February 27, 2011

Gaddafi's mercenaries

From my new VDARE.com column:
In last week’s column, Bahrain—Electing A New People…And Shooting The Old One, I pointed out the roles played by immigration in Bahrain’s discontent, most notoriously in the rulers’ use of immigrant mercenaries to attack native political opponents.

Today in Libya, a major rebellion is surging back and forth across the same Mediterranean coastal desert where Peter Brimelow’s father spent years chasing Gen. Rommel’s Afrika Korps. Despite the contrast between the bland sophistication of Bahrain’s leaders and the egomaniacal sturm und drang of Colonel Muammar Kaddafi, the upshot has been the same—the government’s immigrant mercenaries opening fire on native-born protestors.

Granted, there is no end to the list of reasons for Libyans to be angry with Kaddafi. But the role played by immigration in that North African tragedy is surprisingly large.

Read the whole thing there.

Speaking of stuff I found funny while writing at 4am ...

69 comments:

Anonymous said...

OT:

http://www.cdc.gov/minorityhealth/CHDIReport.html

Hope that you check out the CDC Health Disparities & Inequalities Report (CHDIR)which tracks differences in health stats among the races to see if it has anything of value in its reportings or the way it reports.

Truth said...

Oh please, Steve.

Gaddafi did not hire African "mercenaries" to insulate himself from the Libyan people, he hired them to insulate himself from the same enemy that has toppled Mubarak and soon Al-khalifa, the CIA. And he was quite brilliant in doing so.

You're smarter than that. Or did you really belive the "Arab peoples are rising up as one, in unison, to defeat the scourge of dictatorship!"

Dude, cancel Fox news, and stop having martinis with Rushton for a few months.

Anonymous said...

He played well the immigration angle didn't he.

Chicago said...

Libya's mercenaries have an echo here. An ever expanding class of native born mercenaries has been created by the government's patronage of outfits like the former Blackwater company and other, smaller ones. Lots of people out there with gun skills and the willingness to use them for pay. The companies probably screen them to make sure they have the right psychological makeup so they'll do what their employer pays them to do. These contractors are employed in various countries right now. What happens when they come back to the USA with few other skills and fewer job prospects? If there were to be any domestic problems here wouldn't the government be tempted to utilize these "contractors" here? They might not be foreign born but would they have any real self identification with the citizenry? As mercenaries wouldn't they just point their guns in any direction their paymasters tell them to?

Captain Jack Aubrey said...

"Despite the contrast between the bland sophistication of Bahrain’s leaders and the egomaniacal sturm und drang of Colonel Muammar Kaddafi, the upshot has been the same—the government’s immigrant mercenaries opening fire on native-born protestors."

But I'm sure Max Boot approves.

Le Sigh said...

I'm almost embarrassed to say that I like he's putting up a fight, not just meekly stepping down like Mubarak did.

That said, he's a dictator and needs to go. The civilian casualties aren't worth it.

Anonymous said...

Kadaffi is the Keith Moon of international politics.
Rather than being wholly 'bad', Kadaffi is 'mad' in the devil-may-care, outrageous, over blown schoolboy sense that Keith Moon exemplified - you know the type of kid who actually had the balls to set fire to the school and not give a damn, only Kadaffi blows up airliners for his 'practical jokes'.
It is likely that ADD plays a part in this outrageous behavior - a stage that 'Moon the Loon' and Kadaffi never really grew out of.The unforyunate fact is such kids become legends in their own lunchtimes earning the the vicarious awe and respect of other kids who would never have the guts to do what they do, but want to have some of the notoriety rub off on them.
Keith Moon's (the greatest rock'n' roll drummer of all time) stunts involved putting cherry bombs down toilets (with spectacular results), driving Rolls-Royces into swimming pools, trashing hotel rooms, and other general shenanigans involving explosives, firearms and expensive cars.He once drove a tank down London's Oxford Strret whilst dressed as Erwin Rommel, in broad daylight.
The word 'evil' is being bandied about to describe Kadaffi, but I think he is more of a Keith Moon with an international size sand-pit to play in and guided missiles instead of cherry bombs.

jody said...

as i predicted, the largest oil refinery in iraq was bombed.

