Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
by DevilYouKnow » Sun Feb 27, 2011 12:28 pm
by Jeff » Sun Feb 27, 2011 1:14 pm
AlicetheKurious wrote:What a stacked deck: if the Libyan people stay quiet in their chains, the West reaps billions in oil and arms contracts and hugs and kisses the dictator. If the Libyan people rise up and pay with blood for their freedom, the West swoops in to smash and grab whatever it wants and enslave the people even more while bleating about "liberation" and "democracy".
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton says the U.S. is "reaching out" to Libyans trying to organize a post-Moammar Gadhafi government and is "ready and prepared to offer any type of assistance."
Two senators say the Obama administration should recognize a provisional government that seems to be taking shape in Libya's eastern half and offer military aid.
Clinton told reporters traveling with her to Geneva for a U.N. meeting Monday on Libya that "we are just at the beginning of what will follow Gadhafi."
She didn't say whether the U.S. might provide military aid. She also didn't mention the provisional government, but just referred to "many different Libyans who are attempting to organize in the East."
by Jeff » Sun Feb 27, 2011 3:27 pm
Anti-Gaddafi figures say not contacting foreign govts
BENGHAZI, Libya | Sun Feb 27, 2011 10:45am EST
BENGHAZI, Libya Feb 27 (Reuters) - Opponents of Muammar Gaddafi based in eastern Libya said on Sunday they did not want any foreign intervention in the country and said they had not made contact with foreign governments.
The comments were made by a spokesman for a new National Libyan Council, which was formed after a meeting in Benghazi. The spokesman described the council as the face of the revolution and not an interim government.
by eyeno » Sun Feb 27, 2011 4:58 pm
US neo-cons urge Libya intervention
Signatories to the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) demand "immediate" military action.
Independent Senator Joseph Lieberman wants the US to arm Libyan rebels [GALLO/GETTY]
In a distinct echo of the tactics they pursued to encourage US intervention in the Balkans and Iraq, a familiar clutch of neo-conservatives appealed Friday for the United States and NATO to "immediately" prepare military action to help bring down the regime of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi and end the violence that is believed to have killed well over a thousand people in the past week.
The appeal, which came in the form of a letter signed by 40 policy analysts, including more than a dozen former senior officials who served under President George W. Bush, was organised and released by the Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI), a two-year-old neo-conservative group that is widely seen as the successor to the more-famous – or infamous – Project for the New American Century (PNAC).
Warning that Libya stood "on the threshold of a moral and humanitarian catastrophe", the letter, which was addressed to President Barack Obama, called for specific immediate steps involving military action, in addition to the imposition of a number of diplomatic and economic sanctions to bring "an end to the murderous Libyan regime".
In particular, it called for Washington to press NATO to "develop operational plans to urgently deploy warplanes to prevent the regime from using fighter jets and helicopter gunships against civilians and carry out other missions as required; (and) move naval assets into Libyan waters" to "aid evacuation efforts and prepare for possible contingencies;" as well as "(e)stablish the capability to disable Libyan naval vessels used to attack civilians."
The usual suspects
Among the letter's signers were former Bush deputy defence secretary Paul Wolfowitz; Bush's top global democracy and Middle East adviser; Elliott Abrams; former Bush speechwriters Marc Thiessen and Peter Wehner; Vice President Dick Cheney's former deputy national security adviser, John Hannah, as well as FPI's four directors: Weekly Standard editor William Kristol; Brookings Institution fellow Robert Kagan; former Iraq Coalition Provisional Authority spokesman Dan Senor; and former Undersecretary of Defense for Policy and Ambassador to Turkey, Eric Edelman.
It was Kagan and Kristol who co-founded and directed PNAC in its heyday from 1997 to the end of Bush's term in 2005.
The letter comes amid growing pressure on Obama, including from liberal hawks, to take stronger action against Gaddafi.
