Liberals Silent on Iraq Atrocities

In New York, you cannot ride a subway without being bombarded with posters about Darfur and now, Tibet. Of course I have sympathy for those killed and displaced in Darfur, though the numbers have been overblown and other specifics of the situation have been exaggerated. And I am a sucker for all plainly legitimate secessionist movements, as in Tibet. But I am quite sick of being guilted into protest and “action” with the purpose of fixing problems my government is in no way (currently) responsible for.

The Tibet march poster I saw yesterday mentioned the “atrocities” perpetrated by the Chinese government. How about the atrocities carried out, abetted, enabled, and inspired by the US Government in Iraq? The death toll in Iraq beats last month’s entire cluster of clashes in Tibet practically every hour. Why, outside of a few stickers on newspaper boxes around town, is no significant mention made of what’s going on non-stop in Iraq? Are mainstream liberals just so cowed by the see-through rhetoric of the now completely debunked War Party that they still refuse to criticize a war their military is currently prosecuting?

Why are they demurely and cowardly “supporting the troops” in Iraq while wasting their rage on bullsh*t like a police crackdown against rioters in Tibet? This goes all the way up to top liberals in the country — the disgusting Nancy Pelosi tells the President he should boycott the Olympics opening ceremony in Beijing. Who is George Bush to express moral indignation about anything? France’s Sarkozy is just as ridiculous — he rubs his face in Bush’s crack as the Decider bends over to destroy another piece of Iraq, but is contemplating a boycott of the Olympics opening ceremonies over a few scuffles in Lhasa?

Sick.

How about some priorities reevaluation?

One thought on “Liberals Silent on Iraq Atrocities”

  1. exactly. the US government has zero moral authority to lecture any other country about any godda**ed thing.

    want to boycott a country that’s perpetrating despicable war crimes in the ME and elsewhere on a daily basis? boycott the US.

  2. There is much more to this than mere cowardice. These liberals are part of the same elite that the mainstream “conservatives” (a much debased term) are. To call the US out on its atrocities is to threaten one of the ideological cornerstones of American imperialism- the idea that the US is always benign- and, by extension, their own power and privilege. Duplicitous, oleaginous, and disingenuous- that about sums up the modern liberal.

      1. Abraham:

        I’ve seen you post frequently to this blog, so I have to believe that you’re well aware that the terms “liberal” and “conservative” are, to both the authors who post here and their readers, interchangeable and meaningless. I’m also assuming that you’re well aware that “conservatives” are an even more frequent target of criticism on AW.com than “liberals.”

        In short, I’m assuming that your post was meant to be read as tongue in cheek.

        1. Yes, I’m well aware of that. “Liberal” is more a self-designation than anything, and should be understood in that sense.

        2. Uh, no, liberranter. I’m not sure what makes you an expert on AW.com’s content, but you’re the one that seems to have mis-read this piece. Vance is clearly focusing on “liberal” moral indignation over the Tibet crackdowns when the war on Iraq ostensibly provides enough fodder for their righteous ire.

          “Liberal” and “conservative” are interchangeable here? Where on Earth did you get that silly notion?

  3. It’s misdirection. Look over here and not over there, one of the oldest tricks in the book. They are con men (and women) and thats how they operate. Liberal Socialists and Fascist Conservatives what a great combination. It’s getting harder and harder to tell them apart. They both advocate sticking their noses in everyone’s business here and abroad. What is they say? Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

    Peace.

  4. I’m all for getting our priorities straight, and I agree the Iraq war is worse than “the scuffles” in Tibet. But there’s no reason not to condemn both, and if we never did anything good until we stopped doing everything bad, no good would ever be done. Look, I know everyone’s going to jump on me for saying so, but if stern words and a boycott of the Olympics can stop Chinese human rights abuses, I don’t see much reason not to do it. It’s not like it the war in Iraq would go much worse if we did, and Sapienza’s “waste” comment notwithstanding, there’s plenty of rage to go around.

    1. …but if stern words and a boycott of the Olympics can stop Chinese human rights abuses, I don’t see much reason not to do it.

      “You hypocrite! First take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.” (Matthew 7:5, NIV)

      1. As I said, “…if we never did anything good until we stopped doing everything bad, no good would ever be done.”

        I had your lame-ass Biblical principle in mind when I wrote that. Do I need to put it in smaller words, or do you have something other than “divine revelation” to back up your position?

        1. What else does one need other than a simple, common-sense, time-tested admonition to get one’s own disastrous, toxic mess of a house in order before trying clean up someone else’s? Or do you need something monosyllabic (that means “made up of one-syllable words”) to more clearly explain the point?

        2. Hmm. I suppose I deserved the snippy tone, so let me be the first to take the insults down a notch. The problem is that your simple, common-sense admonition runs headlong into an even more simple, common-sense admonition: two wrongs don’t make a right. Would the world be a better place if the US pulled out of Iraq? Let’s stipulate the answer to that is Yes. Would the world be a better place if China stopped abusing Tibet? Also, Yes. Now suppose, counterfactually, that the US is the only state able to both stop the war in Iraq and get China to stop abusing Tibet. Your admonition would say that if the US doesn’t pull out of Iraq, then it ALSO shouldn’t stop China from abusing Tibet. In other words, your express position is that we should commit one wrong because we’re not going to stop committing another one, and that just doesn’t look right.

        3. Weston, what must be kept in mind is that each individual has a finite amount of time and energy to expend. The more time and energy expended on issues NOT under our control — such as Darfur or Tibet — the less time will be left to expend on issues that ARE (at least somewhat, as citizens of the perp state) under our control. Darfur, and especially Tibet, are distractions that sap our time and energy so we have less time and energy to devote to putting an end to our own crimes in Iraq and our interventionist foreign policy in general. I do suspect that in some cases the publicity given to these distractions is deliberately intended to have precisely that effect. Tibetans are likely oppressed less than our own Black and Latino underclasses. For that reason, the whining and hand-wringing I hear about human rights abuses in Tibet sometimes infuriates me even more than straight Neocon bullshit from the likes of William Kristol.