obama will NOT, WILL NOT, pull all american troops from iraq. nor will any US president, until this giant mountain of debt the US is building gets so colossal that they might be forced to pull out due to simple economics.

have you guys noticed how the US television news media is flushing all iraq news down the drain? they will not report on how badly things are going in iraq no matter what. they have to protect obama at all costs as he simply cannot afford to have everything going wrong all at the same time. since there's so many other things happening right now that are hurting obama, the voters have to be kept pretty much in the dark about how badly everything is going in iraq.

we can only imagine the 180 degree reversal in attitude were GW bush commander in chief right now. but with obama as commander in chief? his orders are: lecture the front line troops about fag sensitivity.

Laban said...

Don't forget the all-female bodyguard team (and the cohort of Ukranian nurses) to add to the eccentric colour.

I'm sure he's evil too, though. Being evil and being entertaining aren't incompatible e.g. Idi Amin.

Anonymous said...

Well, the western elites haven't hired immigrant mercenaries to gun down their own citizens (not yet anyway, but I wouldn't put anuthing past them), but If you care to peruse the work of the Australian academic Frank K. Salter, you will see that the elitist policy of open borders, in fact, is just as genocidal, only that it is surer and no messy cadavers need be left on the ground.

Anonymous said...

I'm almost embarrassed to say that I like he's putting up a fight, not just meekly stepping down like Mubarak did.

Me too.

A) Pan AM 103 notwithstanding, he's better than the alternative [i.e. the Muslim Brotherhood], and

B) I gotta root for anyone in the modern era who tells the international elitist commentariat & the professional brow-furrowers in the diplomatic corps to go shove it.

Anonymous said...

Actually, I remember seeing footage of his all-female bodyguard.
Damn attractive too, was my reaction.

Mr. Anon said...

"Truth said...

Oh please, Steve.

Gaddafi did not hire African "mercenaries" to insulate himself from the Libyan people, he hired them to insulate himself from the same enemy that has toppled Mubarak and soon Al-khalifa, the CIA. And he was quite brilliant in doing so."

Yeah, because people always love their dictators. Leave it to you to leap to the defence of savage black killers. You know, you're really breaking all those stereotypes of the strutting, bracadocious, black race-man. Keep it up. It's instructive for the new people reading this site.

Anonymous said...

West Point and Annapolis have been quietly puring white male officers with 'goals' of reaching 30,40 % minority /female (bull dyke with hostility towards the core culture)

There was an article by a anapolis English prof. blowing the whistle so great was the need for diversity that they were letting kids - even asian ones with something like 300-400 board scores and had a remedial program for them (much like Sotomayer reading children's books before her start at princeton)

I always say -when the army is being radically demographically changed, look out.. trouble ahead - not for the armies of other countries, but for the people of this one.

travis said...

Gaddafi did not hire African "mercenaries" to insulate himself from the Libyan people, he hired them to insulate himself from the same enemy that has toppled Mubarak and soon Al-khalifa, the CIA.

Truth is closer to the truth than anyone suggesting that this is a spontaneous uprising.

none of the above said...

I'm less concerned about the foreign mercenaries in the US than about our massive multi-trillion dollar effort to work out technology and tactics for cheaply holding down a hostile population, hunting down hard-to-find networks of enemies and dissenters, etc. It's far too easy to see how those tools might be turned on us one day. There are places where it has already begun--see the Washington Post's Top Secret America series for some examples. And psyops directed at the American public have been a part of the war on terror from the beginning.

farmiddle said...

One thing I don't get is that after 41 years in power, Gaddafi hasn't promoted himself to General.

farmiddle said...

ignore my previous comment. Thought I was being original, but wasn't.

stari_momak said...

"to insulate himself from the same enemy that has toppled Mubarak and soon Al-khalifa, the CIA."

You forgot to mention creating HIV/AIDS and flooding the ghetto with crack.

stari_momak said...

Nice column today -- focused on the topic at hand, minimal references to film (and those that were in the column were pertinent). Avoided the temptation to tie the Libya thing in with Steve's unified theory of everything (e.g. left out how Jody Foster might have selected sperm from a tall, dark, and testosterone heavy man like Ghaddafi).

And of course the theme is original to you and makes a valid connection between a topical phenomenon and tectonic shifts going on underneath. But we've come to expect that from you.

Grumpy Old Man said...

The odious Max Boot wants a kind of foreign legion, in which we recruit foreigners and immigrants to the armed forces in exchange for citizenship. It's been tried before, and didn't work out too well for the Romans.

SF said...

Suppose we finally get another president (first since Eisenhower) who is determined to deport illegal aliens and begins a roundup in Los Angeles, which results in riots. What would the international community and CNN say about using force on peaceful protesters?

IHTG said...

This rebellion against Gadaffi may end with Sub-Saharan Africans being ethnically cleansed from Libya.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/02/28/article-1361323-0D6451A2000005DC-695_638x410.jpg

Eventually liberals are going to realize what's going on here and things will get amusing.

none of the above said...

jody:

It seems to me that the news coverage of Iraq, Afghanistan, and the rest of our invade-the-world adventures goes in cycles, and that this has been more-or-less independent of who was in office. I remember noticing this kind of cycle under Bush, and it continues under Obama--the same war keeps going on, but media sources lose interest and focus on something else, and then later get interested again.

Each time they get interested, some kind of common narrative gets built up, and then all reports somehow get hammered into that narrative. And this works because mostly, the American people don't know much about it and don't really care all that much. And our media sources are mostly dishonest by design, heavily spun by the military, and subject to all kinds of pressure and internal partisan desire to fine-tune their coverage. (Note the sanitized pictures that come back, relative to what wars actually look like.)

I don't understand the mechanisms used to control the media. But I think it's the same mechanisms for foreign and domestic concerns--people who challenge the ruling class-media consensus (aka invade-the-world, invite-the-world, in-hock-to-the-world), even (especially) when they have the facts on their side, are routinely either shut out of media coverage, or demonized. Facts that call that consensus into question as black-holed or minimized. And so on.

There's an element of partisanship there, but I think it's much bigger and more interesting than just partisanship.

Anonymous said...

Liberals use black and other non-white thugs as their stormtroopers in this country, a far more important subject to write about.

Eric Rasmusen said...

I used to think the Colonel was crazy,but the evidence shows he's pretty clever. First, he had the sense to drop terrorism in 2003 rather than be overthrown by Bush. His hobby got too expensive. Now, it seems, he's had the sense to divert his ambitions to Africa, an easier target, and a target that actually has helped him at home. It remains to be seen whether the "cheap mercenary" strategy will work, but it isn't obviously nonsensical. If the main purpose of mercenaries is to fire in the general direction of unarmed civilians, hiring untrained teenagers from another country who are of an unpopular race makes some sense.

Svigor said...

Gaddafi did not hire African "mercenaries" to insulate himself from the Libyan people, he hired them to insulate himself from the same enemy that has toppled Mubarak and soon Al-khalifa, the CIA. And he was quite brilliant in doing so.

So, sell me on this. What's the CIA's motive? Dying for oil shocks? Love the idea of radical Islamic dictatorships taking over? Rampant anti-Americanism? Playful nihilism? Misanthropy? Just following orders?

Kylie said...

I noticed in that YouTube parody that Gaddafi looked more like a real leader than any president we've had since Reagan.


Gaddafi shuffled papers around as if he didn't know what he was doing. Maybe he didn't, maybe it was just theater. But he wore his authority well. Call him an international buffoon, if you like, but up at that podium, he sure didn't look like anyone who'd ever have to dodge thrown shoes or answer hecklers.

Don't even get me started on a bare-chested Putin fishing in a stream or riding a horse.

Svigor said...

USA with few other skills and fewer job prospects? If there were to be any domestic problems here wouldn't the government be tempted to utilize these "contractors" here? They might not be foreign born but would they have any real self identification with the citizenry? As mercenaries wouldn't they just point their guns in any direction their paymasters tell them to?

It goes both ways. Nobody's going to hold back against a bunch of mercs (and mercs aren't going to fight as hard as flag-wavers). And a merc culture means military skills and guns are up for hire, not monopolized by governments.

