====================================================================== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. ======================================================================
On 6/15/14 1:39 AM, Einde O'Callaghan via Marxism wrote:
I find it difficult to take any commentator who refers to Gilad Atzmon favourably as a serious commentator!
In an exchange with Shamir, he explained that by "intervention", he didn't mean military attacks exclusively even though that's what most reasonable people would understand by the term. He meant interference as in NGO, CIA, and just about any other attempt by imperialism to influence the outcome in another country. It is not just that, it is also meant as an imperative to support the state that is being interfered with. This would have obligated us, for example, to support Mubarak or Putin's crackdown on NGO's, something that these people did. For my money, this is far worse than the knee-jerk CP support for the Kremlin that took place when Stalin was in power. At least they could be excused for defending socialism after a fashion. What this has to do with the Syrian Baathists, for example, is anybody's guess especially when Vogue magazine profiled the dictator in glowing terms and Hillary Clinton referred to al-Assad as a "reformer".
________________________________________________ Send list submissions to: [email protected] Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
