portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary global

imperialism & war


This is unbearable
These Paris attacks are turning into one of the most obnoxious experiences of my life. Suddenly people all over the world are calling for prayer for the victims of atrocities.

This makes me think of the time that cruise missiles and stealth bombers of other high tech kit was used to knock out Iraq's electricity and water system. Imagine what would happen if the people of New York found themselves living in a densely populated urban area and suddenly there was no water and no power. Well, you can imagine the death wave that would follow in the months after something like that happened. Estimates are that about three hundred thousand people died. According to current standards of international law, such as the Geneva Conventions, that sort of thing is illegal and is an international war crime. Then some leaker (there is always a leaker) leaked some top secret document that we weren't supposed to see where they discussed the fact that what they just did was illegal and an international war crime. Should they worry. No. They would do it anyways. Of course, when someone leaks a document that is a crime because all sorts of skull duggery and illegality and lawlessness must be kept secret. That's why it is a top secret. So we will find whistle blowers in jail and international war criminals going free, and perhaps even coming back to power for a second go at it.

Now just in case anyone might wonder where a fanatically enraged radicalized suicide bomber comes from, I will point out that when people in Baghdad were dying by the hundreds of thousands after a terrorist attack like that one, no one said a single prayer. No, not one. No one prayed for the victims of atrocities. Not once.

For this reason I am finding this whole business of praying for the victims of the atrocities in Paris to be an obnoxious experience. I had no idea that people were like that, so hypocritical, so jaundiced, so one sided, so blind, but then I would suppose that the good side of this Paris attack is that it is exposing so much that would otherwise have remain hidden.

so, Brent 15.Nov.2015 19:32

let's get this straight

You have chosen to post here to Indymedia, a political pontification which you entitled: 'Offensive'

In your screed ^ above, you make veiled assertion/accusation that somehow, the innocent civilians who died and were injured in a terror attack, are somehow not "deserving" of the worldwide sympathy and "prayer for the victims of atrocities".

It is quite natural for real, compassionate human beings to offer these sentiments to complete strangers even in another country.

Therefore your 'Offense' (taken as evidenced from content of your ^ writing) seems misplaced and even dysfunctional.

Furthermore you mentioned Iraq and the U.S.-led destruction visited upon citizens of that illegally invaded-and-occupied nation.

Remember and comprehend, Brent:

the U.S. assault on Iraq came a year and a half after the 9/11 attacks, after that-long of a buildup of U.S. administration and corporate mass media brainwashing propaganda which, still to this day more than a dozen years later, has instilled in the minds of millions of Americans that Saddam Hussein's regime had _something_ (?) to do with the attacks of 11 September 2001.
(Yes, millions of U.S. citizens still believe that the Iraq invasion has some connection with that country's "involvement". Despite 100% indisputable proof to the contrary. Power of corporate mass media brainwashing.)

as we all know, there was no connection whatsoever between Hussein/Iraq and (whatever) perpetrators of the 9/11 events. If it was in fact (as asserted by the U.S. government's official explanation) al-Qaeda responsible for 9/11, they were completely opposed to the secular regime of Hussein.

You also wrote [Quote]:
" just in case anyone might wonder where a fanatically enraged radicalized suicide bomber comes from "

In case you were somehow alluding that the recent Paris attack would somehow have some connection to Baghdad (your next word in that sentence), you're 100% incorrect.

According to media reports, the IS organization supposedly claiming responsibility for the Paris strikes has also said that it has been a direct response to recent French bombing of Syria. (nothing to do with Iraq.)

Furthermore, you need to educate yourself on the nature of IS / ISIS, how they were created, from where they obtain funding, munitions, organization etc.


Do not make the blanket inference, as many did on and after 11 September 2001 for example, that these attacks were (Islamic fundamentalist?) 'blowback' for prior deeds of the West in the MidEast.
(Or, that Westerners never "prayed enough" for the death/destruction which they visited upon innocents in those faraway countries)

Anyway the upshot Brent, is that before you might be inclined again to post a "feely" screed about how "Offended" you are, that people anywhere in the world might very much want to share the compassionate human instinct with victims of what very well might be a State-[not "Islamic"]sponsored terror holocaust,
you'd best from now on instead hang out with these folks [PDX IMC, by the way/fwiw Deep-Sixed this repost from the Newswire]:  link to www.weaselzippers.us

3 Points 17.Nov.2015 17:41

Reading Score

1. I liked Brent's analysis on why people will pray and mourn for "some" but not for others.

2. I liked that Brent didn't try to sneak a unrelated link that was supposedly "Deep-Sixed" already, into his post at the very end.