If you want to know where mercenary culture leads, read up on the Condottieri (Italian for contractor). Short version: an alienated populace (mercs ate natives out of house and home), serious degradation of military reputation (money over flags), NERF fights (we're all in the same boat, right guys? So let's make this look good for the rubes, but make sure we all make it home when it's over), propagation of conflict (excess supply, meet new demand).

Svigor said...

I'm almost embarrassed to say that I like he's putting up a fight, not just meekly stepping down like Mubarak did.

That said, he's a dictator and needs to go. The civilian casualties aren't worth it.


You're just hatin' on him 'cause his foreign workers are doing jobs the natives won't do.

currahee said...

Scipio Africanus, while he still can!

James N.S.W said...

There's a pretty big reason to hope that Gadaffi wins in Libya. If he loses, mini-Camp of the Saints begins.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,747459,00.html

"But if Libya collapses into anarchy, some observers have said, it could become an immigration route for far more people from sub-Saharan Africa.
"

bbartlog said...

The Libyan uprising may reflect some discontent on the part of the people, but in terms of the media reporting it's a very staged affair, complete with planted news reports. It wouldn't surprise me if the actual uprising was rather tepid and insignificant, and is being puffed up so that the sudden appearance of tanks and other armaments delivered by the CIA seems natural rather than mysterious and surprising.
As dictators go Khaddafi is not a bad guy. Like Hitler, he actually believes that he's one of the good guys, which makes him less of a kleptocrat than simple pigs like Mubarak. Oil money actually goes to public facilities in Libya, rather than Swiss bank accounts.

Whiskey said...

Khadaffi was a disaster, the Muslim Brotherhood and tribal dislocation and fighting will be even worse.

Why? Because Libya supplies 10% of world oil and its oil is of the highest quality (lowest sulfur, highest hydrocarbons). Refining it is much cheaper. Already production is threatened by tribal fighting. Given structurally tight oil supplies fueled by "Green" stupidity (likely profit taking by Soros and Co.) and China's rise, oil at $220 a barrel is already being discussed by the various international energy agencies.

Blackwater "mercenaries?" They are uniformly ex-US military White guys doing the same jobs they did in uniform for five times the pay. Someone has to guard oil rigs, pipelines, refineries, in places like Nigeria and such. Unless you fancy living in a big city next to NAMs and walking to such work as you can get. The world runs on oil, its childish and naive to expect to get it from places like Nigeria without security.

Anonymous said...

The same type of situation unfolded in China in 1989 with the student protests. Almost none of the soldiers who attacked the Chinese students were Han Chinese. They all consisted of ethnic minorities.

The Anti-Gnostic said...

Blackwater "mercenaries?" They are uniformly ex-US military White guys doing the same jobs they did in uniform for five times the pay. Someone has to guard oil rigs, pipelines, refineries, in places like Nigeria and such.

Yeah. And that'll be a big help when (not if) La Reconquista begins in earnest for the Southwestern US. But at least you'll have relatively cheap gas as you're flooring it out of LA.

Anonymous said...

To: None

"Each time they get interested, some kind of common narrative gets built up, and then all reports somehow get hammered into that narrative. "

It's this kind of thing that makes me nervous about our waging war anywhere. I'm starting to second guess everything I read wondering how much is fact and how much is spin with an agenda I probably wouldn't share.

In the past year I've started noticing that news articles in British papers cover even American stories in a much different way than our papers do. This isn't even from a liberal vs. conservative standpoint. For instance, the coverage of our financial meltdown was often more comprehensive and of a more conservative bent than say NYT or WSJ and foreign news stories seem to get way more coverage in BBC articles.

Any guesses whether journalism in Europe is more intact as a profession than it is in the US?

"Don't even get me started on a bare-chested Putin fishing in a stream or riding a horse."

OMG, sexy evil. ; )

Hitler wasn't funny or sexy, though, not once. Why would someone paste one parody after another of a tense, angry dictator and call it humor? Must be a guy thing.

Anonymous said...

Ugh, I hate the military industrial complex and the CIA and the invade the world/invite the world/in hock to the world complex as much as the next guy, but some of you guys are just nuts.

The CIA couldn't predict the fall of the Berlin Wall; the CIA certainly didn't predict what is going on now in the middle east; they are at best reacting to it and if you really think that what is going on in Libya is staged or fake, you need to start taking your meds again.

