | Feb 23, 2011 8:06:46 PM | 159
claudio
*the idea of a No Flying Zone is interesting; why don't we experiment it on Gaza first?*
the paper
*That would be the start of an idea. I vote for another one above Lebanon. And then someone teaching some western politicians why dropping a missile from an 'unmanned' plane (like there isn't an human controlling it) on some 'terrorists'*
hmmm
which begs the question.. what about that elephant in the room ?
this monstrous killing machine has been ratching up colossal *collateral damage* since ww2 with total impunity
*humanitarian bombing in ex yugo
wasting fallujah
.......
i could go on for days except i've works to do n this software allows for only 3 links ;-(
the yanks n brits have been committing atrocities on a daily basis and yet the *international communities* [sic] is contend to let them assume the role of prosecutor, judge n executioner all in one.
is this *ic* insane ?
nfz for the evil twins, that'd be POETIC JUSTICE, innit ?
Posted by: denk | Feb 23, 2011 8:30:39 PM | 160
the impulses in each & every country are made up of very different & differing elements - & i would be very surprised if there is not enormous interference from outside
egypt was the jewel in the crown & i cannot see imperial power letting it go, so too bahrain - the saudis & the israel are no doubt shitting their pants in this moment - with the wealth of possibilities
gaddaffi's opposition is not unlike himself - the two salafist currents which are least consensual are in libya - the libyan salvation front & in algeria - the gia or its inheritors
i hope the masses have the means to thwart bot imperialists & those who would seek to limit their possibilities
& yes rick you are right - i did not explain myself well but for all the 'admiration' for the gloss of america - there has been a profound hatred really cultivated in the last ten years perhaps more but iraq & the refusal to do anything about the palestinian question has told the people of the middle east exactly what the empire thought - for me that day to day hatred has been cultivated to such a degree that it is not only the possession of fundamentalists but it would seem to me enormous section of the population in each of these countries
& you are right to make the point that what is happening in europe & the us to the underclass, the poor, the working poor & parts of the middle class are going to have resonance with the events in the middle east, how power can be challenged
greece is a perfect example of this where you have an insurrectionary activity happening in parallel to a 'normal' functioning society
& there are not so many shiny things to offer in our times - even in the west, they cannot guarantee work, housing & health - i witness this every day in my work
Posted by: remembereringgiap | Feb 23, 2011 8:34:32 PM | 161
this is how the bullshit organ of capital sees it
Posted by: remembereringgiap | Feb 23, 2011 8:42:42 PM | 162
rick
In a language even you can understand: people everywhere fighting despotic regimes deserve support. I certainly support protesters in Iran & elsewhere to stand up against religious tyrants and monarchs.
Rick, in a language you can understand, I am quite unlike rememberinggiap and assorted USuk(ers) on this question of support for protesters against tyrannies. These boorish retards do not support the protesters in Libya, or the protesters in iran, or the protesters in Syria (when that happens), because these countries have historically opposed US assertion of power in the region. In other words, USukers are hypocrites who don't give a shit about "the people."
if you cannot understand what I've just said, then you are a dolt.
Posted by: slothrop | Feb 23, 2011 8:48:55 PM | 163
r'giap,
i am completely unconcerned by slothrop's petty interventions. for five years he been demonstrably wrong to the point of perversion. what he does or does not say is a matter of complete differenceMy highly respected friend, then why do you keep responding to his bait. You continually feed him energy by taking apart his shit. Let it lay and it will rot into cyber oblivion. Your commentary is valuable except when you bite for his trolling, which you have continually done since your above quote. Please, just let it be the shit it is. I and most of us here, I'm sure, don't need you to awaken us to see dog shit when it is in our path.
Posted by: juannie | Feb 23, 2011 8:53:31 PM | 164
r'giap,
i am completely unconcerned by slothrop's petty interventions. for five years he been demonstrably wrong to the point of perversion. what he does or does not say is a matter of complete differenceMy highly respected friend, then why do you keep responding to his bait. You continually feed him energy by taking apart his shit. Let it lay and it will rot into cyber oblivion. Your commentary is valuable except when you bite for his trolling, which you have continually done since your above quote. Please, just let it be the shit it is. I and most of us here, I'm sure, don't need you to awaken us to see dog shit when it is in our path.
