You're not gonna see these videos on CNN.

[Jack Weber]

Yes, there's no particular subject which seems to preoccupy you, at all.

You mean how everything seems to relate to his glorious Mediteranean pile of rocks??

[Michael Hardner]

Ralph McGehee, a senior CIA operations manager during the years of the Indonesian coup said Indonesia was

"a model operation ... You can trace back all major, bloody events run from Washington to the way Suharto came to power."

- Pilger, "The New Rulers of the World"

I think freedom is a great gift that America has given to the world and continues to give. But the official press release often downplays misdeeds of the recent past.

It is possible to value the ideal without having to buy into the press package.

[bloodyminded]

Ralph McGehee, a senior CIA operations manager during the years of the Indonesian coup said Indonesia was

"a model operation ... You can trace back all major, bloody events run from Washington to the way Suharto came to power."

- Pilger, "The New Rulers of the World"

I think freedom is a great gift that America has given to the world and continues to give. But the official press release often downplays misdeeds of the recent past.

It is possible to value the ideal without having to buy into the press package.

Yes, absolutely. If I didn't value the professed ideals, I wouldn't care about any of this at all.

But to insist that the ideals are reality is wrongheaded; and to suggest they trump reality, is perverse.

[Jack Weber]

Yes, absolutely. If I didn't value the professed ideals, I wouldn't care about any of this at all.

But to insist that the ideals are reality is wrongheaded; and to suggest they trump reality, is perverse.

I agree...

See General Augusto Pinochet in Chile for another gleaming example...

[Bob]

Of course suharto is to blame. But then, so are his cohorts. Another crazy idea, eh?

Before I debunk your post, however, I'd like to note well that you consider it a trivial matter for the Western democracies to aid and support state terrorism and mass murder...as long "the events would have happened" anyway.

But it's moot anyway, because you're mistaken.

The sheer degree of the slaughter--twenty-five years' worth--would not have been possible without countries arming the military--and all the while knowing what the Indonesians were doing. The West supplied the means for the killings...not as apolitical arms dealers, either, but as conscious contributers.

At least as important is the fact that the US--them alone--could have stopped the killings at any moment during that 25 years, simply by ordering Indonesia to back down, and ceasing the supply of arms. Because in fact, that's precisely what did happen, in 1999 (after a pretty bloody year of murder).

And it all could have been done without violence, as it eventually was.

Since when could America simply order Indonesia to do its bidding? And why are you suggesting that if America hadn't sold arms to Indonesia, that the violence would have come to an end? Don't you know there countries that sell arms besides America?

[Bob]

Yes, there's no particular subject which seems to preoccupy you, at all.

I don't bring up Israeli issues when irrelevant, however. I can't recall exactly, but I think I remember you trying to derail discussions towards this subject several times.

[Bob]

Come on, Bob, I offered you the link. Try to extract yourself from your stuperous back-slapping with the forum's chief intellectual coward for just a moment.

The "green light" is explicit, in a face-to-face conversation between Ford, Kissinger, and Suharto.

Of course I expect Bush_cheney and Dogonporch to pretend it's not there and not bother reading it--they find Western-backed terrorism hilarious, proudly so.

I didn't quite see the wilful avoidance coming from your direction, however.

Here is the link to the declassified document itself. Not an interpretation; the document.

See for yourself. Scroll to page four (or read the whole thing, if you fear there might be some lost context).

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB62/doc4.pdf

Or, alternatively, you can just take the "mind-reader" Bush-Cheney--who has expressed equal parts ignorance and patriotic glee about terrorism that eclipses Hamas and Hizbollah combined--at face value, as a sincere and interested sceptic.

If you wish to travel that road.

It's interesting that you linked that document, as that document just happens to be what I looked at last night. I read through the whole thing, and yes, it reveals what appears to be cordial relations between Ford, Kissinger, and Suharto. But so what? Nowhere in that document is any proof that somehow Indonesia would have done (or not done) whatever the American administration had "ordered". There is no question there is something untoward about maintaining relations with a government that is engaging in such war crimes, but that is certainly not the same thing as your suggestion that somehow America had the means to easily stop the war. It was also during the Cold War, which I'm sure had a lot to do with the motivations of the American government towards staying plugged in to the region.

