|
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 |
hypnotist
Joined: 04 Dec 2004
Location: I wish I were a sock
|
 Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 7:14 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| hypnotist wrote: |
| There's an implicit assumption you seem to be making throughout that such intervention is of limited effectiveness. Why's that? |
In the covert ops I've reviewed for my thesis, this has always been of only limited effectiveness.
For one thing, CIA has pretty strict ground rules (as did KGB, according to former Sub-Director General Nikolai Leonov, that is) about keeping its money in political and not antigovernmental activities (like strikes). But these ground rules have never given any local recipients pause, as they tend to use these funds however they like.
This leads to unforeseen but not necessarily disadvantageous developments (like Patria y Libertad's use of three-pronged spikes in the Oct. '72 truckers' strike in Chile -- CIA money probably bought those spikes, even though the Agency was studiously attempting to avoid PL "like the plague" -- but the National Party, who rec'd CIA money, didn't mind associating with PL), and also dilutes whatever objectives CIA may be intending to achieve -- based on whatever its presidential/congressional authorization may be. |
Fair enough. Mind you, I'm not (yet) sure I trust the link of the NED to the CIA...
Even some of the NED��s critics concede the group��s record is not all negative. ��I don��t think it��s just the CIA reincarnated,�� said Elizabeth Cohn, a professor of International and Intercultural Studies at Goucher College, Towson, Md., who wrote her doctoral thesis on the National Endowment for Democracy. Parts of the organization do ��some very good work�� in strengthening democratic institutions and fostering democracy.
But the problem is when the NED oversteps its bounds and meddles in the internal affairs of other countries, radically altering the political landscape in pursuit of U.S. foreign policy objectives, she said. The $10.5 million it pumped into Nicaraguan opposition groups in a dirt-poor country with 4 million residents essentially threw the February 1990 election to Violeta Chamorro, the candidate for the U.S.-backed UNO coalition, Cohn said.
I've no idea if that's a valid conclusion or not, but it's a hell of a lot of money. It's both less underhand and less subtle than the CIA, in any case.
| Quote: |
| Pro-U.S. broadcasts? Sure, why not? It really helped in Cuba. Forty years and look at the damage these broadcasts have done to the Castro regime. Nick Cullather, while going through CIA's job files for PBSUCCESS, found many cables complaining that SHERWOOD's signal didn't even make it to Guatemala City. |
It's more the intention than anything. This kind of thing is exactly why those countries can talk of Yanqui Imperialism and keep a straight face.
| Quote: |
| It seems that radio worked very well for the Nazis in wartime Europe, but doesn't work very well for the Agency in peacetime Latin America... |
Well, access to news and information was much harder to come by, back then...
| Quote: |
| You seem to be assuming a pretty tight command and control relationship. But with Latin American assets? With Caribbean politicians? Why are you assuming this? |
Actually, I'm not. Quite the opposite. Like the previous poster's plausible deniability, but perhaps more subtle than that - several different agencies pursuing individual agendas with a direction, if not a precise path, set by above.
| Quote: |
| hypnotist wrote: |
| The US may or may not have had a leading role in the coup, but it's quite clear that it's trying to influence Venezualean affairs.) |
This is, without a doubt, true, just as true as it was for London in its prime, indeed, in the very same country... |
Oh, of course, of course! It has indeed always been thus. I just find it interesting that many Americans seem to see America as somewhat different, even innocent, in all this. America has a massive amount of power in the world, and often doesn't use it in a particularly nice, democratic or productive way. Fair enough, but it does get tiresome arguing with people who think America can Do No Wrong.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 7:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| hypnotist wrote: |
| Fair enough. Mind you, I'm not (yet) sure I trust the link of the NED to the CIA...I've no idea if that's a valid conclusion or not, but it's a hell of a lot of money. It's both less underhand and less subtle than the CIA, in any case. |
It smells like the CIA. If it isn't, it's probably some private conservative group with access to large amounts of funds, adopting earlier CIA methods and tactics (with informal CIA guidance in the form of retired personnel??? -- pure speculation...)