Posted by: juannie | Feb 23, 2011 8:53:31 PM | 165
oh c'mon, juannie. just look at their arguments. Answer a simple question: what the mullahs in iran ever permit the supreme leader to be toppled by popular election? Of course not. So, it's reasonable to support persons in Iran who protest against the mullahs. But your highly respected friend doesn't care in the least about the protesters in iran, because the mullahs are anti-Israel, anti-America. This may be a good thing. But that's beside the point. at the point is that all protesters confronting state oppression deserves support.
Posted by: slothrop | Feb 23, 2011 9:10:53 PM | 166
Well. I think it's a little funny to say, or imply, that the US is using Gandhi's tactics. One has to possesses the ethos in order to apply the paradigm. The US is a spook power and the CIA and/or Brzezinski do not control worldwide revolutionary youth, they are not the handlers, except in the egocentric realm of psychotic solipsism. The spooks, the CIA, do have their stubby, sausage-like fingers on lethal hardware, the robot drones. They do field a number of assassins, like the cretin who is now in police custody in Pakistan. They are pimps, drug dealers, and stool- pidgin peddling rat-fuckers. But I am certain that they have no talent manipulating revolutions.
I laugh at your assertions that you're right about anything in five years. You're completely wrong about Iraq. According to you, Iraqi nationalism was going to crush the American army; according to you, sectarian clashes were impossible because Iraq never experienced sectarian conflict, which of course, was completely untrue; that the kurds were digging their own graves, as you said; according to you, there would never be a de facto partition of the country, etc.
This is just one historical event in the past 10 years you've been utterly wrong about, at just about every turn. But because you're a stupid old mule, you keep kicking away. What else are you going to do?
Posted by: slothrop | Feb 23, 2011 9:18:11 PM | 168
copeland, in essence, i am in full agreement though in the immediate post revolutionary period there will be,"a number of assassins, like the cretin who is now in police custody in Pakistan. They are pimps, drug dealers, and stool- pidgin peddling rat-fuckers." & there will be elements of empire doing their best to fuck up the masses desires
& yes yr right juannie - i forget , i see enough earnestness even through the insults, but in the end i waste my time & those of others
Posted by: remembereringgiap | Feb 23, 2011 9:26:23 PM | 170
"& there are not so many shiny things to offer in our times"
We in the U.S. are almost being forced to buy these shiny things. The things get more shiny, more hollow.
Like a cancer killing its host.
Posted by: Rick | Feb 23, 2011 9:32:10 PM | 172
oh good grief, annie. This video could have been taken at any time, any place. and now we know that the victims are actually dead? Smells to me like a CIA propaganda stunt. The Western media have done everything they can to sully the reputation of everybody's favorite arab bogeyman.
There now, see how it works? USuk 101.
Posted by: slothrop | Feb 23, 2011 10:03:06 PM | 173
tsk tsk tsk...
the *ic* stikes again,
*The international community must get over the foolishness of the 2003 invasion, and take swift action against Gaddafi*
http://tinyurl.com/498l3da
hey old chap
if there's justice in this world, that us/uk evil twins ought to be hauled to the world court and tried for crimes against humanity by now.
but it aint gonna happens coz
the inmates have taken over the asylum ;-(
p.s. i'm banned by the guardian, economist, bbc, wsj, iht, huffpo, etc etc....wow, aint these the *icons of free speech* which always lambast china's censorship ?
Posted by: denk | Feb 23, 2011 10:49:27 PM | 174
and what was the rallying call for the iraq invasion ?
**The international community must get over the mistake of nam and take swift action against saddam*
mind u, that *mistake* in nam ratched up a 3m *collateral damage*
what about that iraq *foolishness*, the most conservative estimate is 1m ?
Posted by: denk | Feb 23, 2011 10:54:33 PM | 175
owl
*But these are modern Western weapons killing unarmed civilians, and if we don't at least level the playing field a little with regard to air power, there will be a bloodbath that could very well spark a regional war. *
us/uk/nato have been perpetrating INDUSTRIAL SCALE BLOODBATH on a daily basis since ww2, the *collacteral damage* runs up to tens of millions at least.
where's that fucking *ic* ?
u want nato to *level the playing field * for the anti kadafi forces ?
what chances has this *world cop* given to the ak47 armed resistance fighters in afpak, iraq when they shit such craps like d.u. and daisy cutters from 30 miles up ?
