CRACKDOWN on "conspiracy theorism"/unAmerican activities on babble

105 posts / 0 new
Last post
notaradical

From 500_Apples' closed thread:

Catchfire wrote:

Pogo wrote:

Is it possible to believe both that there was an organic movement and that foreign powers used clandestine means in efforts to shape the movement? Perhaps it then becomes a question of degrees - how much foreign influence and how effective was it?

To clarify, this is exactly the kind of discussion babble is meant to have. The threads in question, supported by Larouchean articles, are not.

...based on your arbitrary criteria. My forum title reads 'rabble-rouser' but why do I feel increasingly like 'muzzled-dog'?

There was ample opportunity in every thread you closed for opponents of the argument to voice their opinion - and boy did they! So if your criteria for a "Babble-worthy" discussion is the representation of both arguments, then those threads were not lacking. I would like to point out that not once did any opponent give evidence to the contrary, no matter how superficially it may have eroded the initial hypothesis.

A defense lawyer does not go into the courtroom embodying both sides of the case. Oh and if those threads were a court of law, you would have been asking for an appeal about now. The idea that every forum thread must adequately address polar dimensions of an issue is absurd. We are not writing unbiased reports from the front. Even Rabble stories are tilted. So until you can prove to me that my comments were "racist", "orientalist", "imperialist", or "enablist", I disagree with your decisions.

Your grounds for closing the threads were completely contrived. Just admit it.

Roscoe

500_Apples wrote:

Shut thread !! ban !!!

May we take this post mean you have reconsidered your quasi-flounce of the closed thread?

I don't participate in the tinfoil hat threads. To me they are silly but, I do opine that those who wish to discuss those issues should be left alone to do so.

I much prefer a dingy tavern with spilled beer and peanut shells on the floor, 2 chaps arm wrestling at one table, a chess game underway on another and some dour communists plotting in the corner to a refined drawing room debate where only certain individuals and vetted subjects are allowed.

Trying to maintain a polite debating society  among such a diverse, anonymous and passionate crowd is akin to herding cats. babble is losing (lost) its edge and becoming tedious and boring.

Bacchus

Roscoe wrote:
I much prefer a dingy tavern with spilled beer and peanut shells on the floor, 2 chaps arm wrestling at one table, a chess game underway on another and some dour communists plotting in the corner to a refined drawing room debate where only certain individuals and vetted subjects are allowed.

Sounds like some of my favourite evenings

Fidel

Well I think I'll take this opportunity to announce my departure from babble as well since 500_Apples' thread was shutdown so quickly. 

babble has become too pro imperialist and intolerant of legitimate dissident views for my liking. The well is poisoned.

Perhaps the business people should solicit donations from NED, IRI, USAid, "al-Qa'bong"(racist handle if ever there was one), Timebandit etc. Because I refuse to have anything more to do 

with the American inquisition disguised as a progressive left wing forum. It's too bad, really.

It's been fun. Good luck to all you genuine lefties. You know who you are. The struggle for democracy continues. Carry on fighting the good fight. Over and out. 

Off!

notaradical

Fidel wrote:

Well I think I'll take this opportunity to announce my departure from babble as well since 500_Apples' thread was shutdown so quickly. 

babble has become too pro imperialist and intolerant of legitimate dissident views for my liking. The well is poisoned.

Perhaps the business people should solicit donations from NED, IRI, USAid, "al-Qa'bong"(racist handle if ever there was one), Timebandit etc. Because I refuse to have anything more to do 

with the American inquisition disguised as a progressive left wing forum. It's too bad, really.

It's been fun. Good luck to all you genuine lefties. You know who you are. The struggle for democracy continues. Carry on fighting the good fight. Over and out. 

Off!

Well that's lamentable. Stay and rabble rouse.

notaradical

al-Qa'bong wrote:

What got my goat was being accused of being an "enabler of empire" for suggesting that the dark races were capable of thinking for themselves.

And then there's this thread title, where making such a suggestion is equated with McCarthyism.

