[ENGLISH.ALARABIYA.NET] Libyan Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar ... served in the Libyan army under Muammar Qadaffy, and took part in the coup that brought Qadaffy to power in 1969. He became a prisoner of war in Chad in 1987. While held prisoner, he and his fellow officers formed a group hoping to overthrow Qadaffy. He was released around 1990 in a deal with the United States government and spent nearly two decades in the United States, gaining US citizenship. In 1993, while living in the United States, he was convicted in absentia of crimes against the Jamahiriya and sentenced to death. Haftar held a senior position in the anti-Qadaffy forces in the 2011 Libyan Civil War. In 2014 he was commander of the Libyan Army when the General National Congress (GNC) refused to give up power in accordance with its term of office. Haftar launched a campaign against the GNC and its Islamic fundamentalist allies. His campaign allowed elections to take place to replace the GNC, but then developed into a civil war. Guess you can't win them all... ’s plans for Libya took an abrupt turn for the worse marking yet again another stage of the Libyan Civil War.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/14/2017 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: Arab Spring
#1
Has anyone noticed that Libya's natural wealth is declining in importance rapidly?
There is an oil glut, prices are low if not falling and technology is improving to push oil even harder. This is no longer the time of oil equals instant wealth for the oligarchs.
Say the name George Soros and liberals see dollar signs ‐ literally. The world’s 22nd richest man, according to Forbes, is now worth $20 billion. But Soros isn’t just noteworthy for the money he has ‐ he’s notable for the money he has given away. Since launching his Open Society Foundations in 1984, Soros has donated more than $8 billion to charities around the world.
But instead of gaining a mighty reputation for his philanthropy, or his investment prowess, Soros is reviled abroad and criticized here in his adopted country. Most everywhere Soros, his foundations or his investing have gone, trouble has followed. He’s helped foment revolutions, undermined national currencies and funded radicals around the world. Soros has been convicted of insider dealing in France and fined $3 million, fined another $2 million in his native Hungary. His "foundations have been accused of shielding spies and breaking currency laws" and his investing strategy has been targeted for harming several national currencies.
Even his support for higher education raises huge red flags. Soros has contributed more than $400 million to colleges and universities, including money to most prominent institutions in the United States. He also helped establish Central European University which, in turn, uses its resources to promote his personal goal of an "open society."
Here in the United States, Soros money provides the foundation for liberal organizations promoting everything from gay marriage and drug legalization to anti-death penalty strategies. While his charitable giving goes to liberal organizations with close ties to the Democratic Party, his political giving goes almost entirely to Democrats.
That’s not the story the broadcast networks have been telling about Soros for the past five years. There were 29 mentions of Soros during that time but only one gave any hint at trouble, and that was merely to mention he was "still known as the man who broke the Bank of England." But ABC followed it up with: "That was all legal." Only a sex scandal with a 28-year-old Brazilian actress gave Soros any negative publicity at all. Continues, including donations analyses.
Posted by: Vast Right Wing Conspiracy ||
03/14/2017 09:32 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
How different would the world be if this fellow had not been born.
#6
I wonder how much of his 'fortune' stem from his, and his 'adopted' father's job of confiscating jewish property for Nazi Germany back when he was 10.
He has absolutely no remose or morals - that is what was really creepy about that interview he gave. No empathy whatsoever.
DR NIAZ MURTAZA [DAWN] MANY people say Pakistain’s problems today stem from the wilful failure of rulers to establish an Islamic system. These are not supporters of the murderous MoslemIslamic State ...formerly ISIS or ISIL, depending on your preference. Before that al-Qaeda in Iraq, as shaped by Abu Musab Zarqawi. They're very devout, committing every atrocity they can find in the Koran and inventing a few more. They fling Allah around with every other sentence, but to hear the pols talk they're not really Moslems.... group but well-meaning individuals who abhor IS excesses. For them, this system is like turning on a water tap waiting to deliver unlimited sustenance.
But when asked for specifics, they can only express vague generalities and wishful desires for an egalitarian system. However, it was a brave man who first ate an oyster... egalitarianism is a final outcome that cannot be reached directly but through effective policies which they struggle to identify. Their basic belief, sold widely by holy mans, is that the human mind is weak and leads us astray, so we must follow religious injunctions even for small things by gleaning Islamic history for edicts which only holy mans can decipher.
