web analytics

Spiegal Spills The Beans

Blogging pal, Al Devito, at “Vineyard Views” is right to consider a subscription to the German magazine, Der Spiegal, a worthwhile investment. It’s standard of journalism is usually excellent, and hits hard at the heart of matters the US media are often loathe to touch.

Two recent articles are particularly worthy of note. The first, a rather lengthy essay, entitled, “America Loses Its Dominant Economic Role” is linked to by the Vineyard and contains some, almost amusing, world leaders’ views of the final decline of George W Bush while at his last UN General Assembly meeting.

Here’s a snippet to whet the appetite:

There are days when all it takes is a single speech to illustrate the decline of a world power. A face can speak volumes, as can the speaker’s tone of voice, the speech itself or the audience’s reaction. Kings and queens have clung to the past before and humiliated themselves in public, but this time it was merely a United States president.

Or what is left of him.

George W. Bush has grown old, erratic and rosy in the eight years of his presidency. Little remains of his combativeness or his enthusiasm for physical fitness. On this sunny Tuesday morning in New York, even his hair seemed messy and unkempt, his blue suit a little baggy around the shoulders, as Bush stepped onto the stage, for the eighth time, at the United Nations General Assembly.

He talked about terrorism and terrorist regimes, and about governments that allegedly support terror. He failed to notice that the delegates sitting in front of and below him were shaking their heads, smiling and whispering, or if he did notice, he was no longer capable of reacting. The US president gave a speech similar to the ones he gave in 2004 and 2007, mentioning the word “terror” 32 times in 22 minutes. At the 63rd General Assembly of the United Nations, George W. Bush was the only one still talking about terror and not about the topic that currently has the rest of the world’s attention. [The global economic crisis ~ RJA]

“Absurd, absurd, absurd,” said one German diplomat. A French woman called him “yesterday’s man” over coffee on the East River. There is another way to put it, too: Bush was a laughing stock in the gray corridors of the UN.

The American president has always had enemies in these hallways and offices at the UN building on First Avenue in Manhattan. The Iranians and Syrians despise the eternal American-Israeli coalition, while many others are tired of Bush’s Americans telling the world about the blessings of deregulated markets and establishing rules “that only apply to others,” says the diplomat from Berlin.

But the ridicule was a new thing. It marked the end of respect…….[1]

Der Spiegal runs another article in the same issue. It concerns the now almost forgotten conflict in Georgia/South Ossetia, when Russian forces moved into that nation to protect its citizens from the military of Georgia’s American-trained lawyer president, Mikhail Saakashvili.

A Sparrow Chat article on the Georgian crisis, entitled, “The Great Chess Game”, (August 11th, 2008) concluded that Georgia had attacked South Ossetia, intending to take back the province by force, only to be overwhelmed by the Russian army dashing to aid the majority of its citizens who make up the South Ossetian populace.

The action was considered calculated on Vladimir Putin’s part; a master chess move designed to draw a line in the sand over which NATO should never cross.

The article ended:

Saakashvili is almost certainly finished politically. South Ossetia will remain independent. Eventually, the conflict will calm down like an expired squib. Russia will retain its influence, the West retire to lick its wounded pride, and the great Soviet chess master will no doubt quietly gloat over his latest triumph.[2]

In the interim, the Western powers have moved heaven and earth to condemn the Russians for their actions, accusing them of deliberate aggression against their smaller neighbor. They’ve propped up Saakashvili, sent US gunboats to the area and flown in unnecessary aid, as props for a photo-opportunity, rather than to save the already well-fed Georgians.

It seems, though, the tide is now beginning to turn, and Georgian president Saakashvili may well be carried away on the ebb.

Der Spiegal:

“Today, we are all Georgians,” Republican presidential candidate John McCain declared. The neoconservative commentator Robert Kagan compared the Russian action with the Nazis’ 1938 invasion of the Sudetenland region of Czechoslovakia. And in a meeting with US Vice President Richard Cheney, Saakashvili was assured of Washington’s support for his most fervent wish: admission to NATO.

But now, five weeks after the end of the war in the Caucasus, the winds have shifted in America. Even Washington is beginning to suspect that Saakashvili, a friend and ally, could in fact be a gambler — someone who triggered the bloody five-day war and then told the West bold-faced lies. “The concerns about Russia have remained,” says Paul Sanders, an expert on Russia and the director of the conservative Nixon Center in Washington. His words reflect the continuing Western assessment that Russia’s military act of revenge against the tiny Caucasus nation Georgia was disproportionate, that Moscow violated international law by recognizing the separatist republics of South Ossetia and Abkhazia and, finally, that it used Georgia as a vehicle to showcase its imperial renaissance.