        4. Bill, I agree that individuals only have a finite amount of time to expend, and of course I’m worried about the possibility that minor issues get play in the media at least in part because its serves someone’s interests to “distract” us from relatively more important issues.

          But I’m skeptical of your argument for two reasons. First, efforts to stop the war in Iraq have diminishing returns. If you’re not familiar with economics jargon, that means that at some point, the harder we try, the less effect we have per ounce of effort. The US is heavily committed in Iraq, and I could spend every minute of every day trying to change that fact and just not get anywhere. But if I and others take a few of those minutes to devote to other goals that are less important but easier to accomplish, it seems that more good might be brought about overall.

          Second, even if I’m wrong about the first point, there is nothing wrong with a division of labor. There are a lot of people working very hard for justice in the US, and I’m not sure I see any reason why all of them should work on the same issues. There are already people working to help disadvantaged minorities, and there are already people working on stopping the war in Iraq. All of that seems compatible with still other people working to stop China’s violence against Tibet.

          I don’t hold with single-issue politics, and those are only a couple reasons why. The bottom line is that the US is a big and powerful country, and it can do a lot of things at once. We shouldn’t miss the chance to do a few easier, smaller good things just because we’re simultaneously hung up on one enormous bad thing.

        5. Sorry, all of that was premised on the thought that the Tibet situation is at least partially under our control, which I see that you deny. I think it’s an interesting question whether international condemnation and a boycott of the Olympics will actually get China to do something it doesn’t want to do. If you’ve read my previous posts carefully you’ll see that I never committed myself to the view that this would work, although I disagree with you to the extent that I think it could–for reasons I admit are not entirely clear to me, international actors take the Olympics very seriously. Unlike the recent House Resolution condemning the alleged Russian assassination of a political dissident, for example, a boycott of the games at the very least sends a potent message to the host that its behavior is unacceptable.

    2. With Weston: The repression of Tibetans by the state of China must be confronted. Simple as that. To rate atrocities in terms of relative atrociousness, is an repulsive pursuit. Tibetans at the end of the lash/gun/baton feel the blows not one ounce less than do Iraqis.

      At issue is the absurd hypocrisy of “anti-war” democrats selecting the easy road (many of whom have, and will continue to make fortunes off of the war machine)–but not their purpose in calling out the PRC. What needs to be increased is direct confrontation with congressmen, not merely the “scorn of the intellectuals.”

  5. As long as we continue to pay our taxes without complaint then we will remain the warmonger’s slaves. They know it and no matter how much we protest without substance, they will just keep on doing what they are doing. Most Americans are cowed, afraid of crossing “the man” and they keep their heads buried in the sand.

    “No taxation without representation”: That is the spirit that made the country and for all practical purposes the general population no longer has any representation in Washington. It has been given over to the highest bidder long ago…

    We have become a nation of whiners.

  6. The real atrocities are happening in Palestine and Iraq and are being commited by Israel/US. The zionist neo-cons want to divert our attention and look for other conflicts which are not our business.

  7. Our educational system, like that of most countries, does its job in thoroughy vaccinating the young with nationalism and collective narcissism. This immunizes most people to acknowledgement of our wrongdoing and creates virulent reactivity to those who do not share our views or bend immediately to our demands. When someone like Reverend Wright or Noam Chomsky dare to point out the glaringly obvious, they elicit an overwhelming inflammatory response. Go back and think of your history classes in school, and how they glossed over slavery, the genocide of the Native Americans, the Spanish-American War and other outrages. For far too long we’ve confused jingoism for patriotism, greed for sound economics, bigotry for religious principles and warmongering for self defense.

  8. We should speak out against wrongs wherever they occur, no matter who the victims or the victimizers are. By all means, our priorities should be to halt the debacle in Iraq. The extent of the killing and our government’s criminal behavior demand it.

    That said, the thugs in Beijing are doing what they’ve always done: lording over their helpless subjects. I feel for the people of Tibet. They were dealt a very crappy hand.

  9. Great comments all round (no Tim today :)

    Recently my mother-in-law bought some Tibetan flags and gave them to friends and family to display. It got me thinking how trendy it is to support Tibet’s independence, but displaying a Palestinian flag will get you all sorts of trouble thse days (and probably a visit from the lcoal Gestapo). And we rarely get news of Palestinian deaths on mainstream commercial news although they greatly surpass China’s killing of Tibetans, just like the Iraqi deaths get less coverage than some angry monks shouting in Tibet. And speaking of independence, is anyone boldly supporting Iraq’s independence?!?

  10. Thanks for the antiwar website for pointing out the so plainly obvious. Many innocent people died in the recent Tibetan riot, but most of them are ethnic Han and Hui (i.e., Chinese Muslim), including an eight-month old baby. These facts will never be shown on the main-stream Western media, but a few key strokes of search will find some of the details in Google or YouTube… Remind me how the Iraq war is flamed by the same media…

    Please also visit the anti-cnn.com website, where all the distortion and mis-information of the western media in reporting the recent Tibetan riot is analyzed and documented by volunteers.

    It is a critical historical time. These biased reports on the Tibetan riot, are for the first time, widely accessible to the common Chinese people. Remember, all Chinese students undergoing English education from grade one, and >99% of western media are freely assessable from China. People in China are just shocked by the open hostility that the major western media displayed against China. Ironically, the government propaganda machine has always emphasized on the good wills of the outside world towards China, which is largely true in the rest of the world besides the few countries that have committed the most crimes in war, slavery and injustice in recent human history. It is really a wake up call to the common people in China.

