World Politics

[python]

Actually, i am glad the us exposed its hand by both acknowledging that they are behind the fiasco that enraged most of latin america after snowden was not on the bolivian president's plain and by giving an egg in the face of its political prostitutes in europe... The us european hores will now have to explain to their electorate WHY they expressed false indignation about the us spying on the citizens of europe while the only and easy chance to send a message to the american abusers of the european civil rights - to ignore the us false warning about snowden being on the presidential plain - was obeyed like a hore would always do.

An additional benefit to snowden's helpers is that now they know the extent of the us desperation and what they need NOT be doing to oblige the bully.

 

[Tyler'sTwin]

Totally agree with this. An utterly shocking and disgraceful episode that makes you wonder what kind of behind the scenes leverage the US used on countries who are not feeling all that pro-American right now in view of the scale of US spying activities against European allies as revealed by Snowden.

Maybe the NSA has dirt on all these clowns in power?

 

[python]

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/glob...e-moscow-and-exactly-where-he-could-go/66833/

a very interesting article on legal and logistical aspects of how snowden can escape. yesterday's incident with the bolivian president's plain was also considered.

one option i think the author did not consider would be a discrete escape that involves an intermediate stop-over in an anti-us or neutral country (iran ?) with the eventual travel by not necessarily an airplane.

in any case, i think a security agency's cover from a host or stop-over nation is a per-requisite for success.

 

[rhubroma]

The flaming Egyptian drama confirms that there is great confusion under the sun today, for which even the term “democracy,” once not up for discussion, vacillates before the military coup now in action. The Islamist party had democratically won the election: Cairo is a quasi-modern metropolis, quasi-secular, however, the Egyptian hinterland is in the “hands of the clergy” and thus poor and rural Egypt gave its vote to the Muslim Brothers. Raise your hand, however, he that isn’t content with the consequences of that election, or its consensus. Raise your hand, by contrast, he that isn’t a fan of Cairo, the capital, against the reactionary quarter. Yet is this desperate defense of “ modernity” – whatever this may mean – enough to justify a coup d’état against archaism? You see certain long bearded fanatics in the Arab world that make you want not one, but ten armies that (as in Algeria, to the cost of much bloodshed ) impede Islamic fundamentalism from prevailing. Though what legitimacy does a power not elected by the people have in contradicting and nullifying a power elected by the people? The army has prestige (it also generates and hence controls 40% of the Egyptian economy, from military industry to tourism), the experts tell us, and represents the “unity,” imposed obviously by force, of the country. Yet when democracy is a sham, as in this case, what are we to make of it? Just pretend it’s nothing?

It makes me wonder what one earth the American government was thinking when it recklessly and imperiously thought to “bring democracy to the Middle East.” Inevitably democracy also comes with its unsavory outcomes, which can be fervently hostile to the very values and causes for which you hoped the democratic process - i.e. the freedom of a people to choose its governing class, as opposed to the oppression of a dictatorship – would favorably resolve: even to the point of bemoaning the overthrown dictator. In the case of Egypt one could never route for the Muslim Brothers, though not for this is a return to military repression to be considered auspicious.

 

[python]

There we go again...the official response of the guardian of our world's freedom, human rights and democracy is...- 'what happened in egypt was NOT a military coup'.

Then, what do you call the military deposing the democratically elected president, suspending the country's constitution and parliament, arresting dozens of the ruling party officials, slaying dozens of pro president peaceful demonstrators, appointing a figure head puppet president ?

These are confirmed facts from the western main stream media. Yet, it was not a military coup according to washington

 

[Amsterhammer]

There we go again...the official response of the guardian of our world's freedom, human rights and democracy is...- 'what happened in egypt was NOT a military coup'.

Then, what do you call the military deposing the democratically elected president, suspending the country's constitution and parliament, arresting dozens of the ruling party officials, slaying dozens of pro president peaceful demonstrators, appointing a figure head puppet president ?

These are confirmed facts from the western main stream media. Yet, it was not a military coup according to washington

A military coup is not a military coup when 1.6 billion in US military "aid" depends on what you call the armed overthrow of the democratically elected president, whose agenda is starting to scare you sh!tless.

Plus ca change.

 

[patricknd]

A military coup is not a military coup when 1.6 billion in US military "aid" depends on what you call the armed overthrow of the democratically elected president, whose agenda is starting to scare you sh!tless.

Plus ca change.

There we go again...the official response of the guardian of our world's freedom, human rights and democracy is...- 'what happened in egypt was NOT a military coup'.

Then, what do you call the military deposing the democratically elected president, suspending the country's constitution and parliament, arresting dozens of the ruling party officials, slaying dozens of pro president peaceful demonstrators, appointing a figure head puppet president ?

