The American media is rife with stories and pictures of the hero’s welcome that Abdel Baset al-Megrahi received in Libya after his release from Scottish custody for the 1988 Lockerbie bombing.
The only thing missing is context. Unfortunately, that is typical of American journalism.
The Libyan people are happy to have Megrahi back because they believe him to be innocent. The Lockerbie bombing was probably the result of a bomb put on the plane by Iranians, and that in response the the American shoot-down of an Iranian jet in 1988. It is the “blowback” context that Americans rejected. To deflect attention away from American activities, a Libyan was put up as a scapegoat. Hence suspicions surround the original trial, including bribing of a key witness. It appears as though Megrahi was railroaded. He has never confessed to the crime, and insists on his innocence to this day. A new witness came forth in 2008 to protest his innocence.
Read more here, here and here. And “The Lockerbie Case” is a fascinating blog that has tracked all of the evidence surrounding the tragic incident. American names keep popping up.
It’s a fascinating story from many standpoints – how Lockerbie is part of terror history, but the Americans shooting down the Iranian airliner that same year is not; how the mere denial of deliberate act by American officials in the Vincennes incident satisfies American journalists, but how world wide pleas and suspicions don’t get the slightest rise out of them.
This I know: On this incident, the Libyan people are better informed than the Americans. Proably about many other things as well.
Piece of Mindful 
Maybe the Libyan people know about the $900M oil exploration deal between British Petroleum and LNO.
LikeLike
Right on point!
LikeLike
Amusing, how can you possibly live with yourself being called an American?
LikeLike
Jeez – you could have done better. I wanted some real argument, and not a knee jerk. Have you ever doubted?
LikeLike
This I know: On this incident, the Libyan people are better informed than the Americans. Proably about many other things as well.
Please tell me you know some other things.
Common courtesy would dictate a more subdued homecoming.
LikeLike
Well, it’s kind of a given that the rest of the world knows all about American foreign policy, and Americans know squat.
Anyway, had you suffered the indignity of seeing an innocent man imprisoned for all these years and had you been demonized as terrorists by people are are really, really good terrorists, when vindication came, you would cheer too.
LikeLike
it’s kind of a given
Phhtt. You can’t just make your case, you have to add that the other side is stupid.
I like your embedded links: a couple of speculation pieces that don’t keep the time line straight, and a self reference with this gem: I operate on the assumption that people are the same, everywhere.
LikeLike
I did not say “stupid”. You did. Absence of knowledge is not the same as absence of intelligence. People are the same, everywhere, but live in different environments – ours is heavily propagandized – there’s that word again. There’s probably more information about world events seeping into Libya than this place. Hell, Americans don’t even know about Canada’s health system, and they are right on the border!
The time line puts a bomb on the plane in Germany, a warning given Americans by German authorities that was ignored. Something was going on there that you’re missing. Report back.
LikeLike
Americans know squat.
This is you saying stupid. Absence of knowledge implies absence of intelligence to acquire knowledge.
There’s probably more information about world events seeping into Libya than this place.
Probably not. This is more of your schtick that calls Americans stupid to give your ramblings more power.
LikeLike
Absence of knowledge most definitely does not imply lack of intelligence. Lack of curiosity might. If bright kids go to school but are not offered a broad scope of hisotry, are they stupid, or ignorant?
I don’t understand the dynamics well. For instance, the guy who fixes my car can probably disassemble an engine and put it back together, far beyond my intelligence. But at the same time, he cannot grasp the basics of health insurance. Who’s more intelligent? Him or me? I have no answer for you. I make more money, but that’s no indicator.
Much of it has to do with the ability to grasp abstractions. Typically, a human’s IQ is around 100 – that’s enough to make a good living and deal with mechanical concepts. But abstractions like hisotry and insurance and journalism area beyond his grasp. In your case, I have tried to get across the abstraction called “propaganda”, and it is clear to me you cannot grasp it.
Does that make you stupid? No. It simply means we cannot communicate, that you would not do well in fields like hisotry or psychology or journalism that require abstract thinking.
And it means that people who do understand concepts like propaganda literally own your soul.
Anyway, I said that the rest of the world understands American foreign policy, while Americans do not. It is no accident. Our propaganda system limits not only our access to information, but our ability to grasp it. We’re mostly not stupid, but mushroomed – kept in the dark and fed shit.