    By the way, I was an old activist in the 1989 Chinese student movement. But shortly after a few years of living in US convinced me that China is much better off without the western politicians’ concern and passion for the Chinese “human rights” and “democracy”.

  11. The thoughts of Mr. Sapienza and all of the comments above give me some hope that the people of America can actually think logically. If this webpage could just be shown on every computer in every college and high school in the country, the next generation might turn things around.

  12. Tibet is a long term tragedy,with a popular spokesman,the Deli Lama.In Palistine most leaders are murdered or imprisoned.Any outside spokesman is ignored or discredited by being called a terrorist or an antisemite.

    1. You said:

      Tibet is a long term tragedy,with a popular spokesman,the Deli Lama.

      I say:

      The “Deli Lama?” Does he make a good pastrami sandwich?

  13. Brad Smith says,”Liberal Socialists and Fascist Conservatives what a great combination. It’s getting harder and harder to tell them apart.”

    Reminds me of what the late English playwright Joe Orton said, “Scratch a Liberal and you find a fascist.” And correct me if I’m mistaken but weren’t a few of the neo-cons once Liberals, if not outright socialists?

    And, of course, Sapienza is quite right about the blatant hypocrisy. When the Olympics Torch Relay goes through San Fran you will of course see the protests. Curiously you won’t see any protests about what the U.S. is doing in Iraq.

    Which makes you wonder if ‘freedom’ and ‘human rights’ are the real issues where these protesters are concerned. In my opinion they are not! They never were! The issue is pure, unadulterated racism. Yup, I said it and no apologises…

    Their hypocrisy and behaviour says it all…

  14. And how about the longtime and ongoing atrocities carried out by the Israelis but funded and otherwise abetted, enabled, encouraged, and praised by the US Government?

  15. In my observation, pro-war liberals are generally Zionists. And the target of choice is always Islamic. As an example, the crisis in Darfur is presented as the Arabs in Northern Sudan persecuting blacks in Southern Sudan, when it is actually a civil war. Several years ago, an armistice between the two factions was arranged, but the southern faction refused to stop fighting. Of course, our media never really dealt with that disjointed fact, preferring to stick with the old “bad Arab” theme. And, can you imagine a Hollywood fund raiser for the “starving Palestinians”?
    I don’t believe that our Congress will generate many resolutions condemning China – a guy deep in debt does not usually spit on his creditors. Probably they will blame Iran for interfering in Tibet.
    Zionist control of our media and our Congress is so strong that I doubt anything will change until this whole ediface of lies and deceit comes crashing down around us. You can accelerate this by avoiding paying taxes as much as possible

  16. Why single out liberals? All such hypocrites (left or right) should be described with an appropriate term: interventionists, statists, warmongers, etc.

    How about some labels reevaluation?

  17. What’s the point of the accusation? And just what is the authors definition of liberal? I never really had a label until the warmongers dubbed me a liberal and now this piece of tripe!
    I’ve been opposing the Iraq war since before it started. 5 years of howling at the moon about the atrocities, writing my congressman, standing on street corners with signs, telling any one who would listen. I’ve lost business over this thing, practically lost my mind in the process and now I’m a hypocrite?

    1. Clearly, you are not a part of mainstream liberalism. So come off it. Some people just love to look for insult where there is none.

      1. Jeremy, you made no distinction. If you meant no insult, perhaps you should be a little more succinct in your writing.
        As far as your tag….”mainstream liberalism”, there is no such thing. Liberal is just another over used term that encompasses a multitude of philosophies of people who oppose
        “conservative” policies, whatever that is.

  18. Here we go again. Nixon and his cronies decided to start a propaganda war against the term "liberal". We are still dealing with many of these same cronies in this current administration of the pretender, Bush.

    Define conservative. The Conservative Party of England were the inheritors of the name "Tory". So a conservative is a Tory, and supporter of the monarchy, and the British Empire. The name conservative has a tarnished history of supporting colonialization and the maintenance of Empire.

    The liberals at the time of our revolution called themselves liberal, distinquishing themselves from the Tories.

    The Old Right is different from the neo conservatives. The neo conservatives have seduced people into believing that liberalism in the issue, and they are the bastions of the New Right without the true conservative views of the Old Right. The Old Right opposed foreign aid, entrance into the World Wars, espoused a gold basis for money, etc. None of these new so called "conservatives" who self identify as such, are conservative at all. Corporate welfare is their public view, and wars support corporate welfare of specific industries within our economy at the expense of every one else. Not conservative.

    The problem is ignorance, and a desire to just go with the flow, without knowing where that flow is going. For the years since Reagan, it became politically correct to be a "conservative" because of the success of the Nixon spin of the word. And Reagan was not really a "conservative" either. Now all the "conservatives" think they are libertarians. They do not qualify.

  19. Darfur is trendy ala George Clooney. Tibet is trendy ala Richard Gere. Afghanistan is trendy ala all that heroin. Nothing says Hollywood chic like an Afghan warlord and several thousand kilos of raw opium on it’s way to ‘cookdown kitchen’. After all, those Hollywood trendy types DO love their heroin. They don’t like to talk about it, but they do love to geez it.
    Moral authority is vanished from the global stage. Moral authority has rotted away courtesy of war mongering lunatics like George Bush, Tony Blair, John Howard, and even Nico the Sark. It WAS sort of trendy how the Sark helped burn the Muslim youth in France. Moral authority has made a greedy transformation into moral expedience. We’ll now hold up the corrupt United Nations as our ‘power point presentation’ on corruption and comprehensive collapse of moral authority. Can we all say U.N. Security Council and irrelevant in the same breath? Israel and Palestine? Annapolis? Farce? Condo Rice and cannibalism?
    Most liberals are hypocritical and most conservatives are hypocritical. I use the classic Democrat and Republican phrase in an interchangeable motif. However, the voices of sane leadership are STILL silenced and marginalized. Ron Paul, Bob Barr, Chuck Hagel, and Joe Biden. Biden? Yup, the man does have some fascinating and germane things to say. However, the Biden tends to shoot his own balloons directly off the stage and that’s comical but sad.
    The stranglehold on media is what MUST be broken. Without access, ANY message will die of simple neglect.

