Cynthia McKinney opposes Libya's fight for freedom from dictatorship

@My_nameaintearl
@My_nameaintearl Banned Users Posts: 2,609 ✭✭
edited May 2011 in The Social Lounge
http://articles.cnn.com/2011-05-21/world/libya.mckinney_1_moammar-gadhafi-economic-policies-mckinney?_s=PM:WORLD

A former U.S. congresswoman slammed U.S. policy on Libyan state TV late Saturday and stressed the "last thing we need to do is spend money on death, destruction and war."

The station is fiercely loyal to Moammar Gadhafi and her interview was spliced with what appeared to be rallies in support of the embattled Libyan leader.

"I think that it's very important that people understand what is happening here. And it's important that people all over the world see the truth. And that is why I am here ... to understand the truth," former Rep. Cynthia McKinney said during a live interview.

She said she was invited to Libya by the "nongovernmental organization for fact-finding," adding that she intends to bring more people to the country soon so that "they too can understand."

NATO warplanes have been pounding military targets since March after the U.N. Security Council approved a resolution to protect civilians by any means necessary as Gadhafi's forces try to quash a nearly three-month revolt against the leader's roughly 42 years of rule.

Gadhafi's government has repeatedly urged the international community to send fact-finding teams to Libya to report what's happening on the ground.

At one point during the interview, state TV cut to what it said were live airstrikes, hitting Gadhafi's compound.

"Is that a bomb?" McKinney asked.

"I want to say categorically and very clearly that these policies of war ... are not what the people of the United States stand for and it's not what African-Americans stand for," she told state TV.

The former Georgia representative also slammed the economic policies of U.S. President Barack Obama and said the government of the United States no longer represents the interests of the American people.

"Under the economic policies of the Obama administration, those who have the least are losing the most. And those who have the most are getting even more," she said. "The situation in the United States is becoming more dire for average ordinary Americans and the last thing we need to do is to spend money on death, destruction and war."

Separately, McKinney appeared on state-run Press TV this week in Iran. She was reported to be in Tehran attending the International Conference on Global Alliance Against Terrorism for a Just Peace.
«1

Comments

  • bunz
    bunz Members Posts: 1,000
    edited May 2011
    its funny she has this take.... i guess under bush we never wasted money on war.... i guess most of the money being spent on war isnt cleaning up bush's mess..... dumb ?
  • Mr.Burns
    Mr.Burns Members Posts: 517
    edited May 2011
    bunz wrote: »
    its funny she has this take.... i guess under bush we never wasted money on war.... i guess most of the money being spent on war isnt cleaning up bush's mess..... dumb ?

    You're more of the dumb ? in this. Cynthia McKinney has always fought the good fight against injustice around the world. Remember when she was willing to be arrested after fighting a belligerent cop on the steps of congress? Yeah that Cynthia McKinney. She's got more ? than all them other uncle Tom ass black "leaders" like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.

    Now on Libya, doesn't it strike you strange as to why NATO, which is headed by the U.S., has such an interest in "helping freedom". Where were they in Egypt? Where are they now that the government of Bahrain is engaging in mass assassinations and torture of its own citizens? What about Syria which is massacring whole crowds at funerals for dead protesters?

    I'll tell you why. Libya exports much of its oil to Europe and they're now eager to put in power a leader who is willing to be their man ala Saddam Hussein. The Europeans are cashing in on their support for Americas illegal war in Iraq. They are also looking to avoid an influx of North African refugees onto European shores. Gaddafi was almost successful in quelling the unrest in Libya until NATO decided to intervene. Your a fool to think that the U.S. or Europe are for "freedom".
  • Mr.Burns
    Mr.Burns Members Posts: 517
    edited May 2011
    bunz wrote: »
    i guess under bush we never wasted money on war.... i guess most of the money being spent on war isnt cleaning up bush's mess..... dumb ?

    This is why Cynthia McKinney is one of the realest.
  • bunz
    bunz Members Posts: 1,000
    edited May 2011
    Mr.Burns wrote: »
    You're more of the dumb ? in this. Cynthia McKinney has always fought the good fight against injustice around the world. Remember when she was willing to be arrested after fighting a belligerent cop on the steps of congress? Yeah that Cynthia McKinney. She's got more ? than all them other uncle Tom ass black "leaders" like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.

    Now on Libya, doesn't it strike you strange as to why NATO, which is headed by the U.S., has such an interest in "helping freedom". Where were they in Egypt? Where are they now that the government of Bahrain is engaging in mass assassinations and torture of its own citizens? What about Syria which is massacring whole crowds at funerals for dead protesters?