These are confirmed facts from the western main stream media. Yet, it was not a military coup according to washington

i just about fell out of my chair laughing this morning listening to two different people explaining the "not a coup" line. monty python at their best couldn't write **** that funny.

 

[Wallace]

A military coup is not a military coup when 1.6 billion in US military "aid" depends on what you call the armed overthrow of the democratically elected president, whose agenda is starting to scare you sh!tless.

Plus ca change.

I'm starting to get upset about all the anti-Americanism in these forums. Don't you people understand how hard Obama was working to broker a deal? All Morsi would have had to do to stay in power is appoint a secular prime minister, fire all the people he appointed to replace Mubarak's thugs, reappoint Mubarak's thugs, and relinquish all his power, and then the US would have been just delighted to let him remain in power.

It's like you people think there's something wrong with being a figurehead. Every ship of state needs a figurehead. They're pretty.

 

[BroDeal]

Nothing to see here. Morsi voluntarily quit to spend more time with his family. It happens all the time in corporate America. It happens to leaders of countries with militaries not under civilian command as well.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Political Left needs poor (people) to remain in power

Nail meet head!

 

[rhubroma]

I'm starting to get upset about all the anti-Americanism in these forums. Don't you people understand how hard Obama was working to broker a deal? All Morsi would have had to do to stay in power is appoint a secular prime minister, fire all the people he appointed to replace Mubarak's thugs, reappoint Mubarak's thugs, and relinquish all his power, and then the US would have been just delighted to let him remain in power.

It's like you people think there's something wrong with being a figurehead. Every ship of state needs a figurehead. They're pretty.

You highlight the very problem though: what business does a foreign state have in approving or disapproving the democratic outcome of another state?

I'm not so naive as to think that billions in military aid from the US does not come at a cost for Egypt; though the intrusion this represents, I don't say merely for many among the Arab world, but for democracy itself, can only but bring about reasoned criticism of America and the means by which it has attempted to mold the world to its own form and liking. In this case with the militarization of a foreign state, which can’t render the Egyptian democratic process legitimate, unless congenial to the military regime and hence the US.

Consequently, if you're intellectually honest, you wouldn't be so peeved about "all the anti-Americanism" on this forum, but more critical of how the US government operates and the consequences this has for the societies affected by its policy. While nobody is rooting for the Muslim Brothers, perhaps if the Stars and Stripes were less intrusive, arrogant and imperious, then maybe the attraction toward such religious fanatics, who appear to offer the cultureless masses something to stand up for their identity and traditions (as against what they regard as the tyranny imposed upon them by their own US backed military), would be mitigated to the point of their political marginalization. By contrast US policicy in the region has ironically played right into the hands of the religious parties, but not the secular ones.

I’m thus sorry to say but, in this case, as with many others, America has reaped what it has sown. Going on, therefore, about Obama working hard to broker a deal totally overlooks the historical dilemma. Yet until this historical dilemma gets addressed by the protagonist any temporary deals can only lead to further conflict, which is also to the great cost of the US tax payer (if one wishes to see this only in terms of a domestic problem).

 

[python]

<snipped>

Consequently, if you're intellectually honest, you wouldn't be so peeved about "all the anti-Americanism" <snipped>

i dont have an argument with you per se, but with use of the phrase, which imo represents the essence of many non-americans, myself included, sharp critique of the us foreign policy.

many may feel offended by the following comparison (i sincerely dont mean it), but it sounds very similar to some (perhaps a minority) jewish people branding those critiquing israeli accesses in gaza for example as anti-semites. this is a pervert and stupid line of thought. and a conduit to channelling ones inner blind hatred i must add.

to begin with, america is a great country and its citizens are decent people justifiably priding themselves on civil values and following the law.

but what happens when the country leaders abuse the values and the law daily, brazenly and in the face of its own thinking citizens and foreigners

refusing to call the egyptian events for what they are - a military a coup - is but one example in hundreds...professing and and lecturing others on values and the law whilst circumventing it when expedient or worse, spying and invading other nations in law's name.

there is this great american law - no assistance to military takeovers. yet, in a blunt insult to anyone's intelligence, a language was found to bypass it.

or another recent example...the fundamental american law says - no lying to congress. yet this is exactly what the chief of the national intelligence did when asked if his employees spy on millions of americans. he would get away with it as usual until snowden blew up the lies. and did the liar go to prison ?
of course not because a hollow apology was ready in the back pocket.


it is this type of arrogant double standard and pseudo-legality that cause the 'anti-americanism'.

america did not invent this but is arguably the most dangerous practitioner if judged by its weight and might.

