I'MMA LET YOU FINISH
Front row!
I like my dissidents boiled with a litttle salt.
GWB, friend of tyrants the world over
Once again, dear leader is proving his gut instincts are supurb.
Steve, I just noticed your comments on the NY Times piece as well.
n a 1995 referendum, [Karimov’s] term of office was extended for two more years, and more recently, a January 2002 referendum extended his rule to 2007. None of the elections or referenda met international election standards.
Yeah, well, welcome to our world. Supreme Ct. appointed GWB in 2000 and Diebold voting machines gave it to him in '04. Luckie duckies R US.
Around the Radical Right blogosphere on Uzbekistan so you don't have to wade through the blame being leveled on Islamic opposition.
Good one on Frist, Atta.
I will lay Giacomo-like odds that the feline filleter will get that ticket fixed.
Thsi should be getting more atention this morning in the MSM. We are sending more peole there through redidtion than any other place on the globe........Speaking of lack of coverage ....how about the memo from our british friends ........this country is asleep at the wheel..
Did Bush look into Karimov's eyes, too?
OT, but this is great news. Just received this from a friend:
A controversial evangelical doctor will leave an important Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory panel following allegations that he had inordinate influence over the FDA's decision on nonprescription status for emergency contraception (EC). Dr. W. David Hager, appointed to the FDAs’s Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee after ardent opposition from women’s reproductive health and rights groups, including the Feminist Majority, told the Lexington Herald-Leader that he “will no longer be on the advisory committee after June 30.”
Evidently that little expose in The Nation helped him make his decision. 
. And I brought the President the good wishes of President Bush and our appreciation for their stalwart support in the war on terror . . . Our relationship is strong and has been growing stronger. Rummy
Maybe GWB can get some good advice on how to handle protesters in the USA from his great pal, Karimov.
Tom,
Excellent blogwhore. Good information at your site.
Evidently that little expose in The Nation helped him make his decision.
HUZZAH! The Narcoleptic Buggerer steps down!
The Narcoleptic Buggerer steps down!
You said a mouthful! But ewwwwwww.
'bout time this little story got legs with the MSM. what with all the rightards yapping about how Saddam gassed his own people and all the press about freedom on the march ya know.
wish all the shit happening in Africa would get revealed to our braindead populace.
Good morning moon bats and America Haters. Another fine day for you all to spew your hate Bush venow, rah rah all that's Euro and against us. Keep it up. Makes it easier for us....
It seems that, in its desire to keep Mr Karimov onside in the war on terror, the Bush administration still holds to the maxim said to have been used by President Franklin Roosevelt to describe an American-backed dictator in Nicaragua: “He may be a son of a bitch, but he’s our son of a bitch.”
He's in good company.
the problem with uzbekistan is that it's really hard to say who is doing what. the government blames everythiing on islamic fundamentalists, and largely closed the conflict to independent media (they did a news blackout yesterday--i think it's lifted now). from what i can tell the protests leading up the yesterday's violence were about freeing a bunch of political prisoners (who were, of course, accused of being fundies by the government) and economic reforms
i sent a couple of uzbek friends an email yesterday to ask them about their take on the situation. while some responded, none mentioned the standoff in andijon. none live anywhere near there (the closest is in samarkand). i doubt they would agree that uz is boiling over though
rakhmat
A one party state that tortures people? Hey, we could learn a lot from these guys!
Maybe George should form himself a new coalition - Coalition of the Chilling.
See also http://dearkitty.modblog.com/?sh...&
blog_id=599632
Makes it easier for us...
To demonstrate how the rednecks in crackerland are far and away the stupidest motherfuckers on the planet.
man! you libruls fucked that guy hager right up the ass... err...
Maybe George should form himself a new coalition - Coalition of the Chilling.
I thought Gilliard's description was apt:
Because Islam "I boil my enemies like soup" Karimov is a major US ally in the war on terra. But like throughout Central Asia, we turned a blind eye to his murdering ways.
The ultimate Soup Nazi.
ouch
man-date
man-whore
man-soup
HUZZAH! The Narcoleptic Buggerer steps down!
That little story really creeped me out. Not just the buggery, but the fact that he would leave a check on the nightstand. Ugh! As GWPDA said a few weeks ago, we are beginning not to lose.
Now if only the corporate media would pick up a bit more on w out bike riding in the middle of a work day.
Good morning moon bats and America Haters. Another fine day for you all to spew your hate Bush venow, rah rah all that's Euro and against us. Keep it up. Makes it easier for us....
Waaaaaaaahhhh.
Want a little cheese with that whine?
Lemme clue your stupid ass in on something here, puss-puss. We love America, we just hate your sorry ass.
Capiche?
What makes it "easier for us", dog dick?
a little Saturday morning giggle from Poppy...
being called a (merica) hater by a mouthbreather is a complement - pass it on!
I was eating my Uzbekistan freedom Wheaties this morning, and saw Karimov was on the front of the cereal box, along with this caption:
Freedom is on the march.
(just don't ask in which direction)
(offer not valid everywhere)
(freedom defined at an unspecified later date by Atty General Gonzalez)
WT - that was funny.
I imagine when 41 looks and Clinton and then at his spawn, he gets a little depressed.
I was eating my Uzbekistan freedom Wheaties this morning, and saw Karimov was on the front of the cereal box
You had that with a bowl of oil, right?
