|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
 Posted: Sun Aug 19, 2007 1:38 am Post subject: Left Wing Fascist |
 |
|
This is a contradiction.
My question: Is the blurring of the traditional uses of political terms by the Right an effort to make 'fascism' a useless term so as to give them cover for what they really believe? Dare I say it, a vast right-wing conspiracy? Was Hillary right all along? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 19, 2007 1:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| see the answer to your post |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 19, 2007 1:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Alias wrote: |
Read the article?
So why is Pilger a "Left-wing Fascist" again? |
Cause he is a left winger who also is anti Jewish.
and he supports the Iraqi insurgents.
| Quote: |
...TONY JONES: John Pilger, do you still maintain that the world depends on what you call "the Iraqi resistance" to inflict a military defeat on the coalition forces?
JOHN PILGER: Well, certainly, historically, we've always depended on resistances to get rid of occupiers, to get rid of invaders.
And what we have in Iraq now is I suppose the equivalent of a kind of Vichy Government being set up.
And a resistance is always atrocious, it's always bloody.
It always involves terrorism.
You can imagine if Australia was occupied by the Japanese during the Second World War the kind of resistance there would have been, and so on.
We've seen that all over the world.
Now, I think the situation in Iraq is so dire that unless the United States is defeated there that we're likely to see an attack on Iran, we're likely to see an attack on North Korea and all the way down the road it could be even an attack on China within a decade, so I think what happens in Iraq now is incredibly important.
TONY JONES: You mean defeated militarily?
JOHN PILGER: Yes..... |
and he was an apologist for Saddam.
| Quote: |
irst casualty of Pilger. . ., The
Spectator, The, Jun 28, 2003 by Sweeney, John
John Sweeney says that John Pilger blames the Americans alone for birth defects in Iraq, and overlooks evidence that implicates Saddam Hussein
The Americans arc making a hash of rebuilding Iraq, but one of the not so bad things they have done is to give Iraqis the freedom to scribble. On the wall outside the Baathist ministry of health the other day, a graffiti artist had scrawled in perfect English, 'We need a health ministry free of corruption.'
For years John Pilger - 'one of the world's most renowned investigative journalists', it says on the back of his latest book - has been insisting that the West, not Saddam, is to blame for the crisis in Iraq's public health; that 5,200 Iraqi children were dying every month; that Western depleted-uranium weapons were to blame for an epidemic of cancers; that sanctions crippled Iraq's doctors. Funnily enough, Pilger's journalism echoed what the Baathist regime wanted people to hear.
But very recently in Baghdad what some might call the Pilger-Baathist line was put to a very public test by yet another American blunder. They handpicked a new acting health minister, Dr Ali Shenan al-Janabi, who was number three at the health ministry under Saddam. According to virtually every Iraqi doctor I spoke to, he was an unacceptable choice. The Iraqi doctors were not keen to say so to the BBC on camera. To criticise the Baath party on the record is, even now, something that no Iraqi will do lightly. Then two surgeons at Al Kindi teaching hospital in Baghdad, Dr Rahim Ismael and Dlair Omar, mulled it over and said, 'OK, we'll do it.' They damned the health ministry under Saddam as a corrupt and brutal instrument of state oppression. They said that many medicines had been held back in warehouses. The ministry was trying to make healthcare worse in Iraq, the goal being to blacken the name of UN sanctions, which Saddam detested as a brake on his power. The fewer drugs, the worse the equipment and the more dead babies, the better it was for the regime. Any Iraqi doctors who didn't toe the line were punished.
In the mid-1980s Iranian human-wave offensives almost took Basra, but they were stopped by Saddam's chemical weapons. The UN found incontrovertible evidence that Saddam used mustard gas against the Iranians every year between 1984 and 1988. When the Iranians came close to Basra, the Iraqis dropped gas on their own people, too. Nearly all of the war was fought in Iraq, not Iran, so that's where Saddam dropped his chemical weapons.
Mustard gas - sulphur mustard - is carcinogenic and mutagenic. That is, sulphur mustard causes cancers, leukaemias and birth defects. The children of Iranian soldiers who were gassed by Saddam's men have developed terrible cancers and birth defects. No depleted-uranium weapons were used on them. The children of Halabja, the Kurdish town gassed by Saddam, have developed cancers and birth defects. Again, no depleted uranium was used on them.