CIA was effectively thrown out of this game after the Ramparts scandal in 1967. The whole machine closed down, in bits and pieces, mind you, in subsequent years.
| hypnotist wrote: |
| It's more the intention than anything. This kind of thing is exactly why those countries can talk of Yanqui Imperialism and keep a straight face. |
Not this so much as...the Monroe Doctrine, the war with Mexico, Washington's subsequent moralizing to Chileans in the aftermath of the War of the Pacific that other nations should not engage of aggressive expansionist wars (!!!), William Walker in Nicaragua, Cuban independence and the Platt Ammendment, United Fruit Company and gunboat diplomacy and "dollar diplomacy," the canal, Wilson's non-recognition principle and Costa Rica, PBSUCCESS and the Guatemalan Revolution, the era of the Cuban Revolution and counterinsurgency and covert ops, Operation Just Cause...this is just a partial list...
they keep a straight face because Washington is imperialistic and extremely interventionist, esp. in the Caribbean Basin.
Paradoxically, that's where Arbenz, Castro, Guevara, Allende, and Chavez come from...
Last edited by Gopher on Wed Aug 31, 2005 7:43 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bulsajo
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 7:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
pan o palo.
Plus ca change... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 4:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well Gopher, I certainly hope that you are right.
I have my doubts, however. Especially since Bush has re-hired many key figures from Reagans Iran-contra years.
Things like the following make me and many others around the world cringe.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=%20ME20050829&articleId=881
Police chief- Lockerbie evidence was faked
CIA planted tiny fragment of circuit board crucial in convicting a Libyan for the 1989 murder of 270 people
by Marcello Mega
August 29, 2005
The Scotesman
Email this article to a friend
Print this article
A FORMER Scottish police chief has given lawyers a signed statement claiming that key evidence in the Lockerbie bombing trial was fabricated.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 4:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
from your article
:
What he says has been called into question;
| Quote: |
| But Esson, who retired in 1994, questioned the officer's motives. He said: "Any police officer who believed they had knowledge of any element of fabrication in any criminal case would have a duty to act on that. Failure to do so would call into question their integrity, and I can't help but question their motive for raising the matter now." |
| Quote: |
The first suspects in the case were the Syrian-led Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine - General Command (PFLP-GC), a terror group backed by Iranian cash. But the first Gulf War altered diplomatic relations with Middle East nations, and Libya became the pariah state.
Following the trial, legal observers from around the world, including senior United Nations officials, expressed disquiet about the verdict and the conduct of the proceedings at Camp Zeist, Holland. Those doubts were first fuelled when internal documents emerged from the offices of the US Defence Intelligence Agency. Dated 1994, more than two years after the Libyans were identified to the world as the bombers, they still described the PFLP-GC as the Lockerbie bombers.
A source close to Megrahi's defence said: "Britain and the US were telling the world it was Libya, but in their private communications they acknowledged that they knew it was the PFLP-GC. |
It was either Libya or Iran.
Bathists , Khomeni followers, Bin Laden lovers or similar ideological types are always doing evil things cause it is their nature. If they were gone from the world there would be far less terror. Without question they are the cruelest and most sinister politcal forces in the world.
Last edited by Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee on Wed Aug 31, 2005 5:53 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hypnotist
Joined: 04 Dec 2004
Location: I wish I were a sock
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 5:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
It was either Libya or Iran.
|
If it were Iran, there would be an innocent man in prison. And what about Syria?
I suggest anyone wanting to read about the huge holes in the evidence used in the trial reads Paul Foot's Lockerbie - The Flight From Justice which outlines just how thin the case was, and how much remains unexplained, or Cover-Up of Convenience by John Ashton and Ian Ferguson which is a later and more detailed account of the same thing. Believe their alternative theories or not as you wish, but it's clear to me the conviction is unsafe.
Last edited by hypnotist on Wed Aug 31, 2005 5:33 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hypnotist
Joined: 04 Dec 2004
Location: I wish I were a sock
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| It smells like the CIA. If it isn't, it's probably some private conservative group with access to large amounts of funds, adopting earlier CIA methods and tactics (with informal CIA guidance in the form of retired personnel??? -- pure speculation...) |
http://www.ned.org/about/nedhistory.html
Now who's getting carried away with conspiracy theories? 
(It's pretty clear what Reagan had in mind for it, though...)
| Quote: |
| CIA was effectively thrown out of this game after the Ramparts scandal in 1967. The whole machine closed down, in bits and pieces, mind you, in subsequent years. |
Sure. They needed to be both more subtle and more open in what they did, as I said - hence organisations like the NED. They "offer" support to both sides, safe in the knowledge that only their allies will qualify and accept.
| Quote: |
| hypnotist wrote: |
| It's more the intention than anything. This kind of thing is exactly why those countries can talk of Yanqui Imperialism and keep a straight face. |
Not this so much as...the Monroe Doctrine, the war with Mexico, Washington's subsequent moralizing to Chileans in the aftermath of the War of the Pacific that other nations should not engage of aggressive expansionist wars (!!!), William Walker in Nicaragua, Cuban independence and the Platt Ammendment, United Fruit Company and gunboat diplomacy and "dollar diplomacy," the canal, Wilson's non-recognition principle and Costa Rica, PBSUCCESS and the Guatemalan Revolution, the era of the Cuban Revolution and counterinsurgency and covert ops, Operation Just Cause...this is just a partial list... |
Whoa there, horsey! Yes, I know well enough about the hypocrisy of the US when it comes to its own back yard (and see other thread on the US/Canada trade disputes). I was just saying it was one example of it. You quoted 12 others. The list goes on, and is still being added to, that's my point. Americans who try to pretend that this kind of behaviour is entirely in the past (as you yourself have occasionally seemed to imply on this thread, if not stated outright, so apologies if I'm misinterpreting) are burying their heads in the sand.
Possibly we're arguing at cross purposes - I'm focussing on current events whereas you seem to prefer to examine the historical record. We're applying different methodologies to answer different questions...
| Quote: |
they keep a straight face because Washington is imperialistic and extremely interventionist, esp. in the Caribbean Basin.
Paradoxically, that's where Arbenz, Castro, Guevara, Allende, and Chavez come from... |
Paradoxically? That's sarcasm, right? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 5:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="hypnotist"]
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
It was either Libya or Iran.
|
If it were Iran, there would be an innocent man in prison. And what about Syria?
I don't know. But Libya has carried out bombings before.
And Syria might of done it but Assad was not a big risk taker. They might have done it w/ Iran. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 6:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
deleted
Last edited by Gopher on Sun Dec 02, 2007 1:15 am; edited 4 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BigBlackEquus
Joined: 05 Jul 2005
Location: Lotte controls Asia with bad chocolate!
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 6:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pat Robertson is old. Hes losing it. That happens to people when they get as old as he is. Besides, he apologized and said he was wrong.
The OP needs to understand this and realize it is not all conservatives who act this way.
If someone called me a terrorist just because I am Muslim, then I am sure you would jump all over them for it, and rightfully so. Maybe you would even ban them from this board. They would be generalizing in a bad way, and it would be wrong. You, however, as a moderator, should be held to a higher standard and realize that throwing out comments like cooky right winger, or whatever you said, only angers people. Robertson is old and is making comments he wouldnt have made before. To generalize him with right wingers is wrong.
I find it rather contradictory and somewhat interesting that you egg these people on and anger them, then remove them from the board when they get angry. That only makes them hate us more, and totally close their ears to what we have to say.
The OP also needs to understand that the way to win people over to our side is to appeal to them with actual solutions to problems, rather than the same old: cooky right winger this, Bushie is bad, Americans are stupid for electing him and now they know it type of junk.
How can we, who lean to the left, ever win more people to our cause if we cannot offer them something other than: Right wingers are cooky and Bush is evil? We need someone who can offer solutions without pointing fingers. We need someone who can stand up and forget about the past, look to the future, and realize what needs to be done, then do it.
Until we find a person like that, I fear the left will not be winning any elections anytime soon. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 7:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| some waygug-in wrote: |
Well Gopher, I certainly hope that you are right.
I have my doubts, however. Especially since Bush has re-hired many key figures from Reagans Iran-contra years.