Protesters in Afghanistan were also gunned down. What started as a peaceful protest, unfortunately, picked up criminals and gun toting Muslim fundies. Freedom is on the march! I'm getting a bad feeling about how things are going there.
Steve Gilliard rules.
Found this on his blog. Many comments from Mr. Kunstler.
http://tinyurl.com/a9vmw
You had that with a bowl of oil, right?
I actually had it with scotch. It's the only way I can stomach it. But the back of the box recommends extra virgin santorum.
upyernoz - during the Cold War every two bit dictator knew they could get US support against opposition by claiming the opposition was Communist and somehow connected to the Soviet Union.
Same thing now, but substitute Islamo-fascist for Commie... in the same way that Ledeen and the usual Busheviks were claiming International Terrorist was all backed by the Soviets during Reagan's first term and now... well you know the rest.
I've never paid for sex, had anal sex, or had the inclination to copulate with or digitally manipulate livestock.
I'd never fit in with today's Republican party.
Now if only the corporate media would pick up a bit more on w out bike riding in the middle of a work day.
And being totally clueless, yet again. God, he's an embarrassment. My head hurts.
karimov has been cracking down on islamists (real or imagined--i believe there's a bit of both) since the 1999 tashkent bombings. this is not just a ploy to curry favor with the u.s. it also has that effect, but karimov started pursuing the policy for one reason--he feels threatened by political islam, even in a pretty secular place like uzbekistaqn
personally, i think the u.s. would support karimov's government no matter what his domestic policies were so long as he kept making available the military bases to u.s. troops. the base near karshi was critical during the war in afghanistan--it was the only base in the region that the u.s. was given full access to in october 2001.
underwhelm,
not even the urge to drop a dog from waist height?
[slightly gratuitous blogwhore - still working on my first cuppa]
This is the Dean of the Democratic Party: http://www.radioblogger.com/imag.../
byrdesther.mp3
David Rees saw this coming over a year ago: UZBEKIKITTY
from “Get Your War On”. Click the three little links on the page… purr, meow, rowr.
Tony B.
Yep, the fact that it's Islamic parties demanding freedom and democracy really is one to make the freepertrash's collective head explode.
The opposition in Uzbekistan has an Islamic character primarily because it's a bit harder for your ex-Communist party boss turned 'nationalist hero' to blow up mosques when suppressing the opposition.
I'm just staggered that there's no official US response, given that there's a military presence in the fucking country.
I'm just staggered that there's no official US response, given that there's a military presence in the fucking country.
We don't respond unless there's crude oil involved.
Good morning...I got nothing, need coffee.
pseudonymous,
it's not really accurate to say that " that it's Islamic parties demanding freedom and democracy." i don't know if you've read their press releases about hizb-ut-tahrir's vision for the future, but it's not exactly a liberal paradise
that being said, because islamic parties are the only opposition with any semblance of organization in uz, some democrats are sympathetic to them. also, the gov't tends to call everyone who challenges them "islamists"
i'm not really really clear what u.s. response you are advocating. sure, there are u.s. troops there, but what should they have done? should u.s. troops have assisted the jailbreak in andijon? should they have tried to stop it? (but that would put them on karimov's side) should they have tried to overthrow karimov? i'm curious what you think they should have done
I imagine when 41 looks and Clinton and then at his spawn, he gets a little depressed.
Billy B | Email | Homepage | 05.14.05 - 9:20 am | #
Like on X Files: 41 is cig smoking man, Clinton is Muldur, and 43 is c.s.m's idiot son. Remember how that turned out?
Maybe the U.S. should put its money where its mouth is.
When one examines the politics of people seeking democracy before deciding whether or not they support the movement, one is doing exactly what the U.S. admin loves to do...prevent democracy in friendly dictator-controlled states, and push for democracy in hostil states.
It's fucking bullshit, as Blaghdaddy said this morning as well, but hey, you gotta replace the head if the body isn't working...on to the White House...
i'm not really really clear what u.s. response you are advocating.
As in a response. I looked in the usual sources to see if there was a statement from USSR-expert Condi's State Dept or the White House. Even a fucking holding-pattern statement along the lines of 'well, we're concerned and urge all parties to avoid violence' would be in keeping with yer standard diplomatic response.
condi's too busy trying to douse the fire caused by the Gitmo Koran flushing.
she can't multitask with this bunch. there are too many atrocities to cover up for.
As long as the war on terror is still going well and . . ."OBEIDI, Iraq -- Large numbers of U.S. forces supported by helicopters gathered outside this Euphrates River village Saturday, pushing ahead with their region-wide operation to wipe out supporters of Iraq's most wanted militant. The military said four more Marines were killed."
http://www.washingtonpost.com
"Remain calm! All is well!"
Trying to get as close to Kevin Bacon as I can....
When one examines the politics of people seeking democracy before deciding whether or not they support the movement, one is doing exactly what the U.S. admin loves to do...prevent democracy in friendly dictator-controlled states, and push for democracy in hostil states.
you're missing my point. all i'm saying is that not all these movements are necessarily "seeking democracy"
that's not to say that we should not pressure the uzbek government to allow them to exercise their democratic rights. i just think we should be realistic about the situation
morning, freethinkers. thanks for the educational discussion of what's going on over there; we hear so little of it in our press.
i find it funny that our trolls would right away first thing wake up and log on with a morning greeting before telling us all how wrong we are. if that's not love i don't know what is.
pseudonymous,
the u.s.' response
don't get me wrong. i'm not pro-karimov by any stretch. and i'm not a fan of the bush administration's policies towards the country either. it's just that there's no easy answers to this and my friends in uzbekistan are really afraid of muslim fundamentalism, even as they dispise karimov.
