I found this article on Quartz --
Hacked emails reveal China’s elaborate and absurd internet propaganda machine - Quartz
It describes the process in China as "absurd" and derides it as unsophisticated. However I'm sure it works! It has some effect on public opinion, for sure. I would imagine that it will evolve into a more elegant and sophisticated system or process as citizens also get more hardened to reading obvious propaganda.
I'm convinced that the US right-wing effort is using immense amounts of money to do something very similar in trying to mold public opinion. Yes, they fund and support the right-wing news stations, talk shows, newspapers and magazines. However they also produce immense amounts of false or misleading twitter, facebook or email postings that get broad circulation. The amount of that stuff dramatically increases around election time. Much of it appears to be "humor" of a sort that makes liberal positions look stupid by not presenting the whole story. I'm sure it has an effect on the less educated in the US...which is exactly what they want!
Tuesday, December 30, 2014
Tuesday, December 23, 2014
$5.4B PLEDGED TO GAZA, HALF FOR REBUILDING | UTSanDiego.com
The Union Tribune says that a lot of countries have pledged an immense amount of money to help rebuild the Gasa strip:
$5.4B PLEDGED TO GAZA, HALF FOR REBUILDING | UTSanDiego.com
However, today's Union Tribune reported that none of the "pledged" money is being "funded" by those donors yet. The report was made by Tia Goldenberg, who apparently is a reporter/writer for Israeli news organization (so probably can't be trusted to be impartial). See this link: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/81a7db32e60b4b7b89da5af38f6c02ce/palestinian-man-arrested-after-foiled-attack-soldier
However it is believable. Why would anyone put up money to rebuild something that will likely get blown up again by the aggressive Israeli's? In response to the launch of a series of unreliable, inaccurate and somewhat impotent missiles launched by radical factions in Gaza, Israel blew up much of the Palestinian infrastructure (thousands of buildings) and killed a large number (2100) of men, women and children whom they keep trapped in what appears to be a prison camp called the Gaza strip. Very little damage was done to Israeli property and very few deaths or injuries to its citizens (66 soldiers and 7 deaths according to Tia Goldenberg).
The correct response, in my mind, would have been for Israel to go into Gaza, capture the individuals involved, give them fair and open trials and impose fair and reasonable punishment when found guilty. Why must Israel blow up all of the Palestinian's buildings, power plants etc? That is just crazy! Why should the Palestinians have to depend upon the charity of other, uninvolved, Arab countries to rebuild? When the US goes in to a country and blows up everything (which I also think is sometimes too much), we end up paying for the repairs, as we have in Afghanistan and Iraq most recently. We even helped Germany and Japan rebuild after WWII! Why shouldn't Israel pay and manage the reconstruction of the Gaza strip? The US has fully funded Israel's state-sponsored terrorism against their neighbors. If Israel won't pay for the rebuilding, we should stop sending our money to Israel, and divert it to help the people of Gaza. Israel and their allies have been paying for advertising on billboards, radio and television to try to convince US citizens that what they have been doing is correct. I think that is just another example of why we shouldn't be supporting them.
If I were asked to contribute to help Gaza rebuild, I would insist that every building be designed to withstand bombs, and have anti aircraft and anti missile equipment mounted to help defend them from Israel before I would lend them a dime!
$5.4B PLEDGED TO GAZA, HALF FOR REBUILDING | UTSanDiego.com
However, today's Union Tribune reported that none of the "pledged" money is being "funded" by those donors yet. The report was made by Tia Goldenberg, who apparently is a reporter/writer for Israeli news organization (so probably can't be trusted to be impartial). See this link: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/81a7db32e60b4b7b89da5af38f6c02ce/palestinian-man-arrested-after-foiled-attack-soldier
However it is believable. Why would anyone put up money to rebuild something that will likely get blown up again by the aggressive Israeli's? In response to the launch of a series of unreliable, inaccurate and somewhat impotent missiles launched by radical factions in Gaza, Israel blew up much of the Palestinian infrastructure (thousands of buildings) and killed a large number (2100) of men, women and children whom they keep trapped in what appears to be a prison camp called the Gaza strip. Very little damage was done to Israeli property and very few deaths or injuries to its citizens (66 soldiers and 7 deaths according to Tia Goldenberg).
The correct response, in my mind, would have been for Israel to go into Gaza, capture the individuals involved, give them fair and open trials and impose fair and reasonable punishment when found guilty. Why must Israel blow up all of the Palestinian's buildings, power plants etc? That is just crazy! Why should the Palestinians have to depend upon the charity of other, uninvolved, Arab countries to rebuild? When the US goes in to a country and blows up everything (which I also think is sometimes too much), we end up paying for the repairs, as we have in Afghanistan and Iraq most recently. We even helped Germany and Japan rebuild after WWII! Why shouldn't Israel pay and manage the reconstruction of the Gaza strip? The US has fully funded Israel's state-sponsored terrorism against their neighbors. If Israel won't pay for the rebuilding, we should stop sending our money to Israel, and divert it to help the people of Gaza. Israel and their allies have been paying for advertising on billboards, radio and television to try to convince US citizens that what they have been doing is correct. I think that is just another example of why we shouldn't be supporting them.