Posted by: denk | Feb 24, 2011 12:13:05 AM | 176
not to mention the hapless civilians who get incinerated by a sudden bolt of death hurtled outta the sky.
and what might be their crimes ?
they just happend to be around when some *operator* in langley sent a couple of hellfire to take out another *terrarist suspect*
it sure feel cool to be the *world's oldest democrazy* when u enjoy *extraterritorial right* to perform *extra judicial execution* all over the world innit ?
ah, thats what i call the ultimate freedom !
Posted by: denk | Feb 24, 2011 12:28:25 AM | 177
weve had lies that Gaddafi fled to Venezuela..that clearly came from the anti venezuelan neocon playbook...you lot would have believed that because it was in the media.Now its been refuted by Venezuela...
How many more lies are being spun by gaddafis enemies and being printed up as media reports for you to uncritically believe?
Posted by: brian | Feb 24, 2011 1:11:13 AM | 178
weve had lies that Gaddafi fled to Venezuela..that clearly came from the anti venezuelan neocon playbook...you lot would have believed that because it was in the media.Now its been refuted by Venezuela...
How many more lies are being spun by gaddafis enemies and being printed up as media reports for you to uncritically believe?
Posted by: brian | Feb 24, 2011 1:11:15 AM | 179
I suppose the tiresome Slothrop character considers his use of a gravity's rainbow character rather outre.
Using a nym based on any pynchon yawn especially that contrivance of inaccessibility 'gravitys rainbow' shows that anyone who would use such a nym and be a ra ra ra cheerleader for the USA has missed the ugly reality that lies at the heart of pynchons monotonously labyrinthine apologues.
That is that the narratives are essentially old yarns rehashed to make full understanding a sweat. A sweat, hell a chore is closer to it. Pynchon's patter seems to be that the peculiarly north american notion that true art must be hard. For Tom, that is best reinforced by making the story an exercise in simple, if back breaking decoding. Anyone who swots up on obscure trivia can 'get it'. Especially trivia based on mid 20th century scientific theory which allows T.P.'s natural audience of the aging over-educated (sufficiently monied to buy this lame shit in hardcover) to get a head-start on the decoding.
Understanding this true art 'properly in the approved manner' is then a Horatio Alger myth, he who sweats hard enough can claim to understand it. The reward is as good as owning a better motor car than your neighbour. An exercise in one upmanship where materialism has been replaced with pseudo-intellectualism. It is still consumerist - knowledge or technology - whatever.
So when I read slothrop I have this image of a pudgy english teacher at a community college, who has been spouting the same hackneyed critiques of "The Crying of lot 49" for the last 30 years.
No wonder he waffles on about being a structural marxist. This is exactly the blather of those desperate to make a mountain out of a literary molehill.
Hang on! Karl never met the Soho post modernists, he got there about 100 years too soon. Oops Sloth misses the point again.
Posted by: Paradise Mislaid | Feb 24, 2011 4:44:47 AM | 180
Slothrop,
Who are you to judge what a particular foreign society/culture desires as a nation when it is only a small minority protesting? Compound that with outside interference and it is difficult to ascertain propaganda from reality. If you wish to physically go to a foreign nation and join the protesters, or go there and “preach” your own desires/values to them (or do your preaching by remote communication) so be it. Some things of other cultures are either none of my or my nation's business or , at best, left until I get my own house in order.
Here in America, I have seen large groups misled by propaganda and they end up supporting something they never intended or desired. To manipulate people has become more than an art, it is now a science.
Therefore, I do not dismiss brian's comments in total, it is just in these latest Arab uprisings it appears obvious that the “West” has been caught off-guard so to speak. When viewed through U.S./Israeli interests, any interference in causing the uprisings would at least seem premature on their part as the results seem a more united population without a puppet leader. More likely, it was economic issues and other lack of opportunities more than anything else, spurring the youth to action. In this, I see no reason not to support the uprising(s).
Posted by: Rick | Feb 24, 2011 5:40:11 AM | 181
'Therefore, I do not dismiss brian's comments in total, it is just in these latest Arab uprisings it appears obvious that the “West” has been caught off-guard so to speak.'
well, Rick...maybe..maybe not.
http://tarpley.net/2011/02/18/mubarak-toppled-by-cia-because-he-opposed-us-plans-for-war-with-iran/
Posted by: brian | Feb 24, 2011 6:06:10 AM | 182
Copeland:
'Well. I think it's a little funny to say, or imply, that the US is using Gandhi's tactics. One has to possesses the ethos in order to apply the paradigm'
the US is using Gandhi tactics...its not implied...Gene Sharp who sillhy people like to sanwich his name wih Gandhis, because they assume he is against dictators anywhere...Gandi was only against the british overlords..He did not take his methods elsewhere.