3. I think that "let's get this straight" missed the whole point of Brent's post.

" Reading Score " 18.Nov.2015 01:00


1. Brent's "analysis" mentions nothing whatsoever about Beirut, which was also struck by a deadly terror attack the day before Paris this week.
( doesn't Brent care about nonwhites who are massacred by terror? .................. )

2. "Unrelated link" - the post about ISIS did not appear on IMC until 48 hours later. The first attempt to post that [Washington's Blog] article to the Newswire was indeed deep-sixed hence the reference to such at the time of 15.Nov.2015 19:32.
An understanding and comprehension of the origins, function and sources of support of ISIS is indeed germane to the topic of Brent's screed about the echelons of humans more/less "deserving" of prayer after being victims of terror (as outlined in the above comment).
It seems that " Reading Score " missed ^that point entirely.

3. "The whole point of Brent's post" was to bitch and whine momentarily and with amateurish purported "analysis" about the "whole business of praying for the victims of the atrocities in Paris as obnoxious".

praying for innocent victims of a terror attack anywhere is somehow "obnoxious" ?
(Perhaps had the following been the focus/topic of Brent's post the U.S. corporate mass media attention, and also that of certain members of U.S. political opportunists wing(s) focused intently on "praying for Paris" was "obnoxious". But no, not the very notion of human being(s) wanting to pray for their fellow innocents. And reminder again: Brent's article makes no mention of Beirut this week.)

I find the remarks of '3 Points / Reading Score' and Brent to be not only obnoxious, but sophomoric and immature (as proven by the utter lack of context or analysis).

Dodge, Whoops and Spin 18.Nov.2015 20:56

Reading Score

You missed the point on this one again, and changed the subject" Brent's "analysis" mentions nothing whatsoever about Beirut", So yes, it "mentions nothing about Beirut" but you elaborately side step about what Brent originally wrote and don't even acknowledge "his point(s)" You are bringing up 911, Beirut and ISIS, etc as you dodge his post and the topics in their context.

Would it be " obnoxious, but sophomoric and immature" of me to refer you to this part of your rant
--> [PDX IMC, by the way/fwiw Deep-Sixed this repost from the Newswire]: link to www.weaselzippers.us <-- That is the link you snuck in. (not the ISIS link)

I feel like Brent was comparing the discrepancies in the way people lately (as in Paris) shown their sorrow, pain and compassion, as compared to the millions in Iraq that have been slaughtered. It is hypocritical to pay respects for (only) those who have been murdered if your from one particular country, but not the other. And he mentions the fact that if you whistleblow about human rights abuses and war crimes it becomes you the whistleblower are the bad guy. Brent said, to him the praying was an "obnoxious experience". Your inserting words like -->"somehow not "deserving"" <-- (etc)

Sorry Brent's score remains standing.

pdx imc (or something) apparently Deleted my last comment-reply 19.Nov.2015 10:33


Your "Reading Score" bob-and-weave argument is invalid, Brent's article and premise is invalid.

And Brent's entire screed is indeed based on the implication that the Paris victims are, somehow, not deserving of sympathy or 'prayer' (whatever that does/means).

Total, utter lack of historical context, relevance or comprehension as well (Iraq??? vs. 2015 Paris? wtf...)

Loser steps down - refuse to address points of post 19.Nov.2015 18:08

Score Card

You have ignored every point I made

No logic - No continuity to the original post

Score remains the same (for obvious reasons)

If I #PrayforParis, Who Will Pray for Victims of French Colonial Aggression? 19.Nov.2015 20:41

by Darius Shahtahmasebi

November 19, 2015

What has happened in Paris last weekend is surely tragic indeed. At least 129 civilians were murdered in blatant terrorist attacks on civilian areas. The mainstream media and social media hysteria is understandable given the surprise nature of the attacks and the geographical location in which they took place: Paris, the city of love.

However, if the public truly care about the deaths of innocent lives perhaps they should direct their anger, frustration, fear and political grievances at the French government. The sympathy, fear and unity that the public feel is not only a powerful distraction from truly awful atrocities that happen daily in other parts of the world, but distract us from France's acts of aggression in the last decade.

In 2011, France spent over 450 million euros flying at least 4500 sorties over Libya bombing the North African nation back into the Middle Ages. The UN Security Council Resolution authorizing this military activity authorized a no-fly zone to protect civilians but in actuality killed scores of civilians, desecrated Gaddafi's armed forces whilst backing, funding, supporting and providing air cover for al-Qaeda affiliated rebels. Although we had been told that this military aggression was necessary to prevent Gaddafi from committing genocide on his own people, it transpired that the public had once again been lied to through an Iraq-WMD style propaganda campaign. The French-backed rebels at the time fighting to overthrow Gaddafi were not only the same fighters that France was claiming to fight in Mali, but included fighters from al-Qaeda in Iraq, which today are known as ISIS.