As long as the war on terror is still going well and . . .
Daniel Schorr on NPR this morning mentioned in passim that the government of Iraq is speaking of imposing martial law. Which, I immediately thought, would make de jure official what is de facto now. But even Schorr understood that was not a significant step forward for "democracy."
Chickens. Coming home to roost.
Upyernoz, I know: my friends in the USA are really afraid of Christian Funamentalism too . . .
you're missing my point. all i'm saying is that not all these movements are necessarily "seeking democracy"
just to be playful: are you implying that if it is a will of the majority and it would be essentially a state of laws, there's something wrong with an islamic state? or are you saying that "democracy" as conceived by the west is always better or the best choice?
that's not to say that we should not pressure the uzbek government to allow them to exercise their democratic rights. i just think we should be realistic about the situation
upyernoz | Email
clarify your use of 'realistic.' according to what standard? defined by whom? with respect to what resources/material concerns?
i'm so tired of people arguing that the US has some mandate or right or need to "pressure" states around the globe. to my mind, we've pretty much got a failing record of state manipulation: if we don't overthrow the choice of the people we install crazy dictators who produce generations of america haters with their abusive, US funded practices. what's so wrong about us just doing nothing, except joining in on some international humanitarian efforts with real cash?
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publicati...ok/geos/
uz.html
under the heading of natural resources: natural gas, petroleum, coal, gold, uranium, silver, copper, lead and zinc, tungsten, molybdenum
-J.T.
I sure hope preznit jesus the deserter is watching this closely (between cartoons, of course), because when this comes to 'merica, it will be far uglier. Did these christian ding-a-lings think they would get away with this bullshit? I hope they like to fight, but I fear they underestimated these equally fucked-up muslims. The average christian is no match for these crazy motherfuckers.
Typical Bu$h world. Stir up shit all over the Middle East under the cover of "fighting terrorism" there so they won't come after us here. Hahahahahahaha. Threaten Iran, ignore N. Korea and then announce CLOSING military bases. Is it any surprise that the proposed base closings are almost entirely in Blue coastal areas?
via corrente, mmmm mmmm, i loves me some John Conyers:
"Therefore, given the Administration's concession that the Geneva Conventions apply to Iraqi and Taliban prisoners, given its concession in the Gonzalez memo that a violation of the Conventions would also constitute a violation of federal criminal law, and given the flagrant violations of the Conventions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo Bay which have been confirmed by official investigations, it is clear that a prima facie violation of federal criminal law exists. It is also evident that high-ranking Administration officials, including the Defense Secretary, as well as high-ranking military officials, may have authorized these actions and are potentially subject to criminal prosecution as well."
Pechorin, and what about the people caught in the middle who think they are all full of shit?
Good morning, folks.
Yeah, it's really me. Posting on the weekend! Woo Hoo!
I imagine when 41 looks and Clinton and then at his spawn, he gets a little depressed.
I'd say a lot depressed, but in some ways, I think less of Clinton for befriending that old old gas bag who sired 1,000 points of dullness.
For anyone interested in DKos diary re W being out of the loop while the country thought we were under attack.
Excellent read.
http://www.registan.net/>Registan.net is a useful site for resources and commentary on Central Asia.
How many more men and women have to die?
http://tinyurl.com/qip1
rmj-
I thought Iraq was already under marshal law, and that the gov't was now extending it another 90 days or so.
OT: Phucking Pharmacists
again this morning, there was a story on NPR about the resistance and/or ethical forebodings of pharmacists to fill prescriptions against which they harbor objections.
I resent the following to the NPR letter dept directly:
Excuse me???
Pharmacists have the ethical right to withhold valid prescriptions from
patients?
NOT!
If a pharmacist has 'ethical' difficulties filling the prescriptions of
her/his customers, perhaps he/she should find a less ethically taxing
occupation...Several come to mind, but the family nature of the broadcast
prohibits me specifying them.
Pharmacists are nothing more than glorified pill counters. The
'professionalization' of the trade is a ruse used mainly to limit
competition, and regulate entry into the field.
Pharmacists are licensed by states. Any pharmacist who refuses to fill a
lawful prescription issued by a licensed physician should immediately have
BOTH her or his pharmacists license AND the business license of the
pharmacy suspended, if not permanently revoked.
mutherfockers...just fill the prescriptions cully!!! and keep your ideology under your fuckin smock,...
.
Hunter's latest post on the Bolton Nomination is a must-read, too.
WGG: You should have suggested the pharms take up journalism. No ethics left in that profession.
Bless you for writing them. They're going to get an earful today.
