I see no one really talks about Libya any more.
Tagged: lying liars Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts
-
thabet
-
thabet
The Saudi Lobby:
-
Arwi
Saudi Arabia’s record is no better than Iran’s when it comes to respect for human rights.
Saudi is surely far worse. A limited, flawed and marred democracy is better than a monarchy, and women in Saudi are struggling for the right to drive while women in Iran have far more autonomy, professional opportunity and public participation.
-
thabet
-
-
thabet
-
thabet
Speaking to a delegation in Kuwait, Sheikh Abdul Aziz bin Abdullah, stressed that since the tiny Gulf state was a part of the Arabian Peninsula, it was necessary to destroy all of the churches in the country, Arabic media have reported.
-
thabet
-
-
thabet
-
thabet
Well, there’s a surprise: Eric Pickles, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, turns out to have promoted right-wing tabloid rubbish when he used the Winterval myth last November to try and distract attention from the Tory-led government’s unjust cuts to local and public services.
On a related note, BBC Radio 4 had a programme on negative stories about Muslims in the British press. I got this via Tabloid Watch which noted:
But were any of the newspapers that pump out this rubbish willing to defend their ‘stories’?
Neither the Daily Mail, Telegraph, Star or Sun wished to appear on the programme today, and the editor of the Express was simply ‘too busy’.
Well worth a listen.
-
Yakoub
A spokesperson for the toothless Press Complaints Commission agreed to be interviewed, although they no longer “regulate” papers belonging to one of the worst offenders, The Express Group.
-
-
thabet
-
thabet
Documents obtained by researchers show that November 2001 is when the Bush regime started ‘developing its plan to attack Iraq’.
As Juan Cole helpfully notes:
[Donald] Rumsfeld’s memo certainly violates the charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal on war crimes…
But who cares? One of the lessons we have learnt today is that ‘international norms’ only apply to Eastasia (or was it Eurasia?).
-
Mitchell
One of Juan Cole’s assertions is that a section of the memo entitled “How start?” contains a list of ideas on how to start the war under false pretenses. I made the simple comment that “how start” means “How might it start”, not “How can we start it”. That was at least ten hours ago, at a time when no comments had gone through. There are ten comments there now, and it still hasn’t shown up. Maybe he’s thinking about how to respond…
-
thabet
I made the simple comment that “how start” means “How might it start”, not “How can we start it”.
Here’s a simpler comment: the US invaded Iraq based on lies, fabricated evidence, etc.
-
Mitchell
Maybe I should leave this alone and settle for making my point about Cole’s mistake. But since you bring up the bigger picture…
For a long time, I thought that the true history since 1991 (Iraq’s withdrawal from Kuwait) was one of Iraq sponsoring attacks on the US (starting with the February 1993 WTC bombing), the US government hiding as much of that situation as possible, then fabricating a reason for a counterattack (e.g. the supposed Iraqi attempt to assassinate Bush Sr in Kuwait in 1993, which served to justify the bombing of Iraqi intelligence in July that year). This escalated through the 1990s, and 9/11, the anthrax letters, and the invasion of Iraq in quest of WMDs were simply the apotheosis of this process.
If you entertain this scenario, there are two ways to interpret the anthrax letters. You could see them as an attempt by an American insider to forcibly connect 9/11 with the WMD issue; or, you could see it as a signal from Iraq of the next level of escalation should America attempt regime change. And I favor the latter interpretation. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was the operational mastermind of 9/11. After many months of dragging out the issue, the first actual deadline for an Iraq invasion was only announced after KSM was captured in Pakistan at the home of a microbiologist. So I suspect that the war was on hold until the threat of weaponized anthrax being dispersed in American cities was neutralized as much as possible.
Furthermore, I always figured that Iraq got that “Ames strain” anthrax, around 1988, at the time when Iraq was still considered an ally against Iran, from the biowarfare division of the UK’s MOD, when David Kelly was in charge, and that this is why he was murdered – so he couldn’t talk about it. Meanwhile, some years later in America, Bruce Ivins was framed as the anthrax mailer, and subtly driven towards suicide.