Anonymous said...

It is remarkable Steve's ability to spin anything to somehow blame immigration for it. The mortgage crises, the lack of innovation in television, the reason for the downfall of dictatos in foreign countries, even the lack of progress in the space program over the past 40 years or so, everything is to blame on immigration.

travis said...

So, sell me on this. What's the CIA's motive? Dying for oil shocks? Love the idea of radical Islamic dictatorships taking over? Rampant anti-Americanism? Playful nihilism? Misanthropy? Just following orders?

Try self-interest. Why do we need the CIA and the whole national security apparatus in the first place? Because we live in an uncertain world and have enemies? What, then, is the CIA's incentive for contributing to stability and a more stable world? Same can be said for the media, who love all the things you mentioned. Nothing worse than a slow news day.

Bill said...

North African kings have been hiring Nubian mercenaries for millennia.

La plus ca change...

Truth said...

"Yeah, because people always love their dictators. Leave it to you to leap to the defence of savage black killers."

Anon, please, pull out your copy of 'See Spot Run" and begin practicing again.

Where did I "leap to the 'defence' of anyone? Except arguably Gaddafi who is, by HBD standards, white.

Truth said...

"You know, you're really breaking all those stereotypes of the strutting, bracadocious, black race-man."

When did I strut, and what did I brag about?

Svigor, handle my light work here, Buddy

Truth said...

"So, sell me on this. What's the CIA's motive? Dying for oil shocks? Love the idea of radical Islamic dictatorships taking over? Rampant anti-Americanism? Playful nihilism? Misanthropy? Just following orders?"

The entire point of the CIA is to advance the Globalist agenda. China is not controlled by the globalist agenda and it is growing. The current cold war is one between the globalists, and the mainly Chinese, Russian, Indian coalition, and this grouping is attempting to lock-up resources around the globe.

The middle east makeover is the culmination of a 25 year plan that started with Gulf War I to control the Persian Gulf in it's entirety, not partially as we did when Bush's daddy 'reigned' and do not. The endpoint is to get rid of the Khalifate and to install CIA puppets as leaders. It's already happened in Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Anonymous said...

"That said, he's a dictator and needs to go. The civilian casualties aren't worth it."

I don't think the conclusion follows from the premises. Africa is full of dictators. They need to STAY, not go. It's amazing who gets to say who is a dictator and who is a legitimate government, etc?
Imagine if in 1970 after the Kent State unpleasantness, a world leader (someone like Johannes Balthazar Vorster, for example) had announced: 'Nixon must go for the good of his country. The hippies must take over forthwith.'
Gilbert Pinfold

Anonymous said...

Libya supplies 2% of the world's oil, not 10%.

Source: http://nationaljournal.com/economy/libya-why-a-two-percent-oil-producer-is-rattling-global-markets-20110223


Here is the BBC on world oil producers in this region:
Region's major oil producers (% of world oil output)
Saudi Arabia: 12%
Iran: 5.3%
United Arab Emirates: 3.2%
Angola: 2.3%
Libya: 2%


Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12563063




I read Steve's article at Vdare initially.
Vdare has been better this year than ever before.

Anonymous said...

"It is remarkable Steve's ability to spin anything to somehow blame immigration for it. The mortgage crises, the lack of innovation in television, the reason for the downfall of dictatos in foreign countries, even the lack of progress in the space program over the past 40 years or so, everything is to blame on immigration."


Well, lets check Steve on these issues:
1)Mortgage crisis: we basically loosened up lending laws to make NAM's eligible for loans they didn't have the credit for, and we made downpayments a option, not a necessity. Not only could they have bad credit, but they weren't even risking losing a year's worth of savings if they couldn't afford the house. They didn't even have to acculturate themselves to living-within-their-means for a couple of years to get into a house they'd never be able to afford. Many planned to sub-let rooms in their houses to relatives/friends (got one on my street like this) even before they moved in, hurting the public schools in the area.

Declining public schools, due to loose lending laws/Section 8/HUD have led to even more expensive real estate where whites/asians seek to insulate their own kids and still send them to public schools, making family formation for them even less affordable.