LikeLike
that you would not do well in fields…
As usual you make a point to insult the intelligence of those with whom you disagree. This speaks more to your insecurities and your problems with authority.
You are too anxious to draw conclusions from a limited sample. “I said that the rest of the world understands American foreign policy, while Americans do not.” From what evidence do you draw this conclusion? Where have you learned what the ‘rest of the world’ knows about foreign policy? You have no credibility in this area, but blogging lets you pretend.
LikeLike
As usual you make a point to insult the intelligence of those with whom you disagree.
There’s no reaching you. I made exactly the opposite point.
That you don’t deal well in abstracts is not a slam on intelligence – Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Thomas Edison – none of these men are/were abstract thinkers. Roughly ten percent of us deal in abstracts, 90% in concrete conceptualization. And that, of course, is a hard line drawn where there is actually much overlap.
From what evidence do you draw this conclusion? Where have you learned what the ‘rest of the world’ knows about foreign policy?
Polls taken in those areas where the U.S. is involved, via the marriage of our corporations and our military, show very little love for the U.S. The U.S has over 700 hard installations around the globe, strategically placed to ensure that global financial interests are protected.
For instance, the attack on Serbia under Clinton was done to open up that country to American corporations, and install a military base in Kosovo to protect the nearby pipeline that is bringing oil in from the Caucuses. Serbians all l knew this, Americans not.
And of course every Iraqi knew about Abu Ghraib and all of the other torture facilities in Iraq while Americans did not. We still know only about Abu Ghraib,and not the others, and are even so naive as to think that it ended when they got caught, or when Bush left office. We don’t know that the U.S. was and is running a torture regime there.
On and on it goes. But for evidence, I can only cite polls regarding U.S. popularity abroad. You and I both know you’ll never look any further. It has nothing to do with your intelligence, but rather your insulated attitude.
LikeLike
Sigh. More insults. Oh well. I’ll learn what I can. Since I’m so prone to propaganda, why don’t you take it upon yourself to gather me into the way of awareness and proper attitude?
You are giving mixed signals about cognitive abilities. Often you take the egalitarian line where we are all equally endowed, and differences arise from our upbringing and other environmental differences. Other times you take the Royalist line where some are better than others. When pressed you get slippery and start grabbing at distinctions between intelligence and abstract thinking, between intelligence and acquired knowledge.
Do you think we can measure general intelligence reported as IQ?
Do you think society self-sorts itself along the lines of IQ as discussed in the book “The Bell Curve”?
LikeLike
Also:
But for evidence, I can only cite polls regarding U.S. popularity abroad.
You have indicated that the elites control the information flow. How have these polls escaped their purview?
You and I both know you’ll never look any further.
I’m the government fed toadstool asking for help. This is the best you can do? Methinks you are more interested in spinning a narrative than backing up the details.
LikeLike
Your notion of what constitutes an insult is interesting. Nothing said here is beyond your grasp, but you simply don’t want to look a little deeper or further. Nothing I can do about that.
Intelligence varies by level and type. IQ tests, in my opinion, miss as much as they capture. But they do capture something. There are indeed stupid people out there, but mostly in this country there are people with limited sight horizons. I have often noted that conservatives see what they see very clearly, but don’t see very much.
We can go on and on about this. You make the world out to be a very boring and understandable place. It’s infinitely complex and gives us all a lifetime offun in trying to understand it. Propaganda is but one aspect of our existence that I find fascinating and try to understand. Your attitude, that it doesn’t really have much importance, is nothing more than an indication that it is working on you in spades.
Propaganda is very easy to overcome. You simply have to be aware of it. We are all susceptible. I kick myself when I fall for it, come under its spell. But at least I ahve awareness of my vulnerability. You don’t.
Elites do control information flow. But information still exists and can be found with a little searching. And anyway, these polls have not escaped the purview of anyone but you, it appears. They leave most people scratching their heads “We just ry to help people, and they hate us. .;.. “They’re jealous of our freedom.”
US popularity abroad has risen in recent months. It’s due to the fact that we elected Obama. US foreign policy, however, has not changed one iota since he took office. I cannot explain everything.
And anyway, I refuse to be your Googler.
LikeLike
There are indeed stupid people out there, but mostly in this country there are people with limited sight horizons. I have often noted that conservatives see what they see very clearly, but don’t see very much.