    1. Not sure what you meant by, “…Biden tends to shoot his own balloons directly off the stage…,” but it reminds me of listening to him during the debate in October, 2002. The clown raised all sorts of really good, germaine questions. What would the war cost? How long would we be there? Etc, etc. He said we really ought to have the answers to all those questions before voting for the resolution, and that we really didn’t have all the answers. As he spoke, I was convinced he intended to vote, “No.” Then he voted, “Yes.” I was absolutely flabbergasted.

  20. Why, outside of a few stickers on newspaper boxes around town, is no significant mention made of what’s going on non-stop in Iraq?

    Because propaganda outlets like the NYT, Antiwar.com, CNN, et cetera have spent the last 4 years desperately spinning the hopeless guerrilla war in Iraq into something more palatable.

    The deindustrialization of Iraq and the mass murder, ethnic cleansing, death squads, and torture inflicted on the Iraqis for resisting the occupation has been replaced with the fable of noble America virtuously trying to hold the country together and make the savage darkies stop killing each other. This has enabled Americans to cheerfully forget their ongoing atrocities and begin braying for new ones.

    1. As far as I can recall, you are singular in using the term “deindustrialization” in regard to Iraq on this site.

      Right on target, and obviously part of Israel’s and the Neo-Cons’ game plan from the beginning fro Iraq, with idiots in the Marine Corps who have defined themselves as do-gooders building schools and improving the quality of life in Mesopotamia doing their dirty work for them.

      1. It appears to be a forbidden concept in the American press. They’ll occasionally mention that the reconstruction has been sluggish or inefficient, but will never state that the reason many Iraqis still lack water, electricity, and fuel is because the occupation wants it that way. The same thing is happening in Gaza, but that’s a non-issue here as well.

  21. I grew up in the sixties, and remember our own gov’t gunning down peaceful college students, Kent State, Orangeburg S,C, and L.A. just to name a few. And they want the U.S. to protest China; get real.. What a nuerotic and forgetful nation we have become.

  22. So appreciate this strong truth-telling from Jeffrey Sapienza above, and I agree with him every inch of the way. Freaking correct is he!

  23. Darfur is just an excuse for a USRael oil grab, and “liberals” with their “Save Darfur” nonsense are playing right into the fascists’ hands. Darfur is a war for resources between nomads (conveniently portrayed by the U.S. Zionist media as “Arabs” when in fact they are ethnically African) and village dwellers.

    From antiwar.com itself:

    DARFUR’S WAR OF DEFINITIONS
    Ramzy Baroud
    Antiwar.com
    8/26/04

    http://www.antiwar.com/orig/baroud.php?articleid=3445

    “Alex de Waal is not one of those journalists, but an author recognized in Western media circles as a leading authority on Sudan. He wrote in the Observer on July 25: “Characterizing the Darfur war as ‘Arabs’ versus ‘Africans’ obscures the reality. Darfur’s Arabs are black, indigenous, African Muslims – just like Darfur’s non-Arabs.””

    The USRael government wants eastern (if not all of) Africa, its natural resources, including its water. That’s why *our* government is starting an AfricaCom.

    The genocide in Congo is MUCH worse, but we hear nary a peep from the “progressives.”

  24. Perhaps I’m mistaken but it seems to me that certain people are down right obsessed with hating and blaming America and Israel for all of the worlds problems. Therefore, if there is a genocide (and it IS a genocide) in Darfur these folks will acknowledge it but then they will minimize it and say let’s turn our attention back to the evil US of A and Israel. Or they will try to find some way to blame the US for it. I was at a Darfur rally and you’d think they would have posters to criticize the President of Sudan, Mr. Al Bashir. Oh they had a few, but mostly a lot of the protesters just wanted to turn the Darfur rally into a blame Bush hate festival. If there is an ethnic cleansing and deliberate destruction of the Tibeten culture and people at the hands of the ruthless Chinese Communist Party, these folks will again acknowledge it, say its a bad thing too, but again they will minimize it and shift attention back to the big bad and evil USA and Israel. If there terrible atrocities being committed in Burma they will minimize it so they can keep hating America and Israel.

    In short, if an atrocity or human rights violation can’t be directly blamed on America or Israel some folks don’t really seem to give a damn about it. But if they can find a way to implicate Israel or America these same folks will have an immediate apoplexy.

    1. You are really missing the point here aren't you Tim?

      It's not about who commits what atrocities but how these atrocities are reported. No one is minimizing what is happening in Tibet, but it really does pale in comparison to what is happening in Iraq. No one can deny this.

      The Iraqi war began back in 2003 over a pack of lies for the sake of oil. Over 4000 dead American soldiers and probably half a million dead Iraqis (most likely conservative estimates)and still counting.

      The point is, the media has been in a reporting frenzy over Tibet when we get so little converage on the tragedy that is Iraq. The above facts speak for themselves on the magnitude of atrocities being committed. It's obvious that you are turning a blind eye to this when the "minimizing" is actually being done on the Iraqi War.

    2. Tim R,
      Consider the possibility that Israel and America REALLY are at fault for the destruction/occupation of Iraq/Palestine. And if so, who should be the ones to do something about that? Should the Chinese worry about the occupations of Iraq and Palestine and we worry about Tibet? Reminds me of the the old Groucho Marx comic line – “I have Addison’s disease .. and he has mine”. Doctor, heal yourself.