I think Steve is roughly about 120% right about this personally.

2) Lack of Innovation in Televsion:
Anonymous is right, and Steve is wrong. BET (Black Entertainment Televsion) and Telumundo soap operas (and its talk shows) are the dramatic equivalent of Beethoven's best symphonies. Bringing in people who favor such artistic entertainment is going to assure us of the highest brow cultural entertainments imaginable. Even the theatre-goers in the Greek stadia 2400 years ago will not see tragedy and comedy as our progeny will in 50 years.

3)Reason for the downfall of dictators in foreign countries: Libya citizens were pissed off about the burgeoning sub-saharan-Africanization of their Berberesque country. Quaddafi's daughter is a blonde. Libya is now more than 10% sub-saharan black. I dont think their residents ever got to vote on this. People tend to get aggravated over such things, and since the iron laws of political correctness dont wield such force in that nation, it actually counts some.

4)Lack of progress in the space program over the last 40 years or so. If we didn't have NAM underclasses, imagine how much more money NASA might have had. The inventor of the Bloom-box said on televsion (60 minutes) that his invention was "turned backwards" to make electricity. He originally wanted it to spew out an atomosphere on Mars. Who knows what we could have accomplished in a 90% non-NAM United States? How many trillions have been spent on the war on poverty, criminal justice, legal necessities, sprawl, and rising fuel prices related to sprawl because of our NAM underclasses? Its been a lot.

Our corporate elites have privatized profits and socialized externalities associeted with NAMS. Where have I read that before? Oh wait..........

Anonymous said...

@Anon, the inventor of Bloom box is a tamil brahmin

Anonymous said...

"Anonymous said...
@Anon, the inventor of Bloom box is a tamil brahmin"



I know that. I --seen-- him on "60 minutes". He is not a NAM, he's an Asian (Indian). Hence the term Non-Asian-Minority.

-----------------------------------



An encouraging development in Texas: A group has formed that will fund scholarships for White Men Only:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1361139/Texas-group-launches-scholarship-white-men-ONLY--need-equal-shot.html

I was just trying to get this idea started the other day. The group is calling itself: The Former Majority Association For Equality.
They set up a website FMAE.com. They are accepting donations. I dont even live in Texas and I sent them $30.
I was trying to get the idea started that whites could start a non-govermental-white-boosterism-organization dedictated to helping at-risk whites with academic help and scholarships to in-state schools and trade schools, to booster white family formation, and eventually a postive-racial consciousness (you dont have to "hate" anybody else to love your own group). It looks like someone has already taken such a step in Texas. Good for them. I hope to see more like this.

They will not accept any donations from hate groups, and have no "racial" positions. Two things I suggested such a group would have to do to keep the media from destroying them. The "authories say they have no recourse against the group", but Im sure Kagan, Sotomayor, Breyer, and Ginsburg are already thinking about what a threat they pose, etc.

Keep things like this in mind as you contemplate the Quaddafis, Obamas, Bushes, and $PLC's of this world race-replacing you. Only 61% of Seattle's youth is still white, two-thirds of Texas youths are non white according to the demographer Murdock. But if you lament that fact, according to Morris Dees (and Elliot Abrams, who wanted us to accept a million easily assimilatable Haitians after a decade of campaining agaisnt intermarriage amongst his own little group), you are a irredeemable racist and deserve an Amalekite's fate.

Mr. Anon said...

"Anonymous said...

Ugh, I hate the military industrial complex and the CIA and the invade the world/invite the world/in hock to the world complex as much as the next guy, but some of you guys are just nuts.

The CIA couldn't predict the fall of the Berlin Wall; the CIA certainly didn't predict what is going on now in the middle east; they are at best reacting to it and if you really think that what is going on in Libya is staged or fake, you need to start taking your meds again."

Yes, it's worth keeping in mind that CIA employees are government workers. As such, they have alot to keep in mind - like thinking about their pension, scheduling their use-or-lose leave, diversity training, ethics training, and all the other minutiae of a life spent in the federal civil service. I don't think that they are nearly as competent as they imagine they are.

Truth said...

Most CIA agents are elite university graduates with hard science backgrounds.

Anonymous said...