Pilger knows all about chemical weapons. He wrote in the Minor in January, 'I often came upon terribly deformed Vietnamese children in villages where American aircraft had sprayed a herbicide called Agent Orange. This terrible chemical weapon was dumped on almost half of South Vietnam. Today, as the poison continues to move through water and soil and food, children continue to be born without palates and chins and scrotums or are stillborn. Many have leukaemia.' If chemical weapons cause cancers in Vietnam, why don't they do the same in Iraq? The answer seems a simple one: chemical weapons cause cancer so long as they are dropped by the Americans.
Shortly after Pilger's programme was broadcast in 2000, Arbuthnot phoned Gwynne Roberts, the only journalist brave enough to go to Iraq in 1988 and dig up soil contaminated by Saddam's chemical weapons. Portland Down found mustard gas in Roberts's soil samples. Arbuthnot was puz-zled: how could the cancers in Iraq have started in 1992? Roberts's view, like mine, is that - without letting the West off the hook on the question of depleted uranium - the contribution that Saddam's chemical weapons may have made to the Hiroshima Effect should be seriously investigated.
I emailed John Pilger, asking him, 'You know about Saddam's use of chemical weapons, so why didn't you raise the possibility of that being the cause of the cancers and birth defects?' He replied, 'You apparently think my film was made in 1991. It wasn't. It was made in 1999, eight years after the 1991 Gulf war, or twice the time it takes for deformities to develop, according to you. In the film I clearly put to one of the doctors the doubts that depleted uranium is the cause of the deformities. Her answer was a good one. Another specialist himself raises the doubts and addresses them. At no point in the film do I say that DU is, on its own, responsible for the extraordinary rise in cancers over, I repeat, a period of eight years up to when the film was made.'
This is artful. If Pilger and Arbuthnot accept that DU cannot have caused cancers observed in 1992, why haven't they made this clear? None of the cancers and birth defects that Pilger's researcher dates hack to 1992 can be the fault of depleted uranium. To omit the possibility that some of the cancers were caused by Saddam's chemical weapons is to misrepresent the facts. To imply by that omission that depleted uranium is solely responsible for the cancers and birth defects in Iraq as he docs in his book, his film and in the Daily Mirror is a disgrace to journalism.
I accuse John Pilger of cheating the public and favouring a dictator.
John Sweeney is special correspondent for the BBC.
Copyright Spectator Jun 28, 2003
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 19, 2007 2:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
Pilger is a left wing fascist.
|
This is a contradiction in terms, unless you mean something like he's playing Mussolini to someone's Hitler. |
It is when you have left wingers that have many things in common with the far right including the hate mongering populism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
arjuna
Joined: 31 Mar 2007
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
arjuna
Joined: 31 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Former CIA agent tells: How US infiltrates "civil society" to overthrow governments
BY PHILIP AGEE
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4332.htm
08/03/03: Condemnation of Cuba was immediate, strong and practically global following the imprisonment of 75 political �dissidents� and the execution of three ferry hijackers. Prominent among the critics were past friends of Cuba of recognised international stature.
As I read the hundreds of denunciations that came through my mail, it was easy to see how enemies of the revolution had seized on those issues to condemn Cuba for violations of human rights. They had a field day.
Deliberate or careless confusion between the political dissidents and the hijackers, two entirely unrelated matters, was also easy because the events happened at the same time. A Vatican publication went so far as to describe the hijackers as dissidents when in fact they were terrorists. But others of good faith toward Cuba also jumped on the bandwagon of condemnation treating the two issues as one.
With respect to the imprisonment of 75 �civil society activists�, the main victim has been history, for these people were central to US government efforts to overthrow the Cuban government and destroy the work of the revolution.
Indeed, �regime change�, as overthrowing governments has come to be known, has been the continuing US goal in Cuba since the earliest days of the revolutionary government. Programs to achieve this goal have included propaganda to denigrate the revolution, diplomatic and commercial isolation, trade embargo, terrorism and military support to counter-revolutionaries, the Bay of Pigs invasion, assassination plots against Fidel Castro and other Cuban leaders, biological and chemical warfare, and, more recently, efforts to foment an internal political opposition masquerading as an independent civil society.