  25. These people aren't just hypocrites on Iraq, look what we are supporting in Palestine! Israel has turned Palestine into one big concentration camp and are working on the final solution! Meanwhile the New York Times runs

    a full color photo on the front page showing two protesters hanging a "Free Tibet" sign on the Golden Gate Bridge. Has anyone EVER seen this newspaper publish a color photo on the front page of the millions of people protesting the Iraq war or the horrific pictures of Palestinian children shot in the head by Israeli snipers?

    1. Wendy Wasp writes: “Has anyone EVER seen this newspaper publish a color photo on the front page of…the horrific pictures of Palestinian children shot in the head by Israeli snipers?”

      Before making such slanderous allegations can you kindly provide documentation and proof of what you are sprewing? Can you supply reputable, reliable, and verifiable sources for this scurrilous accusation?

      The fact of the matter is, contrary to what you have been brainwashed to believe, Israeli soldiers do not purposefully go around shooting Palestinian kids in the head. Yes, kids die accidentally sometimes and that is a terrible tragedy. You can even say that Israel has been reckless or negligent but to imply that they have snipers who deliberatly go around shooting children in the head is an outright lie.

  26. At the moment, the U.S. and Israeli governments (and Israel’s fan club) are responsible for much of U.S.’ foreign policy. This extends into their meddling into Africa and Pakistan.

    Sudan has huge oil reserves which China and France have already negotiated deals to get access to. Israel wants a piece of that action and with its U.S. supporters, like the late, unlamented, Tom Lantos, manipulated U.S. public opinion, especially on the “left” to generate the “Save Darfur” campaign.

    BTW: it turns out that Israel is buying Iran’s oil, this while Israel and its fan club (including the U.S. Zionist controlled media) do their best to manufacture a pretext for war on Iran.

    Don’t believe me, here’s the proof (from today’s Democracy Now!)

    Report: Israel Is Secretly Importing Iranian Oil

    http://www.democracynow.org/2008/4/8/headlines#9

    “An Israeli energy newsletter has revealed Israel is secretly buying oil from Iran despite an official boycott. The newsletter EnergiaNews reports Israeli companies get around the boycott by having the oil delivered to European ports, where it is then bought by Israelis. The oil is then imported into Israel by the Eilat-Ashkelon Pipeline Company, which keeps its oil sources secret.”

    Americans are suckers. GET ISRAEL AND ITS FAN CLUB OUT OF U.S. FOREIGN POLICY NOW!!!!!

  27. Richard Vajs,

    Yes, if you are right and we are responsible for the destruction/occcupation of Iraq and Palestine then we should concern ourselves about it. But as Martin Luther King said, “An injustice anywhere, is a threat to justice everywhere.” So why only focus on Iraq/Palestine?
    And by the way, the United States does an awful lot of business with China and we gave them “most favored nation” trading status and all sorts of perks, so we are responsible.

    1. Tim R,
      Why only focus on the destruction/occupation of Iraq/Palestine? Friend, isn’t that enough to put on your plate? What greater tragedy has ever happened to America compared to the descent into Hell that our association with that racist, criminal country of Israel has led us? In the 60 years that Israel has stolen land from the Palestinians, not one word has been spoken out loud in our U S Congress in protest. Not one word. But over $150 Billion in direct aid and several Trillion $ in associated costs have been spent on behalf of that dirtbag country. American taxes pay for the cluster bombs that killed Lebanese civilians. American taxes paid for the resettlement of Russian Jews into the West Bank dispossessing the natives. American taxes paid for the outrages that fueled 9-11. American taxes pay for the Mossad goons who taught us how to torture our prisoners.
      And for us few, who know the truth, we are assaulted everyday by having to watch the deferrment to, the pandering to, and the slavish devotion to this criminal country by our media, our Government and even our religous leaders.
      Why should I care about the mal odors coming from far off Tibet when we are up to our noses in a Zionist sewer right here in the USA?

      1. Richard Vajs,

        We clearly have a huge difference of opinion on the Israel issue. I do agree that Israel has not treated the Palestinians well and they certainly have a share of the blame. However, you keep insisting the all the land was “stolen.” But isn’t it true that the land was fought for and won in several wars? From the beginning of civilization nations have had wars over land, and the winner generally gets to keep the land. So Israel had wars in 48, 67, and 73 and they won. Period. It is the law of conquest. Israel has no more stolen the land from Palestinians than the United States has stolen it from the Native Americans. If Israel has to give back land then you should also be calling on the United States to give back the land to the Native Americans.

  28. Being in part a liberal hippy type myself, I can attest to the youthful idealism of wanting to save the world and to do good. The energy and drive to make a difference can be usurped by evil powers that want to misdirect it as has happened with the Save Darfur fund, ( most likely a CIA mind control program, or maybe a fund by people who profit off mis-channeling the liberal desire to make a positive difference)

    This all became clear to me one day while listening to Democracy Now

    http://www.democracynow.org/2007/6/4/mahmood_mamdani_on_darfur_the_politics

    MAHMOOD MAMDANI: And I’m struck by the innocence of those who are part of the Save Darfur—of the foot soldiers in the Save Darfur Coalition, not the leadership, simply because this is not discussed.

    Let me tell you, when I went to Sudan in Khartoum, I had interviews with the UN humanitarian officer, the political officer, etc., and I asked them, I said, “What assistance does the Save Darfur Coalition give?” He said, “Nothing.” I said, “Nothing?” He said, “No.” And I would like to know. The Save Darfur Coalition raises an enormous amount of money in this country. Where does that money go? Does it go to other organizations which are operative in Sudan, or does it go simply to fund the advertising campaign?

    AMY GOODMAN: To make people aware of what’s going on in Darfur.

    MAHMOOD MAMDANI: To make people aware of what is going on, but people who then, out of awareness, give money not to fuel a commercial campaign, but expecting that this money will go to do something about the pain and suffering of those who are the victims in Darfur, so how much of that money is going to actually—how much of it translates into food or medicine or shelter? And how much of it is being recycled?