Two prominent senators whose foreign policy views often reflect neo-conservative thinking, Republican John McCain and Independent Democrat Joseph Lieberman, called Friday in Tel Aviv for Washington to supply Libyan rebels with arms, among other steps, including establishing a no-fly zone over the country.
On Wednesday, Obama said his staff was preparing a "full range of options" for action. He also announced that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will meet fly to Geneva Monday for a foreign ministers' meeting of the UN Human Rights Council to discuss possible multilateral actions.
"They want to keep open the idea that there's a mix of capabilities they can deploy – whether it's a no-fly zone, freezing foreign assets of Gaddafi's family, doing something to prevent the transport of mercenaries (hired by Gaddafi) to Libya, targeting sanctions against some of his supporters to persuade them to abandon him," said Steve Clemons of the New America Foundation, who took part in a meeting of independent foreign policy analysts, including Abrams, with senior National Security Council staff at the White House Thursday.
Interventions
During the 1990s, neo-conservatives consistently lobbied for military pressure to be deployed against so-called "rogue states", especially in the Middle East.
After the 1991 Gulf War, for example, many "neo-cons" expressed bitter disappointment that US troops stopped at the Kuwaiti border instead of marching to Baghdad and overthrowing the regime of Saddam Hussein.
When the Iraqi president then unleashed his forces against Kurdish rebels in the north and Shia insurgents in the south, they – along with many liberal interventionist allies – pressed President George H.W. Bush to impose "no-fly zones" over both regions and take additional actions - much as they are now proposing for Libya - designed to weaken the regime's military repressive capacity.
Those actions set the pattern for the 1990s. To the end of the decade, neo-conservatives, often operating under the auspices of a so-called "letterhead organisation", such as PNAC, worked – often with the help of some liberal internationalists eager to establish a right of humanitarian intervention - to press President Bill Clinton to take military action against adversaries in the Balkans – in Bosnia and then Kosovo – as well as Iraq.
Within days of 9/11, for example, PNAC issued a letter signed by 41 prominent individuals – almost all neo- conservatives, including 10 of the Libya letter's signers – that called for military action to "remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq", as well as retaliation against Iran and Syria if they did not immediately end their support for Hezbollah in Lebanon.
PNAC and its associates subsequently worked closely with neo-conservatives inside the Bush administration, including Abrams, Wolfowitz, and Edelman, to achieve those aims.
Liberal hawks
While neo-conservatives were among the first to call for military action against Gaddafi in the past week, some prominent liberals and rights activists have rallied to the call, including three of the letter's signatories: Neil Hicks of Human Rights First; Bill Clinton's human rights chief, John Shattuck; and Leon Wieseltier of The New Republic, who also signed the PNAC Iraq letter 10 years ago.
In addition, Anne-Marie Slaughter, until last month the influential director of the State Department's Policy Planning office, cited the U.S.-NATO Kosovo campaign as a possible precedent. "The international community cannot stand by and watch the massacre of Libyan protesters," she wrote on Twitter. "In Rwanda we watched. In Kosovo we acted."
Such comments evoked strong reactions from some military experts, however.
"I'm horrified to read liberal interventionists continue to suggest the ease with which humanitarian crises and regional conflicts can be solved by the application of military power," wrote Andrew Exum, a counter-insurgency specialist at the Center for a New American Security. "To speak so glibly of such things reflects a very immature understanding of the limits of force and the difficulties and complexities of contemporary military operations."
Opposition
Other commentators noted that a renewed coalition of neo- conservatives and liberal interventionists would be much harder to put together now than during the Balkan wars of the 1990s.
"We now have Iraq and Afghanistan as warning signs, as well as our fiscal crisis, so I don't think there's an enormous appetite on Capitol Hill or among the public for yet another military engagement," said Charles Kupchan, a foreign policy specialist at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).
"I support diplomatic and economic sanctions, but I would stop well short of advocating military action, including the imposition of a no-fly zone," he added, noting, in any event, that most of the killing in Libya this week has been carried out by mercenaries and paramilitaries on foot or from vehicles.