Blatantly racist. And I was accused of being racist and orientalist in my previous thread? Cripes, mods! Get your heads in the game! I haven't even been here 2 months, but this one's got an offensive moniker AND makes comments like this.

notaradical

Sven wrote:

It's too simplistic to make either of these assertions: That the Arab Spring was

1.  100% caused by the CIA (and that popular action played no role)

The first assertion is not only simplistic but it is demonstrably false (there were massive protests and, in many cases, harsh reprisals against the protesters).  The second assertion, given past history, is almost certainly false.

As someone noted earlier, reality almost certainly falls somewhere between those two extremes...and that the relative influences are matters of degree and matters of legitimate discussion.

Although there may have been a diversity of groups present, that does not preclude an external body from applying the initial push. What I and some other Babblers contended was that these revolutions indeed occurred, but their impetus was applied externally with full knowledge of its aftereffects. Period. Coming to any other conclusion of our meaning - and there were a great many diversions - is disingenuous and inflammatory.

wage zombie

Fidel wrote:

Well I think I'll take this opportunity to announce my departure from babble as well since 500_Apples' thread was shutdown so quickly. 

babble has become too pro imperialist and intolerant of legitimate dissident views for my liking. The well is poisoned.

Really?

Sven Sven's picture

wage zombie wrote:

Fidel wrote:

Well I think I'll take this opportunity to announce my departure from babble as well since 500_Apples' thread was shutdown so quickly. 

babble has become too pro imperialist and intolerant of legitimate dissident views for my liking. The well is poisoned.

Really?

How can babble lose Snert and Fidel in the same damned day?!  Is there a full moon glowering down at us?

Com'on back, Fidel.

Seriously.

al-Qa'bong

notaradical wrote:

al-Qa'bong wrote:

What got my goat was being accused of being an "enabler of empire" for suggesting that the dark races were capable of thinking for themselves.

And then there's this thread title, where making such a suggestion is equated with McCarthyism.

Blatantly racist. And I was accused of being racist and orientalist in my previous thread? Cripes, mods! Get your heads in the game! I haven't even been here 2 months, but this one's got an offensive moniker AND makes comments like this.

What's racist about this post, or my handle?  I'm genuinely curious.

And what did Snert do to get banned?

Sven Sven's picture

al-Qa'bong wrote:

And what did Snert do to get banned?

See this thread.

notaradical

al-Qa'bong wrote:

What got my goat was being accused of being an "enabler of empire" for suggesting that the dark races were capable of thinking for themselves.

And then there's this thread title, where making such a suggestion is equated with McCarthyism.

Dark races? As opposed to what, the European Light races? And Al-Qa'bong as a trite play on...?

al-Qa'bong

Quote:
Dark races? As opposed to what, the European Light races?

I was thinking more of pure, white races, but yeah.  I guess the intent of my comment flew past you.

And al-Qa'bong is a play (Trite?  Who are you kidding?) on the name of a famous masked Hanna Barbera character.  I need it as a disguise , seeing as folks with my real last name end up in places like Khiam prison for, wait for it...resisting empire.

polly bee

Fidel wrote:

Well I think I'll take this opportunity to announce my departure from babble as well since 500_Apples' thread was shutdown so quickly. 

babble has become too pro imperialist and intolerant of legitimate dissident views for my liking. The well is poisoned.

Perhaps the business people should solicit donations from NED, IRI, USAid, "al-Qa'bong"(racist handle if ever there was one), Timebandit etc. Because I refuse to have anything more to do 

with the American inquisition disguised as a progressive left wing forum. It's too bad, really.

It's been fun. Good luck to all you genuine lefties. You know who you are. The struggle for democracy continues. Carry on fighting the good fight. Over and out. 

Off!

 

Sorry to see you go Fidel.  I think I will go with....haven't posted more than a handful in the last year or so, best that way.  Cheers.

Fidel

Thanks Polly. I've missed your comments. Take care.

[one more for the road]Well that changes things, Q. Your claim to ethnicity makes your racist babble handle approximately twice as dumb as before. You were only a point five before the above post. Now you're rounded up to a large hole between your ears. And your use of the word 'race' to identify people is interesting as well. You and Catchfire aren't very big, but you both can be pretty dumb sometimes.

500_Apples wrote:
More bullying by this sorry excuse of a moderator.
"Larouchean" lol. The trans-Siberian railroad guy? Keep throwing meaningless labels around.
Tell me more about how Pinochet's installation in 1973 was due to a popular uprising.

