tagged w/ No-fly Zone
-
"The bad news: the baby seal hunting season has begun off the coast of Newfoundland. The good news: they're using a more humane technique. They're shaking the baby seals instead of clubbing them." Chris Martin joins People for the Ethical Treatment of Stand-up Comedians at the 9:55 Comedy Club's open mic May 2, 2011. Joshua Saucier is the MC.
http://www.chrismartincomedy.com"The bad news: the baby seal hunting season has begun off the coast of... more
-
-
"The Pillsbury Dough Boy celebrated his fifty-first birthday. Sadly, he never recovered from his molestation at the hands of the Michelin Man." Stand-up comedian Chris Martin deflates brands April 27, 2011 at McCormack's Irish Pub in Richmond, VA. Joe Hafkey is MC.
http://chrismartincomedy.com"The Pillsbury Dough Boy celebrated his fifty-first birthday. Sadly, he never... more
-
-
"We just celebrated Presidents Day. We should have a Vice Presidents Day. That way, instead of shooting off fireworks we'd get to shoot someone in the face." Stand-up comedian Chris Martin has one of those nights March 9, 2011 at McCormack's Irish Pub in Richmond, VA. Pitshou Kafuku is the MC.
http://chrismartincomedy.com"We just celebrated Presidents Day. We should have a Vice Presidents Day. That... more
-
-
by Medea Benjamin and Charles Davis, March 31, 2011
His lines may be better delivered, but Barack Obama is sounding – and acting – more like the heir to George W. Bush than the answer sold to the public in his award-winning ad campaign. Indeed, when not sending billions of dollars to repressive governments across the globe, the great liberal hope is authorizing deadly drone strikes and military campaigns in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen and now, in his most morally righteous war yet, Libya.
Strutting out to a podium before an audience of uniformed military personnel – wonder where he got that idea from – a confident, some would say cocky, American president offered a fierce albeit belated speech justifying another preemptive war against a country that posed no threat to the United States. And if you closed your eyes, you could almost hear that faux-Texas drawl.
"As Commander-in-Chief, I have no greater responsibility than keeping this country safe," the president declared, adopting his predecessor’s favorite title for himself. "I’ve made it clear that I will never hesitate to use our military swiftly, decisively, and unilaterally when necessary to defend our people, our homeland, our allies and our core interests."
Put another way, President Obama says he will only start a war – without consulting Congress, much less the public – when it is absolutely necessary for defending the "homeland" or for, you know, whatever he deems an "interest."
Enter Muammar Gadhafi, a caricature of a tyrant whom the Obama administration just a matter of months ago was looking to sell $77 million in weapons, including more than 50 armored troop carriers. Back then, Gadhafi was a thuggish but reliable client in his old age. And he happened to rule over a country that has the largest oil reserves in Africa.
Funny how friendship works.
But a few short weeks ago, Gadhafi became unreliable – a public relations nightmare – when he started using the weapons he purchased from his erstwhile allies against his own people. Like Saddam Hussein before him, he became a liability.
So now Obama believes Gadhafi to be a "tyrant" who has lost his "legitimacy" – as if there was anything "legitimate" about his previous 42 years of dictatorial rule. On Monday, the president argued war was necessary to prevent Gadhafi from massacring rebel forces and their supporters in Benghazi. Such a massacre "would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world," said the war president. "I refused to let that happen."
I – me – the imperial president. Cue the commander-in-chief landing on an aircraft carrier.
But if the threat of a massacre is what spurs President Obama to action, what are we to make of his reaction to Israel’s massacre of more than 1,400 Palestinians during Operation Cast Lead in Gaza, or what Amnesty International calls "22 days of death and destruction"? Giving Israel an additional $30 billion in American weapons is a rather curious response, no?