"There may be some things we can do – such as airlifting humanitarian supplies to border regions where there are growing number of refugees, but I would do so only with the full support of the Arab League and African Union, if not the UN," said Clemons.
"(The neo-conservatives) are essentially pro-intervention, pro-war, without regard to the costs to the country," he said. "They don't recognise that we're incredibly over- extended and that the kinds of things they want us to do actually further weaken our already-eroded stock of American power."
A version of this article first appeared on the Inter Press Service News Agency.
by DevilYouKnow » Sun Feb 27, 2011 6:09 pm
The Council on Foreign Relations wrote:
"We now have Iraq and Afghanistan as warning signs, as well as our fiscal crisis, so I don't think there's an enormous appetite on Capitol Hill or among the public for yet another military engagement," said Charles Kupchan, a foreign policy specialist at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).
"I support diplomatic and economic sanctions, but I would stop well short of advocating military action, including the imposition of a no-fly zone," he added, noting, in any event, that most of the killing in Libya this week has been carried out by mercenaries and paramilitaries on foot or from vehicles.
"There may be some things we can do – such as airlifting humanitarian supplies to border regions where there are growing number of refugees, but I would do so only with the full support of the Arab League and African Union, if not the UN," said Clemons.
"(The neo-conservatives) are essentially pro-intervention, pro-war, without regard to the costs to the country," he said. "They don't recognise that we're incredibly over- extended and that the kinds of things they want us to do actually further weaken our already-eroded stock of American power."
by Jeff » Sun Feb 27, 2011 9:27 pm
Libya escapees tell of looting in the oilfields
By Oliver Poole in Benghazi
Monday, 28 February 2011
The last group of Britons believed to still be in Libya streamed on to a Royal Navy frigate yesterday, bringing with them stories of looting and lawlessness that spoke of devastating damage to the country's oil infrastructure.
The majority climbing the gangplank to HMS Cumberland for a transit to Malta were oil workers who had been trapped for days in the desert covering the south of the country, and had witnessed drilling rigs being stripped of equipment and Bedouin tribes robbing at gun point.
"There's now no law down there," said Simon Robinson, who had been in charge of one of the rigs. "Gangs are stealing anything they can get their hands on. I had a vehicle stolen directly off me. Three guys appeared with AK-47s. I know exactly which kind of gun it was as I can remember reading the small print on the barrel when one was pointed at me."
...
Mr Robinson, whose rig was in the south-eastern drilling zone known as area 103, said he and his men were left stranded for several days while he pleaded with his US-based oil company Occidental to send help.
"The company said it was going to send mercenaries such as Blackwater or an equivalent. But they never arrived. Some of my Libyan men said they would go and get help. Two days later they came back with a pick-up truck and two Land-Rovers. We piled the vehicles with whatever supplies we needed and they drove us out of there. I'm so grateful to them for coming back for us."
...
by Plutonia » Sun Feb 27, 2011 9:40 pm
by Jeff » Sun Feb 27, 2011 11:47 pm
Muammar Gaddafi's nurse flees Libya for Ukraine
Galyna Kolotnytska, a Gaddafi confidante, arrived in Kiev on a Ukrainian defence ministry aircraft that evacuated 185 people
Miriam Elder in Moscow
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 27 February 2011 19.06 GMT
Muammar Gaddafi's "voluptuous" nurse and close confidante has fled Libya for her native Ukraine as the Libyan leader's tenuous grip on power weakens by the hour.
Galyna Kolotnytska arrived in Kiev early on Sunday morning on a Ukrainian defence ministry aircraft that evacuated 185 people from the country, Ukraine's Segodnya newspaper reported.
Kolotnytska, 38, was described in US diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks in December as a "voluptuous blonde", one of Gaddafi's closest confidantes and possibly his lover.