And if a consensus of progressive babblers become fed up with the bullying and idiotic comments by moderators at any time in future, they might try a peaceful rebellion of their own. Write to rabble's business people, publisher, Duncan Cameron etc, and let them

know how you feel about the moderating. Twitter revolutions are said to sometimes be effective, too. 

And no I don't support CIA funded Otpor or colour revolutions for meddling in other countries' sovereign affairs. But apparently some people around here think it's all just another conspiracy theory/unAmericanism. And so they shouldn't mind at all if babblers attempt something similar along the way toward democratizing babble. 

Peace out.

[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v697/rabblerabble/Capture-7.gif[/IMG]

Slumberjack

You leave over a difference of opinion vis-a-vis moderating style, which you infer as being touched up with imperialism, while sticking with a party where 103 of them recently voted for it.  I don't get it.  How about a little consistency at least.

notaradical

Slumberjack wrote:

You leave over a difference of opinion vis-a-vis moderating style, which you infer as being touched up with imperialism, while sticking with a party where 103 of them recently voted for it.  I don't get it.  How about a little consistency at least.

I get where you're coming from Slumberjack, but let's have a little solidarity in this thread at least. The mods are shutting down critical discourse just like the state shut it down in the wake of 9/11, because it was "unpatriotic". Except this time it's "insensitive" to the sacrifices of the N.African/Middle East revolutionaries, which, by the way, none of us has denied.

notaradical

al-Qa'bong wrote:

Quote:
Dark races? As opposed to what, the European Light races?

I was thinking more of pure, white races, but yeah.  I guess the intent of my comment flew past you.

And al-Qa'bong is a play (Trite?  Who are you kidding?) on the name of a famous masked Hanna Barbera character.  I need it as a disguise , seeing as folks with my real last name end up in places like Khiam prison for, wait for it...resisting empire.

No, I got the gist. It doesn't excuse your deplorable comment. If I had satirized the state of downtown Baltimore's largely African-American population, could I have used the 'n' word? Sheesh.

Anyways I'm done pointing out your character deficiencies. Let me be as a poor sop in a firing line.

Caissa

Is anyone keeping a count of how many people have  been banned, suspended of left in the last 24 hours? What a royal  (or should I say radical) fuck up.

 

notaradical

Caissa wrote:

Is anyone keeping a count of how many people have  been banned, suspended of left in the last 24 hours? What a royal  (or should I say radical) fuck up.

I have a feeling they'll be back.

I stay. It is a privilege to participate in these forums. I consider myself a pretty civil commentator until insults are flung my way. Contrary to what some people here might believe, I did not start the 'USA Manufactured the Arab Spring' threads because of my love for empire or thinly veiled racism. Looking back at my most recent comments, they're a tad heavy-handed, but so was the crackdown on critical discourse.

I recognized immediately that the events of the Arab Spring drew striking parallels to the People Power revolution of my parents' generation. In that case, the CIA installed its puppet. I began digging using a simple Google search. Lo and behold! Ample evidence pointing to CIA complicity. Each article, examined individually out of the context of the whole discussion, can still throw doubt upon the prevailing opinion that the revolutions were spontaneous. That is my rebuttal to my opponents' claims that the stringing together of my sources was haphazard. They still have not addressed this.

To me it speaks more to our desire to surrogate our current struggles here at home. We want so badly to overthrow the neoliberals that we cling on to any semblance of popular movement, even if it contains underpinnings of Western intervention. I see no greater threat to the advancement of progressive ideas than the complete shuttering of debate stemming from, as Fidel put it, the "fetishization" of progressive movements to compensate for our largely benign socialist initiatives.

notaradical

Slumberjack wrote:

On the other side, a notion which suggests that nothing in the form of aspirations toward freedom and democracy occurs to people around the world, except for what the west dangles in front of them, is a disgusting one. The unavoidable correlation, unless we're being necessarily emphatic about it, is that people were injured, tortured, and died in support of a vision that wasn't their own, that was implanted for nefarious effect. The fact that we've been drawn in to the latest media fable about an "Arab Spring" obscures the fact that each instance of popular revolt is underwritten by entirely unique sets of circumstances.