I therefore find myself in a peculiar no-man’s-land of hybridized conspiracy theory, in which the American state and the British state did indeed lie and assassinate in order to wage their war, but in which Iraq was also a state sponsor of part of al Qaeda.
This situation of mutually covert asymmetric warfare is far from unique. It appears to be part of how “great powers” and “rogue states” interact. And in my experience, it makes a politics of truth and morality a very difficult thing. I remember hoping that Obama would beat Hillary Clinton because I figured that the Clintons were just as much a part of the meta-cover-up as Bush. To expose just part of the truth would really just strengthen a new political lie.
Also, this sort of truth is just too complicated for mass politics. If an everyday person is driven to consider conspiracies, “9/11 was an inside job” is about as far as they’ll get – and Ahmadinejad is giving us a glimpse of a future where that belief begins to acquire political significance. The realist in me says you will never succeed in producing a government of truth, anywhere, ever; at most, you will only get a government of belief. Totally honest people in politics are either honest dupes or honest fanatics. It may be that sometimes it’s better to have a new start under the dupes and the fanatics, rather than to perpetuate a regime of cynicism and cruelty. But whoever is in power will eventually have to lie, if they wish to stay in power.
-
shams
as an insider, i have to point out that the mil think tanks did actually believe in the WMDs. The problem was that Saddam feared Iran more than the US, and deliberately spoofed the Iranians….post 911 and after our abortive foray into the Graveyard of Empires the think tanks ran the threat assesstment matrices and Uncle Saddam popped up as the biggest bite we could swallow. It was pretty shocking to him, cuz America propped him in the Iraq/Iran war.
After we found no WMDs (remember, post GULF I we had no HUMINT from Iraq, only IMMINT and EO). Rather than saying oops our bad, Bush embarked on the Epic Fail of the Manifest Destiny of Judeoxian Democracy.
Rove and Cheney were smart enough to know that what Bush was attempting was impossible, but exploited that fucking WEC retard for their own goals– a wartime electorate and a wartime economy.
Bush would have lost his second term if not for the war in Iraq.-
thabet
as an insider, i have to point out that the mil think tanks did actually believe in the WMDs.
Who cares what think tanks ‘believed’?
Actual insiders, who were responsible for the intelligence coming to the Blair government, said things like this:
Even a loyal Labour minister told the ongoing Iraq Inquiry:
Earlier inquiries in Britain showed that intelligence officials conceded the evidence was ‘patchy’ and ‘sporadic’.
-
thabet
In this I would say the Bush regime was far more honest than Blair. They didn’t care if Saddam Hussien had those weapons or not, whether he was funding terrorism or not. They just wanted to invade Iraq no matter what — this is what the evidence shows.
-
shams
Thabet i worked with some of those guys. One of the clearances i held while working for my masters thesis says the oath meant criticizing a sitting president was forbidden. Iraq was a knee jerk reaction to 911.
That fucking WEC retard Bush believed the EXACT same STUPID thing you do…. that muslims would joyfully accept Our Wunnerful Superior Westernstyle/Judeoxian Gift Democracy.
The biological basis of behavior and EGT make that impossible. -
thabet
Actually it is orientalists like you and Bush who narrowly define Muslim politics. The only difference between you and Bush et al is the latter believed the force of arms and rigging elections is needed to ensure imperial ambitions are maintained. Your man Obama is a little more of a realist but cannot brook the sight of independent Muslim countries (eg Turkey). You however justify “Islamic” oppression with ref to “biology” or social norms or whatever you’re wittering on about. And when internal dissent is brought up you dismiss them as “noobs”.
I readily accept the wide spread of political movements in Muslim countries from pan-Islamic ones to religious-nationalist ones to ethnic ones to those who integrate themselves into international leftism.
Try “living in Colorado”!
-
shams
what are you talking about? im not an orientalist and you and Bush and razib are all colonialists and western culture chavinists. You all believe in the moral authority of western/judeochristian democracy….you all believe that muslim majority countries should adopt western models as a panacea for their ills.
it can’t be done.
im citing the biological basis of behavior.You however justify “Islamic” oppression with ref to “biology” or social norms or whatever you’re wittering on about.
i am not saying radical fundamentalist shariah is benevolent– im saying it cannot be changed in situ with judeochristian proselytizing because of EGT and the absence of secular substrate like secular law schools.
Is that razibs hand up your butt working your jaws?what does your “living in colorado” remark mean?
i rent. neither you or razib know anything about me.Finally, i don’t know if Obama harbors imperialist intentions.
I do know that Bush was a fucking WEC retard that was too stupid to get that when muslims are democratically empowered to vote, they vote for islam. There is such a thing as islamic democracy, evidenced by Iraq and Turkey.
American ‘westernstyle democracy’ == judeochristian democracy.
that is a fact.
and that is what our missionaries with guns failed to proselytize in Iraq and Afghanistan. -
shams
nice that you are razibs sockpuppet now thabet.
do you think muslims are barbarians too? -
shams
brother thabet, you apparently believe in the moral authority of western/judeochristian culture. that means you believe al-Islam needs ‘reform’, to become more like western/judeochristian society…… is this true?
-
thabet
Please show me one quote where I said anything about the superiority of “westernstyle moral authority” or the need for Muslims to adopt “western democracy”. Thanks.
Let me note that Turkey no longer has the death penalty. This was introduced by the Ak Party.
-
shams
by the AK [Islamic] party.
you only say three things here…Obama is worse than Bush, i hate tony blair, and those hirgabi fundamentalists are giving Islam a bad name. that is the sum of all your links.
the implication is that Our Superior Judeoxian Democracy would solve the islam problems of the hirgabi.
do you believe in judexianity now?
-
thabet
So you can’t show me a quote where I said “believe in the moral authority of western/judeochristian culture”?
Good. Progress of sorts.
-
thabet
-
shams
nah. the AKP is the PERCIEVED ISLAMIC party. the consent of the governed.
So………you don’t believe westernstyle democracy is better for muslim populations? Then why are you trying so hard to refute that there can be islamic democracy?
my bad. -
thabet
you don’t believe westernstyle democracy is better for muslim populations?
Show me one quote where I suggested this. In the absence of such evidence, why are you even disagreeing with me when I clearly stated:
I readily accept the wide spread of political movements in Muslim countries from pan-Islamic ones to religious-nationalist ones to ethnic ones to those who integrate themselves into international leftism.
-
shams
subanallah! then there can be islamic democracy?
what are we fighting over then?
just admit Turkey is evolving from Kemalist occidentalism to islamic selfrepresentation and we can be friends again.
the only kind of democracy cannot be judeoxian democracy.
that was cause of Our Epic Fail in Iraq and Afghanistan– proselytizing judeoxian democracy because americans are evangelists at heart. -
shams
pardon Kemalist occidentalism IMPOSED BY A DICTATOR.
you fell in the trap Aziz and Said described– occidental GOOD! islamic BAD! -
thabet
just admit Turkey is evolving from Kemalist occidentalism to islamic selfrepresentation and we can be friends again.
Show me a single quote where I said anything about “Kemalist occidentalism”.
I have always said that other people are perfectly entitled to arrange themselves however they see fit, whatever my own personal opinions on it. For example, I am not the one who supports Obama’s suppression (you do by your uncritical slavering over whatever he does) of the Palestinian electorate, even though I may not agree with the views of Hamas. If Palestinians voted for Hamas, that’s up to them.
-
shams
If Palestinians voted for Hamas, that’s up to them.
i agree totally.
you just argued that the AKP was the “secular party” because they were enacting secular reforms.
the AKP is the islamic party.
you told me in mail that there was no sucha thing as judeochristianity.
retract please. -
shams
im perfectly willing to let other people arrange themselves too…..as long as truth and science and history inform their positions.
My position is that islam is only incompatible with westernstyle/judeochristian democracy.
that islamic democracy is a natural political evolution.