(click homepage for my letter to the NPR ombudsman today, on an entirely different subject!)
are you implying that if it is a will of the majority and it would be essentially a state of laws, there's something wrong with an islamic state?
not at all. but i question whether groups like HT or IMU (who advocate the return of a caliphate) really want to establish the kind of state that is supported by a majority of uzbeks. it's wrong to assume that anyone who is anti-karimov is a populist
clarify your use of 'realistic.' according to what standard? defined by whom? with respect to what resources/material concerns?
when i said we should be "realistic" about the situation, all i meant was not to force it into some simplistic white-hats vs. black-hats model. everyone who is anti-karimov is not necessarily someone to be applauded (e.g. last year's bombings in tashkent).
i'm not sure if that answered your questions, but that's really all i meant when i used the term
i'm so tired of people arguing that the US has some mandate or right or need to "pressure" states around the globe.
applying pressure on other countries is part of international diplomacy. why can't the u.s. decide who they want to trade with and who is beyond the pale? who we should have diplomatic relations with and who we should not? that's all forms of pressure. as is the annual state department human rights reports. should the government stop issuing them? personally, i think they are a good idea. although the content sometimes suffers from political manipulation, at least it makes it slightly more likely that american foreign policy will be dictated by more than crass economic interests.
i'm not talking about overthrowing governments, i'm talking about trade deals and diplomatic incentives. like it or not, countries are going to interact with one another, and that means they all have influence over each other. i think it's a good idea to use that inflluence to promote human rights. and i don't think the u.s. has any special mandate to do that, all signatories to the UN charter are obligated to do it.
spinoza sez: I thought Iraq was already under marshal law, and that the gov't was now extending it another 90 days or so.
1) it's /martial/ law... from the root referring to Mars, god of war...(/demi-snark)
2) you're right...they extended martial law last week for another 90 days, iirc...
and good morn to ye, moonbats all and sundry! it's beautiful here in the Duke City today...a little windy, but warm and sunny...
have a great day...
I thought a watched Uzbekistan never boils.
The best overview of Uzbekistan I’ve seen is A href="http://www.pinr.com/report.php?
ac=view_report&report_id=251&language_id=1">this piece from PINR from January 2005 that includes the some of energy politics.
The "great game" in Uzbekistan concerns the eventual destination of the country's energy reserves. Washington wants Uzbekistan's oil and gas to flow to Japan rather than to China, and has reportedly worked behind the scenes in Moscow to block a gas pipeline to China and to push for infrastructure in Russia. A Russo-American accord on the energy issue is checked by Moscow's strategic interest in restoring influence in Uzbekistan at the expense of Washington, which has moved Moscow closer to Beijing...
...How the issue of energy distribution will be resolved remains to be seen. Washington will continue to appeal to Moscow's economic interests in order to try to block energy exports to China; Beijing will continue to woo Tashkent with aid and investment, and seek ultimately to bring Russia into its sphere of economic influence; and Tokyo will pursue its efforts to compete with Beijing on Uzbekistan's economic front.
Under more favorable domestic political conditions, Karimov's position would be strengthened by the courtship of emerging regional power centers. As it stands, the Euro-American alliance seems to be betting that eventually its inherent instability will bring Tashkent's crony and statist regime down, offering the opportunity for a reassertion of Western influence. China, Russia and Japan are placing their wagers on the Tashkent regime, hoping to draw Uzbekistan into their orbits firmly enough to secure their interests even with a successor regime.
And the best reporting I've seen on the recent events comes from Eurasianet.
JT,
Thanks for pointing to an excellent site.
Folks, check this out.
A WorldNutDaily columnist makes sense! I'm in fog just contemplating it, but it's true.
Title of the piece: "Bush Christ-like? Hardly"
Amen.
Bush Christ-like? Hardly
UNITED NATIONS — U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan did not initially tell investigators in the Oil-for-Food probe that he met twice with representatives of his son's employer as the Swiss company began soliciting United Nations business.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/
0,2...,156520,00.html
Namestealer: go find some livestock to bugger.
i second cs' endorsement of "the registan" site as a good source for central asian news. the people who run the site lean conservative a bit when it comes to u.s. policies, but their info is really top notch. you can always disagree with their analysis
oh, and cs' link is broken. here's one that works
A pox on both their houses!!!!
TV commentator issues an odd 'nevermind'
Reuters News Service
LOS ANGELES -- A U.S. political commentator has admitted he failed to check his facts when he erroneously reported on the MSNBC cable news network last month that Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger had jokingly advocated doing away with the moon.
In one of the stranger mea culpas from a major U.S. news outlet in recent years, the commentator, Joe Scarborough, a former congressman, acknowledged on Friday that the governor's purported lunar outburst on the nationally syndicated radio show of Howard Stern was actually a spoof.
Citing a British newspaper, Scarborough had quoted Schwarzenegger on the air as saying: "If we get rid of the moon, women, those menstrual cycles are governed by the moon, will not get (pre-menstrual syndrome). They will stop bitching and whining."
Scarborough chided Schwarzenegger for insensitivity, saying: "Hey, governor, way to make 50 percent of California's voting population turn frigid toward you."
Thanks for the link, JG.
why can't the u.s. decide who they want to trade with and who is beyond the pale? who we should have diplomatic relations with and who we should not? that's all forms of pressure. as is the annual state department human rights reports. should the government stop issuing them? personally, i think they are a good idea. although the content sometimes suffers from political manipulation, at least it makes it slightly more likely that american foreign policy will be dictated by more than crass economic interests.
there are good people, even today, at state and throughout our gov't who believe in the concepts of diplomacy, peace and service and who work towards those goals every day.
that said, i find your analysis unrealistic. if we honestly cared about any of the humane values listed above, well, we wouldn't do a lot of things that we currently do and have done for most of our history. right now, our number one concern is control of oil. it shouldn't be, but it is. therefore all our policies relating to nations with oil are complicated by the complex of forces and concerns that want to take their place in the 'development' of that resource. contrast this with our inattention to matters in nations without oil, or with our 'dance of equals' with our euro trading partners. it's always about the money in diplomacy, money and power, and while i utterly agree that fundie islamic parties are little better than fundie xtian ones over here, i can't deny that unlike our fundies, who've never really suffered a day of hunger, political oppresion or lived under the threat of constant gun violence, i can understand why the majority of uzbeks (or any group in CA or the ME) would choose fundementalist islam and those endorsing it who promise them release from poverty and bondage thru it. even as i know how those promises will not be met.