Gene Sharp has put his borrowed tactics at the service of Venezuelans enemies of Chavez, as well and OTPOR:
'First noted by geopolitical analyst and historian Dr. Webster Tarpley, some suspicious similarities could be seen between the Egyptian unrest and another, known US-backed uprising in Serbia. Serbia's Otpor, or the "resistance," was funded to the tune of millions by the US National Endowment for Democracy. Its signature clenched fist logo adorned flags, signboards, and t-shirts carried by the US State Department-laid astro-turf until the ousting of Slobodan Milošević in 2000.'
http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2011/02/cia-coup-college.html
so either your ignorant and clueless or ....
Posted by: brian | Feb 24, 2011 6:12:47 AM | 183
Copeland:
'Well. I think it's a little funny to say, or imply, that the US is using Gandhi's tactics. One has to possesses the ethos in order to apply the paradigm'
the US is using Gandhi tactics...its not implied...Gene Sharp who sillhy people like to sanwich his name wih Gandhis, because they assume he is against dictators anywhere...Gandi was only against the british overlords..He did not take his methods elsewhere.
Gene Sharp has put his borrowed tactics at the service of Venezuelans enemies of Chavez, as well and OTPOR:
'First noted by geopolitical analyst and historian Dr. Webster Tarpley, some suspicious similarities could be seen between the Egyptian unrest and another, known US-backed uprising in Serbia. Serbia's Otpor, or the "resistance," was funded to the tune of millions by the US National Endowment for Democracy. Its signature clenched fist logo adorned flags, signboards, and t-shirts carried by the US State Department-laid astro-turf until the ousting of Slobodan Milošević in 2000.'
http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2011/02/cia-coup-college.html
so either your ignorant and clueless or ....
Posted by: brian | Feb 24, 2011 6:12:47 AM | 184
u s imperialism was defeated in iraq as surely as fascism was defeated at stalingrad, only it does not know it
in this instance an empire was finished by what in chess is called i think a self-mate
those in the middle east have a different conception of time & the real results of the cheney bush junta's 'inventing facts/history on the ground" will be proved to be as empty as we thought. the cost of the empire's loss is incalculable in human terms - a genocide if there ever was one & the collapse of their financial berlin wall in 2008 - a direct result
as dylan once sd - something is happening here & you don't know what it is, do you mr jones
Posted by: remembereringgiap | Feb 24, 2011 6:15:50 AM | 185
'In a language even you can understand: people everywhere fighting despotic regimes deserve support. I certainly support protesters in Iran & elsewhere to stand up against religious tyrants and monarchs.'
nice to know Slops supports the overthrow of israels jewish tyranny and dictatorship.
Iran however has already has its confrontation with the Green colour revolutionaries..they lacked the support of the mass of the people.
Posted by: brian | Feb 24, 2011 6:15:50 AM | 186
I believe the strategy of the West as it relates to areas of strategic interest around the globe, is as follows, in order from highest preferred outcome to lowest.
1.) Controlled Order - This was Egypt for the last 30 years. You secure a dictator, or dictatorial government, ply it with all manner of bribes, arm it to the hilt and have it do what it needs to do to keep its population in order so that geopolitical strategy can be executed without restraint.
2.) Contained Chaos - if #1 fails, or has no possibility of manifesting, then actions are taken to collapse the state and create an environment of contained chaos, to include special ops on the ground to factionalize the population of the target country and inculcate violent clashes, thus inducing the semblance of a civil war, the parameters of which can be contained and manipulated. Afghanistan, and even Iraq, are prime examples of this strategy, and Egypt too, will be, if the youth refuse to do the West's bidding with their wished for Government.
3.) Uncontrolled/Uncontained Chaos - If #1 and #2 have proved impossible, or too costly from a cost/benefit standpoint, uncontrolled/uncontained chaos will be tolerate as opposed to #4, so long as the target country has nuclear capacity. Somalia is a prime example of this.