I think that is the critical statement. The title of my previous threads was "The USA Manufactured the Arab Spring". That is not all-encompassing of the legitimate struggles of the people in that region. It speaks to the revolution in its current manifestation. You will be hard-pressed to find proof in those threads that I denied genuine unrest and dissent.

'Manufacture' means to create. To use an industrial analogy, a car is manufactured when its components are assembled. Those pieces may have come from a variety of other manufacturers with a variety of manufacturing styles. However, the car manufacturer puts it all together. In this analogy, the CIA is the car manufacturer. It harnessed the potential energies of popular revolution and redirected them.

I don't understand why it occurred to my opponents that I denied the sacrifice and the reality of the revolutions. I was referring to its impetus. Period.

Slumberjack

notaradical wrote:
  You will be hard-pressed to find proof in those threads that I denied genuine unrest and dissent.

I was going on the assumption all along that you didn't intend to infer what was attributed to you. The point about being necessarily emphatic has been borne out I believe. You may have survived your hazing as a relative newcomer, but we've lost a few along the way and now it's time to try and gather them back up.

Slumberjack

notaradical wrote:
I get where you're coming from Slumberjack, but let's have a little solidarity in this thread at least. 

Hey, I quoted an extract from Debord up thread, and...I called the mod a 'manager.' What more do you want? But I have leanings all around here on this particular issue. On one side of the coin the hands of the corporate imperium in all of its manifestations are never idle hands. The entire history of western commercial rule and its interests as they pertain to the North America context alone has been one of continuous divide and conquer with genocidal implications. In our time we can observe spontaneity from any population anywhere as being of great concern to them. The imperative to engineer a position out in front of any such impromptu outbursts finds a very compelling motivation in profit driven megalomania as the horrifying reality, as it has always been.

On the other side, a notion which suggests that nothing in the form of aspirations toward freedom and democracy occurs to people around the world, except for what the west dangles in front of them, is a disgusting one. The unavoidable correlation, unless we're being necessarily emphatic about it, is that people were injured, tortured, and died in support of a vision that wasn't their own, that was implanted for nefarious effect. The fact that we've been drawn in to the latest media fable about an "Arab Spring" obscures the fact that each instance of popular revolt is underwritten by entirely unique sets of circumstances.

In our attempts to analyze the totality of it, or in parts as they occur, we can't help but to become immersed in our own confusion in relation to all of the manufactured contradictions which appear to be escaping the grasp of the imperium's overlords. That they give off every sign of being in a state of crisis everywhere doesn't mean we have to start our own crisis here. For that reason alone I think its collectively worth the effort to extend ourselves here to ask 500 Apples, Fidel and Polly Bee to reconsider, and correspondingly, to ask for a little more faith from the mods when it comes to determining the intent of people who've been around for awhile.

ETA:  Thanks May for your thoughts.

al-Qa'bong

notaradical wrote:

 

No, I got the gist. It doesn't excuse your deplorable comment. If I had satirized the state of downtown Baltimore's largely African-American population, could I have used the 'n' word? Sheesh.

It seems my earlier comment is still whooshing past you.  Turn the mirror around, old chap.

500_Apples

OK, Fidel is gone, Snert is gone, and in general a lot of people that made me like babble in 2008 or so are gone.

My purpose with these threads was to explore the role of western intelligence agencies within the "Arab spring". Is it like Iran 1953? Chile 1973? Ukraine and Yugoslavia in the 1990s? Or is it more like Iran 1978 or Algeria 1962? Somewhere in between? What factors are completely new? It is worth investigating in my opinion, and it is not at all a priori obvious which is the correct model.

It is a denial of reality, and thus implicitly racist, to deny the role of power relations in these conflicts. The reason it's valid to ascribe a role to Washington, London and Paris is that they have the most power. In Bahrain, where protesters were undermining a pro-US government, tanks were pointed at them, many of them were executed, and the protests were reduced.

There are historical examples of the west seeding false revolutions. I'm in Chile right now.

Back in 1973, if you said the CIA was involved in the Pinochet coup, you were to be considered a lunatic "conspiracy theorist". Today, the whole planet knows what really happened.

By the way, the term Arab Spring is itself racist, as it implicitly assumes that the social dynamics are the same as that in the Paris spring, rather than being specific to the historical situation at hand.