What I found most interesting about the "Bush Not Christ-like" link posted above was this little gem underneath the article:
In Kyle Williams' book, "Seen and Heard," America's youngest national columnist takes on the establishment, offering clear evidence that a leftist agenda is at work in our nation.
Kyle Williams, oh wise author and basher of all things liberal, is 15 fucking years old.
No problem, Vicki. Just wanted to tell folks. Apologies if it mucked up this, um, boiling thread.
Upyernoz,
RE:...i'm not pro-karimov by any stretch. and i'm not a fan of the bush administration's policies ...either. it's just that ... my friends in uzbekistan are really afraid of muslim fundamentalism, even as they dispise karimov.
Well, that's a statement that bears repeating. Anti-imperialism is not the same thing as freedom and justice. The most depressing thing about stuff like this is that often, there are no good guys, just duelling would-be oligarchs. Witness Iraq, where the choices seem to be between as US-backed resource extraction kleptocracy, an Iran-lite type of Shi'ite theocracy, or Mercedes-Benz feudalism run by a by a bunch of Sunni chieftain mafiosi. Or maybe all three, after a nasty civil war and the breakup of the country.
Anyway, I wish that some of my more strident compatriots on the left would get the message a little better that any movement that fights US imperialism is not by definition a good movement. You have to differentiate between the Sandinistas and the Khmer Rouge.
Yeah, he's 15. Crazy. But I'm sure they'll have him completely straightened out by the time he's of age. You know, no more straying from the right-wing reservation like today's column.
hmmm. Not sure why my link did that. Try again . . .
Registan.net
fixed link
this piece from PINR
JG, y'all sure that Bushfish web site ain't a parody? Seems like I saw an ad for it over at Gin'rull J.C. Christian's site the other day, just above the bumper nuts ad. I just checked, the bushfish ad ain't there now. Or, maybe my synapses are misfirin' big time this mornin'.
Another fund-o angst story.
Dear Pastor Bob, I have become enslaved to gratifying my flesh, to the sin of masturbation, sometimes even without pornography! I am a slave to my own lusts; unable to break free from this debilitating habit that makes Jesus weep and makes me unworthy of the Virgin. Because I am unable to stop this behavior, I feel ashamed and frustrated. I have difficulty interacting in social situations because I know that I have a deep dark secret -- the secret that I am a slave to fondling myself, caressing myself, and to orgasm.
I have read my Bible on this. It says that demon masturbation is indulging the flesh, which leads to sin-slavery (John 8:34). Masturbation makes us begin to live according to the dictates of the flesh and to become slaves to the "misdeeds of the body." Scripture warns us about this kind of activity, "For if you live according to the flesh (by giving in to its desires), you will die" and tells us how to stop, "but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live" (Romans 8:13).
Pastor Bob, I am so frightened. Am I going to go to hell for all of this masturbation? Help me please, I can't stop.
QL.
Thanks for the read. That was great.
OOPS! My bad. That was Tuesday's Gin'rull not an ad. I gots to stop staying up so late.
Regarding assets held by Bush and Cheney....
...because federal ethics law allows them to list the values of their assets in ranges rather than precise numbers, it is difficult to discern whether the two are wealthier than they were a year ago.
The disclosure, for instance, said Bush's 1,583-acre ranch was worth between $1 million and $5 million.
chicago dyke,
that said, i find your analysis unrealistic.
why is it unrealistic? i don't disagree with most of what you said. i never said that oil did not shape much of our foreign policy. in fact, i was arguing that human rights should be more of a guiding light than economic interests. if you're dismissing that as unrealistic, does that mean that you believe it is impossible to ever have a foreign policy that is not based on oil?
maybe i misunderstood where our conversation was going. here's what i thought we were doing:
earlier, you said that the u.s. has no right to try to influence other countries.
then i responded, that i think it's okay to influence others because influence is inevitable whenever countries interact. so if we're going to influence others, we might as well try to use our influence for issues like human rights
now you seem to be saying that my analysis is unrealistic because, in fact, much of american foreign policy is guided by oil policy. but i was speaking prescriptively not descriptively. when i talked about human rights, i was talking about how things are, but how they ought to be.
are you saying my ideas impossible and that an oil-based foreign policy is inevitable? if it is, then what's the use in even complaining about it?
sorry, upyer. i'm in a nasty mood this morning and that was a poor choice of words. i'm just feeling the despair such news brings about, and as others have put better, there seems to be no "good" option for any of the groups involved. i can see that we're essentially on the same page and am just arguing unimportant minutea.
oh and for the record, i don't think oil is a major factor in u.s-uzbek relations. uzbekistan really does not have much oil, and what it does have is dwarfed by the huge reserves of its neighbors along the caspian sea--kazakhstan and turkmenistan. because it did not have a lot of oil uzbekistan was largely ignored by the u.s. prior to 9/11. then suddenly, a country bordering afghanistan offering free use of its miliary bases made the country strategically important for the u.s.