    1. War-mongering in the NYT

      This war-mongering column by Nicholas D. Kristof, Op-Ed columnist for the New York Times, appeared on April 10.

      Memo to Bush on Darfur
      http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/10/opinion/10kristof.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

      Kristof, expresses frustration that Bush hasn’t yet invaded Darfur “Mr. Bush backs off and does nothing” which, according to Kristof, is because “[Bush thinks he] can’t invade a third Muslim country, especially one with oil”.

      Oh yes, there is lots of oil sitting under the ground in Darfur, and yes, Bush wants to get his hands on it.

      Under the guise of recommending “practical steps for Darfur” to President Bush, Kristof casually slips in these militaristic suggestions:

      excerpts from Memo to Bush on Darfur:

      -The U.N. and U.S. should take South Sudan up on its offers in 2004 and 2005 to provide up to 10,000 [armed] peacekeepers for Darfur.

      -The U.S. should impose a no-fly zone over Darfur from the air base in Abeche, Chad (or even from our existing base in Djibouti). We wouldn’t keep planes in the air or shoot down Sudanese aircraft. Rather, the next time Sudan breaches the U.N. ban on offensive military flights, we would wait a day or two and then destroy a Sudanese Antonov bomber on the ground.

      -We should warn Sudan that if it provokes a war with the South, attacks camps for displaced people or invades a neighboring country, we will destroy its air force.

      Send in 10,000 “peacekeeping” armed troops? Destroying bombers? Destroying Sudan’s air force?? This does NOT sound like “practical” approaches to me, these are all violent!

      This is war-mongering!! Kristof should be severely reprimanded by his peers AND his editors, for this column and blog. He even offers readers to respond to his Facebook – this guy is way too internet saavy, obviously looking to drum up support for a war by any method he can.

      And look at this! Kristof has hopped on the anti-Olympics bandwagon as well [there has to be a script somewhere we don’t know about]. Look for his column in which he refers to the Beijing Olympics as “The Genocide Olympics”(how original…)

      Could it possibly be because George Bush is afraid that China will get to the oil in Sudan first?

      This places deep suspicion on the entire “Save Darfur” campaign.

  29. US water pipelines are breaking

    NEW YORK (Long AP April 8, 2008)- Two hours north of New York City, a mile-long stream and a marsh the size of a football field have mysteriously formed along a country road. They are such a marvel that people come from miles around to drink the crystal-clear water, believing it is bubbling up from a hidden natural spring.

    ….The water is coming from a cracked 70-year-old tunnel hundreds of feet below ground, scientists say.

    The tunnel is leaking up to 36 million gallons a day as it carries drinking water from a reservoir to the big city. It is a powerful warning sign of a larger problem around the country: The infrastructure that delivers water to the nation’s cities is badly aging and in need of repairs.

    The Environmental Protection Agency says utilities will need to invest more than $277 billion over the next two decades on repairs and improvements to drinking water systems. Water industry engineers put the figure drastically higher, at about $480 million….

    Engineers say this is a crucial era for the nation’s water systems, especially in older cities like New York, where some pipes and tunnels were built in the 1800s and are now nearing the end of their life expectancies….

    Catastrophic problems can arise when infrastructure fails. An 84-year-old steam pipe erupted beneath a New York street last year, creating a mammoth geyser that rained mud and debris down on the city.

    In Chicago, an 80-year-old cast-iron water main broke earlier this year, spilling thousands of gallons and opening up a 25-foot hole in the street.

    In Denver, up to 4 million gallons of water gushed from a ruptured 30-year-old pipeline in February, gouging a sinkhole across three lanes of Interstate 25. The lanes were shut down for nearly two weeks.

    Cleveland has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on infrastructure in the past 20 years but still must repair daily breaks. Last month, a break in a 2 1/2-foot-diameter water main turned a downtown square into a watery crater and knocked out other utilities.

    The amount of wasted water from these breaches is staggering.

    The 36 million gallons a day that leak from the 85-mile Delaware Aqueduct in New York state amounts to more than 1 billion gallons a month. That may be a drop in the bucket compared to the hundreds of billions of water consumed in New York City every year, but the daily leak in the tunnel would meet the daily demands of drought-ravaged Raleigh, N.C.

    Residents in Wawarsing, about 100 miles from New York City, blame tunnel leaks for the constant flooding in their yards and basements. Department of Environmental Protection engineers are trying to determine whether the aqueduct is really responsible for the soggy mess along Route 209 that has gotten considerably worse over the last 10 years….

    New York has spent decades digging a new $6 billion tunnel that will create an alternative source of water delivery and allow for easier inspection and repair of the other tunnels. It is expected to be completed by 2020.

    Around the country, water rates are going up to help pay for the repairs, estimated at anywhere between $550 and $7,000 per household during the next three decades.

    Augusta, Ga., raised rates 11 percent from 2001 through 2007 for a $300 million program to improve the deteriorating water system. Cleveland gradually increased rates by about 6 percent for more than 15 years to fund a $750 million project to address aging and inefficient pipes. Springfield, Mass., doubled rates for its 250,000 customers. Philadelphia, Kenosha, Wis., Portsmouth, Va., and other cities have followed suit.

    Many engineers and water utilities say water bills around the country are too low. In New York City, where a studio apartment can rent for more than $3,000 a month, the cost of water and sewage is about $60 for an entire single-family home….

    [excerpted]

    1. At this rate, how will the US ever be able to complete the proposed undersea water pipeline to Israel?

      Tick tock tick tock–save water shower together.

      1. I note also that the various bureaucratic entities are phrasing this largely as a residential drinking water issue–invariably speaking of per capita consumption, as if industrial and commercial consumption were not the part of the issue.

        Junk mail anyone?