 

[Amsterhammer]

Consequently, if you're intellectually honest, you wouldn't be so peeved about "all the anti-Americanism" on this forum,.....

I’m thus sorry say but, in this case, as with many others, America has reaped what it has sown. Going on, therefore, about Obama working hard to broker a deal totally overlooks the historical dilemma. Yet until this historical dilemma gets addressed by the protagonist any temporary deals can only lead to further conflict, which is also to the great cost of the US tax payer (if one wishes to see this only in terms of a domestic problem).

Professor, I fear that you may have misread Wallace's post, which was literally dripping buckets of sarcasm.....

 

[Scott SoCal]

i dont have an argument with you per se, but with use of the phrase, which imo represents the essence of many non-americans, myself included, sharp critique of the us foreign policy.

many may feel offended by the following comparison (i sincerely dont mean it), but it sounds very similar to some (perhaps a minority) jewish people branding those critiquing israeli accesses in gaza for example as anti-semites. this is a pervert and stupid line of thought. and a conduit to channelling ones inner blind hatred i must add.

to begin with, america is a great country and its citizens are decent people justifiably priding themselves on civil values and following the law.

but what happens when the country leaders abuse the values and the law daily, brazenly and in the face of its own thinking citizens and foreigners

refusing to call the egyptian events for what they are - a military a coup - is but one example in hundreds...professing and and lecturing others on values and the law whilst circumventing it when expedient or worse, spying and invading other nations in law's name.

there is this great american law - no assistance to military takeovers. yet, in a blunt insult to anyone's intelligence, a language was found to bypass it.

or another recent example...the fundamental american law says - no lying to congress. yet this is exactly what the chief of the national intelligence did when asked if his employees spy on millions of americans. he would get away with it as usual until snowden blew up the lies. and did the liar go to prison ?
of course not because a hollow apology was ready in the back pocket.


it is this type of arrogant double standard and pseudo-legality that cause the 'anti-americanism'.

america did not invent this but is arguably the most dangerous practitioner if judged by its weight and might.

And the larger the bureaucracy gets, the more the power is centralized... particularly in the executive branch, the more of this the rest of the world will see.

 

[rhubroma]

Professor, I fear that you may have misread Wallace's post, which was literally dripping buckets of sarcasm.....

Yea, I kinda got that when it was too late. I hope Wallace won't be offended. At any rate, let's just pretend he was being serious and those were the thoughts that came to mind.

 

[rhubroma]

...

to begin with, america is a great country and its citizens are decent people justifiably priding themselves on civil values and following the law.

but what happens when the country leaders abuse the values and the law daily, brazenly and in the face of its own thinking citizens and foreigners

refusing to call the egyptian events for what they are - a military a coup - is but one example in hundreds...etc...

Though how do we define a "great country," I've asked? I suppose you mean by the example it has provided. Ok but there are as least as many disreputable things, like preventative war, as there have been commendable ones. Whereas one could also apply the concept to a whole class of states like France, though what horrific actions it did in North Africa and South Asia provide little of which to approve.

That the American citizens are generally a decent people I don’t doubt, though in my travels I could say the same for any number of other nations I have visited.

Look I don't mean to be so nagging, but I don't think these things are of any consequence. Rather I do feel that in addressing this historical dilemma, the US state and its people need to be much more aware of the government's foreign affairs, at least if we want to work toward long term and constructive solutions to problems that will eventually explode into a fatal catastrophe if something useful (and I say this with no irony) isn't done first.

As per your last statement, which I unfortunately snipped: with great power comes great responsibility.

 

[Wallace]

You highlight the very problem though: what business does a foreign state have in approving or disapproving the democratic outcome of another state... [cut for brevity] if you're intellectually honest, you wouldn't be so peeved about "all the anti-Americanism" on this forum, but more critical of how the US government operates and the consequences this has for the societies affected by its policy. While nobody is rooting for the Muslim Brothers, perhaps if the Stars and Stripes were less intrusive, arrogant and imperious, then maybe the attraction toward such religious fanatics, who appear to offer the cultureless masses something to stand up for their identity and traditions (as against what they regard as the tyranny imposed upon them by their own US backed military), would be mitigated to the point of their political marginalization. By contrast US policicy in the region has ironically played right into the hands of the religious parties, but not the secular ones.