If I were asked to contribute to help Gaza rebuild, I would insist that every building be designed to withstand bombs, and have anti aircraft and anti missile equipment mounted to help defend them from Israel before I would lend them a dime!
Prosecute Torturers and Their Bosses - NYTimes.com
I have been critical of the United States use of rendition and "enhanced interrogation techniques" ever since it was first leaked to the press a year or so after 9/11. For many years, I supported Amnesty International and read their newsletters describing torture done in other countries. I had always thought that the US was much more ethical, "Christian," and moral than those "other" countries who condoned the practice. I was ashamed of our country for resorting to torture, and was appalled that the US legal system would allow it. It appeared that the Republican Party clearly supported (and still supports) the torture, which is in line with their strong support of the gun lobby, and the death penalty. I was surprised that Peggy Noonan of Wall Street Journal wrote an editorial titled "a flawed report" but it's premise was that torture was wrong.
The New York Times editorial board wrote on December 21st that they believe that all involved in the torture done to detainees under the Bush administration should be prosecuted, including Dick Cheney. See this article:
Prosecute Torturers and Their Bosses - NYTimes.com The article also has links to support their case.
Clearly what CIA and it's contractors did was illegal under US and international law. Clearly they knew it was illegal, and they even made great efforts to destroy evidence (destruction of video tapes). Apparently they even tortured citizens of other allied countries without their knowledge, and ended up torturing people who were, in fact innocent. I believe something should be done to prevent this type of action from happening again in the future. Individual prosecution of the perpetrators and "their bosses" doesn't sound like something we want to have publicly presented, however some sort of discipline should be issued. While a member of the Air Force, we were taught many times that we were to refuse any order that we thought was illegal, and that the law would protect us. I doubt if military members were involved in torture, but if they were, they could be prosecuted. The civilians, and civilian contractors involved, however, could possibly plead "ignorance of the law" etc.
I can understand and I believe the US public can also understand some situations where torture might be necessary. The TV series "24" presented situations in almost every season, where torture was necessary, and possibly justifiable, to prevent an immediate imminent disaster, such as a nuclear weapon detonation in the center of a city within hours. Of course, the TV-scripted results of those sessions often saved tens of thousands of lives and made the ends justify the means. However, the situations that the CIA was in after 9/11 was way beyond that. What could they possibly expect to get out of individuals undergoing torture months or years after the individuals were captured? The only thing I can think of is information that could lead to the arrest of other co-conspirators. However, any rational individual, or well operated organization, would recognize that the individual was captured and would have covered their tracks very quickly by changing names, addresses, passwords, strategies, tactics, and changing locations for storage of materials, weapons or the locations of targets. Any information obtained would have been close to useless. I believe it was primarily done to achieve some sort of "revenge" for 9/11 more than really to obtain critical information for protecting the nation.
The New York Times editorial board wrote on December 21st that they believe that all involved in the torture done to detainees under the Bush administration should be prosecuted, including Dick Cheney. See this article:
Prosecute Torturers and Their Bosses - NYTimes.com The article also has links to support their case.
Clearly what CIA and it's contractors did was illegal under US and international law. Clearly they knew it was illegal, and they even made great efforts to destroy evidence (destruction of video tapes). Apparently they even tortured citizens of other allied countries without their knowledge, and ended up torturing people who were, in fact innocent. I believe something should be done to prevent this type of action from happening again in the future. Individual prosecution of the perpetrators and "their bosses" doesn't sound like something we want to have publicly presented, however some sort of discipline should be issued. While a member of the Air Force, we were taught many times that we were to refuse any order that we thought was illegal, and that the law would protect us. I doubt if military members were involved in torture, but if they were, they could be prosecuted. The civilians, and civilian contractors involved, however, could possibly plead "ignorance of the law" etc.
I can understand and I believe the US public can also understand some situations where torture might be necessary. The TV series "24" presented situations in almost every season, where torture was necessary, and possibly justifiable, to prevent an immediate imminent disaster, such as a nuclear weapon detonation in the center of a city within hours. Of course, the TV-scripted results of those sessions often saved tens of thousands of lives and made the ends justify the means. However, the situations that the CIA was in after 9/11 was way beyond that. What could they possibly expect to get out of individuals undergoing torture months or years after the individuals were captured? The only thing I can think of is information that could lead to the arrest of other co-conspirators. However, any rational individual, or well operated organization, would recognize that the individual was captured and would have covered their tracks very quickly by changing names, addresses, passwords, strategies, tactics, and changing locations for storage of materials, weapons or the locations of targets. Any information obtained would have been close to useless. I believe it was primarily done to achieve some sort of "revenge" for 9/11 more than really to obtain critical information for protecting the nation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)