And what about the hundreds of civilians killed by drone attacks in Pakistan since Obama took office – as many as 1,850 according to the New America Foundation? In early March, the very administration cloaking its new war in moralizing rhetoric carried out a massacre of 40 Pakistani civilians – a massacre the president who authorized the attack couldn’t even be bothered to comment on.
Right now, the Obama administration is actively supporting brutal regimes in Yemen, Iraq, and Bahrain – to name a few – where protest movements are being violently suppressed on the American taxpayers’ dime. And the Obama administration is selling $60 billion in weapons to the Saudis, who not only oppress their own dissidents but recently occupied neighboring Bahrain and violently cracked down on peaceful protesters there with the U.S.’s stamp of approval.
So if one thing’s clear, it’s that the U.S. government is fine with tyranny – when it’s "pro-American." Fancy rhetoric aside, there is no "freedom agenda."
Speaking to reporters this week, Obama’s Deputy National Security Advisor Denis McDonough conceded as much, saying that the White House doesn’t "make decisions about questions like intervention based on consistency or precedent." Rather, "We make them based on how we can best advance our interests in the region."
And as history professor and war supporter Juan Cole helpfully notes, the rebels control significant swaths of oil-rich territory and have taken "key oil towns" thanks to the U.S.-led bombing campaign – of 200 cruise missiles fired so far, 193 have been fired from American warships. They are also on the verge of taking 80 percent of the Buraiqa Basin, writes Cole, which "contains much of Libya’s oil wealth."
Bingo: We just found "our interests." And unsurprisingly, they don’t involve protecting innocent people from being killed so much as they do protecting the natural resource on top of which they’re dying – and then having the freshly liberated locals pick up the tab for American contractors to rebuild everything American missiles destroyed.
Major General Smedley Butler had it right: war is a racket.
But even assuming Obama has the best of intentions – with which the road to hell is paved, mind you – U.S. intervention in Libya is more likely to do harm than good. Besides the inevitable "collateral damage," meaning widowed mothers and orphaned children, war sets off an unpredictable chain reaction of evil – evil that no side has a monopoly over.
Indeed, The Los Angeles Times reports that while the intervention is sold as in defense of human rights, the Libyan rebels on whose behalf the U.S. is intervening are actively rounding up hundreds of their perceived political opponents and imprisoning them without charge in Gadhafi’s former torture chambers. Those being rounded up are primarily black immigrants, with rebel spokesman Abdelhafed Ghoga telling the paper that suspected Gadhafi mercenaries who don’t voluntarily turn themselves in will be subjected to extra-judicial "justice" (read: murder) for being "enemies of the revolution." If they seize the country, who will stop roundups – and massacres – in Tripoli and elsewhere of those deemed to be supporters of the Gadhafi regime, perhaps for no reason other than the color of their skin?
U.S. officials have publicly acknowledged an al-Qaeda presence among the rebels, bringing to mind U.S. support for the Afghan mujahideen in the 1980s. And with the self-proclaimed leadership consisting of former top-level Gadhafi cronies who had no problem with the regime’s human rights abuses four weeks ago, those lionizing the rebels – and suggesting the U.S. illegally arm them – should take a closer look at who the U.S. and its allies are preparing to put in power when Gadhafi’s gone.
The Obama administration and supporters of the war — who a month ago couldn’t tell the difference between Benghazi and Baghdad — portray the intervention in Libya as a simple morality tale, with evil on one side and good on the other. But the reality is more nuanced than the applause lines the president laid out in his speech. In the real world, peace is rarely achieved by dropping bombs and installing the most avowedly "pro-American" locals you can find in power. Just look at Afghanistan and Iraq, where George Bush started wars that Barack Obama has only continued – and in the case of the former, escalated.
"Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries," Obama said this week. "The United States of America is different." And credit where credit’s due, he’s right: From Gaza to the Arabian peninsula, Obama doesn’t stand idly by while others carry out atrocities – he funds and arms those carrying them out.