I'm sorry rhubroma (and by the way: I love your vacuum cleaners. We have one and it cleans the kitchen at night while we sleep. Very convenient), but I entirely agree with you. My anti-American line was meant to be, you know (insert up-speak) ironic? The NYTimes, the disgustingly hawkish "Paper of Record" had a long editorial piece about how hard the US worked to try to preserve democracy in Egypt, without ever acknowledging in any way that all the choices the US offered to the elected leader of a sovereign nation defeated, by their nature, the entire concept of what it means to be the elected leader of a sovereign nation. What the US has done in Egypt might not be as bad as what we've done in Iraq (or Afghanistan, and don't get me started on South America...), but you can add it to our long and impressive list of national shames.

I do wish that there were better sources for news than the NYTimes, NPR, and the BBC, my primary sources, unfortunately. It's difficult to figure out from here the real nature of the anti-Morsi protests. Clearly the old guard was involved. On the other hand, there did seem to be genuine secular outrage at the way Morsi had claimed too much power. And then there's the whole issue of Morsi jailing his opponents without trial and torturing them. However, as an American I no longer have the right to take any kind of a high-principled moral stance on that particular issue.

 

[Amsterhammer]

I do wish that there were better sources for news than the NYTimes, NPR, and the BBC, my primary sources, unfortunately. It's difficult to figure out from here the real nature of the anti-Morsi protests. Clearly the old guard was involved. On the other hand, there did seem to be genuine secular outrage at the way Morsi had claimed too much power. And then there's the whole issue of Morsi jailing his opponents without trial and torturing them. However, as an American I no longer have the right to take any kind of a high-principled moral stance on that particular issue.

Exactly. I can recommend some other news sources that usually tell it pretty much like it is -

http://www.spiegel.de/international/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/

 

[Wallace]

Exactly. I can recommend some other news sources that usually tell it pretty much like it is -

http://www.spiegel.de/international/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/

Thank you.

I also read The Nation and The NY Review of Books, those nice old lefty standards, but there's a time-lag in their reporting.

 

[rhubroma]

I'm sorry rhubroma (and by the way: I love your vacuum cleaners. We have one and it cleans the kitchen at night while we sleep. Very convenient), but I entirely agree with you. My anti-American line was meant to be, you know (insert up-speak) ironic? The NYTimes, the disgustingly hawkish "Paper of Record" had a long editorial piece about how hard the US worked to try to preserve democracy in Egypt, without ever acknowledging in any way that all the choices the US offered to the elected leader of a sovereign nation defeated, by their nature, the entire concept of what it means to be the elected leader of a sovereign nation. What the US has done in Egypt might not be as bad as what we've done in Iraq (or Afghanistan, and don't get me started on South America...), but you can add it to our long and impressive list of national shames.

I do wish that there were better sources for news than the NYTimes, NPR, and the BBC, my primary sources, unfortunately. It's difficult to figure out from here the real nature of the anti-Morsi protests. Clearly the old guard was involved. On the other hand, there did seem to be genuine secular outrage at the way Morsi had claimed too much power. And then there's the whole issue of Morsi jailing his opponents without trial and torturing them. However, as an American I no longer have the right to take any kind of a high-principled moral stance on that particular issue.

Well now that that's been cleared up, I can only refer you to my earlier post about the confusion that exists under the sun over democracy. Secondly, you'll have to clue me into the "vacuum" statement, as it's all just Greek to me. Unless you mean an I-talian vacuum, though I can take no credit for that.

 

[Wallace]

Well now that that's been cleared up, I can only refer you to my earlier post about the confusion that exists under the sun over democracy. Secondly, you'll have to clue me into the "vacuum" statement, as it's all just Greek to me. Unless you mean an I-talian vacuum, though I can take no credit for that.

Sorry. Silly joke: robot-vacuum-review.toptenreviews.com/roomba-760-review.html

 

[Christian]

Anticipated elections in Luxembourg!

Jean-Claude Juncker, prime minister of 18 years and european champion of austerity measures had to step down today after a secret service scandal. However he refuses to assume responsibility and will again be the top candidate of his party in the next elections.

Since his party has monopolized all power during the last century (only once there was a prime minister from another party, 1974-1979) and since the electoral system plays in their favour, he will certainly be re-elected, thus proving that he rules with absolute power with the consent of the majority of electors.

 

[BroDeal]

I do wish that there were better sources for news than the NYTimes, NPR, and the BBC, my primary sources, unfortunately.

There is: Al Jeezera, America's fineset news source--well, that and The Onion.

It is sad. Land of the free press, and you have to read foreign newspapers to get decent news.

 

[python]

according to my rss feeds, snowden just asked for asylum in russia. this is a reversal of his earlier withdrawal after putin set a condition.

something is going on. i doubt he would submit a second request without a nod from the russians. or he simply realized they are the only party in the mess that can guarantee his safety.

 

[Echoes]

I assume that the comment about Al-Jazeera was sarcasm.