Regarding the many spellings of Qadhdhfi's name, if these 122 or so spellings were different persons, he wouldn't need to hire foreign mercenaries - he could have staffed his personal security force all by himself!

Anonymous said...

"- even asian ones with something like 300-400 board scores and had a remedial program for them"

Asians are the most overreped group at West Point. 3.5% of the 18-24 population but 7% of West Point.

http://www.heritage.org/static/reportimages/3E59D41279449CAB99F8C7CF54E02351.gif

Mr. Anon said...

"Truth said...

Most CIA agents are elite university graduates with hard science backgrounds."

Yeah, right. On what basis do you make this claim? Where is the evidence for this assertion, oh knower-of-all-things? More magical thinking from "Truth".

Anonymous said...

Michael Jackson was a vain narcissist who wanted to be white. Gaddafi is a vain narcissist who wants to be black.

Anonymous said...

Now you know what Obama's civilian force is all about.

Svigor said...

Try self-interest. Why do we need the CIA and the whole national security apparatus in the first place? Because we live in an uncertain world and have enemies? What, then, is the CIA's incentive for contributing to stability and a more stable world? Same can be said for the media, who love all the things you mentioned. Nothing worse than a slow news day.

I get the institutional self-interest argument. I'm a firm believer, in fact. But you can take any argument too far. I need something more if I'm going to believe the CIA is screwing the pooch six ways from Sunday.

Svigor, handle my light work here, Buddy

Don't drag me into your flirting.

Svigor, handle my light work here, Buddy

The entire point of the CIA is to advance the Globalist agenda. China is not controlled by the globalist agenda and it is growing. The current cold war is one between the globalists, and the mainly Chinese, Russian, Indian coalition, and this grouping is attempting to lock-up resources around the globe.

The middle east makeover is the culmination of a 25 year plan that started with Gulf War I to control the Persian Gulf in it's entirety, not partially as we did when Bush's daddy 'reigned' and do not. The endpoint is to get rid of the Khalifate and to install CIA puppets as leaders. It's already happened in Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan.


The more I read about 4GW, the less the idea of the Globalists rocking the boat in the ME makes any sense. What was the problem with Ghaddafi, again? Give the people in the ME a shot and they're quite likely to install theocratic autocracies. So I just don't get the "great game" angle in rocking the boat.

Asians are the most overreped group at West Point. 3.5% of the 18-24 population but 7% of West Point.

Sounds like a good way to make your military teh suck. On the other hand, if diversity is diversity is diversity, they're a lot better choice than NAMs. "Better" if you're still into the "USA! USA! USA!" thing, which I am not.

Truth said...

"Yeah, right. On what basis do you make this claim?"

The truth, Grasshopper.


http://www.ehow.com/how_4750209_job-cia.html

TGGP said...

Truth, I didn't see any reference to hard science there.

I can understand China & Russia being considered less globalist, but I'm surprised you included India. I would have included them in the U.S coalition.

Another perspective on why Qaddafi didn't rely on a standard army.

none of the above said...

Anonymous:

As far as our wars, my sense is that we're more-or-less buried in bullsh-t. The pentagon has been incredibly effective at controlling US coverage, with a combination of embedded reporters, "military advisors" for the big broadcast stations who turned out to be Pentagon shills, and appeals to patriotism. They even seem to be selling a line now that makes you some kind of traitor if you even listen to some sources of information, like Wikileaks, or Al Jazeera before the Egyptian uprising (when it turned out that they were the only ones doing real reporting).

There's a huge cost to all this. I can see that we're getting piles of BS, but not which reports we're seeing are true, which are spin, which are edited to remove the inconvenient stuff. And yet, when I go to vote, I need to have some idea what's going on over there, in order to even have any idea which politicians, if any, are talking sense.

That's one reason I tend to be really skeptical of invade-the-world adventures, Great-Game-playing spy and diplomacy stuff, do-gooder foreign aid programs, etc. I have no faith whatsoever that voters can evaluate them, and even less faith that the folks running those programs will do a good job when nobody's watching.