And just like Bush, he doesn’t let his hypocrisy get in the way of a good war.by Medea Benjamin and Charles Davis, March 31, 2011
His lines may be better... more
-
-
* Tensions with Britain as Gates rebukes UK government over suggestion Gaddafi could be assassinated
* French propose a new political 'committee' to oversee operations
* Germany pulls equipment out of NATO coalition over disagreement over campaign's direction
* Italians accuse French of backing NATO in exchange for oil contracts
* No-fly zone called into question after first wave of strikes 'neutralises' Libyan military machine
* U.K. ministers say war could last '30 years'
* Italy to 'take back control' of bases used by allies unless NATO leadership put in charge of the mission
* Russians tell U.S. to stop bombing in order to protect civilians - calls bombing a 'crusade'
Deep divisions between allied forces currently bombing Libya worsened today as the German military announced it was pulling forces out of NATO over continued disagreement on who will lead the campaign.
A German military spokesman said it was recalling two frigates and AWACS surveillance plane crews from the Mediterranean, after fears they would be drawn into the conflict if NATO takes over control from the U.S.
The infighting comes as a heated meeting of NATO ambassadors yesterday failed to resolve whether the 28-nation alliance should run the operation to enforce a U.N.-mandated no-fly zone, diplomats said.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1368693/Libya-war-Germans-pull-forces-NATO-Libyan-coalition-falls-apart.html#ixzz1HTKJhp7w* Tensions with Britain as Gates rebukes UK government over suggestion Gaddafi could... more
-
-
On Tuesday, A US F-15E Eagle fighter jet crashed in a field outside Benghazi, apparently due to malfunction. Both pilots were injured, and as villagers approached to greet the Americans, the crewmen started shooting.
In a DOD video update which accompanies this article, Admiral Samuel Locklear, Commander of U.S. Naval Forces Europe & Africa did not mention this embarrassing incident in his briefing, which has caused the first casualties of the coalition mandate to protect civilians from being fired upon by pro-Qaddafi forces.
The Department of Defense, via Secretary Robert Gates, has downplayed claims of civilian casualties since the coalition offensive started. News of Qaddafi's compound being hit last night did not take long to make headlines; the compound had been targeted as it allegedly housed communication and command operations.
Six Libyans received medical attention at a nearby hospital, one of which was a young boy who may have to undergo a leg amputation due to his injuries. It had been the intention of the villagers to welcome the Americans who may have thought they had crash landed in hostile territory.On Tuesday, A US F-15E Eagle fighter jet crashed in a field outside Benghazi,... more
-
-
Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) says President Barack Obama did not have the constitutional authority to order U.S. forces to participate in an attack on Libya.
In a conference call with other liberal lawmakers Saturday, Kucinich asked why the U.S. missile strikes were not impeachable offenses, according to two Democratic lawmakers who spoke to Politico.
The U.S. unleashed a barrage of strikes against the Libyan regime's air defenses over the weekend, but ruled out using ground troops in what Obama called a "limited military action."
After taking a cautious stance on armed intervention in Libya's civil war, Obama ordered the attacks citing the threat posed to civilians by Moamer Kadhafi's forces and a UN-mandated no-fly zone endorsed by Arab countries.
"We must be clear: actions have consequences, and the writ of the international community must be enforced," Obama told reporters while on an official visit to Brazil Saturday.
"We are answering the calls of a threatened people. And we are acting in the interests of the United States and the world," he said, stressing that Washington was acting in concert "with a broad coalition."
Reps. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Donna Edwards (D-MD), Mike Capuano (D-MA), Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), Maxine Waters (D-CA), Rob Andrews (D-NJ), Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), Barbara Lee (D-CA) and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) "all strongly raised objections to the constitutionality of the president's actions" during the conference call, a source told Politico.
Kucinich also released a statement on his website Friday questioning the constitutionality of the president's actions.
"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation," he insisted.