4.) Uncontrolled Order - This must be avoided at all costs. This means that the target country is truly independent and free from manipulation and coercion by Western forces. Iran is an example. If #4 manifests, every effort must be made to move the target country to # 1, 2, or 3 above.
Note I use the term the West, and I'm going to keep using that term. This is where slothrop has kept me honest. I believe it was Copeland who discussed the shift of the Global Plutocracy's operations from the UK to the US after WWII. I agree with this assessment, but we are now in a time when the Nation-State increasingly has no validity except to create a false illusion amongst the somewhat sentient in order to prevent them from looking behind the curtain or seeing a curtain, at all.
Posted by: Morocco Bama | Feb 24, 2011 7:26:15 AM | 187
origin of the: gaddaffi is in Venezuela lie? It seems its a brit:
'The foreign minister of Venezuela, Nicolas Maduro, said that he hard conversed with his counterpart in Libya, who had given him assurance that Col Gadaffi was still in Libya. He described Mr Hague’s comments as irresponsible. Later that day, Col Gadaffi appeared on his country’s state TV and described malicious rumours about his leaving as the work of hating channels. Outside a ruined building, he stated that he was in Tripoli (the capital) and not Venezuela.
Mr Hague made his comments at an EU meeting of foreign ministers on Monday, saying he had viewed unconfirmed information which suggested that Col Gaddafi was en route to Venezuela. However, Mr Maduro stated that Moussa Koussa, his Libyan counterpart, had spoken with him from Tripoli and confirmed that Col Gaddafi was managing the situation confronting Libya.
http://www.discountvouchers.co.uk/news/166293535.html
so where did he get his unconfirmed info? and if unconfirmed info, why broadcast it?
To demonise Venezuela?
Posted by: brian | Feb 24, 2011 7:46:30 AM | 188
Tyrone Slothrop. (Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow.)
heh, Paradise Mislaid nailed it. thx. not that it matters, but i did wonder, frown in concentration, anagrams and the like, i even read that book...
I haven’t read Paradise Mislaid (by Anne Whitehead.)
trivia, ignore, carry on
Posted by: Noirette | Feb 24, 2011 9:49:23 AM | 189
Justin Raimondo argues against U.S. intervention in Libya:
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2011/02/22/interventionists-target-libya/
Posted by: mistah charley, ph.d. | Feb 24, 2011 11:39:15 AM | 190
I'm against intervention, as well, because we all know what that would mean. However, I believe it is pretty much inevitable. This from the Cheerleading Puppet In Chief.
As more Libyan towns and cities fell to anti-government forces Wednesday, U.S. President Barack Obama said Washington is preparing "the full range of options" to respond to the ongoing violence in the oil-rich North African state.In a five-minute televised statement from the White House, Obama stressed that Washington preferred to act in concert with other nations and international institutions.
"This is not simply a concern of the United States," he said as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stood by his side. "The entire world is watching, and we will coordinate our assistance and accountability measures with the international community."
But he also hinted that Washington may consider taking unspecified unilateral action against the regime of Libyan leader Muammar Gadhafi.
"I’ve …asked my administration to prepare the full range of options that we have to respond to this crisis," he said. "This includes those actions we may take and those we will coordinate with our allies and partners, or those that we’ll carry out through multilateral institutions."
He didn't ask his "administration" anything. The MIC told him to make a brief announcement, and so he did.
Posted by: Morocco Bama | Feb 24, 2011 12:19:16 PM | 191
Correction @ 187 above.
I said:
so long as the target country has nuclear capacity.
that should read
so long as the target country does not have nuclear capacity.
Pakistan, for example, would always only be allowed #1 status. If any of the others manifested, full on invasion would be necessary along the scale of Nato's intervention in Yugoslavia.
Posted by: Morocco Bama | Feb 24, 2011 1:02:44 PM | 192
My criticism of the hypocrisy of b, giap, noirette, debs, aka USukers is reasonable. They only support the revolutions aimed at toppling auspicious pro-US tyrants.
Juannie, fuck you, really. That was out of line.
Also, there are some really stupid people visiting this blog.