But then Saunders qualifies his statement: “More and more people are realizing that there are two sides in this conflict, and that Georgia was not as much a victim as a willing participant.”

It would appear that evidence has now established Saakashvili was lying when he accused Russia of an unprovoked attack. NATO investigations are beginning to uncover the truth.

Der Spiegal:

According to this [NATO] intelligence information, the Georgians amassed roughly 12,000 troops on the border with South Ossetia on the morning of Aug. 7. Seventy-five tanks and armored personnel carriers — a third of the Georgian military’s arsenal — were assembled near Gori. Saakashvili’s plan, apparently, was to advance to the Roki Tunnel in a 15-hour blitzkrieg and close the eye of the needle between the northern and southern Caucasus regions, effectively cutting off South Ossetia from Russia.

At 10:35 p.m. on Aug. 7, less than an hour before Russian tanks entered the Roki Tunnel, according to Saakashvili, Georgian forces began their artillery assault on Tskhinvali. The Georgians used 27 rocket launchers, including 152-millimeter guns, as well as cluster bombs. Three brigades began the nighttime assault……..

The [NATO] intelligence agencies conclude that the Russian army did not begin firing until 7:30 a.m. on Aug. 8, when it launched an SS-21 short-range ballistic missile on the city of Borzhomi, southwest of Gori. The missile apparently hit military and government bunker positions. Russian warplanes began their first attacks on the Georgian army a short time later. Suddenly the airwaves came to life, as did the Russian army.

Russian troops from North Ossetia did not begin marching through the Roki Tunnel until roughly 11 a.m. This sequence of events is now seen as evidence that Moscow did not act offensively, but merely reacted. Additional SS-21s were later moved to the south. The Russians deployed 5,500 troops to Gori and 7,000 to the border between Georgia and its second separatist region, Abkhazia. [my bold ~ RJA]

From this information, acquired by NATO intelligence, it is obvious that the Georgian forces attacked the South Ossetian town of Tskhinvali nine hours before the Russian army fired one shot in retaliation. Any suggestion the Georgians were simply defending their territory is ludicrous. Saakashvili’s lies have come back to haunt him.

European leaders are now calling for an international investigation into the causes of this war. Saakashvili is worried.

Is he, as Sparrow Chat suggested, finished politically?

Der Spiegal:

Last week, the heads of Georgia’s two major political parties called for Saakashvili’s resignation and the establishment of a “government that is neither pro-Russian nor pro-American, but pro-Georgian.” In Moscow, former Georgian Deputy Interior Minister Temur Khachishzili, who spent years in prison for attempting to assassinate Saakashvili’s predecessor, Eduard Shevardnadze, is drumming up support for a change of government back home among the more than one million Georgians living in Russia.[3]

A question remains: if Sparrow Chat was able to deduce the true events of this war four days after its inception, why were Western political powers unable to do so, and so insistent on blaming Russia, in a political spat that brought the world to the brink of a new Cold War?

The answer, of course, is that they were well able to deduce the truth.

Which begs another question: why did they, like Saakashvili, choose to lie about it?

[1] “THE END OF ARROGANCE” Der Spiegal, September 30th 2008

[2] “The Great Chess Game” Sparrow Chat, August 11th 2008

[3] “Did Saakashvili Lie?” Der Spiegal, September 15th 2008

Filed under:

An Unreserved Apology To ‘WILL-TV’

It’s not often Sparrow Chat gets it wrong. Research is the key to factuality and before writing any article it behooves the writer to ascertain facts, as opposed to rumor. Nevertheless, to err is human and no-one is above making the occasional mistake.

In the case of a recent article entitled, “Why I Won’t Support Our Local PBS” just such an error occurred, and for that I unreservedly apologize to PBS and our local provider of that service, WILL-TV.

Sparrow Chat accused WILL-TV of removing the 5.00am broadcast of BBC World News from its listings and substituting with a kid’s cartoon.

In an email, set out below, the program director, David Thiel, tells how the fault lay not with WILL-TV, but with the BBC itself, for reducing the number of satellite feeds available for PBS, thus making it impossible for them to transmit the program in the morning:

Thanks for writing. I’m sorry to learn that you have such a low opinion of our operation, even though it seems that you place a good deal of value on our programming.