-
-
-
-
-
-
thabet
The political class always requires the media to pass on its propaganda, uncritically, to the masses. Here’s a fine example from grovelling Blairite hack Michael White, whose wit is always targeted on opponents and critics of our political masters:
And here’s a fine example of William Hague rushing to strengthen this fragile system which ought to hold the powerful to account:
-
thabet
-
aziz
hey! he is YOURS. you better take him back or we are going to pull a Fallujah on London. Got it?
-
thabet
Why not? I mean you’ve taken Hitchens and Lewis. What’s another warmongering fanatic between friends?
-
aziz
well, ok. But then we are going to “misplace” GWB. Somewhere in Chelsea, I think…
-
midwinterspring
I have a compromise we can all agree on: Let the UAE have them both.
-
aziz
theymight send back that Xe guy though
-
Shams al-Nahar
nah…..give them to Hamas to barter with.
-
-
-
-
-
-
thabet
Bill Clinton defends Tony Blair:
“People can argue about Iraq – we will find out about Iraq as time passes [...] but on balance [the Special Relationship] has been a good thing for the world because we are not imperialist any more and whatever we do we have the capacity other countries don’t”.
-
thabet
Barack Obama condemns Qur’an-burning pastor; supports child-burning missile strikes:
I really can’t put it any better than this:
[...]
On a similar note, war criminal Tony Blair was also out condemnding the burning of the Qur’an:
“There is fragility and what is important is for Muslims to hear from people like me and to know that the pastor does not represent us any more than extremists represent the truth about Islam.”
No, Tony, no one wants to hear from ‘people like you’ because only ignorant morons care what a warmongering, lying fanatic who launches an illegal, unpopular war based on lies really thinks.
-
shams
The dronestrike program is also entirely stupid– mathematically it is non-cost viable.
As i have repeatedly pointed out.
When Wikileaks posts the Garani massacre video the world will be treated to the slaughter by bomb of 92 children and adolescents.
How many terrorists will that video recruit?
its exponential.
sure thabet, you’re all cranked out NAOW about Obama not gettin’ out fast enuff…., but you and the rest of the maftoons are no different than that WEC retard Bush.-
shams
on the moral authority of western culture.
-
thabet
sure thabet, you’re all cranked out NAOW about Obama not gettin’ out fast enuff…., but you and the rest of the maftoons are no different than that WEC retard Bush.
Touched a nerve did I?
-
-
MikeLyons
I also condemn an act that, although they have every right to do, is a stupid act that will inflame and divide.
I can’t figure out if I’m talking about the Koran burning or the building of the Ground Zero Mosque.
The condemnation applies to both, though.
-
Dan
Oh yes because building a community center two blocks from Ground Zero is the same as burning a book that is revered by over 1.3 billion Muslims.
God, were you born an idiot Mikey?
-
-
thabet are discussing. 
Arwi are discussing. 
shams, 
thabet, and 2 others are discussing. 
Dan, 
MikeLyons, 
aziz 8:25 am on April 20, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I think the question of whether or not to engage in intervention is a good debate we need to have (every time the question arises). But I find the taxpayer-dollar angle to be a red herring. Let’s be honest and admit that no one gives a crap about taxpayers’ expenses, aside from Ron Paul.
Anyway, the cost of the Libyan intervention was barely one Instagram’s worth!
thabet 10:53 am on April 20, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Err, I don’t see anyone having this ‘debate’ now. They’ve all moved onto Syria.
thabet 10:54 am on April 20, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
“Let’s be honest and admit that no one gives a crap about taxpayers’ expenses”
No, not really. Not at a time when shrill voices tell us we must curb public spending for the greater good because we can’t afford it any more.
aziz 7:15 am on April 21, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Domestically speaking, here right now we seem to be winning the debate. The attempted murder of Medicare and Social Security has been thwarted, though vigilance is still required. Medicaid is still vulnerable since by design it’s half funded from the states, and so conservative legislatures can do more damage (example: Texas).
I dont know enough about teh situation in the UK, frankly. I do know that if we had a VAT like you folks did, we’d have no problem funding our social programs at all.