    I'll tell you why. Libya exports much of its oil to Europe and they're now eager to put in power a leader who is willing to be their man ala Saddam Hussein. The Europeans are cashing in on their support for Americas illegal war in Iraq. They are also looking to avoid an influx of North African refugees onto European shores. Gaddafi was almost successful in quelling the unrest in Libya until NATO decided to intervene. Your a fool to think that the U.S. or Europe are for "freedom".

    hey i read your first 2 sentences, than i stopped... i know who she is, but to blame what i SPECIFICALLY said on obama, makes her stupid, in that case... so ? outta here mr. burns, her head is in the right place, but she is quite outspoken
  • @My_nameaintearl
    @My_nameaintearl Banned Users Posts: 2,609 ✭✭
    edited May 2011
    Mr.Burns wrote: »
    Libya exports much of its oil to Europe and they're now eager to put in power a leader who is willing to be their man ala Saddam Hussein
    If Gaddafi's gubment exports lots of oil to Europe, then isn't he already "their man?"
  • Mr.Burns
    Mr.Burns Members Posts: 517
    edited May 2011
    bunz wrote: »
    hey i read your first 2 sentences, than i stopped... i know who she is, but to blame what i SPECIFICALLY said on obama, makes her stupid, in that case... so ? outta here mr. burns, her head is in the right place, but she is quite outspoken

    Exactly you didn't READ. If you did READ you'd know she wasn't blaming anyone for what's happening in Libya especially not Obama. And if you READ my post you'll see why U.S. support of Libyan rebels is suspect.

    READ READ READ
  • Mr.Burns
    Mr.Burns Members Posts: 517
    edited May 2011
    If Gaddafi's gubment exports lots of oil to Europe, then isn't he already "their man?"

    Gaddafi has never been a stable leader. He's a schizophrenic who thinks he's an Africa's pharoah. The unrest in Libya has negatively affected oil exports to France, which is Libya's former colonial master, the U.K., Spain and other less notable European nations. A stable nation makes stable oil exports, which Libya has never been.
  • @My_nameaintearl
    @My_nameaintearl Banned Users Posts: 2,609 ✭✭
    edited May 2011
    If NATO wants to replace a dictator with anybody who will be more stable, isn't that a major improvement? Do you think they're simply going to install another strongman when this movement of democracy is sweeping over the Middle East, beyond anyone's control?
  • Mr.Burns
    Mr.Burns Members Posts: 517
    edited May 2011
    If NATO wants to replace a dictator with anybody who will be more stable, isn't that a major improvement? Do you think they're simply going to install another strongman when this movement of democracy is sweeping over the Middle East, beyond anyone's control?

    Stable doesn't mean democratic or peaceful. Have you ever known the western powers to install anything other than violent dictators? And who gives any outsider the right to choose who leads your country? Since when does U.S. and Europe reserve the right to make choices for Libyan citizens?

    The U.S. and Europe are hypocrites. They like to talk about freedom but their actions support oppression.
  • @My_nameaintearl
    @My_nameaintearl Banned Users Posts: 2,609 ✭✭
    edited May 2011
    Where is your evidence that NATO is moving to install a replacement dictator? Libya is a HUMANITARIAN CRISIS right now. One of NATO's functions is to get involved in those, although they don't always do it.

    Gaddafi needs to go and any effort to remove him is morally sound.
  • Mr.Burns
    Mr.Burns Members Posts: 517
    edited May 2011
    Where is your evidence that NATO is moving to install a replacement dictator? Libya is a HUMANITARIAN CRISIS right now. One of NATO's functions is to get involved in those, although they don't always do it.

    Gaddafi needs to go and any effort to remove him is morally sound.

    The only thing I agree with you on is that Gaddafi needs to go but what I don't agree with is the method. The international community should be giving food aid and shelter but instead the West offers guns and missiles. If the West wants to help the people of Libya why then did the Italians, Spanish and French allow a refugee ship from Libya to float out in the ocean until passengers on the boat died of starvation? Why do the Italians and French have a boarder dispute over Italy giving Italian passports to North African refugees and then shipping them through France (in the hope that they'd end up being France's problem and not theirs) ?

    If you know Libya you know it's a tribal nation much more so than Iraq. In order for the West to have preferable conditions they need a strong man. Mark my words they'll install a strong man.
  • @My_nameaintearl
    @My_nameaintearl Banned Users Posts: 2,609 ✭✭
    edited May 2011
    Give the Libyans some credit. They started a popular uprising and they're demanding the re-structuring of the country into a democratic republic.
  • Mr.Burns
    Mr.Burns Members Posts: 517
    edited May 2011
    Give the Libyans some credit. They started a popular uprising and they're demanding the re-structuring of the country into a democratic republic.

    That won't happen through violence. In the end when Gaddafi is deposed the rebels are going to raise up arms against each other and the one with the biggest guns, which will be generously donated by Western powers, will be the victor. Even the Egyptian revolution which was largely peaceful is looking like it may descend into the same sort of military rule as before due to outside meddling.