The administration of US President Ronald Reagan in the early 1980s decided that more than terrorist operations were needed to impose regime change in Cuba. Terrorism hadn't worked, nor had the Bay of Pigs invasion, nor had Cuba's diplomatic isolation, nor had the economic embargo. Now Cuba would be included in a new world-wide program to finance and develop non-governmental and voluntary organisations, what was to become known as �civil society�, within the context of US global neoliberal policies.
Coups
The CIA and the Agency for International Development (AID) would have key roles in this program as well as a new organisation christened in 1983 � the National Endowment for Democracy (NED).
Actually, the new program was not really new. Since its founding in 1947, the CIA had been deeply involved in secretly funding and manipulating foreign non-governmental voluntary organisations.
These vast operations circled the globe and targeted political parties, trade unions and business associations, youth and student organisations, women's groups, civic organisations, religious communities, professional, intellectual and cultural societies, and the public information media. The network functioned at local, national, regional and global levels.
Over the years, the CIA exerted phenomenal influence behind the scenes in country after country, using these powerful elements of civil society to penetrate, divide, weaken and destroy organisations on the left, and indeed to impose regime change by toppling governments.
Such was the case, among many others, in Guyana, where in 1964, culminating 10 years of efforts, the Cheddi Jagan government was overthrown through strikes, terrorism, violence and arson perpetrated by CIA agents in the trade unions.
About the same time, while I was a CIA agent assigned to Ecuador, our agents in civil society, through mass demonstrations and civil unrest, provoked two military coups in three years against elected, civilian governments.
Anyone who has watched the opposition to President Hugo Chavez's government in Venezuela develop can be certain that the CIA, AID and the NED are coordinating the destabilisation and were behind the failed coup in April 2002 as well as the failed �civic strike� of last December-January.
The Cuban American National Foundation was, predictably, one of the first beneficiaries of NED funding. From 1983 to 1988, CANF received US$390,000 for anti-Castro activities.
NED
The NED is supposedly a private, non-government, non-profit foundation, but it receives a yearly appropriation from the US Congress. The money is channelled through four �core foundations�. These are the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (linked to the Democratic Party); the International Republican Institute (Republican Party); the American Center for International Labor Solidarity; and the Center for International Private Enterprise (US Chamber of Commerce).
According to its web site, the NED also gives money directly to �groups abroad who are working for human rights, independent media, the rule of law, and a wide range of civil society initiatives.�
The NED's NGO status provides the fiction that recipients of NED money are getting �private� rather than US government money. This is important because so many countries, including both the US and Cuba, have laws relating to their citizens being paid to carry out activities for foreign governments.
The US requires an individual or organisation �subject to foreign control� to register with the attorney general and to file detailed activities reports, including finances, every six months.
Cuba has its own laws criminalising actions intended to jeopardise its sovereignty or territorial integrity as well as actions supporting the goals of the anti-Cuba US Helms-Burton Act of 1996, such as collecting information to support the US embargo or to subvert the government, or for disseminating US government information to undermine the Cuban government.
Efforts to develop an opposition civil society in Cuba had already begun in 1985 with the early NED grants to CANF. These efforts received a significant boost with passage in 1992 of the Cuban Democracy Act, better known as the Torricelli Act, which promoted support, through US NGOs, of individuals and organisations committed to �non-violent democratic change in Cuba�.
A still greater intensification came with passage in 1996 of the Cuban Liberty and Solidarity Act, better known as the Helms-Burton Act.
As a result of these laws, the NED, AID and the CIA (the latter not mentioned publicly but undoubtedly included) intensified their coordinated programs targeted at Cuban civil society.
CIA
One may wonder why the CIA would be needed in these programs. There were several reasons. One reason from the beginning was the CIA's long experience and huge stable of agents and contacts in the civil societies of countries around the world. By joining with the CIA, the NED and AID would come on board on-going operations whose funding they could take over while leaving the secret day-to-day direction on the ground to CIA officers.