See also http://dearkitty.modblog.com/?sh...&
blog_id=599632
no problem, CD. i just like arguing and i am obsessed with uzbekistan ever since i visited in 2003
Chicago Dyke,
RE:are you implying that if it is a will of the majority and it would be essentially a state of laws, there's something wrong with an islamic state?
Please excuse me for butting in, but I'll bite on that. The answer is yes. Democracy is only one of the pillars of a just society. Personal freedom is an equally important one, and is in no way guaranteed by the institution of democracy. Any state that is governed by the dogmas of a specific religion, at least a religion that , like christianity or Islam, says that you have to do things exactly their way or roast in hell, is by definition restrictive of personal freedom. de Tocqueville said it first and best in "Democracy in America", citing the danger of the emergence of a "tyrrany of consensus". Witnes the co-existence of slavery and democracy in America for almost 100 years.
...Having said that, I must qualify by stating in no uncertain terms that I also believe that if there is a place has a democratic government that respects the rule of law, it is DECIDEDLY NOT the business of any external agent to try to strighten out its possible deficiencies with trespect to the foregoing discussion.
I kind of agree with blerb.
Even a popularly-based theocracy based on state-mandated Ba'al worship would pretty much suck. Some people actually like Britany Spears, and they should have the right to indulge themselves.
But if Canada decides to pass the Ba'al- worship mandate, I don't think we should invade or even comment.
As to my own comments on the subject of this thread, I thing it will be very interesting to see what kind of a two-step Mr. Bush will attempt if this matter really "boils over". How are they going to spin it if they decide to support Karimov so they can keep their bases? If the opposition really is driven by Islamic fundies, how are they going to make common cause with them to throw out a nasty dictator? It seems like a truly excellent opportunity for the general lack of brains and foresight of this administration to be showcased.
Actually, I hope this stays in the news for a long time because it is such a wonderful comment on the Bush commitment to democracy, but it won't because Uzbekistan is too hard to had for our media to pronounce.
chicago dyke,
that said, i find your analysis unrealistic.
why is it unrealistic? i don't disagree with most of what you said. i never said that oil did not shape much of our foreign policy. in fact, i was arguing that human rights should be more of a guiding light than economic interests. if you're dismissing that as unrealistic, does that mean that you believe it is impossible to ever have a foreign policy that is not based on oil?
maybe i misunderstood where our conversation was going. here's what i thought we were doing:
earlier, you said that the u.s. has no right to try to influence other countries.
then i responded, that i think it's okay to influence others because influence is inevitable whenever countries interact. so if we're going to influence others, we might as well try to use our influence for issues like human rights
now you seem to be saying that my analysis is unrealistic because, in fact, much of american foreign policy is guided by oil policy. but i was speaking prescriptively not descriptively. when i talked about human rights, i was talking about how things are, but how they ought to be.
are you saying my ideas impossible and that an oil-based foreign policy is inevitable? if it is, then what's the use in even complaining about it?
crap. ignore that last comment. i hit reload on an old window and it reposted something i wrote before.
why is it unrealistic? i don't disagree with most of what you said. i never said that oil did not shape much of our foreign policy. in fact, i was arguing that human rights should be more of a guiding light than economic interests. if you're dismissing that as unrealistic, does that mean that you believe it is impossible to ever have a foreign policy that is not based on oil?
IMHO, until the U.S. frees itself from oil dependency, it is hard to believe that any president, Republican or Democratic, will be able to get away from a foreign policy based on oil, to one that considers human rights more important. So it's a case of "Physician, heal thyself".
Karin,
RE:until the U.S. frees itself from oil dependency, it is hard to believe that any president, Republican or Democratic, will be able to get away from a foreign policy based on oil
BINGBINGBINGBINGBING!
We have a winner!.....
Did you see what Scott McClellan said about bringing freedom 'n' democracy to the world?
"The people of Uzbekistan want to see a more representative and democratic government, but that should come through peaceful means, not through violence."
Through peaceful means, not through violence? Do these monsters even listen to themselves, or do they think the American people are too stupid to compare their actions with their words?
America is incapable of facing up to the reality of freeing itself from oil dependency -- we will just run out & scramble frantically & unsuccessfully to find a replacement (there isn't one)
I don't know how it will play out, but there will be changes & it will be painful
Do these monsters even listen to themselves, or do they think the American people are too stupid to compare their actions with their words?
Is a rhetorical question?
...if there is a place has a democratic government that respects the rule of law...
blerb - 11:01
Bellaciao
Janis Karpinski was a National Guard Brigadier General (one star). In June 2003 she was given command of the 800th Military Police Brigade. She was in charge of 15 detention centers in Iraq but neither she nor her troops had any training in running prisons or interrogations. Karpinski also had command of National Guard and Army units in Mosul, Iraq, some distance away.
,,,Her demotion was not officially related to the abuse at Abu Ghraib, but was for dereliction of duty, making a material misrepresentation to investigators, failure to obey a lawful order and shoplifting. She had taken less than $50 in cosmetics from an Air Force base commissary some years earlier.
Major General (two star) Geoffrey Miller arrived in Fall 2003. He was sent from the Guantanamo prison to write a plan to improve intelligence gathering and interrogations in Iraq.
While Karpinski’s command may have been a shambles, there is little evidence to indicate that the torture and abuse happened under her command. Higher-ups moved military intelligence personnel into control of the two cell blocks where the worst offenses occurred and the activities there were initiated after General Miller’s visit.