To Catchfire: If you don't want to be insulted, you should adopt the effective strategy of not insulting people first. I personally practice reciprocity and treat other people as they treat me, if you start calling other people imperialist or larouchean and condescendingly closing their threads based on fabricated anti-historical pretenses, expect to be hit back. Look at how much damage your attitude has done to the forum in the last 24 hours.

So long babble. Anyone who wants to keep in touch, send a PM.

al-Qa'bong

Quote:

By the way, the term Arab Spring is itself racist, as it implicitly assumes that the social dynamics are the same as that in the Paris spring, rather than being specific to the historical situation at hand.

Like the "Prague Spring?"

contrarianna

Rebecca West wrote:
The original thread was closed because it was espousing ideas, without any valid proof, that the Arab Spring was a manipulation of Imperialist forces.  Completely disavowing the incredible sacrifices of people who have protested, under threat of violent death, this conspiracy theory represents the kind of thought that can only be attributed to an arrogant cultural group that cannot conceive that  people other than themselves can successfully revolt against their government.

That clear enough?

Although the titles of the threads closed may be enough to excuse moderator closure, the statement of allowable discussion goes well beyond any recapitulation of any babble "anti-imperialist" position.

It makes a political assessment of non-imperialism as an indisputable fact; a simplistic assessment of pro vs anti-regime change dynamics in situations which are far more complex than that of assumed progressive forces representing the so-called "arab spring".

Yes, to claim that the "arab spring" was invented by the CIA and does not have roots in popular uprising against tyranny is absurd--and demonstrably so.

But to suggest that the regime change forces in all these countries all represent progressive, anti-imperialist impulses is also absurd--and demonstrably so.

To say that the CIA and "imperialist manipulation" has little or no part in both the current pro and anti-regime change forces (depending on the state involved) is equally absurd--and demonstrably so.

notaradical

Slumberjack wrote:

I was going on the assumption all along that you didn't intend to infer what was attributed to you. The point about being necessarily emphatic has been borne out I believe. You may have survived your hazing as a relative newcomer, but we've lost a few along the way and now it's time to try and gather them back up.

I was pretty incessant, huh? I just felt like my protests were being largely ignored - that the moderators slapped a blanket offense on the thread and closed it without any consultation. I understand that as mods they have the power and privilege to do so. Oh well...

al-Qa'bong wrote:

It seems my earlier comment is still whooshing past you. Turn the mirror around, old chap.

I'm just gonna concede at this point. To be honest, I don't have any issues with anyone on this forum until I get insulted. I'm glad to debate as long we remain civil and not resort to insulting each others' intelligences.

 

 

Slumberjack

notaradical wrote:
 I understand that as mods they have the power and privilege to do so. Oh well...

People seem to have discovered ways of getting around that.

voice of the damned

500 Apples wrote:

My purpose with these threads was to explore the role of western intelligence agencies within the "Arab spring". Is it like Iran 1953? Chile 1973? Ukraine and Yugoslavia in the 1990s? Or is it more like Iran 1978 or Algeria 1962? Somewhere in between? What factors are completely new? It is worth investigating in my opinion, and it is not at all a priori obvious which is the correct model. 

I think these threads might have gotten off to a better start had the original title been something like "American influence in Arab Spring outcomes?". Which would have acknowledged the complexity of the social movements and the multiplicity of the players. Instead, we got the blunt assertion that the whole movement is "manufactured in the USA", which didn't really set the tone for a nuanced debate.

What I find odd about this whole discussion is that, back when Gay Girl In Damascus was generally being taken as a credible source, everyone seemed to find it quite plausible, and laudable, that a left-wing activist living in Syria would be involved in an Arab Spring uprising. Then, one guy makes a video saying that the Arab Spring is a CIA front, and gets instant credibility(at least in some circles). So, I'd say that progressives themselves seem to be a little confused as to what they think about the regimes in that part of the world.  

 

  

 

Slumberjack

voice of the damned wrote:
So, I'd say that progressives themselves seem to be a little confused as to what they think about the regimes in that part of the world. 

I haven't detected any confusion about the nature of the regimes there, or here for that matter.  Would you care to point to a few examples?

voice of the damned

Slumberjack wrote:

voice of the damned wrote:
So, I'd say that progressives themselves seem to be a little confused as to what they think about the regimes in that part of the world. 