In addition, someone had to monitor and report the effectiveness of the local recipients' activities. NED would not have people in the field to do this, nor would their core foundations in normal conditions. And since NED money was ostensibly private, only the CIA had the people and techniques to carry out discreet control in order to avoid compromising the civil society recipients, especially if they were in opposition to their governments.
Finally, the CIA had ample funds of its own to pass quietly when conditions required. In Cuba, participation by CIA officers under cover in the US Interests Section would be particularly useful, since NED and AID funding would go to US NGOs that would have to find covert ways, if possible, to get equipment and cash to recipients inside Cuba. The CIA could help with this quite well.
Evidence of the amount of money these agencies have been spending on their Cuban projects is fragmentary. Nothing is publicly available about the CIA's spending, but what is easily found about the other two is interesting. The AID web site cites $12 million spent for Cuba programs during 1996-2001, but for 2002 the budget jumped to $5 million plus unobligated funds of $3 million from 2001. AID's 2003 budget for Cuba is $6 million showing a tripling of annual funds since the George Bush junta seized power. No surprise given the number of Miami Cubans Bush has appointed to high office in his administration.
[Details]
Whatever the amount of money reaching Cuba may have been, everyone in Cuba working in the various dissident projects knows of US government's sponsorship, funding and of its purpose � regime change.
Far from being �independent� journalists, �idealistic� human rights activists, �legitimate� advocates for change or �Marian librarians from River City�, every one of the 75 �dissidents� arrested and convicted was knowingly a participant in US government operations to overthrow the government and install a US-favoured political, economic and social order. They knew what they were doing was illegal, they got caught and they are paying the price.
Anyone who thinks these people are prisoners of conscience, persecuted for their ideas or speech, or victims of repression, simply fails to see them properly as instruments of a US government that has declared revolutionary Cuba its enemy.
They were not convicted for ideas but for their paid actions on behalf of a foreign power that has waged a 44-year war of varying degrees of intensity against this poor country.
To think that the �dissidents� were creating an independent, free civil society is absurd, for they were funded and controlled by a hostile foreign power and to that degree, which was total, they were not free or independent in the least.
The civil society they wished to create was not just your normal, garden variety civil society of Harley freaks and Boxer breeders, but a political opposition movement fomented openly by the US government. What government in the world would be so self-destructive as to sit by and just watch this happen?
The threat of war against Cuba from Bush and his coterie of crusaders, all of them crazed after Iraq, is real. A military campaign against Cuba, coinciding with the 2004 electoral campaign, may be the only way he can hope to get himself elected for his second term.
[Abridged from Granma Internacional. Philip Agee was a CIA covert operations officer from 1959 to 1969 and is the author of Inside the Company: A CIA Diary. He lives in Havana, where he runs a travel web site, <http://www.cubalinda.com>.] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
arjuna
Joined: 31 Mar 2007
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 4:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
why ought anyone believe him?
The US was correct to fight the cold war. The communists were out to destroy the US.
Counterpunch , John Pliger , Information Clearinghouse. Geroge Galloway.
Left wing fascism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Woden
Joined: 08 Mar 2007
Location: Eurasia
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 7:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| John Pliger supports the Iraqi insurgents. |
So do I, and most people who love freedom. That is true freedom, not hegemonic global capitalist liberal democracy freedom, ie. US Empire. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 8:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Woden wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| John Pliger supports the Iraqi insurgents. |
So do I, and most people who love freedom. That is true freedom, not hegemonic global capitalist liberal democracy freedom, ie. US Empire. |
Supporting a bunch of slaves who are mucking their own country up for $$ is freedom?
Welcome to Dave's. Many who share your views here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deadman
Joined: 27 May 2006
Location: Suwon
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 8:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
Supporting a bunch of slaves who are mucking their own country up for $$ is freedom?
|
How is the resistance "mucking up their country for $$"?
Or were you referring to the US?
Edit: This is actually a genuine question - not sure where you stand on the issue. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 9:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Woden wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| John Pliger supports the Iraqi insurgents. |
So do I, and most people who love freedom. That is true freedom, not hegemonic global capitalist liberal democracy freedom, ie. US Empire. |
Then you support Sunnis who despite being only 20% demand to rule the nation.
The you support the followers of Sadr who want to rule the nation without any regard to the minority rights.
