What do these things mean?
What does the resignation of Paul Wolfowitz from the World Bank helm mean?
What does the flat-earth commentary of NASA spokesman David Mould on global warming mean?
There is right now an Iranian hostage crisis. Can anyone describe this and explain what it really means?
The White House and others are now discussing a “South Korean” relation with Iraq. What does that mean?
There is a sudden and disconcerting increase in US trade with Cuba… in food. What does this mean?
Anyone wishing to answer these questions, and sending along key links, post away. We are interested in thoughtful and informative analysis, and in a respectfully participatory process. Really good ‘uns we’ll twist your arm to post elsewhere.
The Buffalo In Da' Midst:
I had a rather one way conversation with Juan Cole of Informed Comment regarding one of the hostages, Haleh Esfandiari:
———–
——————–
Addendenum: The Entry @ wikipedia for Woodrow Wilson is enlightening:
“In the late stages of the war he took personal control of negotiations with Germany, especially with the Fourteen Points and the Armistice. He went to Paris in 1919 to create the League of Nations and shape the Treaty of Versailles, with special attention on ***creating new nations out of defunct empires***.”
1 June 2007, 12:32 am[Emphasis mine]
Jon Flanders:
The South Korean option?
I think this article spells out the real thinking of the Bush Administration.
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/06/01/1603/
They hope they can keep their embassy and 50,000 or so troops, is my guess.
Good luck to them.
1 June 2007, 2:47 pmThe Buffalo In Da' Midst:
Iranian hostages:
Anne Williamson of Sanders Research Associates points out what I think is the crux of my argument, that the Iranian authorities believe, by definition, Haleh Esfandiari, as Middle East director of the Woodrow Wilson Center is involved (IMHO undoubtedly consciously unaware), in ‘regime change activities.
“Thomas P.M. Barnett, a professor of political science at the Naval War College, has come up with a handy ideological framework for the first half of Wolfowitz’s agenda in his recently-published The Pentagon’s New Map. Barnett argues that the world is divided into two parts: “the functioning core” and the “non-integrating gap.” It is America’s task to integrate nations of the gap into the global economy, and thereby deny terrorists a launching pad anywhere in the world. In order to meet this ambitious goal, Barnett sees the military evolving into a relatively small body of fierce warriors, and a much larger force of non-warrior “system administrators, a civil affairs-oriented and network-centric, always-on, always-nearby, always-approachable resource for allies and friends in need.” Special-op bureaucrats, in other words.
Wolfowitz’s World Bank grants will enable the Pentagon’s system administrators to implant themselves throughout targeted countries’ governments, not just their central banks and treasuries per usual. When the warriors then arrive to clear the field, though the government may well collapse, the functioning core’s agents will still be standing and able to keep a shell government in place until local stooges can be recruited via mass paper ballots and paper dollar bribes for propaganda and administrative purposes.”
IMHO, That’s what the Iranians are thinking, and it’s hard to blame them for taking a proactive defensive position if that is indeed the case.
I am praying for wisdom on the part of the Iranian leadership to resolve her detention in a civil, prompt manner, but I suspect this sort of event will re-occur from time to time until the U.S. backs away from it hegemonic ways.
In Full:
1 June 2007, 3:52 pmhttp://www.comedonchisciotte.org/site/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1034&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0
The Buffalo In Da' Midst:
Iranian hostages:
http://www.comedonchisciotte.org/site/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1034&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0
“In order to meet this ambitious goal, Barnett sees the military evolving into a relatively small body of fierce warriors, and a much larger force of non-warrior “system administrators, a civil affairs-oriented and network-centric, always-on, always-nearby, always-approachable resource for allies and friends in need.” Special-op bureaucrats, in other words.
Wolfowitz’s World Bank grants will enable the Pentagon’s system administrators to implant themselves throughout targeted countries’ governments, not just their central banks and treasuries per usual. When the warriors then arrive to clear the field, though the government may well collapse, the functioning core’s agents will still be standing and able to keep a shell government in place until local stooges can be recruited via mass paper ballots and paper dollar bribes for propaganda and administrative purposes.”