    Check Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan

    Check Nouri Al Maliki of Iraq

    Check Saddam Hussein of Iraq

    Check Hosni Mubarak of Egypt

    Check the Saudi Royal Family

    Check damn near all of Latin America, the Philippines, Iran under the Shah...dude I can go forever with the list of Western backed dictators. Don't let all this "freedom" talk fool you. This is the same sort of rhetoric that defined the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
  • @My_nameaintearl
    @My_nameaintearl Banned Users Posts: 2,609 ✭✭
    edited May 2011
    Like I said, give them some credit. You're automatically ruling out the possibility that they can win this thing.
  • Mr.Burns
    Mr.Burns Members Posts: 517
    edited May 2011
    Like I said, give them some credit. You're automatically ruling out the possibility that they can win this thing.

    I mean it's not just an opinion. This is based on a wide range of previous history. On the African continent there has only been one nation successful in a popular uprisings and each time it has been a pacifist movement.
  • janklow
    janklow Members, Moderators Posts: 8,613 Regulator
    edited May 2011
    Mr.Burns wrote: »
    Cynthia McKinney has always fought the good fight against injustice-
    acting so ridiculous that no one can take you seriously is not "fighting the good fight"
  • @My_nameaintearl
    @My_nameaintearl Banned Users Posts: 2,609 ✭✭
    edited May 2011
    janklow wrote: »
    acting so ridiculous that no one can take you seriously is not "fighting the good fight"

    You gonna FoF my 5%er thread or what?
  • janklow
    janklow Members, Moderators Posts: 8,613 Regulator
    edited May 2011
    You gonna FoF my 5%er thread or what?
    what kind of precedent would that set
  • @My_nameaintearl
    @My_nameaintearl Banned Users Posts: 2,609 ✭✭
    edited May 2011
    janklow wrote: »
    what kind of precedent would that set

    so plus platinum threads about exposing racist cults aint whats hot in these e-streets?

    how many FoF threads does the SL have anyway? None? we gotta rep for our set out chea.
  • Alkindus
    Alkindus Members Posts: 1,677 ✭✭✭
    edited May 2011
    Lol its war in Libya, its been weeks if not months now.......nato doesnt give a damn about peace/killing civilians(they serve the bidding of those that seek the dominion over oil and the regimes resources in banks etc etc) and Qadhafi's camp lived by the sword so they will probably die by it as well.
  • Lorenzo de Medici
    Lorenzo de Medici Members Posts: 5,739 ✭✭✭
    edited May 2011
    Seriously? This is why this bird lost. She just doesn't get it. "Under the economic policies of the Obama administration, those who have the least are losing the most." Word? That's b/c of Obama's economic policies? I'm going to venture a guess and say that the bottom 99% of this country is better off now than it was 3 years ago. I can vibe with her on death destruction and war, but America like any other Empire needs to protect its position in the world as well as better its position. Historically, empires get involved in ? like this. Why? b/c we live in a global society lady, and war in libya affects gas prices in Maine.

    I honestly don't like her rhetoric. Like going on Libyan national TV? c'mon man. She's the type of person that does ? like that then asks "why do they treat me like a lepor in congress?"
  • shootemwon
    shootemwon Members Posts: 4,635 ✭✭
    edited May 2011
    Seriously? This is why this bird lost. She just doesn't get it. "Under the economic policies of the Obama administration, those who have the least are losing the most." Word? That's b/c of Obama's economic policies? I'm going to venture a guess and say that the bottom 99% of this country is better off now than it was 3 years ago.

    WRONG.


    And yes, Obama's policies heavily favor the rich and screw over the poor. I thought this was common knowledge.
  • Lorenzo de Medici
    Lorenzo de Medici Members Posts: 5,739 ✭✭✭
    edited May 2011
    shootemwon wrote: »
    WRONG.


    And yes, Obama's policies heavily favor the rich and screw over the poor. I thought this was common knowledge.

    I'm about to go to the gym, but I'll be back.

    But yes, I believe Obama's policies have helped the 99% of Americans who aren't in the top 1% Maybe they've helped the top 1% more(arguable) but that doesn't mean it hasn't helped the other 99%
  • shootemwon
    shootemwon Members Posts: 4,635 ✭✭
    edited May 2011
    I'm about to go to the gym, but I'll be back.

    But yes, I believe Obama's policies have helped the 99% of Americans who aren't in the top 1% Maybe they've helped the top 1% more(arguable) but that doesn't mean it hasn't helped the other 99%

    Actually, his policies have continued the massive transfer of American wealth from the middle class and working class to the rich. It's not helpful to anyone but the extremely wealthy.

    Now, as to your other claim, unemployment was at 5.4% in May of 2008. Maybe you wanna reconsider what you said about people being better off today than 3 years ago.
  • tru_m.a.c
    tru_m.a.c Members Posts: 9,091 ✭✭✭✭
    edited May 2011
    shootemwon wrote: »
    Actually, his policies have continued the massive transfer of American wealth from the middle class and working class to the rich. It's not helpful to anyone but the extremely wealthy.

    Now, as to your other claim, unemployment was at 5.4% in May of 2008. Maybe you wanna reconsider what you said about people being better off today than 3 years ago.

    I hate when ? bring up economic conditions before/during the first stages of the recession....u know better than that shootemwon