What is informative, not to mention easy to post, are three YouTube videos from Noam Chomsky, who is now 82 years old and full of history and wisdom.
The first two (Noam Chomsky and Jeremy Paxman's BBC interview) are very recent interviews of Noam Chomsky concerning the situation in Libya and the Middle East. If you watch them, pay particular to the beginning of the first and the end of the second.
The third ("Libya has been a punching bag for 10 years" (1991)), is a Q&A given by Chomsky 20 years ago (1991) about Libya and Israel. Interesting context for those that don't remember. Chomsky is quite frank about Israeli motives, motives that are more than salient today, not that you have been paying attention.
At the end of the post I've thrown in a few articles for those of you trying to kick the intervention habit.
Noam Chomsky and Jeremy Paxman's BBC interview in full Part 1
Noam Chomsky and Jeremy Paxman's BBC interview in full Part 2.wmv
Noam Chomsky: "Libya has been a punching bag for 10 years" (1991)
Kicking the intervention habit
Should talks of intervention in Libya turn into action, it would be illegal, immoral and hypocritical.
Richard Falk Last Modified: 10 Mar 2011 12:54 GMT
Pack Journalism Promotes War on Libya
By Stephen Lendman
March 10, 2011 "Information Clearing House" -- America's major media never met an imperial war it didn't love and promote, never mind how lawless, mindless, destructive and counterproductive.
WikiLeaks: FRENCH TOTAL-LED CONSORTIUMS ACCEPT LOWER PRODUCTION SHARES IN LIBYA
Summary: Libya's National Oil Corporation (NOC) renegotiated the terms of its production sharing agreements with France's Total and its partners in Libya (Germany's Wintershall and Norway's StatoilHydro), adjusting the existing stand-alone contracts to bring them into compliance with the Exploration and Production Sharing Agreement (EPSA) rubric. The renegotiation of Total's contract is of a piece with the NOC's effort to renegotiate existing contracts to increase the Libya's share of crude oil production.
How The So-Called Guardians Of Free Speech Are Silencing The Messenger
By John Pilger
March 10, 2011
As the United States and Britain look for an excuse to invade another oil-rich Arab country, the hypocrisy is familiar. Colonel Gaddafi is “delusional” and “blood-drenched” while the authors of an invasion that killed a million Iraqis, who have kidnapped and tortured in our name, are entirely sane, never blood-drenched and once again the arbiters of “stability”.
But something has changed. Reality is no longer what the powerful say it is. Of all the spectacular revolts across the world, the most exciting is the insurrection of knowledge sparked by WikiLeaks. This is not a new idea. In 1792, the revolutionary Tom Paine warned his readers in England that their government believed that “people must be hoodwinked and held in superstitious ignorance by some bugbear or other”. Paine’s The Rights of Man was considered such a threat to elite control that a secret grand jury was ordered to charge him with “a dangerous and treasonable conspiracy”. Wisely, he sought refuge in France.