I haven't detected any confusion about the nature of the regimes there, or here for that matter.  Would you care to point to a few examples?

Well, like I said, people seemed to think it was laudable that a progressive(ie. the alleged blogger in Damascus) would join in a struggle against the Assad regime in Syria.

Then, people seemed ready to believe that the movement against Assad was orchestrated by the CIA. In which case, why were they so happy to cheer on the anti-Assad blogger when they thought she was real?

Perhaps it would have been more accurate to say that people are confused about the nature of the movements against the regime, rather than the regimes themselves.

 

al-Qa'bong

notaradical wrote:

 

I'm just gonna concede at this point. To be honest, I don't have any issues with anyone on this forum until I get insulted. I'm glad to debate as long we remain civil and not resort to insulting each others' intelligences.

 

 

The irony is getting deeper.

 

OK, try this: if someone uses terms such as "the dark races," "the turbanned horde," "the Yellow Peril," and "the mysterious Orient;" given the context in which these terms occur, about whom would you think the commentary is directed?

6079_Smith_W

500 Apples:

Don't forget St. Petersburg, 1917

And while I have sympathy for alienation, I don't think the rules are much different in love than they are on the internet. There are a lot of fish in the sea (though we may have to amend that saying soon).

If you need to go, by all means go and I will be sorry for it. But frankly I find flouncing kind of self-indulgent and distasteful. I can think of a number of people who are also missed but who have not made such a drama of it.

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

Well, I hope Fidel comes back. I'm not sure what happened between post #7 and post #54, but I think whatever it was will not overpower Fidel's love of babble. Fidel, I've always admired your enthusiasm for and dedication to babble, and I don't think that this disagreement should keep you from this place. polly bee, I'm not sure why you're leaving as well, but I hope it's temporary.

Again, accusations of a crackdown, stifling of dissent, state oppression, etc. are exaggerated to say the least. Here is, and has always been, my issue: conspiracy-like theories which hold that the CIA or some other American governmental organization exerts supernatural force over world events and deny agency to the countless disparate groups across North Africa and the Middle East runs counter to babble's anti-imperialist, and probably anti-racism policy. Both of the closed threads took this theory up with little (and dubious) proof. In fact, I cited 500_Apples's post in the first thread with admiration, as closer to the kind of discussion we should be having on babble. With that in mind, VOTD posts in this thread (as usual), particularly post #80, outline the situation clearly.

As for the two or three babblers who have left, I hope you take this all into perspective before you make your decision final.

 

6079_Smith_W

@ Cathfire

As I said, moderating is hell, and that goes double for boards where respect for authority equals heresy.

And I think those who claim they want to leave should reconsider too, but I also think going cap in hand to  flouncers is no different than feeding those who troll.

After all, what message does that send to those who play by the rules?

(edit)

And sorry, I don;t mean to imply that you are going cap-in-hand, and I appreciate that as a mod you are in a delicate position. I just don't have much tolerance for flouncing.

 

Sven Sven's picture

contrarianna wrote:

Rebecca West wrote:

The original thread was closed because it was espousing ideas, without any valid proof, that the Arab Spring was a manipulation of Imperialist forces.  Completely disavowing the incredible sacrifices of people who have protested, under threat of violent death, this conspiracy theory represents the kind of thought that can only be attributed to an arrogant cultural group that cannot conceive that  people other than themselves can successfully revolt against their government.

That clear enough?

Although the titles of the threads closed may be enough to excuse moderator closure, the statement of allowable discussion goes well beyond any recapitulation of any babble "anti-imperialist" position.

It makes a political assessment of non-imperialism as an indisputable fact; a simplistic assessment of pro vs anti-regime change dynamics in situations which are far more complex than that of assumed progressive forces representing the so-called "arab spring".

Yes, to claim that the "arab spring" was invented by the CIA and does not have roots in popular uprising against tyranny is absurd--and demonstrably so.

But to suggest that the regime change forces in all these countries all represent progressive, anti-imperialist impulses is also absurd--and demonstrably so.

To say that the CIA and "imperialist manipulation" has little or no part in both the current pro and anti-regime change forces (depending on the state involved) is equally absurd--and demonstrably so.