"Libyan protocol staff emphasised to multiple Emboffs [embassy officials] that Gaddafi cannot travel without Kolotnytska, as she alone 'knows his routine'," read the 2009 cable from Gene Cretz, the US ambassador to Libya. He reported rumours that Gaddafi and Kolotnytska, one of four Ukrainian nurses who serve him, might be romantically involved. Cretz was pulled from the country after the document's release.
Kolotnytska was calm before leaving Tripoli according to her daughter Tatyana, who told Segodnya: "She spoke in a calm voice, and asked that we don't worry, that she would be home soon."
...
by Jeff » Mon Feb 28, 2011 3:16 am
7:21am UK, Monday February 28, 2011
Alex Rossi, in Al Bayda, Libya
The president of Libya's newly-formed National Council has told Sky News that if Tripoli does not liberate itself then the rebel army will take it by force.
In an interview with Sky News - his first since being elected - Mustafa Abdul-Jalil appealed to the international community for help.
...
But mistrust of the international community is still strong. Mr Abdul-Jalil's reaction to the prospect of help from foreign troops was not so welcome.
He said: "Any intervention will be confronted with more force than we are using against Gaddafi."
by Jeff » Mon Feb 28, 2011 3:50 am
African mercenaries hired by the Gaddafi regime to kill Libyan protesters would be immune from prosecution for war crimes due to a clause in this weekend's UN resolution that was demanded by the United States.
By Jon Swaine, New York 9:16PM GMT 27 Feb 2011
The UN Security Council agreed on Saturday evening to freeze international assets belonging to the Gaddafis and their key aides, to ban them from travelling and to block all arms sales to Tripoli. It also called for the International Criminal Court (ICC) to investigate the killings of demonstrators.
This inquiry could lead to senior Libyan ministers and officials being indicted to stand trial for crimes against humanity at The Hague and being given lengthy prison sentences.
But it has been widely alleged that many of the attacks were in fact carried out by foreign mercenaries hired by Colonel Gaddafi. And the US insisted that the UN resolution was worded so that no one from an outside country that is not a member of the ICC could be prosecuted for their actions in Libya.
This means that mercenaries from countries such as Algeria, Ethiopia and Tunisia – which have all been named by rebel Libyan diplomats to the UN as being among the countries involved – would escape prosecution even if they were captured, because their nations are not members of the court.
The move was seen as an attempt to prevent a precedent that could see Americans prosecuted by the ICC for alleged crimes in other conflicts. While the US was once among the signatories to the court, George W. Bush withdrew from it in 2002 and declared that it did not have power over Washington.
The key paragraph said that anyone from a non-ICC country alleged to have committed crimes in Libya would “be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction” of their own country. It was inserted despite Susan Rice, the US ambassador to the UN, saying that all those “who slaughter civilians” would “be held personally accountable”.
Speaking to reporters outside the council chamber, Gerard Araud, the French UN ambassador, described the paragraph as “a red line for the United States”, meaning American diplomats had been ordered by their bosses in Washington to secure it. “It was a deal-breaker, and that's the reason we accepted this text to have the unanimity of the council,” said Mr Araud.
...
by DevilYouKnow » Mon Feb 28, 2011 5:00 pm
by Plutonia » Mon Feb 28, 2011 5:27 pm
Gadhafi regime tried to withdraw money in Canada before asset freeze
CAMPBELL CLARK
OTTAWA— Globe and Mail Update
Published Monday, Feb. 28, 2011 12:42PM EST
The regime of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi has tried to withdraw money from financial institutions in Canada during the crisis there, the federal government has confirmed.
The Harper government refused to say whether the efforts to take money out of Canada involved large sums, citing unspecified “operations reasons” for refusing to provide details.
Government House Leader John Baird tabled official notice of Canadian sanctions in the Commons on Monday, including measures to block any financial transactions between Canadians and the Libyan government, its agents, or Mr. Gadhafi and his associates.
Mr. Baird said Canadian financial institutions are trying to identify assets of the Libyan regime to block further attempts to withdraw the money from Canada.
“We are aware of specific financial dealings of the Libyan regime in financial institutions in Canada, and the actions taken by our government have blocked those,” he said. “There were specific instances brought to our attention,” he added later.
Mr. Baird declined to provide any description of the attempts to take money out, or the scope of the sums. “A number of Canadian financial institutions now are obviously working hard to identify not just assets with respect to Mr. Gadhafi and his family but also the Libyan regime,” he said.
cont
by 23 » Mon Feb 28, 2011 5:52 pm
(excerpted)
What is open source?
Open source is basically a model for innovation driven not by intellectual protectionism but by cooperative competition toward a common, continuously expanding goal. On the battlefield of software technology, the big open source names are familiar even to non-tech savvy users: Mozilla (makers of Firefox and Thunderbird), Wikipedia, Wordpress, and Linux are all titans on par with their proprietary counterparts. Most people are probably not aware that social media services like Facebook have been built from open source building blocks such as PHP and MySQL. Programmers and developers have produced the technologies that power our modern lives because those building blocks are readily available through distributed code, APIs, and open languages. At its core, open source means we do not have to reinvent the wheel in order to build a better car.
The philosophy behind open source extends beyond arguments for efficiency and quality. There is a shared understanding among open source converts and evangelists that it ultimately improves the world. Sharing code and data is only the grease that makes the machine work. The fuel is the collective understanding among the open source community that the combined effort of individual contributors is far greater that the sum of its parts.
Open source in the real world
Thanks to open source, we are finally creating ways to harness and share data in meaningful ways that can help solve the world's problems. Projects like Open 311 are revolutionizing the way citizens communicate with local government when problems arise. The awe-inspiring Code for America project is equipping brilliant young developers with the resources to solve national and local problems using open source technology.
At Friday's conference, rising federal stars like Aneesh Chopra (the first CTO of the USA), Macon Phillips (New Media Director for The White House), and Todd Park (CTO for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) demonstrated how agencies are turning to open source solutions to make government more reliable, transparent, and better able to solve the most pressing national and international issues.
Interest in open source technology as a means of conquering seemingly insurmountable problems has surged in nearly every field, from international development to education to disaster response. Startup initiatives such as CrisisCommons, which provides community and technology liaison support during and after disasters, are demonstrating the power of open source technology to save lives and livelihoods in the face of tragedy. SugarLabs, an innovative open source education platform, is already in use by over 1 million children in over 40 countries. These projects are not merely pipe dreams sketched out on whiteboards; they are already exerting a tangible, positive impact on our world.
Egypt: an open source model
Turning back to the Middle East, where events over the past few months have defied all previous expectations, we can also find echoes of the dynamic power of new technology. I take issue, however, with the pundits and bloggers who have called the events in Egypt a "Twitter revolution" or a "Facebook revolution." The conceptual boxes drawn by those titles are far too narrow and limiting to encapsulate the significance of recent events.
Egypt's revolution is an open source revolution.
Each participant is a change agent unto him or herself, whose power was amplified by the distributed networks of peaceful civil protest. No central leader or platform has emerged during the crisis; the revolt's decentralized nature may have actually contributed to its non-violent success. Put another way, Tahrir Square has given a whole new meaning to the idea of crowdsourcing.
Social media tools (including Facebook and Twitter, both of which incorporate open source into their design) were adopted and tweaked, not by corporations or institutions, but by individuals and teams motivated by a shared commitment to a higher goal. The evidence can be readily found in organic projects like AliveInEgypt (@AliveInEgypt), a network of distributed volunteers that has been providing translations of Egyptian tweets from Arabic to English.
The collective victory of millions of Egyptians is a powerful validation of open source philosophy. It is revolutionary without being destructive; it succeeds by building on what has come before to forge ahead. And in the face of challenge, it is unstoppable.
by DoYouEverWonder » Mon Feb 28, 2011 7:17 pm
The open source revolution
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 169 guests
