@min729:

re, @Joseph Anderson, Berkeley, CA
yes the ’girls with curls’...

Thanks, min. Your comments are much appreciated!

(Btw, I’m African American and Obama *never* fooled me for a second!: I *knew* all along that he was going to be ’Bush III’ -- and is often *worse*, but hidden behind, as I said before, American imperialism’s and corporatism’s ultimate face-lift, short of a Black woman!

[I could oppose Obama and the white Tea Party racism against Obama -- well really against *all* Black and Brown people, with Tea Party exception for maybe Clarence Thomas who supports white capitalist/corporatist supremacy anyway!]

Liberals/progressives/leftists never understood that we didn’t have an anti-war/anti-imperialist, anti-Gitmo/-Bagram gulag, anti-corporatist Democrat/Republican presidential nonimee to choose between in the last presidential election -- and we won’t have one in the next presidential election either. I *heard* all the loopholes you could drive a tank through in every "promise" Obama made!

Obama was the, then, the "Black" presidential candidate who *WOULDN’T* even go to Memphis to commemorate the 40th anniversary of the asssassination of Martin Luther King -- unlike Hillary Clinton and even McCain did -- because Obama thought he’d look like he was ’too close to Black people’! If you can’t commemorate the 40th anniversary of the assassination of Martin Luther King, then *who* African American -- unless someone was a ’Clarence Thomas’ type -- can you do it for? But, somehow, in some supposed gesture to the political right-wing, I see Obama, one day, going to California, to Simi Valley [only *1.4%* Black, probably a city with more *Mercedes* than Black people], to commemorate some anniversary of the death of *Ronald Reagan*!)

BUT, AS I ALWAYS SAY, "*MOVEMENTS* ARE EVEN MORE IMPORTANT THAN PRESIDENTS!"

(Because of certain very strong national progressive grassroots political movements there were several landmark progressive achievements even under *Nixon* and *Reagan*! Liberals/progressives/leftists actually nonehtheless had some *victories* back then. Or course, these days, Obama (or even, before, President Clinton) might be somewhat to the right of *Nixon* in the latter’s domestic programs -- of course, minus Nixon’s Watergate scandal.)

Question to Otto von Bulow:

I’m sure that the U.S. NGO’s and NED infiltration, fronts, attempted infiltration, and attempted fronts are the U.S.’s "back-up" plan everywhere in the so-called "3rd World". The U.S. (and its deputy imperialists) isn’t (aren’t) just going to lay down, play dead, and do *nothing* just because there was/is a successful pro-democracy rebellion in some so-called 3rd World country against a U.S.-supported, or partially U.S.-supported, regime. (Didn’t the U.S. occasionally send kidnapped/"renditioned" victims to places like Syria and, before, Libya to be *tortured*?)


The world is run by various kinds of organised criminal groups....and the various elites have to run with that fact and either fight fire with fire or find themselves disappeared into the history books.

It`s time we realised that our financial religious and political elites are supported by the likes of the CIA and military and their media propaganda machines because any elite that divested themselves of these aids would be finished.....however virtuous they were.


It`s a jungle out there and if we demand more democracy I am sorry to say the result may be more real authoritarianism and surveillance and corruption there could be..... as a way for elites to remain in control while SEEMING to offer us more transparency and democracy!

In the long run we will only survive as a species if we THINK and ACT as ONE mankind.....if we don`t life will continue to be a battle between elites using whatever means are most effective....and authoritarianism and inequality works far more effectively than freedom and democracy!

Question to Otto von Bulow:

I’m sure that the U.S. NGO’s and NED infiltration, fronts, attempted infiltration, and attempted fronts are the U.S.’s "back-up" plan everywhere in the so-called "3rd World". The U.S. (and its deputy imperialists) isn’t (aren’t) just going to lay down, play dead, and do *nothing* just because there was/is a successful pro-democracy rebellion in some so-called 3rd World country against a U.S.-supported, or partially U.S.-supported, regime. (Didn’t the U.S. occasionally send kidnapped/"renditioned" victims to places like Syria and, before, Libya to be *tortured*?)

The U.S. and its deputy imperialists *always*, Machiavellian-like, play both sides in a 3rd World country -- through different routes/organs -- to a certain extent -- and secretly, politically flatters the dissidents/opposition, *just in case* the U.S.-supported dictator/authoritarian regime is ever, by any chance, overthrown, and if the U.S. can’t find *another* dictator there to support.

The dissidents/opposition just have to know/remember that the U.S. is/was just hedging its bet -- and that the U.S. is not really a *real* friend, just an *expedient* "friend", and to be on guard about the U.S. trying to take over by either hand-picking who gets into the *new* regime, or by proxy: the U.S. government is *never* really your friend unless it can get something out of you: the U.S. government plays a cold, calculated game. And the last thing that the U.S. wants is *real* democracies in the Middle East.

(Even Israel is a semi-*theocratic* colonial regime/state, certainly *not* really a true democracy -- in spite of Israel’s PR montra that "Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. (Not every state that calls/ed itself a "democracy" really is/was one. A defined and ideologically Jewish Zionist state can, by definition, never be a true democracy for either ALL it’s residents and certainly not for the native people that Israel has oppressed for well-over half a century!)