I want to correct a couple of misconceptions in your essay, the first being the presumption that WILL-TV is connected with Millikin University. That’s incorrect, we are part of the College of Media at the University of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign. It’s a minor point, but worth clearing up.

Second, the reason that we are no longer able to offer BBC World News at 5:00 am is thanks to the BBC itself. Their new agreement with public television stations, effective October 1, reduces the number of satellite feeds available for our use. Unfortunately, one of those was the 5:00 am feed, and there is no other suitable early morning alternative. This change in our schedule was noted in our member program guide as well as our online listings. We will continue to offer the 5:00 pm weekday feed, as we have for many years.

It’s your choice, of course, as to whether you help us bring to you BBC World News and all of the other national and international public affairs series offered by WILL-TV. We will do our best with the resources and programs that are available to us. Again, thank you for your interest in WILL-TV.

David Thiel

Program Director

WILL-TV

I have no hesitation in apologizing for the hasty assumption that caused me to write the article, but I would still point out that nothing was available on-screen, either before, after, or during the time-slot, to inform the casual viewer of the change. Surely, a marquee-type banner giving the relevant information could have been displayed for a few mornings, so we early risers could understand what was going on?

The lesson to be learned from Mister Thiel’s email, is that it’s always a mistake to attack one’s friends. After all, there are enough enemies out there, and in the media world PBS is a true friend of the American people. Unlike the cable news outlets it manages to maintain a high degree of credibility and fairness in its programming, despite serious political and corporate pressure to the contrary.

And now, a strongly worded letter to the BBC.

Filed under:

Where Skunk Meets Slime

There a vile, pungent odor drifting across the globe. It begins somewhere up in the far reaches of Alaska. It’s nauseating stench permeates around the Golan Heights, across the West Bank, and finds its way into every Palestinian home that borders onto territory Israel claims to be its own.

Israel has a new secret weapon. They call it “Skunk”. Tired of shooting Palestinians who dare to oppose the mighty Israeli army and its ubiquitous invasion of their lands, Israeli scientists have now come up with the most vile, disgusting liquid imaginable. Claimed to be “organic”, and therefore “harmless”, when sprayed on individuals, the pungent odor adheres to its victim for days, defies washing off, and creates misery for the victims and their families.

So powerful is this concoction, Israel is considering selling it to law enforcement agencies overseas as an effective method of crowd control.[1]

The stench of “Skunk” is spreading across the globe. How long before we see this nauseating weapon used on protesters in New York, or Washington, or London?

The equally ubiquitous Sarah Palin was once again proving how unsuited she is for the job of Vice President this week, when after her débâcle in the VP debate, she set out on a campaigning tour of Colorado and California. Her first message to the good people of those states was to accuse her Democratic opponent, Barack Obama, of domestic terrorism back in the late 1960’s.

Linking him to an organization known as the “Weathermen”, she said:

““Our opponent … is someone who sees America it seems as being so imperfect that he’s palling around with terrorists who would target their own country…..” [2]

Being the cold, calculating, slimeball that she is, Sarah Palin failed to point out that the organization to which she was referring, the “Weathermen”, only existed between 1969 and 1974. Obama was eight years old at the time of its inception, and only thirteen when it was disbanded.

The information she has obtained, results from newspaper articles claiming an association between Obama and Bill Ayers, one of the original founders of the “Weathermen”, but now a Distinguished Professor of Education at the University of Illinois in Chicago.

It’s doubtful that Sarah Palin hobnobs with any Distinguished Professors of anything. Judging by her record to date, she has little intellectual ability beyond a capacity for memorizing sound-bites and waffling around issues she knows nothing about.

The use of lies, to formulate political slime designed to score points against an adversary, is despicable. In many ways, it’s comparable to the Israeli’s new “Skunk” weapon. Both aim to saturate their opponents with an obnoxious odor designed to turn others against them, with no recourse to the basic questions of right and wrong.

There’s a vile, pungent odor drifting across the globe. It emanates from a place where the slime-balls of US Republican politics meet the “Skunk” of their Israeli counterparts.

[1] “New Israeli weapon kicks up stink” BBC, October 2nd 2008

[2] “Palin: Obama ‘palling around with terrorists'” CSM, October 5th 2008

Filed under:

Hosted By A2 Hosting

Website Developed By R J Adams