[Shwa]

It's interesting that you linked that document, as that document just happens to be what I looked at last night. I read through the whole thing, and yes, it reveals what appears to be cordial relations between Ford, Kissinger, and Suharto. But so what? Nowhere in that document is any proof that somehow Indonesia would have done (or not done) whatever the American administration had "ordered". There is no question there is something untoward about maintaining relations with a government that is engaging in such war crimes, but that is certainly not the same thing as your suggestion that somehow America had the means to easily stop the war. It was also during the Cold War, which I'm sure had a lot to do with the motivations of the American government towards staying plugged in to the region.

Of course, another Cheech and Chong Shit Retort (C&CSR)

In a nutshell, looks like shit, feels like shit, smells like shit, tastes like shit... but good thing we didn't step in it.

[Jack Weber]

Of course, another Cheech and Chong Shit Retort (C&CSR)

In a nutshell, looks like shit, feels like shit, smells like shit, tastes like shit... but good thing we didn't step in it.

I love it!!

Let's play cards!!

http://friendlydictators.blogspot.com/

[Shwa]

I love it!!

Let's play cards!!

http://friendlydictators.blogspot.com/

Superb poster art!!

[Jack Weber]

Superb poster art!!

I particularily likethe one of Pinochet in sunglasses dancing a jig on Allende's grave...

Not because I'm a fan of the good General but because I enjoy dark humour...

One of General Pinochet's wonderful quotes...

"Democracy is the breeding ground for Communism!!"

Edited April 8, 2011 by Jack Weber

[GostHacked]

Superb poster art!!

Seems like the book would be a good read.

[Michael Hardner]

There is no question there is something untoward about maintaining relations with a government that is engaging in such war crimes, but that is certainly not the same thing as your suggestion that somehow America had the means to easily stop the war. It was also during the Cold War, which I'm sure had a lot to do with the motivations of the American government towards staying plugged in to the region.

How about actively assisting such regimes in their terror campaigns ? Providing them with training, aid, hardware and the names of those who could be kidnapped in the middle of the night ?

That's not the beacon of freedom I know.

[Bob]

How about actively assisting such regimes in their terror campaigns ? Providing them with training, aid, hardware and the names of those who could be kidnapped in the middle of the night ?

That's not the beacon of freedom I know.

Where's the evidence that America did anything beyond simply selling weapons and maintaining cordial relations in secret? And what about the false argument that America's involvement was a necessary component of these events? Indonesia could've purchased its weapons from many other places.

[Michael Hardner]

Where's the evidence that America did anything beyond simply selling weapons and maintaining cordial relations in secret? And what about the false argument that America's involvement was a necessary component of these events? Indonesia could've purchased its weapons from many other places.

It's well documented that the US assisted in assassinating the former leader and providing a list of state enemies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Indonesia

According to a CIA memo, Prime Minister Harold Macmillan and President John F. Kennedy had agreed to "liquidate President Sukarno, depending on the situation and available opportunities". In 1990 the American journalist Kathy Kadane revealed the extent of the secret American support of some of the massacres of 1965-66 that allowed Suharto to seize the Presidency. She interviewed many former US officials and CIA members, who spoke of compiled lists of 5,000 PKI operatives, which the Americans ticked off as the victims were killed or captured.

Google Books

Here's the 'green light' on the invasion of East Timor

Shortly after his return from Indonesia, President Ford was interviewed by Jack Anderson [_San Francisco Chronicle_, November 9, 1979; Blum86]. In his article, Jack Anderson, wrote:

President Ford was on his way to Indonesia for a state visit. An intelligence report forewarned that Suharto would bring up the Timor issue and would ``try to elicit a sympathetic attitude!''