    2. Water can’t be wasted there is as much water now on earth as there was 100 million years ago.

      It can be polluted, but that is another matter.

      1. You are wrong. Relocation allows the concept “waste”, economically, politically and in any other manner you wish.

        Minimally it is wasted energy.

        Merely by the way, read the rest of the article. No doubt some Chinese mainlanders being held as slaves in New York City and growing beansprouts for commercial consumption in the basement are happy to have any excess soggy ground, but there are large areas of leakage where the irrigation benefits are, er, “wasted”, thank you very much.

        1. There are also all manner of pertinent distinctions in the kind of water available–and this is no modern discovery.

          So few among the yahoos, for example, ever enquire as to why the ancient Greek for “river” looks so similar in form to the the Latin-derived “potable”.

          Use your imagination, if you have one.

          Brewers are also experts in the matter.

          The poor Dutch–no matter how they exert themselves, their beer has a doubtful aftertaste.

          Germans in Mexico or China, on the other hand, located exactly what they were after.

        2. There’s another aspect seldom talked about–Americans are terrible builders–often bordering on incompetent.

          That’s is mainly because they are market-driven smart asses and always in a rush.

          It is inconceivable that their engineering knowledge was so primitive that these aqueducts have only a life-time of a century of so.

          Among other things, the Americans have never known how to construct self-cleaning pipes.

          This is also a function of technology. “Round pipes” are cheaper to extrude, even though they are inefficient to put in the ground where one does not want to dig them up for several centuries, if then.

          It is a pity the Americans are so dead set on teaching Iraqis how to be civilized. They will not be around long enough to learn anything of consequence from the Mesopotamiams unfortunately.

          Are there any “self-ownership” types who know anything about, say, drainage tiles about?

        3. It is really a pity the US illegally turned over Saddam Hussein, a prisoner of war, to be hanged.

          He could have been a big help with in solving the coming American crisis in the collapse of infrastructure.

        4. Im just pointing out the water we “wast” seeps into underground aquifers or it goes out to sea to be evaporated and fall for free on our heads as rain. It’s really kind of a perfect system.

          The concept of wasting water derives from overdeveleplment in places where the essentials for life is not abundant or by making the supply unusable with pollution. Which in turn allows a gate keeper to sell access to what should be free.

          To Bring this back to Darfur it is interesting that the region sits on a sea of underground water but by means of war access to that water has been cut setting the stage for some multinationals to go in develop the resource and sell it to the people for a huge profit.

          Whats next to wast air and be charged by a monopoly for a supply.

        5. In other words, you are wrong to say “water can’t be wasted”.

          Anyway, even what you say above is wrong. Potable water arranged at great expense to be dumped in large quantities into aquafiers that then become salt sea is–all other factors eliminated–a waste of potable water, isn’t it?

          Oh yes–eventually, you will reply, it will come back as rain.

          A Keynesian, are you–“In the long run”, yes, yes.

          Be a good fellow, admit your mistake. It’s easier that way. You might live longer as well.

  30. I’m sure you are aware that liberals have not been silent on Iraq atrocities. They’ve been ranting about that since 2003, surely you must have seen or heard of this.

    And you must also be aware that the Tibet thing is just the tip of the tip of the iceberg in the eyes of most liberals. They’ve been protesting Chinese atrocities throughout China for years. Surely you must have see or heard of this as well. So I assume your headline is some kind of rhetorical device.

    But I agree, it is strange for us Americans to call for a boycott of the Olympics when we have troops occupying Iraq.

  31. There will come soft rains and the smell of the ground,
    And swallows circling with their shimmering sound;

    And frogs in the pools singing at night,
    And wild plum-trees in tremulous white;

    Robins will wear their feathery fire
    Whistling their whims on a low fence-wire;

    And not one will know of the war, not one
    Will care at last when it is done,

    Not one would mind, neither bird nor tree
    If mankind perished utterly;

    And Spring itself, when she woke at dawn,
    Would scarcely know we were gone.

    Sara Teasdale

  32. Sara Teasdale, T. S. Eliot, William S. Burroughs–what in the world was going on in Saint Louis besides Budweiser?

      1. “Now”? I wouldn’t know–last time I was in what is “now” Saint Louis was some time ago.

        I am not sure what “dirtiest city” might mean either, or who has the expertise to make such a judgment.

        The “Arch” is tacky.

        Moving the national capital there has points in its favor, after DC becomes the old national capital and a ceremonial center.

        I doubt, however, I will live long enough to see courtiers with blackened teeth around a figurehead King.

        The US simply does not have enough in the way of Kulchur, rationality, or imagination for that to happen soon.

        But who knows?

        The like did wonders for Brasil.

        1. Let’s see: Kansas City’s got Harry S Truman and Tom Prendergast, right? And more currently and also more significant than either of those, Richard Corben.

        2. To continue Missouriwise: Clemens born in Florida (not the state of) but Hannibal has the claim.

        3. Let’s see, when was the last time I was in Van Buren County? A coon’s age acherly.

          Was he really the bastard of a barmaid and Aaron Burr you think?

        4. I mean, if the SPQA is really going to forego impeaching mobsters as President and Vice President this time around, and go for Tarquinius Superbus, whoever that might be, might as well do it right.

          The Neo-Cons and the Born Again Zionists and the Corporate Fascists are too vulgar and sleazy and uncultured and boring for them to make an acceptable court.

          I mean Geezus H., Al Capone at least had baseball and opera, and a degree in accounting.

  33. There’s nothing wrong with, NGOs, churches, and other volunteer groups
    protesting *both* Iraq and Tibet simultaniously. But *don’t* write your
    congressperson…except to ask Washington to “butt out”.

  34. You’re quite right, of course, Wendy. They’re more than hypocrites. But what exactly? The New York Times, for instance, seems to be morphing into a bastion of neo-conservatism. What next? More to the point what lengths will they go to to dumb-down the already dumbed-down public?