This is your nice, crypto-Unitarian way of saying that conservatives are stupid. Nicely done.
these polls have not escaped the purview of anyone but you, it appears.
You said, “Libyans know more about world events than Americans.” I asked, “How do you know this.” You said, “From polls.” I asked, “What polls, and can they be independently verified?”. You said, “I refuse to be your Googler.” That maps the extent of your credibility.
LikeLike
Have it your way. Conservatives are stupid. It was John Stuart Mill who said that while it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative.
I know many conservatives, and many of the many I know are stupid. But not all. I say limited site horizons because there is a tendency among right wing authoritarians to cluster and self-validcate, rather than taking on the whole of the world.
Deal with it.
And as i said, I refuse to be your Googler. I wrote about one instance in which Libyans for sure know than Americans about an important incident – Lockerbie. I speculated that there are probably many more areas, as Americans don’t know much about the rest of the world, or even about American foreign policy. I stand by that, and you Google it if you think it’s far-fetched.
Watch this for fun: http://loopyblog.free.fr/?p=734
LikeLike
It was John Stuart Mill who said…
Interesting that you quote Mill, who probably wouldn’t agree with your general philosophy of life.
the guy who fixes my car can probably disassemble an engine and put it back together, far beyond my intelligence. But at the same time, he cannot grasp the basics of health insurance.
Au contraire. I think an auto mechanic could grasp and craft a better health care system than most.
Much of it has to do with the ability to grasp abstractions…But abstractions like hisotry and insurance and journalism area beyond his grasp…Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Thomas Edison – none of these men are/were abstract thinkers.
??? I guess I need you to explain more of what you mean by “abstractions”. History, insurance, and journalism are based on concrete events. I don’t see where they require particularly abstract thinking such as what is found in philosophy, physics, and higher mathematics. Your judgments of Gates et al is specious. The way you approach problems and your blogging seem particularly non abstract, based as it is on anecdotes and moral equivalency.
LikeLike
Myers/Briggs, Jungian psychologists, identify the ability of a small percentage of the population to deal in abstracts – at least 5%, no more than 10%. The reason there are so few of us is that nature selects concrete thinkers – they have better survival skills. I don’t know why we are here except to write blogs and annoy people. About one-half of abstract thinkers are idealists, they other half seek power outlets. I am an idealist. An idealist who sees life for what it really is is a “cynic”, but idealism precedes cynicism.
I am abstract in the extreme according to those tests, scoring 18 out of 20 on the abstract vs concrete side.
History is a but an imaginary construct of real events. In reality, there is no “history” that we can see, touch or feel. We make narratives on the past by electing and highlighting certain events that may or may not happened, by misconstruing them, and calling them reality. Totally an abstract endeavor. He who controls the past …
To add to the confusion, according to M/B, mathematicians, who completely deal in abstracts, are concrete thinkers in the extreme.
Professions in which you find abstract thinkers: History, psychology, the ministry, English, social sciences … you get the idea. I brought up Edison and Gates because inventors of machines are concrete thinkers by definition – as are engineers. The two men were/are geniuses – but if they could not visualize how machines work, a concrete thoujght process, they would not be well known.
Anyway, read more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-Briggs_Type_Indicator
Fascinating stuff.
LikeLike
Myers/Briggs, Jungian psychologists, identify the ability of a small percentage of the population to deal in abstracts…I am abstract in the extreme according to those tests, scoring 18 out of 20 on the abstract vs concrete side.
These personality surveys measure the relative expression of concrete/abstract. Thomas Edison was maybe six sigma in concrete thinking but four standard deviations above the mean in abstract thinking. The wino down the street maybe scores 18 out of 20 but he may be four standard deviations below the mean in abstract thinking ability. Thomas Edison would do more abstract thinking one morning before breakfast one day than this guy does in his whole life.
History is a but an imaginary construct of real events.
Does imagination = abstract thinking? Not necessarily. History requires synthesis and summation, traits I don’t find particularly abstract.
LikeLike
I don’t think you’re getting it – I think you need to look into it further. M/B is not a test that seeks to pigeonhole or judge people or advance any agenda. I have no idea how Einstein or Henry Ford or Bill Gates would score – I only assume they are ‘S’ types because they accomplished so much in the world of machines, versus the world of ideas. People have studied our presidents in depth (never once have we had an idealist (NF) as president), and other famous people like Joe Stalin (ISTJ) – I personally think ISTJ’s are people to avoid.