"While the action is billed as protecting the civilians of Libya, a no-fly-zone begins with an attack on the air defenses of Libya and Qaddafi forces. It is an act of war. The president made statements which attempt to minimize U.S. action, but U.S. planes may drop U.S. bombs and U.S. missiles may be involved in striking another sovereign nation. War from the air is still war."
"Congress should be called back into session immediately to decide whether or not to authorize the United States’ participation in a military strike. If it does not, the action of the President is contrary to U.S. Constitution. Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution clearly states that the United States Congress has the power to declare war. The President does not. That was the Founders’ intent," the Ohio congressman added.
"The last thing we need is to be embroiled in yet another intervention in another Muslim country. The American people have had enough. First it was Afghanistan, then Iraq. Then bombs began to fall in Pakistan, then Yemen, and soon it seems bombs could be falling in Libya. Our nation simply cannot afford another war, economically, diplomatically or spiritually," Kucinich concluded.
Former presidential candidate Ralph Nader also said the president was committing "war crimes" in the attack against Libya.
"Why don't we say what's on the minds of many legal experts; that the Obama administration is committing war crimes and if Bush should have been impeached, Obama should be impeached," Nader told Democracy Now! Thursday.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/03/21/kucinich-obama-could-be-impeached-for-attacking-libya/Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) says President Barack Obama did not have the... more
-
-
The head of the Arab League has criticized international strikes on Libya, saying they caused civilian deaths.
The Arab League's support for a no-fly zone last week helped overcome reluctance in the West for action in Libya. The U.N. authorized not only a no-fly zone but also "all necessary measures" to protect civilians.
Amr Moussa says the military operations have gone beyond what the Arab League backed.
Moussa has told reporters Sunday that "what happened differs from the no-fly zone objectives." He says "what we want is civilians' protection not shelling more civilians."
U.S. and European strikes overnight targeted mainly air defenses, the U.S. military said. Libya says 48 people were killed, including civilians.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylonbeyond/2011/03/libya-airstrikes-military-tripoli-kadafi.htmlThe head of the Arab League has criticized international strikes on Libya, saying they... more
-
-
BENGHAZI, Libya — Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's forces pushed into the rebel-held city of Benghazi Saturday, defying world demands for an immediate ceasefire and forcing rebels to retreat.
A Libyan rebel spokesman said Gadhafi's forces had entered the city while a Reuters witness saw at least one explosion near the rebel movement's headquarters in the city.
The Washington Post also reported Gadhafi's troops had entered the city. The paper said soldiers had gone in from the west and were in the university area.
A warplane was shot down over Benghazi and Sky News correspondent Emma Hurd — who was in Benghazi Saturday morning but joined a growing exodus fleeing to the east — said there were cheers from the rebels when it crashed following the sound of anti-aircraft fire.
However, NBC News' Jim Maceda told the TODAY show that it later became clear the jet was one of those captured by the rebels. He said it was not clear if it was shot down by Gadhafi's forces, rebels on the ground by mistake or simply had suffered a mechanical failure.
Hundreds of cars full of civilians headed out of Benghazi, a Reuters correspondent said.
"Do we have to wait till he (Gadhafi) kills us all before the (world) acts. We are very disappointed," said Adel Mansoura, an air traffic controller fleeing with his family.
Top stories: Turmoil in the Middle East
Gadhafi's forces attack rebels in Benghazi
NY Times: Our journalists to be released
Yemeni forces kill dozens of protesters
Syrian forces kill 3 protesters
Bahrain demolishes square used by protesters
"When we heard the U.N. resolution, we were very happy and thought we had our freedom but now we have been left on our own to the killers," he said at a petrol station where dozens of other cars queued for fuel as they fled.
The head of the rebel National Libyan Council, Mustafa Abdel Jalil, said the international community must act swiftly to protect civilians from Gadhafi's forces.
"Now there is a bombardment by artillery and rockets on all districts of Benghazi," he told Al Jazeera television. "The international community is late in intervening to save civilians from Gadhafi's forces."