The original thread title (as opposed to the actual posts within the thread itself) was written in absolute terms ("The USA Manufactured the Arab Spring") and it would be fair for someone to read that title and infer the following meaning: "The sole cause of the Arab Spring was meddling by the USA".

But was anyone asserting within the thread itself that indigenous and popular forces within the affected countries played no role in the Arab Spring?

I didn't read it that way.

voice of the damned wrote:

I think these threads might have gotten off to a better start had the original title been something like "American influence in Arab Spring outcomes?". Which would have acknowledged the complexity of the social movements and the multiplicity of the players. Instead, we got the blunt assertion that the whole movement is "manufactured in the USA", which didn't really set the tone for a nuanced debate.

Exactly!!

6079_Smith_W

@ Sven

Yes, but it is kind of hard to find that common ground when one is dealing with abolutist positions in the first place . If we are talking about the position of deomocracy not existing at all, or everytning being decided by the puppetmasters in the pentagon and CIA headquarters, I can see how there might be the need to draw a line.

 

notaradical

Sven wrote:

The original thread title (as opposed to the actual posts within the thread itself) was written in absolute terms ("The USA Manufactured the Arab Spring") and it would be fair for someone to read that title and infer the following meaning: "The sole cause of the Arab Spring was meddling by the USA".

But was anyone asserting within the thread itself that indigenous and popular forces within the affected countries played no role in the Arab Spring?

I didn't read it that way.

I fully concede that my thread title was misleading and ignorant.

Babble Policy wrote:

Moderators may change thread titles for any number of reasons, including but not limited to: errors in grammar or spelling; libel or slander; oppressive/offensive language; commercial or other kinds of spam; any other reason.

Fidel

[counterflounce]

Catchfire wrote:
Again, accusations of a crackdown, stifling of dissent, state oppression, etc. are exaggerated to say the least. Here is, and has always been, my issue: conspiracy-like theories which hold that the CIA or some other American governmental organization exerts supernatural force over world events and deny agency to the countless disparate groups across North Africa and the Middle East runs counter to babble's anti-imperialist, and probably anti-racism policy.

They are only conspiracy theories if you are able to show that the CIA has not orchestrated counterrevolution and overthrow of various countries' democratically elected leaders, and even abandoned US-backed dictatorships over the years to various popular people's rebellions.

They have. And the historical record of actual examples for it happening are many as Peter Cassidy pointed out at the expense of the shape of someone's cranium.

And in addition to CIA fomented counterrevolutions throughout the last century to this one, there have also been a number of U.S. sponsored "colour revolutions", from the former Yugoslavia to Ukraine, Georgia, Belarus and so on. What your coincidence theory apologizing for U.S. imperialism lacks are explanations as to why dictators like Solobodan Milosevic through Robert Mugabe to Muammar Qaddafi were cooperating with the west in the 1990s forward with neoliberal economic reforms, and praised for it by U.S.-based  financial institutions like the IMF, at the same time the U.S. Government and its "at arm's length NGOs" were supporting the political opposition in those countries same as is evident today in Egypt and Libya, Zimbabwe etc.

You can deny all of this and more by simply shutting down threads and threatening babblers with banning for attempting to discuss what U.S., Canadian and other countries' dissidents including those in John Foster Dulles' "Middle East" are saying about the "Arab Spring" today, but we all know that your overriding and beligerant opinions on the matter have nothing to do with nurturing free or open political discussion on babble. In fact, the situation is quite the opposite, and we resent this oppressive environment which you and by all appearances are directly responsible for having created.

Catchfire, your's is the same logic medieval inquisitions were designed around for several centuries. You can accuse us of being racist and imperialist for discussing the very realistic idea that actual racist imperialists are deeply involved in counterrevolutions and destabilizing the Middle East with the aim of expanding John Foster Dulles' "Middle East" beyond the "North Atlantic" Treaty Org's cold war boundaries into the heart of Asia and Africa. Because you've done so with impunity.

But babblers who recognize that they've been given the bum's rush and threatened with banning for expressing these unAmericanisms you are so intolerant of probably will not be babbling while you are calling the shots. And I think that if rabble's business people and publisher were smart, they would encourage the likes of you to be successful elsewhere.

Peace out.