Posted by: slothrop | Feb 24, 2011 1:46:19 PM | 193
rick
*It seems the majority of posters here think the U.S. CIA is in some way instigating/coordinating this revolution even to the point that the bloodshed is propaganda or if real, then purposeful for U.S. evil designs
as they believe the U.S. has its next dictator already lined up to replace Qaddafi.*
u cant blame them, if someone set fire to a building, the neighbors' n police investigators would certainly consider a known serial arsonist in the area the prime suspect. elementary watson ?
after all, cia has done this many times b4
2 classic examples
*If you think the bumbling fools in the U.S. government are that
proficient, any further debate here is useless.*
firstly, ur premise is faulty, those *bumbling fools* in the us gov are above such shenanigans [sic], coz they've dedicated teams of pros
working 24x7 in the basement of langley n pentagon , looking for *spark * all over the world ;-)
*CIA in-house analysts, stung by lapses in predicting the Soviet and
Yugoslav collapses, apparently had begun leaning toward a view that ethnic nationalism could split China with the right spark.* [just one example]
and *bumbling fools* or not, these guys have chalked up a very impressive track record, just the tip of the iceberg mind u...its still work in progress.
Posted by: denk | Feb 24, 2011 11:28:10 PM | 194
if u've the stomach, here're the gory details
*With the children forced to watch they gang-rape the mother, and slash her breasts off. And sometimes for variety, they make the parents watch while they do these things to the children.*
as another example, here's an all time classics, the company men are very nostalgic about one of their *greaterst hit*, they still talk about it around the water dispenser these days.
*propaganda operations were authorised from the MI6 base in
Singapore, which planted fabricated stories about arms shipments from
China in the international media. The purpose, one intelligence officer wrote, was to "blacken the PKI in the eyes of the army and the people of Indonesia*
a little disinfo set off a wholesale massacre that liquidated sukarno n 2m victims.
the same template has been used with deadly effect in asia, south
america, africa, me, ever since.
how's that for *proficiency* ?
Posted by: denk | Feb 24, 2011 11:33:05 PM | 195
secondly, even if the cia, er, they call it ned these days , are *bumbling fools*, u certainly cant blame them for trying.
they had their share of blunders, but they always came back n eventually succeeded in many well documented cases
*In 1990, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) spent $1.5
million in an attempt to defeat the Bulgarian Socialist Party.� This is another huge amount of money pouring into a small country with a
population of about 7.5 million.
Interestingly, in the case of Bulgaria, the US's first attempt to snatch the elections away from the Socialists did not work.� The Socialist Party won, but the NED was not deterred.� Immediately after the elections this CIA-front went to work: they promoted and funded a six-month destabilization effort.� This included street demonstrations, strikes, sit-ins, sieges of parliament and, eventually, the prime minister was forced to resign. (8) *
examples abound, it took them 3 attempts to remove artiside , they
failed to oust chavez but they have been trying ever since.
one classic example. is china, tam, tibet 1959, 1987, 2008, xinjiang
2009, flg, all ended in failure but they keep coming back.
is it just *coincidence* that now we've some mysterious outfit based in amerikka instigating for a *jasmine revolution* in china ?
no, we havent *proved* cia involvement yet.....but our *conspiracy
theory* make much more sense than ur cavalier dismissal of such
*possibility*, coz *those bumbling fools are unlikely to pull off such a trick.*
Posted by: denk | Feb 24, 2011 11:37:40 PM | 196
Everything the imperial power structure touches, turns to shit. Gandhi's methods, on the other hand, have consequences and are fundamentally anti-imperial, such as the march to the sea, that he led, to rally opposition against the British salt tax. Gandhi's methods involve consciousness and are not superficially oppositional; they aim at a deep transformation. The crudest and most vulgar political players cannot use morally transformative processes to further their crude, vulgar ends.
I don't think I'm mistaken about that.
'The Socialist Party won, but the NED was not deterred.� Immediately after the elections this CIA-front went to work: they promoted and funded a six-month destabilization effort.� This included street demonstrations, strikes, sit-ins, sieges of parliament and, eventually, the prime minister was forced to resign. (8) *'
thats why there needs to be laws to keep this sort of crime from happening....Outlaw the NED
Posted by: brian | Feb 25, 2011 2:47:24 AM | 198
One thing's for certain, declining oil & gas production=global recession, especially in Europe.
Posted by: slothrop | Feb 28, 2011 10:35:12 AM | 199
The comments to this entry are closed.
& yes when your interior minister resigns & calls for armed insurrection - i'd say most people might understand it's time to go
Posted by: remembereringgiap | Feb 22, 2011 9:29:33 PM | 101