According to the UN Human Development Index (2010), Libya had the highest standard of living out of any country in Africa. Although the United States, the United Kingdom and Italy also played their part; it was a French Rafale jet that first struck Muammar Gaddafi's motorcade as he attempted to escape Sirte, before these same al-Qaeda affiliated rebels were brought in to the area by NATO commandos to execute the Libyan leader without trial. Before this blatant war of aggression disguised as a humanitarian intervention occurred, Libya was debt free, had high literacy rates and had free healthcare. The country is now in a perpetual state of civil war as two rival governments backed by separate regional and foreign powers fight for control of the country. It should be no surprise that ISIS has a major stranglehold there given that the NATO countries, France being one of the main contributors, backed ISIS affiliated rebels to topple Gaddafi in the first place. According to UNICEF, Libya now has 2 million children out of school. As bad as Gaddafi was, this did not happen under his leadership.

To make this matter more corrupt, the French leader at the time, Nicolas Sarkozy, was under investigation for having received 50 million euros from Gaddafi himself for Sarkozy's election campaign. So, essentially, Gaddafi sent Sarkozy 50 million euros and Sarkozy pays him back by having him assassinated? That has to be the worst recorded friendship in history.

In 2014, France made over 8 billion euros selling arms. The beneficiaries of these arms include the beacon of human rights itself, Saudi Arabia, a country who not only openly executes political dissidents within its own jurisdiction and supports violent jihadist activity, but is currently contravening international law by launching a war of aggression in neighbouring Yemen, the poorest country in the Arab world. The most recent French-Saudi deal is worth $12 billion. Saudi Arabia has used their current weaponry to bomb Yemeni wedding parties and refugee camps. Together with a brutal blockade, Yemen has become Syria within half a year of bombing and faces a humanitarian catastrophe.

France is also actively bombing Mali, Somalia, and in December 2012 emerged as one of the biggest contributors to the rebel groups trying to topple Bashar al-Assad in Syria. Although we have heard time and time again that the US and NATO are only backing moderate rebels, this distinction between rebel groups on the ground has transpired to be false. Take for example the Western-backed Free Syrian Army (FSA), which France has actively and openly supported. The FSA's ranks have become dominated by extremists and their leaders have admitted not only that they regularly conduct joint operations with al-Qaeda, but that they wish to impose sharia law on Syria. Furthermore, since 2012, Western countries have known that the majority of the weapons and arms that they have been pouring into Syria have ended up in the arms of extremists but they are still doing it.

This selective over-play by the mainstream media combined with social media Giant Facebook's response makes you wonder why the victims in France are more important than the victims in Lebanon 2 days prior, or the victims of France's colonial aggression in the Middle East and Africa. How about the 5.4 million people who have died in the Democratic Republic of Congo? When will Facebook propose a flag change for the solidarity of the people who suffer these kinds of attacks daily?

In the wake of the attacks in Paris, the Mayor of New York, Bill de Blasio, stated "the only answer to terrorism is to be resolute, to not let the terrorists change who we are".

But perhaps it is time to change who we are. Whether you like it or not, France has become an aggressive colonial power in the last decade. The France that was opposed to the 2003 invasion of Iraq has become a nation responsible for the death and suffering of millions of people. Let's not forget that ISIS was born out of the US invasion and occupation of Iraq, meaning that France had the morally superior position back in 2003. Yet, the public now are sleep-walking and are eating up every single bit of President Hollande's response.

If Hollande truly cared about terrorism, he should stop funding it.

What has he proposed instead? To close the borders of France, to allow right-wing xenophobia take root and blame this whole issue on the refugee crisis, and to immediately start aggressively bombing Syria. Apparently, France has not done enough bombing in the Middle East and North Africa. Note how quickly Hollande has referred to the Paris attacks as an act of war. The perpetrators of this crime were few and were not acting on behalf of any sovereign government. Who is France now at war with? With ISIS? Given that Western leaders still blame Assad for the rise of ISIS it should not be hard to predict where France's campaign is headed. It would also be a safe bet that we will start to see an activation of France's new democratic and transparent surveillance laws passed earlier this year.

If blowing up civilians in France is a tragic and cowardly act which can generate so much fear, anger and sympathy, it cannot be realistically said that blowing up civilians in Syria in response is a realistic solution.

Brent and "Score" = 0. 20.Nov.2015 18:37


This 'article' of Brent's (a known Newswire spammer) is worthless. (Even more worthless is Brent's fellator, "Score"-whatever)

Take the touchy / feely / 100%-ignorant-of-ALL-politics-and-international-affairs spew somewhere else on the intertubes.

Columbia Student Traumatized By Reading About White People 20.Nov.2015 18:51


A student at Columbia University is urging the school to inject more diversity into its required courses, claiming she suffered severe emotional trauma from reading too many books by and about white people.

Columbia students and faculty gathered Wednesday night for a panel discussion on "Race, Ethnicity, and University Life." According to the Columbia Daily Spectator, much of the commentary revolved around the idea that minorities on campus simply spend too much time being traumatized by the white-centric content of their classes.