Freedom 55

If anyone is implying that Catchfire should be fired; I encourage the likes of you to be successful elsewhere.

6079_Smith_W

counterflounce? 

I love it. Let me pull on my dancing shoes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rW9-FOLG-iA

Not that I actually want you to fuck off, but the threat is kind of annoying, especially since I suspect you have no  intention of going anywhere.

 

 

sanizadeh

Fidel wrote:

They are only conspiracy theories if you are able to show that the CIA has not orchestrated counterrevolution and overthrow of various countries' democratically elected leaders, and even abandoned US-backed dictatorships over the years to various popular people's rebellions.

More than orchestrating counterrevolutions and assassinations, CIA and MI6 are historically famous for manufacturing and propagating conspiracy theories about themselves in order to project an inflated view of their magnificance to the world - especially to the people oppressed under the dictatorships supported by them. What better method to discourage any potential freedom fighter in the Arab world by convincing him that all the popular uprisings he admired were nothing more than a complex plot carefully designed by the masters in London and Washington. (Kind of Matrix Reloaded story). Those who repeat such theories should also consider the reality that they are playing in CIA playground.

al-Qa'bong

The Mossad is pretty good at creating that illusion as well, which is one reason The Angry Arab so gleefully points out how inept they are whenever he can.

  For example:

On the dumb Mossad spy in Cairo (is there a Mossad agent who is not dumb)?

2dawall

Here is a take from someone who supposedly went to school with the guy.

http://maxblumenthal.com/2011/06/ex-classmate-of-accused-israeli-spy-ila...

 

al-Qa'bong wrote:

The Mossad is pretty good at creating that illusion as well, which is one reason The Angry Arab so gleefully points out how inept they are whenever he can.

  For example:

On the dumb Mossad spy in Cairo (is there a Mossad agent who is not dumb)?

2dawall

I am not convinced that Webster Tarpely is entirely disconnected from LaRouche. He still uses the bizarre frames of reference, language that he used when we was with LaRouche formally. I suspect/speculate he made a public break for various reasons of PR (LaRouche had to go to prison at around the time of the supposed break). He is definitely is a conspiracy theorist and he promotes an unhealthy approach.

I also, like 6079, doubt Fidel will stay away.  I do not know him personally but I do know those who have met him and I strongly suspect he will return for many reasons.

Slumberjack

Fidel wrote:
your overriding and beligerant opinions on the matter have nothing to do with nurturing free or open political discussion on babble. 

And nothing to do with reality in fact. Confining ourselves to the present tense is evidence enough, let alone drudging up a history filled with corpses strewn about the planet.  The CIA's drone program is currently assassinating entire families in Pakistan, and here we're being treated to yarn about policy implications as they pertain to a discussion of their denial of agency.  It beggars belief when everyday reality and supernatural forces are fuzed together and given the same standing.  It just doesn't make sense.

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

Fidel, my brother, don't let these mods take you down. Do your thing. I probly wouldn't even be into the NDP if not for your constant reminders. I understand why they closed the thread (although not sure why they didn't just change the title).

In solidarity.

Slumberjack

Hey no NDP. We're having a rare moment.

notaradical

Slumberjack wrote:

And nothing to do with reality in fact. Confining ourselves to the present tense is evidence enough, let alone drudging up a history filled with corpses strewn about the planet.  The CIA's drone program is currently assassinating entire families in Pakistan, and here we're being treated to yarn about policy implications as they pertain to a discussion of their denial of agency.  It beggars belief when everyday reality and supernatural forces are fuzed together and given the same standing.  It just doesn't make sense.

I can forgive them the "supernatural" slur after listening to a few of Webster Tarpley's interviews. I think he's equal parts correct and totally-out-there, in terms of evidence he provides ("Assange is a CIA op because he is tied to Google which was funed by a Soros front org" kind of dealio).

However unfortunate it was that Fidel chose to highlight Tarpley's research, there are still other claims that haven't been refuted. Al Jazeera has video confession of the April 6 leaders' connection to Otpor. Otpor has recorded confession of their involvement with Freedom House, NED, CANVAS, ICNC, all CIA front groups. I feel that these were merely glossed over by the moderators. I just don't see how this constitutes non-evidence.

Pages

Topic locked