1 June 2007, 3:54 pmThe Buffalo In Da' Midst:
Iranian Hostages: http://www.comedonchisciotte.org/site/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1034&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0
“Barnett sees the military evolving into a relatively small body of fierce warriors, and a much larger force of non-warrior “system administrators, a civil affairs-oriented and network-centric, always-on, always-nearby, always-approachable resource for allies and friends in need.” Special-op bureaucrats, in other words.”
MODERATOR’S NOTE: The reference was to the crisis of the US holding kidnapped Iranian officials. Funny, no one seems to know about this.
1 June 2007, 4:41 pmThe Buffalo In Da' Midst:
Personally, I know about the Iranian hostages… I’m just digging more deeply into the US media’s talking points because I think it’s rather obvious that the Iranians are being held, not so much as hostages, but because they ALSO represent what is described above as “Special-op bureaucrats, in other words.”, and in that sense, the ‘enemy’ of a given culture in opposition to that bureaucrat’s goal.
…and sorry about the duplication of posts. I wasn’t aware that the comments were under moderation. Feel free to remove all but the most pertinent bits.
2 June 2007, 2:54 pmStan:
My bad. Not David Mould. Michael Griffin!
***
What does the resignation of Paul Wolfowitz from the World Bank helm mean?
What does this tell us about power struggles within the ruling class? Within the “international” (metropolitan capitalist class) community? Does it reflect part of a process of internal delegitimation directed at the governing American political clique? What were the issues (aside from the “girlfriend” fiasco) between Wolfowitz and Bank veterans… and what does the Bank really exist to do? Does this kind of turbulence present popular movements with “political space”?
What does the flat-earth commentary of NASA spokesman Micheal Griffin on global warming mean?
Do we give them too much credit with our notions that these folks are somehow omniscient (via omnipotence)? The fact seems to be that the same people who now control the world’s currency and its largest nuclear arsenal really are as ignorant as they seem.
There is right now an Iranian hostage crisis. Can anyone describe this and explain what it really means?
Behind the scenes, the seemingly provocative Iranian reactions to US belligerence involves more than meets the public eye. With US press complicity, the US, in a mirrored version of 1979 in Tehran, kidnapped five Iranian officials who were in Iraq, leveling specious claims without a drop of evidence to justify this bit of cornered-rat bullying. These officials were detained months ago. Now Iran reacts by detaining four Iranian-Americans who were in Iran on charges of espionage. No mention by the press of the linkage between the two, since this bears out that the Bush administration kicked off this particular dick-measuring contest. But how is this seen outside the US? And what might that mean?
The White House and others are now discussing a “South Korean†relation with Iraq. What does that mean?
That this is being surfaced seriously, and taken seriously, confirms that the mission (unchanged) was to establish a permanent American military presence in Iraq, and that the situation has been sufficiently trashed to reignite the idea that “we” can never leave (observe the change in rhetoric from folks like Chris Mathews, an opponent of the war, who now says he doesn’t know how “we” can leave… al Qaeda and all that). The rather glaring differences between post-partition Korea and Iraq notwithstanding.
There is a sudden and disconcerting increase in US trade with Cuba… in food. What does this mean?
Doesn’t this confirm everything we’ve been saying about food dependency being THE basic tool in the Imperial armamentarium? Cuba, be cautious, and be very afraid. You are a light in the world on this very issue.
Thoughts.
2 June 2007, 9:10 pmskol:
How many “loopholes” exist within that Cuba-food thinger to totally squander their infrastructure? I wonder what political goings-on happened for that one to exist (esp. in Cuba!). I mean, sure, we’ll give you food (vice versa? both? Suppose it doesn’t really matter, if we’re doing the dictating) to our most hated empire who has and continues to destroy the lives of Central and South Americans everywhere (And economically “displaced” North Americans, likewise). Are we teetering to such an extent that the real victim of this really could be the US? Have we become too too coy for our own good? I have no understanding of the trade thinger (can you tell?), so I wouldn’t know. How well is Cuba doing on food in the first place, what with the decentralizing and agriculture programs?