That Suharto succeeded is confirmed by Ford himself. The U.S. national interest, Ford concluded, ``had to be on the side of Indonesia''.

Ford gave his tacit approval on December 6, 1975 ... Five days after the invasion, the United Nations voted to condemn the attack as an arrant act of international aggression. The United States abstained. Thereafter, the U.S. delegate maneuvered behind the scenes to resist U.N. moves aimed at forcing Indonesia to give up its conquest

As Air Force General Brent Scowcroft, President Ford's National Security Adviser, explained:

I guess it was fundamentally a matter of recognizing reality. We really had no reasonable options ... It made no sense to antagonize the Indonesians ... East Timor was not a viable entity [_Christian Science Monitor_, March 6, 1980; Chomsky82].

[Tilter]

As we can see from the Videos & posts on this subject---

Allahu is really Akbha.

The Islam "religion" is the largest threat to the entire world than any other threat we will see till ---- well --- forever

[Michael Hardner]

The Islam "religion" is the largest threat to the entire world than any other threat we will see till ---- well --- forever

I would word it, instead, thusly:

This religious is the largest threat since... the last one. Go back as far as you like to find threats from various groups, ok ?

[bloodyminded]

Since when could America simply order Indonesia to do its bidding?

It did so, successfully, in 1999.

It might have chosen to do so in 1994. Or 1981. Or maybe not had said, "Go ahead; we'll deal with the materials and the PR problem" in the first place.

Terribly lot to ask.

There's another important point: The US can only supply weapons for "defensive purposes." This is US law.

By using US weapons, and US training, Indonesia felt this would add credibility; they could claim "defense" as their purpose, with the backing of the most influential country on Earth.

And why are you suggesting that if America hadn't sold arms to Indonesia, that the violence would have come to an end? Don't you know there countries that sell arms besides America?

right, who cares if Iran has ever offerre assistance to Hamas? Can't hold Iran responsible for such trivialities.

(Mind you, the analogy is glaringly unfair--to Iran, and extremely generous to the United States. The Indonesian case is far more egregious.)

Edited April 8, 2011 by bloodyminded

[bloodyminded]

I don't bring up Israeli issues when irrelevant, however. I can't recall exactly, but I think I remember you trying to derail discussions towards this subject several times.

I understand this sentiment (your friends DogonPorch and Bush-Cheney do this regularly, including on this thread.) However, and unlike these two jolly fellows, derailment was not my purpose. I responded to your remarks about Indonesian human rights abuses. It seemed to me that if such were the topic, the more important historical situation re human rights abuses was germane.

Really, you said yourself that the videos were supplied not necessarily as a means to discussion, so I don't know if it counts as "derail"ment.

As to the title of this thread; it's quite appropriate, don't you think? CNN hasn't shown interest; they would, no doubt, if the US wasn't one of the agents in question. Or at least the subject wouldn't be verboten.

[Michael Hardner]

Really, you said yourself that the videos were supplied not necessarily as a means to discussion, so I don't know if it counts as "derail"ment.

As to the title of this thread; it's quite appropriate, don't you think? CNN hasn't shown interest; they would, no doubt, if the US wasn't one of the agents in question. Or at least the subject wouldn't be verboten.

I'm scratching my head over this too. The videos weren't supplied as means to discussion but a very substantial one developed in the fertile fields of MLW.

[bloodyminded]

It's interesting that you linked that document, as that document just happens to be what I looked at last night. I read through the whole thing, and yes, it reveals what appears to be cordial relations between Ford, Kissinger, and Suharto. But so what? Nowhere in that document is any proof that somehow Indonesia would have done (or not done) whatever the American administration had "ordered". There is no question there is something untoward about maintaining relations with a government that is engaging in such war crimes, but that is certainly not the same thing as your suggestion that somehow America had the means to easily stop the war. It was also during the Cold War, which I'm sure had a lot to do with the motivations of the American government towards staying plugged in to the region.