The other reason is that when it *is* possible to evaluate those programs, they usually don't look so good. As details of the war on terror have come out, a great deal of it looks like a massive, horrible clusterfuck. We're talking something like a million people dead (maybe a few hundred of them had some connection to Al Qaida), thousands tortured (more than a hundred known to have died under US military interrogation, from FOIAed documents on the ACLU website), vast sums of money spent--and what the hell did we get from it?

Anonymous said...

"Sounds like a good way to make your military teh suck."

Without exception the cadets I've met are a solid stock of people from which to form an officer corps. I imagine you are some scrawny loser who couldn't have a normal conversation outside of your room. You reflect the most pathetic aspect of this blog's readership.

Mr. Anon said...

"The truth, Grasshopper.

http://www.ehow.com/how_4750209_job-cia.html"

Leave it to you to cite the top of the stack from Google. I looked at that same page before I replied to you. It says "disproportionate", not "most" - which is what you orginally claimed.

Most != Disproportionate.

Or alternatively, if they are equivalent, let me use it in a sentence that you might understand: Most rapists are black.

Cheers, D**khead (that's just my term for "Grasshopper")

Truth said...

Grasshopper, your reading inability is really getting old.

This is what I said:

"Most CIA agents are elite university graduates with hard science backgrounds."

This is what the article said:

"The Central Intelligence Agency has a disproportionate number of Ivy League graduates. This tends to skew the hiring process by placing an overwhelming emphasis on an Ivy League background, academic achievement, and advanced degrees. Therefore, your best bet in pursuing a job with the CIA is to obtain an association with a top tier university (they actively recruit at the most prestigious college campuses).


There are only 8 Ivy League Universities, of which the CIA places "an overwhelming emphasis" on recruiting. I said "elite" universities, I did not say Ivy League.

There are many more than 8 elite universities. Penn State is elite, the University of Chicago is elite, Berkley is elite, etc.

I think it's fairly obvious that if they place an overwhelming emphasis on an Ivy league education, MOST come from excellent schools, just beneath the Ivy league.

Please stop trying to "get" me and learn to read.

Mr. Anon said...

"Truth said...

I think it's fairly obvious that if they place an overwhelming emphasis on an Ivy league education, MOST come from excellent schools, just beneath the Ivy league."

No, it is not obvious, nor is it even true. So an unfounded assumption by you makes it obvious? And do you always believe an organizations advertising? - as related by some random FAQ site on the web? And again, "most" is obviously not the same as "disproportionate". Or again, if it is, "most" rapists and serial killers are blacks. You are a stupid man. And stop calling me "Grasshopper", asshole.

Truth said...

I will stop calling you grasshopper when you have proven that you are ready to leave the temple, Kwai Chang Kane.

Truth said...

"Truth, I didn't see any reference to hard science there."

You fan look it up on the CIA website as to which majors are preferred (I got the information straight from a CIA recruiter). Science (including comp. sci. and engineering) and math (including economics, statistics and accounting are heavilly perferred. Is is almos timpossible for an unconnected, non Ivy-league liberal arts grad to be an Agent.

Truth said...

"Or again, if it is, "most" rapists and serial killers are blacks."

You've said this twice now, Grasshopper. Is this supposed to bother me?

I've never raped anyone, what do I give a shit?

Svigor said...

Without exception the cadets I've met are a solid stock of people from which to form an officer corps. I imagine you are some scrawny loser who couldn't have a normal conversation outside of your room. You reflect the most pathetic aspect of this blog's readership.

The only 4th generation military in the world encouraged, demanded, officer initiative. Does that scream "Asian" to you?

Mr. Anon said...

"Truth said...

""Or again, if it is, "most" rapists and serial killers are blacks.""

You've said this twice now, Grasshopper. Is this supposed to bother me?"

No, asshole, it illustrates the difference between "most" and "disproportionate". If you were not stupid, you might have figured that out.

"Truth said...

You fan look it up on the CIA website as to which majors are preferred (I got the information straight from a CIA recruiter). Science (including comp. sci. and engineering) and math (including economics, statistics and accounting are heavilly perferred."

Most women prefer rich husbands - doesn't mean they get 'em. Perhaps the CIA recruiter told you that to discourage YOU from applying. Then again, was this a real CIA recruiter, or just a guy on the internet who told you he was one? Given that you have no discernment or common sense, you might have been confused.