*BUT*, Otto von Bulow, don’t the people of the Middle East have a *right* to graduate from any **dictatorships** (again, usually U.S.-supported) to even a "bourgeois democracy" -- just like the people of the former Soviet dictatorship states graduated to Western-supported "bourgeois democracy" -- just like *we* in the political West have (i.e., a "bourgeois democracy") -- sometimes corrupt &/or with *legalized* corruption/bribery (as the U.S. has with its corporate-financed election campaigns, or with the U.S. *legalized* corruption rich political lobbies system)? And don’t the people of the Middle East have a right to "vote" for their head of state and legislative candidates -- to at least have *some* reformist say in how they are governed? Don’t the people of the Middle East have a right *not* to always get shot down or wisked away in the street just like us(!!) -- at least for the most part (unless you’re Black or Brown and the cops, using some pretext, shoot you down)!?

Graduation to a "bourgeois democracy" is certainly not, alone, a *sufficient* step -- but it may be a *necessary* step.

If those Middle East dictators weren’t *dictators*, then maybe they’d have their own citizens *defending* them against U.S. infiltration, manipulation, and control in the first place.

@Joseph Anderson, Berkeley, CA
yes the ’girls with curls’ that you mention are the women who, as I said, are the ones playing the boy’s game. I agree that the corporate powers (or the boys) figured out the ’Woman’ card a while ago and are now also playing the ’Black’ card. What’s sad is that these tactics seem to actually work.

If you want to find the feminine energy you’ll usually find it living and breathing in the women AND men working at the grass roots level, trying very hard to clean up this mess. This is where our attention should be focused..

"As within, So without"- Hermessianex

Well, Julian’s 3rd show was a *MUCH* more interesting and orderly interview than the 2nd show (especially, then, with David Horowitz).

Julian even asked a few tough questions (unlike against David Horowitz in Julian’s 2nd show) -- and Julian didn’t let Marzouki ’butter him (Julian) up’, however sincere Marzouki was, to stop Julian from *asking* a few tough and very important questions -- but I wish that Julian had pushed for the answer for the tough unanswered questions a little bit more -- not enough to be obnoxious, but enough to show that President Moncef Marzouki was either going to answer the tough question or clearly *wasn’t* going to answer a tough, important question -- like about internet censorship/blocking in Tunisia (a sad surprise to hear after the revolution): Assange all too gracefully let Marzouki off the hook.

Assange also let Marzouki off the hook about his/Tunisia being "soft of Bahrain" -- unless that question and answer was edited out; but then *why*.

The BBC maintstream news interviewers asks *some* tougher questions of its political interviewees, much moreso than the American news interviewers do -- which usually only asks *softball* questions (unless it’s someone that the Democrat or Republican establishment just doesn’t like) -- but, typically, BBC interviewees (especially if they are *establishment* guests) generally *know* (in the BBC’s little pretend game) that *after* an appropriately tough question is asked, and which is often *once* repeated (if the interviewee tries to dodge the answer), the BBC news interviewers will let the interviewee off the hook -- unfortunately for us when it comes to government officials whom we want to answer a tough question, or two, or few, and not dodge them.

But, Marzouki needs to know that, as the saying goes, "THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU/US FREE!" -- except for the torturers and other human rights violators.

Still, THIS 3RD EDITION OF JULIAN’S SHOW WAS *MUCH* BETTER than the 2nd edition. BUT, JULIAN’S ’INAUGURAL’ *1ST* SHOW WAS THE MOST COURAGEOUS SO FAR. Gee, I’d love to see the parts that were edited out of the *1st* edition for sake of time or whatever (maybe Hassan Nasrallah’s criticism of Israel/Zionim was *too* articulate and *too* incisive)!

Julian, here is an idea for ending of your regular show, devote last 5 minutes of the show to read incoming new information. A small offer of financial reward and immunity from exposure for disclosure of wrong doing in events like 9/11 attacks will guarantee many new "WikiLeak Stories". There would need to be indisputable proof for any reported event.

Interesting interview and reflections about the reality in Tunisia, about torture and about what human rights is all about.

The third world war - bad business
First and Second World Wars were the first and second worldwide business in which he earned the highest Jewish Rothschild banking dynasty, and not only them. Times have changed. Let me be sarcastic: The Third World War would be very, very bad business, because the Jews (Rothschild and also keeps the wealth of the Vatican) lost more than they could get. I shall finish this brief comment to my aphorism: Prophets are poorly informed! But I am not a prophet but Croatian journalist ... Giancarlo Kravar (www.giancarlo-kravar.com)

min729 (6 hours ago):

"I’m wondering when are we going to hear from the women of the world? It’s the boys and their toys that made all this mess in the first place...."

Maybe we could hear from the girls with their curls: U.S. *DEPUTY MILITARIST IMPERIALISTS* Margaret Thatcher (although some did call her, with regard to her macho domestic and imperialist politics, "a man with a perm"), or Angela Merkel of Germany, or Julia Gillard of Australia, or Hillary Clinton (Obama’s warmongering assistant), or Susan Rice (U.S. ambassador to the UN), or too bad we couldn’t have heard from the late ethnic cleansing, arch-Zionist racist, Golda Meir (who ’lamented’ that the indigenous Palestinian people ’made’ Israeli soldiers shoot and kill Palestinian kids!)? I’m sure there are or have been other such women: capitalism’s coeds.

Eurocentric international corporate capitalists have shown that they can even find a "Black" man to put a face-lift -- the *ultimate* face-lift (short of finding a Black woman) -- on American imperialist Eurocentric foreign and corporatist policy: international corporate capitalists has also found even *women* to put a face lift on the same.

But, agreed, Assange should find some politically and globally conscious women to interview too.

And *not* one of those so-called "liberal" *Zionist* women *posing* as "politically conscious" -- or P-E-P: Progressive *Except* (on) Palestine.

This interview was excellent, thanks a lot! Like others here, I really like the question about lack of capability/power. I do not know much about the country, but I do not think you can go much further without disclosing what happened during the darkest times.