First of all, and again, America did stop them, just as activists had been claiming they could; a claim ultimately vindicated. Yes, the UN got involved, but not until America allowed it to happen. Plus, this all occurred without violence, a fantastic addition to the triumph of the activists' long-held position.

Second, "Cold War" is inevitably summoned. And while I agree wholeheartedly that Cold War politics were involved (note Suharto's and Ford's discussion about the possibility of East Timor becoming "non-aligned," an insulting sleight to the ruelrs' wishes on both the Indonesian and American side, exposing the extremism of the freshly de-colonised Timorese peasants, and making the slaughter of perhaps a third of the population entirely justified), there was no "Communist threat" that can wave away the horrors.

"Cold War" is not a blanket justification, a talismanic term we can evoke as we sadly nod at yet another result of Soviet or Chinese iniquity!

"Look how those dastardly Communists--by existing--forced us to support mass murder of a people not aligned nor involved with them!"

A promiscuous stretch, to put it generously.

Every situation has to be looked at individually as well as in a larger context. Support for one and a half or two hundred thousand murdered must be set to a high bar, not a low or non-existent one.

Edited April 8, 2011 by bloodyminded

[bloodyminded]

I love it!!

Let's play cards!!

http://friendlydictators.blogspot.com/

And I don't condemn countries for having "relationships" with dictators; it could scarcely be avoided.

I just don't think we should be working with them on matters of oppression, torture, murder and so forth.

[bloodyminded]

It's well documented that the US assisted in assassinating the former leader and providing a list of state enemies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Indonesia

Google Books

Here's the 'green light' on the invasion of East Timor

According to a CIA memo, Prime Minister Harold Macmillan and President John F. Kennedy had agreed to "liquidate President Sukarno, depending on the situation and available opportunities". In 1990 the American journalist Kathy Kadane revealed the extent of the secret American support of some of the massacres of 1965-66 that allowed Suharto to seize the Presidency. She interviewed many former US officials and CIA members, who spoke of compiled lists of 5,000 PKI operatives, which the Americans ticked off as the victims were killed or captured.

Yes. I believe the UK was also involved in this.

Shortly after his return from Indonesia, President Ford was interviewed by Jack Anderson [_San Francisco Chronicle_, November 9, 1979; Blum86]. In his article, Jack Anderson, wrote:

President Ford was on his way to Indonesia for a state visit. An intelligence report forewarned that Suharto would bring up the Timor issue and would ``try to elicit a sympathetic attitude!''

That Suharto succeeded is confirmed by Ford himself. The U.S. national interest, Ford concluded, ``had to be on the side of Indonesia''.

Ford gave his tacit approval on December 6, 1975 ... Five days after the invasion, the United Nations voted to condemn the attack as an arrant act of international aggression. The United States abstained. Thereafter, the U.S. delegate maneuvered behind the scenes to resist U.N. moves aimed at forcing Indonesia to give up its conquest

As Air Force General Brent Scowcroft, President Ford's National Security Adviser, explained:

I guess it was fundamentally a matter of recognizing reality. We really had no reasonable options ... It made no sense to antagonize the Indonesians ... East Timor was not a viable entity [_Christian Science Monitor_, March 6, 1980; Chomsky82].

Right. I mean, it's helpfully very clear. I'm not completely sure what the disagreement is about.

And if the name "Chomsky" suddenly throws anyone into a tizzy, I'd only point again to the declassified document, available on this thread. It's all there.

Edited April 8, 2011 by bloodyminded

[bush_cheney2004]

...I don't know why you'd avoid objectivity here...if America does something--no matter what--you are here to proudly defend it.

Why not now?

Because it doesn't need defending...and most certainly not from an assault from your ivory tower. The very notion of a "green light" strips the issue of time and context. At this basic level, America armed/arms Canada too..for dastardly deeds across the sea. Oh my!

[bloodyminded]

Because it doesn't need defending...and most certainly not from an assault from your ivory tower.

Speaking about what happned constitutes an "ivory tower"?

The very notion of a "green light" strips the issue of time and context.

You still haven't read the supplied document?