"Today in Benghazi there will be a catastrophe if the international community does not implement the resolutions of the U.N. Security Council," he said. "We appeal to the international community, to the all the free world, to stop this tyranny from exterminating civilians."
The fighting came despite a pledge by Libya's government that it was observing a ceasefire and as France predicted imminent military action by the West.
"Everything is ready (to act) but the decision is now a political one. It's clear we have to move quickly," a French government source said, hours before France was due to host an international meeting to discuss military intervention.
Government blames rebels
Al-Jazeera reported the Libyan government said in a statement that its forces were defending themselves.
"The gangs of al-Qaida attacked the units of the Libyan armed forces stationed to the west of Benghazi," the statement said, according to the official Jana news agency.
The statement also said the rebels had used "a helicopter and a fighter jet to bomb the Libyan armed forces in blatant violation of the no-fly zone imposed by the UN Security Council."
Gadhafi also said Saturday the U.N. resolution authorizing international military intervention in Libya was "invalid."
He said he had sent a message to President Barack Obama defending his decision to attack rebel cities: "If you found them taking over American cities by the force of arms, tell me what you would do."
Gadhafi also sent a letter to the French and British leaders and the U.N. secretary general, saying they would "regret" any intervention.
"Libya is not for you, Libya is for the Libyans," he said.
As explosions shook Benghazi, rebel fighters said they were being forced to retreat from the outskirts of the city where the revolt against Gadhafi began a month ago.
The shooting down of the fighter jet was caught on camera and witnessed by several journalists in the city.
"I saw the plane circle around, come out of the clouds, head towards an apparent target, and then it was hit and went straight down in flames and a huge billow of black smoke went up," Reuters correspondent Angus MacSwan said.
"It seems it was attacking the Benghazi military barracks," he added.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42164455/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa/BENGHAZI, Libya — Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's forces pushed into the... more
-
-
(CNN) -- Conflict is raging in Libya, witnesses say, despite the government announcement of an "immediate" cease-fire after a U.N. Security Council resolution authorizing the use of force to protect civilians.
Witnesses in the western city of Misrata said a pro-government assault is persisting and casualties are mounting as countries backing the council's move, such as Britain and France, get their military resources into place to enforce the measure.
"What cease-fire?" asked a doctor in Misrata, who described hours of military poundings, casualties, and dwindling resources to treat the wounded. "We're under the bombs."
"This morning they are burning the city," the doctor said. "There are deaths everywhere."
"Misrata is on fire," according to an opposition member -- who said tanks and vehicles with heavy artillery shot their way into the city Thursday night and the assault continued on Friday. He said Gadhafi's regime announced a cease-fire to buy time for itself. "Please help us."
Libya declares immediate cease-fire Libya reacts to no-fly zone Libyan rebels celebrate vote Breaking down a no-fly zone over Libya Libyan amb. still hopeful for airstrikes
Outside of Ajdabiya in eastern Libya, CNN's Arwa Damon said she heard the sounds of explosions, listened to fighters' accounts of heavy casualties, and saw ambulances. She said fighters, who don't trust Gadhafi, believe the declaration is a trick.
"Everybody around us is on very high alert, still expecting the worst," said Damon.
CNN couldn't independently confirm the witness accounts and it is impossible to tell whether word of the cease-fire declaration trickled down to pro-government forces. The announcement, which came hours after the U.N. Security Council authorized the use of force to protect besieged civilians, drew quick skepticism from France and the United States, among others.
In remarks televised across the globe, Libyan Foreign Minister Moussa Koussa told reporters in Tripoli the country decided on "an immediate cease-fire and the stoppage of all military operations." He noted that the country, since it is a member of the United Nations, is "obliged to accept the Security Council resolution that permits the use of force to protect the civilian population."