Lt. General Ricardo Sanchez (three stars), was the commanding officer of all troops in Iraq. He asked for Miller’s evaluation and he authorized the changes that resulted.
With Karpinski’s demotion based as it was, on issues of dereliction of duties and shoplifting
Seattle Post-Intelligencer
Karpinski told the newspaper the basis for the allegation was a misunderstanding that occurred in 2002 at an Air Force base store in Florida.
A colonel at the time, Karpinski said she removed a bottle of facial cream from her purse, then returned it while rummaging for her cell phone. A security guard believed the bottle belonged to the shop, but store personnel later concluded it was her property and had been "clearly partially used."
A U.S. government official, speaking last week on condition of anonymity, said Karpinski was arrested for shoplifting a cosmetic item. The official said Karpinski did not report the misdemeanor arrest on a later background check.
Good news, though!
The muystery of thethe Virgin Mary likeness on the Chicago underpass has been solved.
Praise by to large intact hymens!
God is great! Hymens are better.
Long live concrete cherrys.
Prior Aelred, I don't know which is worse. Failing to face the reality of oil running out, or failing to face the reality of global warming.
don't get me wrong. i'm not pro-karimov by any stretch. and i'm not a fan of the bush administration's policies towards the country either. it's just that there's no easy answers to this and my friends in uzbekistan are really afraid of muslim fundamentalism, even as they dispise karimov.
upyernoz
In other words, the situation is nuanced. Unfortunately the Busheviks and the radical right blogosphere spit on the notion of nuanced.
US - white hats in all scenes.
US allies - white hats in all scenes.
Opposition to US allies - black hats in all scenes.
Opposition to US - double plus ungood black hats.
And Lil Scottie can tap dance all he wants up there at the podium and claim that there is concern about human rights in Uzbekistan, but the fact is this administration has never lifted a finger to do more than flap jaw on the matter... oh and throw some more silver the way of Karimov for the use of military bases.
And I think the PINR (?) up stream which talked about the US trying to convince all of the oil and gas to go to Japan rather than China as part of some dopey Bushevik encirclement of the "Chi-coms" in order to bring the "Chi-coms" to their knees is spot on... and as Galloway would say... patently absurd.
Karin --
Refusal to face reality is a national characteristic (or perhaps a failing of the species)
One might think that running out of oil would take care of global warming, but we will be burning so much (dirty) coal & wood that it will only get worse (no matter what we do with atomic or wind or solar of hydro)
karimov's uzbekistan is a lousy security state backed by the US, like that of ths Shah, and it deserves to fall. Karimov's troops machine gunned many unarmed protesters keeping vigil in the main square, teenagers, women and young men.
If this is secularism, then give me Islamic fundamentalism.
Karin,
RE:I don't know which is worse. Failing to face the reality of oil running out, or failing to face the reality of global warming.
I think the winner is global warming. Although cheap oil is very close to being in a state of permanent decline as an energy source (if it has not reached its peak already), there are in fact plenty of other sources of fossilized carbon that can be used to fuel more or less the same economic-industrial paradigm we have now for at least a couple hundred more years. Basically, if you put together coal and natural gas, you get gasoline, and we have quite a bit of both of those around.
But of course if demand for these fuel sources continues to increase in accordance with reasonable projections for economic growth, we are talking about spewing one hell of a lot of CO2 into the air. The Antarctic ice cap, which has not always existed, will melt, and sea level wil rise 150 feet. Bye-bye New York, Washington, Philadelphia, Boston, Los Angeles, Miami, etc, etc. Not to mention all kinds of other potentially devastating climactic shifts, particulary in terms of the distribution and amount of rainfall.
In a way this is much worse than the mere prospect of running out, because at least scarcity drives free-markjet economies to find better solutions. Impending ecological catastrophe is not nearly so motivating. I wouldn't buy any real estate in the NEtherlands, If I were you....
are you implying that if it is a will of the majority and it would be essentially a state of laws, there's something wrong with an islamic state?
Please excuse me for butting in, but I'll bite on that. The answer is yes. Democracy is only one of the pillars of a just society. Personal freedom is an equally important one, and is in no way guaranteed by the institution of democracy. Any state that is governed by the dogmas of a specific religion, at least a religion that , like christianity or Islam, says that you have to do things exactly their way or roast in hell, is by definition restrictive of personal freedom. de Tocqueville said it first and best in "Democracy in America", citing the danger of the emergence of a "tyrrany of consensus". Witnes the co-existence of slavery and democracy in America for almost 100 years.
i am a spiritual person who rejects all forms of organized religion and who thinks just about every major holy book is a bunch of superstitious mythology and other undesirable mindcontrol inducing crap.
that said: if you look at the history of islam, i think it's the case that islamic states have done a far better job overall of producing tolerant, balance states of law than in chrisitian history. i'll accept that i could be biased, but the point i'm making is that just because a state is theocratic doesn't mandate that said state will oppress religious minorities. there are periods in spain, egypt, iraq, etc., in which the islamic state was one of rich and diverse culture, valuing intellectulism and debate. there are of course periods where that doesn't happen but overall, islam isn't the worst way to organize a state.
my issue is that we don't really practice democracy over here, and i'm hard pressed to defend this state given the hypocrisy and corruption our experiement with "democracy" has brought us to. it's the age old question: can a society sustain important freedoms over time without a harsh system of laws or orthodox religion? right now, it sure feels like the answer is no, and this is where i think a lot of enlightenment philosophies that we liberals hold dearly fail.
when people suffer, they don't want long winded debate, they want restoring action. they want food, peace, and shelter, and the right to do things their own way. it seems to me that often, it's the charisma of the leadership that is the real reason people endorse a philosophy or religion. i hate him, but i can't deny that W connects to the 'little people" very well. never mind that he's an idiot who couldn't preznit his way out of a wet paper bag.
all i'm really saying is let the uzbek people decide, and let's not judge them for whatever choice they make. they are the ones who will live with it, and unlike us, i don't think their leaders, fundie or no, will ever have the impact on the world that ours are having right now.
blerb, I've been reading that big 3-part New Yorker article on global warming and it is very scary.
I've been on Karimov's evil ass for at least two years.
Hesiod --
Wonderful to see you!
You've been missed!
CD -- good point about Islamic states and their history of tolerance in the past. Pre-Reconquista Spain was a marvel of interfaith tolerance; probably Jews had it better there than in any of the Christian countries of the time.
But of course the problem is that a lot of Americans have NO historical knowledge or perspective at all.
hesiod,
yeah what prior said. can we cajole you got getting back on karimov's ass?
Chicago Dyke,
RE: we don't really practice democracy over here...let the uzbek people decide
I hope you understand that I was talking in purely philosophical terms, and not commenting on the particulars of the political situation either here or there. And that part about it not being the business of any external agent to straighten out the deficiencies viz. freedom of any legitimately constituted, democratically elected government was really important. As to letting the Uzbek people decide ehat kind of government they want, how does one make that happen? I certainly have no idea.
RE:this is where i think a lot of enlightenment philosophies that we liberals hold dearly fail.
Heaven forfend! There is nothing wrong with the philosophies in question! I believe that those philosophies are perhaps the most beautiful intellectual constructs ever invented by the human race. t is just our means of implementing the ideals stated therein that is failing, or at least not succeeding as well as we might like. There is always the possibility of finding other ways. I think for the most part Europe is doing a pretty creditable job, BTW, although by no means a perfect one.
The overarching problem is that of oligarchy, and it is a very difficult one. The destruction of existing oligarchies usually just seems to create new ones, as bad as their predecessors. As to the current best system of mitigating against oligarchy, I think that democratic socialism does pretty well. It just needs a few tweaks, like a good system fo insuring a level playing field in political campaigns. I do not believe that this is an insurmountable obstacle, no matter how pathological the current system in the US is. When you have a truly well-informed and well-educated electorate, and a fully accountable system of government, oligarchy really takes it on the chin. That's why the Pugs are so dead set against good free education and real campaign finance reform. They know it would be the death-knell of their oligarchy.
Anyway, I see no reason in the current world reality to despair that the ideals of the enlightenment are fundamentally flawed. Implementing them is just hard work.
Gotta go now, family and all that, but I'll check back later to see if you had any further comment. It's a beautiful day here in BErkeley, CA. I hope it is too in Chicago, if that's where you are. Ta ta....
Looking at things historically, it seems to me that Islam was a tolerant religion wen it felt dominant & secure -- Islam is a triumphant religion -- Mohammed was his own Constantine
This is a pretty normal dynamic but there are exceptions -- Buddhism has roots that reject worldly values -- Christianity's founder's success was based on failure -- they have coping mechanisms to deal with powerless (at least in theory) that are for difficult for Muslims (but see some in the Sufi tradition)
OTOH -- I think most fundamentalisms (including Buddhist ones) come from fear & the perceived threat that one cannot survive
blerb- let me confess that i am an anarchist. as a long time student of history, i feel that it is inevitable that states will over time become separated from their founding values and philosophies, and embrace hypocrisy and corruption, and usually fall in violent conflict.
i also think that philosophies in general are almost always a lot less useful to the agregate than they are to a group of priviledged, specific people. my favorite example of this is plato, his work has never appealed to me and yet i find myself in a society still shaped by the ideas of a man from thousands of years ago. people cling to ideology as if it were real and tangible, forsaking reality and oftimes at the expense of their lives.
well, i can't finish this b/c my family needs my attention, i'll catch you around later.
I've been complaining about this ever since the Afghan war started. Our bushit government praising a nation whose abuses of it's own people rival anything Saddam ever did proves should be outed for the hypocritical lie that it is.
I've read long and hard about this country since before the invasion(s), and when the debate spread to the notion that Bush's speaches about invading Iraq should hold us to a standard by which we would invade any and all nations that commit such abuses, I was waiting for someone in the press on the Sunday babble to mention our befriending of the Uzbek' and other nations surrounding northern Afghanistan whose own history is that of abuse. By the standards Bush set we should be invading those countries as well. But the truth is that these countries have gas and oil resources which makes them too valuable to our business interests who control our government.
Even today I have yet to hear a single statement made by the media about the irony of Bush's statements in relation to our kissing up to these countries.
This is a point that should be shoved in the faces of every wingnut and troll out there.
I think it was a valuable tool to be used in the arguments against them and invading Iraq, but nobody every brought it up but me.
At least I don't recall anyone bringing it up, least of all on the wingnut side of things.
MYOB'
.
Long live concrete cherrys.
WYldPirate -11:24 am
concrete pussy? my god...that's my second wife...
OUCH!
I noticed that Fox News' coverage of the Uzebekistan violence was prefaced with the line: "Government troops were forced to open fire on crowds..." Isn't that nice?
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