    Here’s an example from the Times Online:

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article3671368.ece?Submitted=true

    It’s an article (written as an earth shattering development) where they ‘unmasked’ the Chinese bodyguards of the Olympic Torch as being paramilitary trained police. ‘Unmasked’ as if the reporters did a fantastic job in revealing what the duplicituous Chinese were trying to hide. Of course if there were no such bodyguards and the Torch was damaged and trampled on they would complain about Chinese incompetence in not protecting the torch. But seeing that there are bodyguards to do the job they must now complain that they’re trained and fit and therefore have to be paramilitary police etc. What do they want? Couch potatoes to do the job?

    It seems that the Chinese can do no right.

    What next? I expect an expose condemning the Chinese for using Chinese matches for lighting the Torch and not using a Greek match…or better yet an English match, seeing that the report is London based.

    Finally, taking hypocrisy to giddying heights: some of the english population were flagrantly offended that a ‘foreign police force’ would be on their soil! Now really! Why get so upset? It’s karma; blowback for a colonialistic and imperialistic past. What goes around comes around! They ought to just relax. The Chinese paramilitary police might just treat them better than they treated their colonies.

    But they won’t relax. They can’t. They’re too busy trying to convince everyone that their hypocrisy is really self-righteousness…a la New York Times…

  35. I so agree with your sentiment, but the phrase “. . . fixing problems my government is in no way (currently) responsible for” is not quite accurate.

    The Dali Lama has been beholden to the CIA since the mid fifties. The Dali Lama signed an agreement with the new Communist government of China in 1951 that gave China sovereignty over an almost completely autonomous Tibet, just like it had been for several hundred years under Imperial China. Then the CIA showed up and, apparently, convinced the Dali Lama to try to break his agreement with China. The CIA recruited, funded, armed, and trained (in Colorado!) a freedom fighting force that fought and lost to the Chinese in 1956. After that attempt at revolution, the Chinese no longer felt bound to the agreement and decided to punish the Dali Lama. When the Dali Lama fled to India in 1959, the CIA funded his government in exile to the tune of $1 to $2 million a year. When Nixon went to China in 1972, that funding was supposed stop. But did it?

    The CIA created the Free Tibet movement. I think my government IS responsible for the current mess in Tibet – then definitely – and probably is now. And that’s another damn good reason for us to get the hell out of Iraq and Afghanistan (remember how much fun the Soviet Union had there?) immediately.

  36. Why are liberals silent on Iraq? Because Liberals, like their reptilian counterparts across the isle, are SLAVES TO ISRAELI LOBBY. How else can you explain their unwillingness to end the war. How else can one justify their unwillingness to make the war an issue in the election. How else can one explain their brazen disregard for the views of the American people.

    This war has always been about Israel and for the benefit of Israel. Think back to those days when every Liberal complained that Saddam Hussein was “horrors” supporting the Palestinian people. Israel wanted the destruction of Iraq and the democrats and republicans delivered it. Israel wants an invasion of Iran and the democrats and republicans are desperate to make it happen.

    Take your pick McCain, Clinton, Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Bush, Cheney, they all swear allegiance to the violence and destruction championed by ISREAL. Unfortunately, the rest of congress, military, judiciary, executive branch and the media are going right along with them.

    Whoever said, “all liberals crack in the end” was exactly right.

  37. Typical amerikan ignorance: lesser acts by other governements become headlines to rail over, while greater actions by the amerikan govt are supported. When did ignorance become mandatory to be an amerikan??

  38. It is really scary to see that the “Darfur” and “Tibet” fever has overtaken New York. The proponents of these campaigns (Advertising campaigns, as the ads on the Subway attest), like Mia Farrow, are transparently supporting the Bush administration’s foreign policies (like the attacks on the Chinese Olympics). I wrote on my blog about when Reporters Without Borders came to my town with a campaign to intentionally disrupt the Rose Parade with an orchestrated protest of the Beijing float. http://pasadenanewprogressive.blogspot.com/2008/01/reporter-without-borders-media-siege-of.html

    Reporters Without Borders were also very involved with the Torch rally protests and have been exposed for years now as accepting money from the State department and working with Otto Reich. See the Diana Barahona article http://www.counterpunch.com/barahona05172005.html

    Its all propaganda, and it is wrong!

  39. Lets take a serious look at what is happening here. Imagine, that the right-wing media machine is USING the Left to its advantage. That is what I believe is happening with the Darfur, Tibet AND the anti-Beijing Olympics campaigns – all of which are valid issues, but ones that have been over-blown and distorted by the media. They are also issues that completely benefit the Bush Administration. This cannot be ignored.

    See this article here: Ten Reasons to Suspect “Save Darfur” is a PR Scam http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/69170

    Remember, graphics (Ads) are media too – and hence the subway ads. As a graphic designer, I see graphic design used WAY too much for these campaigns – to the point of my deep suspicion of them. I have written about it here:
    http://pasadenanewprogressive.blogspot.com/2008/05/darfur-graphics-campaign.html
    http://pasadenanewprogressive.blogspot.com/2008/04/what-is-wrong-with-this-picture.html

    We need to look at WHO is sponsoring these campaigns and question their motives. If they are indeed sponsored by dubious sources, this is really scary – not to mention, dead wrong! Reporters Without Borders, for instance, (who have sponsored the anti-Olympics campaign) is funded in part by a propaganda wing of the State Department, The Center for a Free Cuba – of which Otto Reich (a notorious right-wing propaganda master from the Contra days) is a trustee.

    This is not information the media is going to give us, but it is super-important to know the truth here. At issue is how far will the Right go to deceive the Left.

  40. Do you see how the right-wing bloggers are ATTACKING the truth with these spam comments??

    This is the last thing they want anyone to know about – how they have infiltrated the Left.

Comments are closed.