2 June 2007, 11:08 pmI just see a lot of these as being major hits to our credibility (which must be -[very large number] in most everywhere but the US, but is there spreading potential? Are things coming closer to a head?).
barb:
Iranian hostages: the BBC World Service and Radio 4 regularly mentioned the Iranian diplomats held by the US during the British Naval hostage affair, but I looked in vain for mention of it in news stories on their website, except when they were originally taken in 2004. Jihani was released in April this year probably as part of the deal to get the Brits back - see the Guardian website and search for “Iranian diplomat” hostage. Maybe they’ll do like in April and try to take the moral high ground in how well the hostages are treated.
Wolfowitz: He’s now braying about how pro-Africa and anti-corruption he was, and how this was opposed by the old guard (see/hear interview on the BBC world service buusiness daily) but I reckon the reality was that his gaff with the girlfriend and his arrogant reaction to it threatened to give the game away. It showed that there’s a split developing within capitalists about just how corrupt the system should be, and some are even worrying that things might be going a bit too far on the suicidal tip. In other words, that exterminism might include some of them and theirs as well. Karmabanque rants quite a lot about the coming civil war between the millionaires and billionaires - not sure what that means, but further digging around links on the Financial Sense website reveals some pretty worried if not pissed-off millionaires.
NASA remarks on global warming: They’re trying to protect their money in the face of cuts to science and research funding in general to finance the war. ‘Nuff said, you don’t need a reference to figure that out, surely? Also have a tip from a friend in the business that the Mars program includes re-starting work on nuclear-powered rockets and spaceships (sorry no link to confirm this) - and remember that NASA is also involved in the Star Wars re-start. NASA’s cosying up to the government goes deeper than merely spewing nonsense about the issue of the decade.
What to do about all this shit, that’s the question…
4 June 2007, 5:39 pmbarb:
Sorry, should have said “NASA’s cosying up to the Bush/Neo-con agenda…” - they are part of the government.
4 June 2007, 5:47 pmgoritsas:
What does the resignation of Paul Wolfowitz from the World Bank helm mean?
It means that the elite is not a singularity. It means that elite influences wax and wan. It means various elite factions come into coordination or conflict as the opportunities to gain or loose power or control manifest themselves.
This in no way suggests we, the rest of us as it were, are any better off. We don’t participate except to the extent we are the commodities necessary to keep the machine from grinding to a halt.
What does the flat-earth commentary of NASA spokesman David Mould on global warming mean?
What does it mean? It means the US government has been infiltrated with vast numbers of individuals clearly exhibiting Antisocial Personality Disorder, Sociopathy, or Psychopathy. To put it bluntly.
There is no hope, none whatsoever. Unless, maybe I’m wrong here, unless the US populace gets their collective fat arses off their over-stuffed settees and undertakes a revolution at least as violent as the one that lead to England’s loss of its most productive and valuable colony. Otherwise, you, and the rest of us poor bastards inhabiting a continent other than North America, are headed for extinction.
Any thing else… Just sit back, pop another Prozac or Ritalin or whatever, and enjoy the spectacle afforded by network teevee programming.
The White House and others are now discussing a “South Korean†relation with Iraq. What does that mean?
It means the White House always envisaged a permanent presence in the Middle East devoid of the obligations the House of Saud implied. The Baghdad embassy is an island of America in the sea of oil that will remain anchored as long as that oil sea remains to be pumped. Just as the DMZ is not really Korean, neither will the embassy nor the additional outposts be really part of Iraq. All that matters is the capacity to intervene, that is so clearly revealed by the existence of the various “outposts†being built in Iraq.
What does that mean?
The upshot? What does that mean? It means this. Simply this. Each and everyone of us must, somehow, find a way to disconnect from the corporate fascist state that is every OECD country. We must somehow convince our next door neighbours the way ahead is not paved with tarmac, let alone gold; it is paved with cooperation and festival and planting and harvest.
That is, in the simplest possible terms, what is means.
5 June 2007, 8:06 am