Then you support Al Qaeda who wants to kill off other religons.
See how they tried to kill of the Yadzis in Iraq.
You are a supporter of fascism.
| Quote: |
Consider what happened on Aug. 14. Four jihadist suicide-bombers blew themselves up in two Iraqi villages, killing more than 500 Kurdish civilians -- men, women and babies -- who belonged to a tiny pre-Islamic sect known as the Yazidis.
And what was the Bush team's response to this outrage? Virtual silence. After much Googling, the best I could find was: '' 'We're looking at Al Qaeda as the prime suspect,' said Lt. Col. Christopher Garver, a U.S. military spokesman.'' Wow.
Excuse me, but what exactly are we fighting for in Iraq, or in this wider war against Islamist extremism, if the murder of 500 civilians can be shrugged off? Even if we don't know the exact perpetrators, we know who is inspiring this sort of genocide -- Al Qaeda and bin Laden -- and we need to say that every day. |
Friends of yours Woden?
Last edited by Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee on Wed Sep 05, 2007 9:12 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 9:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| deadman wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
Supporting a bunch of slaves who are mucking their own country up for $$ is freedom?
|
How is the resistance "mucking up their country for $$"?
Or were you referring to the US?
Edit: This is actually a genuine question - not sure where you stand on the issue. |
Who are you talking about the Bathists, the Sadr followers or Al Qaeda?
What do they fight for?
David Icky is the leader of a vile cult.
| Quote: |
Consider what happened on Aug. 14. Four jihadist suicide-bombers blew themselves up in two Iraqi villages, killing more than 500 Kurdish civilians -- men, women and babies -- who belonged to a tiny pre-Islamic sect known as the Yazidis.
And what was the Bush team's response to this outrage? Virtual silence. After much Googling, the best I could find was: '' 'We're looking at Al Qaeda as the prime suspect,' said Lt. Col. Christopher Garver, a U.S. military spokesman.'' Wow.
Excuse me, but what exactly are we fighting for in Iraq, or in this wider war against Islamist extremism, if the murder of 500 civilians can be shrugged off? Even if we don't know the exact perpetrators, we know who is inspiring this sort of genocide -- Al Qaeda and bin Laden -- and we need to say that every day. |
Friends of yours Deadman? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deadman
Joined: 27 May 2006
Location: Suwon
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2007 12:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| deadman wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
Supporting a bunch of slaves who are mucking their own country up for $$ is freedom?
|
How is the resistance "mucking up their country for $$"?
Or were you referring to the US?
Edit: This is actually a genuine question - not sure where you stand on the issue. |
Who are you talking about the Bathists, the Sadr followers or Al Qaeda?
What do they fight for?
Friends of yours Deadman? |
Hey, moron - does this sound familiar
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
and he supports the Iraqi insurgents.
| Quote: |
...TONY JONES: John Pilger, do you still maintain that the world depends on what you call "the Iraqi resistance" to inflict a military defeat on the coalition forces?
JOHN PILGER: Well, certainly, historically, we've always depended on resistances to get rid of occupiers, to get rid of invaders.
And what we have in Iraq now is I suppose the equivalent of a kind of Vichy Government being set up.
And a resistance is always atrocious, it's always bloody.
It always involves terrorism.
You can imagine if Australia was occupied by the Japanese during the Second World War the kind of resistance there would have been, and so on. |
|
You provided the definition of "insurgent" for the purposes of this thread. From your quote, John Pilger supports people who fight to defend their country from invasion.
In the context you yourself provided, your last two posts are totally redundant. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2007 5:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Hey, moron - does this sound familiar |
The David Icky follower is calling someone a moron . Funny
| Quote: |
You provided the definition of "insurgent" for the purposes of this thread. From your quote, John Pilger supports people who fight to defend their country from invasion. |
They are not fighting to defend their country they are fighting to conquer it from other groups.
You see them asking for independence?
Who are the insurgents anyway.
and what gives the insurgents the right to tell the Kurds what to do. The Kurds want the US to keep forces in Iraq.
And the Shia are glad the US took down Saddam who persecuted and killed them.
Futhermore Saddam never gave up his war.
John Pilger Left wing fascist
David Icky leader of a cult. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