There are many issues with this view. Firstly, what constitutes God’s word? Besides the Koran and hadith, even broad and often questionable interpretations by latter-day and present-day holy mans and often even their unsupported opinions are termed God’s word.
The high disregard for human intellect also seems contrary to the message of the Koran which extols it. Human beings are called the best species only since they have high intellect. The Koran says things have been made easy to fathom and those who use their minds can fathom divine signs easily. It is unlikely that a faith which values human intellect so much would expect humans to constantly copy ancient eras with very different contexts for minor things.
There are many societies globally without any history of revealed religions or adherence to detailed religious dogma which have still built materially and morally advanced states, eg, Japan, which far excels all Moslem states on both counts today. The human mind has made amazing discoveries with no holy manal input. Disparaging it makes little sense.
Thus, this view seems designed to empower holy mans by making them the custodian of divine knowledge while disempowering the masses as incapable of discovering the right way without holy mans’ help. But this is contrary to Koranic edicts that everyone can understand Islam directly without holy mans’ help. In reality, especially when it comes to statecraft, Islam expects people to use their intellect to identify policies relevant to their times. So, even the most important issue in governance, ie, how rulers should attain power, is left to people to decide as both the Koran and hadith appear silent on such matters. Thus, it stretches credulity to claim that Islam expects the divine word to be followed strictly for lesser decisions when even the most key decision has been delegated to people.
Similarly, while the debate on edicts vis-à-vis present-day governance, eg monetary, fiscal, industrial policies, continues, they are questions about their applicability to the challenges of the current times. Islam seemingly expects policies in all such areas to be developed by people. But many things that holy mans present as divine injunction and mandatory policies to be adopted by states are either irrelevant or even harmful to the establishment of an egalitarian society today.
So, while we may think that establishing an Islamic system is like turning on a water tap, the obstacles in doing so are far more structural than unwilling rulers.
The Medina system was heavily reliant on the presence of people of very high morals, the likes of whom are absent today. Even if such people could be assembled, the next challenge would be for them to find an easy and peaceful way of attaining power. But if honest people could attain power, they could perform wonders even within a secular social democratic system.
So the next challenge would be to demonstrate that they have a vision and concrete policies based on Islam which can outperform secular systems, ie, deliver the strengths of Western democracies while avoiding their weaknesses. Even so, the next challenge would be to overcome the vehement opposition of holy mans since this new vision will likely be very different from the holy mans’ brand of Islam and will marginalise them. Finally, they will have to win the trust of people who, weary of decades of misuse of religion’s name in politics, largely shun religious politics in Pakistain.
Despite being a firm believer in secular democracy, I still believe if someone builds on Islam’s progressive elements, like egalitarianism, rights for women and minorities, etc., they should be able to develop such a vision. I am a firm believer in secular democracy not because I don’t believe in Islam’s progressive elements, but because I see the faith hijacked by retrogressive forces and little inclination within the majority to challenge their hold and develop a progressive Islamic vision. In such a situation, secular democracy seems the best available option.
The writer heads INSPIRING Pakistain, a progressive policy unit, and is a senior fellow with UC Berkeley.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/14/2017 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Dr Niaz Murtaza being that his name starts with Dr is clearly the best that "secular" has to offer and after many words his conclusion sounds like an opinion. So my opinion, Islam is an entitlement demanding ideology with enforcement by violent means. Violence leads to desolation and death, not success and life. Entitlement leads to bankruptcy, not productivity.
His apples and oranges are Atheism vs Islam. And so where has atheism ever succeeded? The Soviet Union that crushed any religion that would be a threat to "secular" power figures? Venezuela? Cuba? North Korea? Detroit?
Being in a Muslim environment the Dr cannot and will not even mention Christianity or he may loose his life to Islamists, the very religion he is trying so hard to find an answer to Islam bringing success to society comparable to the Western success.
So he finds that the very core of success under Islamic is hard to pin down, indeed impossible.