I really think you ought to look into it further. The purpose of the test is to help us understand how we fit into life and interact with others. We abstract thinkers have a very difficult time communicating with concrete thinkers – which is why at parties you will find us in little clusters off the the side discussing things of no interest to anyone else. Where the otehrs are talking hunting/fishing, we are talking politics and history, which is an abstract construct.
Don’t judge, don’t prejudge – you are surface skimming and not understanding at all. Take the damned test, read about what they say about you, see if it resonates. If not, toss it.
PS – I have a friend in Billings who used to be in charge of data processing for the city government. A speaker came in to talk to department heads about personnel management, and gave them all the M/B test. “One of you,” she said on looking at the results, “feels like he doesn’t belong.” She was talking to my friend who was an SF – ‘sensing (concrete) and feeling’, versus all the others who were ‘NT’ – abstract and tough minded. They did not communicate well.
More fascinating still, NT’s comprise about 2% of the population, yet wound up in charge of 5 of the 6 departments of the city. NT’s pretty much run the world. You’ll find them (or ST’s) running just about every large organization.
Anyway, I am INFP – introverted, abstract (iNtuitive), Feeling, and Perceptive (P is widely misunderstood. It doesn’t mean what it appears to mean at all.) It all comes from Jung.
LikeLike
We abstract thinkers have a very difficult time communicating with concrete thinkers
Sounds more like an excuse for someone with bad ideas.
These social science tests measure traits that occur on a continuum. Just because you score as more introverted does not mean you can’t engage in extroverted behavior. Just because you score as a more abstract thinker does not mean you can’t handle concrete concepts and vice versa.
These tests also don’t speak to the absolute level of these traits. Some people are wicked intuitive and it is reflected in their success. Some people are scary sensory and they blow past most of the world on their climb up the ladder.
These personality distinctions are useful, buy you have seized upon them a little too tightly in your quest to establish yourself as someone with expert knowledge.
LikeLike
You obviously haven’t absorbed a word of anything, nor is your terminology correct.
Yes, traits occur on a continuum. But they are traits, and they can be measured, and that is the purpose of the test. Yes, abstract thinkers can engage in concrete ideation, but they don’t enjoy it and don’t gravitate towards occupations that require it.
You don’t get ‘iNtuitive’ at all. Read Myers Briggs, report back. Hell, you might even take the damned test and learn that the authors are miles ahead of you. You mgiht even learn a thing or two about yourself, and be pleasantly surprised that M/B never set out to put you down. All is well in their world.
LikeLike
nor is your terminology correct.
You noticed. The pedant gets a gold star.
You came on here self identifying with the “5% of the population that has the ability to deal in abstracts”, and I thought, “WTF? This guy seems massively non-abstract. Where does this come from?” Then I find out you got 18 out of 20 on a test in Redbook magazine. Ha ha. You’re too anxious to tell people how special you are. This stems more from your insecurity than from any actual evidence.
LikeLike
Part of the problem here is that the Internet has become so commercialized that it’s hard to find raw data anymore outside of Wikipedia. It’s like going to the carnival and having barkers yelling at you from every side. I started using Google back in the 90’s because it was the only search engine that did not try to steer you to paid advertising. Now that’s all it is – pages and pages of ads before you get to anything useful. With Myers/Briggs, there isn’t anything useful anymore except a brief Wiki article.
Anyway, you’ve prejudged a whole area of psychology, misinterpreted the meaning of terms, and I was going to try and steer you to some useful information about Myers/Briggs typing, Jungian psychology, even some controversy about it. There used to be useful web sites about it, but no more. It’s all advertising crap. They titillate a little, try to get you interested, and then try to sell you shit. It’s a joke.
All I can tell you is to look around, read, learn what the fuck you are talking about. You’re embarrassing yourself a this point. You started right from the gitgo by assigning quality measurements to abstract/versus concrete, as if I was saying one was superior to the other, and presuming that I was saying that concrete thinking was somehow inferior. That was your initial error.
You’ve made many since and have shown no inclination or initiative to take this any further than your fresh-out-of-my ass half baked conclusions. End of thread.
LikeLike