Things like the following make me and many others around the world cringe. |
I don't think that there is anything that I could say that would deter you from this line of predetermined thinking. Good luck to you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 7:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| It was either Libya or Iran. |
No, you've got it all wrong. Don't you know? Col. Quadafi, Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro...they're innocent people, misunderstood and maligned by a lying United States. These leaders are concerned with humanitarian aid and getting petroleum to the poor, for example. Haven't you noticed their response to the damage Katrina wrought?
Everything that is bad ultimately comes down to a U.S.-sponsored cynical conspiracy to dominate the world economy and harm anyone who wants to stop it...Pan Am 103? We all know what really happened there, right?
In any case, the negative PR is really hard to understand because, as we all know, Imperial Spain and Imperial Britain were really loved by all in their time, right? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 8:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And also to you.
peace. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 03, 2005 4:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The Bobster wrote: |
[...
(1) I do want to thank TUM for (trying to) provide the link to the thread where I said this. I understand why Thundarr did not. I wish he would get around to it - I recall the context and circumstance but he would prefer the rest of us do not, and frankly I'm not inclined toward the boredom of reading though my own posts to find the very link Thundaar ought to shown us ... he wants to come to a party and attack me, the least he can do is bring his own gun - that is, unless there is something there he'd rather people not see.
(2) Unfortunately, though, as any of you who have clicked on TUM's link and looked at it will know, my avatar appears nowhere on it, not in any of its 6 pages. It is from early 2004, and I was living in Thailand then, and not posting here very often, still nominally a moderator so I stayed away from the CE forums because I don't respect socks and just wasn't into all the subterfuge in that whole thing - and the remarks Thundarr quoted were more recent, and though I do recall the context I do not feel compelled to provide the thread link - it was he who made the attack, after all, and the attack he made here was fueled by an entirely different discussion where I made him look like exactly the fool that he is.
I am grateful to The Urban Myth for making a wierd and strange attempt to post the link to the thread where I made the comment that some seem to think needs defense - it was wierd and stange in the way that he once claimed to have heard on Arirang as he was drifting asleep said that a couple of commissions investigating Abu Ghraib came up with nothing that implicated the Bush administration, though wierdly and strangely, their website said exactly the opposite. (Yes, he will remember this debacle, and I don't need to provide the link - he recalls it, I'm sure - but if I go looking for it, it won't be a false one, not like what he provided.)
(3) I will, however, go so far as to say that some of his posts I have read recently, ones that seek to refute and confront racism and bigotry, lead me to think that my long campaign to educate him might be bearing some fruit. There is some warmth in my heart when I see that.
I have no remorse for what I said in Thundarr's quote. I'll say it again.
(4) Hate speech against racial and religious groups by those who advocate the murder of 10 million adherents to the muslim faith in order to "send a message" or perpetuate similar statements, as I said, need to be "put down," or those who make similar statements need to be countered, and insulted, refuted by rational argument or by emotional diatribes, or by any example between those extremes. The things at stake for the American nation and the world at large are just too important.
(5) And I just looked at the calendar, and it's been about 10 months since I first decided not to remain silent about the bigotry I see getting promulgated here. I had seen it for while before and it's still too prevalent for me to have time to comment on every instance, quite a bit more so than at that time ... but I notice that others have opposed it since then, so I have not had to do so nearly as often.
That's a good thing to see. |
(numbers are mine)
1. If you had taken the trouble to read more carefully, you would have seen that I was replying to Mr. Bulsajo's request for an entirely different link. The link I posted was in reply to Mr. Bulsajo's post.
2. See 1
3. I have always confronted bigotry and racism, especially those that attempt to mask themselves as opposing said mindsets.
4. Now that's what I am talking about.
5. This is one of the very few time that I agree with what you have said. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bigverne
Joined: 12 May 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 03, 2005 5:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| If they were gone from the world there would be far less terror. |
Not while the ideology of Jihad and infidel hatred is spread in mosques all over the world, and Saudi Arabia, Iran and many other Islamic nations fund Jihadist movements. Al Qaeda is simply a figurehead, inspiring the growing hardcore of Jihadists to murder. They no longer even have the operational capacity to plan or carry out terrorist attacks. Such attacks will merely be carried out by individuals or groups of muslims, many of them citizens of the West, inspired by the ideology of Jihad, which is very much alive and well. |
|
| 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