That is what makes Christianity so simple and successful, the core of which is this, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God... The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us." (John Chapter 1, A Disciple of Jesus of Nazareth, foretold of by Isaiah 700 years prior to his time) With the core of his message being Love and Peace which leads to Life and Prosperity.
#4
"...The Medina system was heavily reliant on the presence of people of very high morals, the likes of whom are absent today."
Mohammud's rule from Medina was characterized by killing lots of people, robbing caravans and forcing his religion on anyone left alive. Yup. High morals.
Posted by: lord garth ||
03/14/2017 8:16 Comments ||
Top||
#5
In Scarne's New Complete Guide to Gambling the author tells of his reply when asked to describe a winning system for a game where a ball rattles around on a wheel and settles in a slot (you know the game I'm talking about, but using the name will bin this comment).
Scarne's advice _ "Go play some other game..." I'd say that applies in the case of pisslam also.
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
03/14/2017 8:36 Comments ||
Top||
#6
MANY people say Pakistain’s problems today stem from the wilful failure of rulers to establish an Islamic system.
Replace Pakistain with Western culture, God with Social Justice, and Islam with Socialism and the article still works.
h/t Instapundit
Every president has both a personality and an agenda. Sometimes they work in tandem, sometimes they don’t.
Bill Clinton’s charm enhanced his platform--until his sexual appetites nearly wrecked it. Barack Obama was both charismatic and snarky, sometimes turning off and sometimes wooing his opponents. Richard Nixon’s neuroses finally empowered his enemies and ruined his foreign policy initiatives. Ronald Reagan’s upbeat persona helped convince the public to "stay the course" with his bitter anti-inflationary medicine.
The outsider Donald Trump faces the same dilemma but in a fashion rarely seen before. For now there are two manifestations of Trump. First is Trump’s message: that of the populist counterrevolutionary determined to recalibrate the last half-century of liberal and therapeutic government and its affiliated culture. Second is Trump the messenger: the ex-reality TV star who tweets nonstop in the early morning hours often to the outrage of his enemies, to the delight of his supporters, and to the embarrassment of the undecided.
The media focuses on Trump the messenger, either because they are not interested in his message or because they see the personal destruction of Trump as essential to the implosion of his agenda.
...Even as Trump tweets, quietly he is also attempting--both through executive orders and anticipated congressional action--landmark deregulation, tax reform, and health care reformulations. If successful, he will remake the economy, tilt the Supreme Court rightward, and prune the deep state. He has green lighted energy production, including coal, natural gas and oil, whose consequence could prove an increasing bonanza for the United States and its allies.
...The point is not that after two months Trump has achieved radical reform or has won over skeptics, only that he embraced a conservative correction of progressivism beyond what most past Republican presidents have envisioned or what congressional conservatives believed was possible after 2008. Because he has rhetorical gifts and personal charm, Trump could prove to be a dynamic president if his own excesses do not eventually empower his enemies.
...For all of Trump’s blasts, so far he has survived the press assaults and faux-scandals. We have reached a point of progressive exasperation in which New York Times columnists compare him to 9/11 and Pearl Harbor or have asked the IRS (apparently on the theory that the agency was long ago prone to political corruption in the Obama era of Lois Lerner) to commit a felony by leaking Donald Trump’s tax returns.
...In trying to destroy Trump rhetorically, the media has instead committed veritable suicide, and it will never restore the patina that it is fair, disinterested and competent. The tumor of Obama-era obsequiousness has terminally metastasized into Trump Derangement Syndrome.
...For now, only one thing remains certain: the candidate whom the Republican establishment most disliked has the greatest potential in a generation to stop the progressive project and enact the agendas that the Republican establishment most wants. And that paradox has become a source of both great wonderment--and fear.
[SultanKnish] After Trump secured the nomination, Obama’s people filed a wiretapping request. As he was on the verge of winning, they did it again. After he won, they are doing everything they can to bring him down.
#6
"Angry mob of Middlebury,
I support you in your fury.
We had such a brave discussion!
Thank you for this nice concussion.
Next time, lynching Dr. Murray,
Please don't be in such a hurry:
Give me time to run away
And praise the anger you display."
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[DAWN] MANY people say Pakistain’s problems today stem from the wilful failure of rulers to establish an Islamic system. These are not supporters of the