It was not immediately clear how the announced cease-fire and word of continued fighting will affect plans of some countries to intervene militarily in Libya -- authorities in Britain and France had talked before Koussa's remarks.
Koussa said Libya plans to protect civilians and provide them with humanitarian assistance and that it is obliged to protect all foreigners and their assets. He also called for a fact-finding mission to sort out the events on the ground.
He said the Libya government was disappointed in the imposition of a no-fly zone, arguing that it will hurt the civilian population. He also said the use of military power would violate the country's sovereignty and go against the U.N. charter, but he acknowledged that some countries may yet intervene.
"There are signs this indeed might take place," Koussa said.
Bernard Valero, a French Foreign Ministry spokesman, said the cease-fire announcement "does not change the threat on the ground."
http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/03/18/libya.civil.war/index.html?hpt=T1(CNN) -- Conflict is raging in Libya, witnesses say, despite the government... more
-
-
UNITED NATIONS — Moving swiftly in response to a request by Arab nations, the U.N. Security Council on Thursday paved the way for international air strikes against Moammar Gadhafi's forces, voting to authorize military action to protect civilians and impose a no-fly zone over Libya.
The council acted five days after the Arab League urged the U.N.'s most powerful body to try to halt Gadhafi's advancing military and reverse the realities on the ground, where rebels and their civilian supporters are in danger of being crushed by pro-government forces using rockets, artillery, tanks and warplanes.
The vote was 10-0 with five countries abstaining including Russia and China, which have veto power in the council, along with India, Germany and Brazil. Russia and China expressed concern about the United Nations and other outside powers using force against Gadhafi, and Germany expressed fear that military action would lead to more casualties.
The United States – which in a dramatic reversal joined the resolution's initial supporters Britain, France and Lebanon – not only helped push for a quick vote but pressed for action beyond creation of a no-fly zone to protect civilians from air, land and sea attacks by Gadhafi's fighters.
"This council moved with remarkable speed in response to the great urgency of the situation on the ground," U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice said. "This resolution should send a strong message to Colonel Gadhafi and his regime that the violence must stop, the killing must stop, and the people of Libya must be protected and have the opportunity to express themselves freely."
The resolution bans all flights in Libya's airspace to help protect civilians. It also authorizes U.N. member states to take "all necessary measures ... to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, including Benghazi, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory."
U.S. officials said the resolution provides a strong legal base for enforcing the no-fly zone and for countries to carry out air and sea strikes against Gadhafi's forces.
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told reporters in Tunisia on Thursday that a U.N. no-fly zone over Libya would require action to protect the planes and pilots, "including bombing targets like the Libyan defense systems."
British Foreign Secretary William Hague said the three criteria for taking action – a demonstrated need, clear legal basis and broad regional support – all have been fulfilled.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/17/libya-no-fly-zone-un-united-nations_n_837378.htmlUNITED NATIONS — Moving swiftly in response to a request by Arab nations, the... more
-
-
French Foreign Minister Alain Juppé addressed the UN Security Council this afternoon in New York, hoping to influence the vote on a no-fly zone over Libya in the coming hours. France has apparently been readying itself for intervention, waiting for the final green light from the UN, hoping the resolution will pass. Juppé said that the draft was authored by France, Lebanon and Britain and that it had been very important to get the stamp of approval from the Arab countries.
The resolution is said to contain the wording 'all necessary measures' to enforce the ban but it was careful to omit any reference, direct or otherwise, to 'occupation'. In order to pass, 9 out of 15 votes are required, and the temperature taken as of half an hour ago was that although it will not be unanimous, there will be sufficient votes for the resolution to be adopted.
Continue reading on Examiner.com: UN Security Council to vote on Libya no-fly zone Thursday - National Foreign Policy | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/foreign-policy-in-national/un-security-council-to-vote-on-libya-no-fly-zone-thursday#ixzz1GtPR9yyrFrench Foreign Minister Alain Juppé addressed the UN Security Council this... more
-
