Member Profile

Total number of comments: 7 (since 2013-11-28 16:38:26)

sandra

Showing comments 7 - 1
Page:

  • The Cruel Jest of American "Humanitarian Aid" to Iraq
    • oh boo hoo -- Prof. Cole's "tone" hurts your precious wittle feelings.
      Grow up. The prof. is absolutely correct in pointing out the immense hypocrisy of this so-called "humanitarian" mission and of the tragic amount of destroyed lives that the US is responsible for. In fact, Prof. Cole omits the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives the US murdered as a result of a decade of merciless sanctions long before the 2003 invasion.
      The incredible arrogance on your part to whine about Prof. Cole's "tone" in the face of the depth and breadth of the US' destruction of Iraqi lives and Iraqi society is astonishing.
      Americans like you need to learn some humility.

  • Is Zionism/ Jewish Nationalism a Political Cult? The Salaita Firing
    • The question to ask when thinking about this incident is "Would Salaita's job offer been withdrawn if he'd posted 'nasty' or 'uncivil' tweets defending Israel and zionism?"

      Of course not. In fact, he could've tweeted FAR FAR worse "uncivil" comments defending Israel and zionism and he'd be on his way to securing tenure at the University of Illinois right now.

      They're just hiding behind "incivility" to excuse this disgusting action against Dr. Salaita.

  • Egypt's Waco
    • Prof. Cole does not address the role of plainclothes organized thugs deployed by the police and military to pose as MB "terrorists" (just as they posed as "violent protesters" a year ago, i.e., posing as young pro-democracy protesters committing violent acts) - charges have been made that some of these thugs have attacked Christians & burned down churches. While there was a curfew in most parts of Cairo on the first day of the military assault, there was none around the churches, for example.

      I am not denying MB responsibility for at least some of the church attacks but the Egyptian military and police have a long widely known history of the use of these organized paid thugs committing violence and posing as members of the group the authorities are repressing.

  • Answer to Glenn Greenwald
    • This article in the Telegraph makes it clear that (as many commentators had already speculated) there was a clear connection between Bahrain and the Libya intervention:

      link to telegraph.co.uk

      A deal was done between the US and Saudi Arabia. The US promised the Saudis to mute any criticism of the Bahrain government attacks on its own citizens (plus Saudi intervention on behalf of that govt) in exchange for Saudi cooperation in the Libya intervention. Which is now a war, actually - the CIA has been there for weeks and Obama has started arming the rebels despite any UN legality issues (as if that would stop the US govt, under ANY president, from arming anyone).

      In other words, the US intervenes only against its enemies - while its friends can go on massacring at will. Rewarding friends for atrocities, punishing enemies for the same.

      And pontificating about human rights and morality along the way.

      You have been entirely dishonest in every single thing you've written about this Libya intervention, glossing over pertinent facts and refusing to take up serious questions made by a variety of people from all sides of the political divide.

  • Top Ten Accomplishments of the UN No-Fly Zone
    • Mr. Cole,

      Your portrait of this operation is dishonest.

      You keep portraying this action as if the Arab League is completely on board and that the US/Europe merely responded to a request for a no-fly zone from them.

      I would like you to please read the transcript of Phyllis Bennis' appearance on Democracy Now (scroll down) in which she explains the sequence of decision-making in the White House:

      link to democracynow.org

      Please respond to it. She makes it clear that it was the White House that first went to both the Arab League & the African Union for something stronger than a no-fly-zone. The African Union refused to cooperate while the Arab League was convinced to go along with a vague NFZ operation.

      If this was merely to save the people of Benghazi, that was done on the first day. Why then did the bombings continue? This has now turned into a regime change operation.

      I find these two articles (surprisingly from the New Republic) far more thoughtful than your own writings on this issue:

      link to tnr.com

      link to tnr.com

  • Top Ten Ways that Libya 2011 is Not Iraq 2003
    • "The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies"

      This is SIMPLY NOT TRUE:

      link to democracynow.org

      (scroll down for Phyllis Bennis' remarks)

  • Eyewitnesses Say Israelis came in with Guns Blazing
    • Prof. Cole, I'm Brazilian (living in NYC) and I subscribe to the TV Globo channel thru satellite TV. I've been watching Globo's coverage of this incident (not a helluva lot better than US coverage, just a little less sycophantic to Israel). On their nightly Jornal Nacional yesterday they had an interview with a Brazilian citizen who was on the ship. She's a Brazilian of Japanese descent. She too testified that the Israeli soldiers started shooting even before they came on the ship and were in full combat mode before anyone on the ship had reacted.

Showing comments 7 - 1
Page: