You've probably already commented on this (I'm working my way through commenting on an entire week's articles, chronologically, so forgive me if you've already answered this), so I have to ask: since the Americans were evacuated, have you been satisfied with Obama's stance on "Qaddafi must go" or not? Seems to me, after the US citizens were safe, he did pretty much what you're calling on him here to do. But then, I don't want to put words in your mouth, so I'm interested in your reaction now.

-CW

Is that the same "cyberpunk" William Gibson, or am I getting names mixed up again? Great article, and great excerpt, thanks for posting it!

Michale -

I'm answering this late, but the answer to your question was: because American diplomats and other citizens were in the process of fleeing, and any rash moves by Obama would have put their freedom and possibly lives in danger. I'm completely satisfied with that explanation, as sometimes there are higher priorities than making a statement. In Egypt, Obama called for Mubarak's regime to end (but not for him to step down immediately, at first) at least a week or so into the demonstrations. It wasn't as fast as you remember, I bet. Also, in Egypt, we had enormous leverage over both the Egyptian military and Mubarak, which simply did not exist in Libya. When dealing with a lunatic (Qaddafi), it's best to get your own people out of harm's way before issuing ultimatums, wouldn't you agree?

-CW

Why the HELL isn't Obama screaming from the rooftops for Qadaffi to get the frack out of Libya??!!??

I mean, compare the US response to Egypt and Mubarak and the US response to Libya and Qadaffi...

Oh sure, we are hearing the usual platitudes and such, once "scheduling difficulties" have been resolved..

But hell, Obama was all but demanding that Mubarak resign, just days into the Egyptian protests..

Qadaffy is BOMBING and STRAFING protests with Fighter Jets and all we hear from the White House is, "oh wow, jeeze. That's really wrong and we really wish Qadaffy would stop all of that..."

Is there any reason why the US is not clamoring for Qadaffi to step down??

Any reason at all???

Michale.....

Indeed! This could turn out to be the decade of the protester.

And, we can have some fun separating out the legitimate demonstrators from the run-of-the-mill shit disturbers. :)

What are they protesting against, anyway? Do they not understand what everyone has to do to undo the economic damage that has been caused by decades of bad policy? Are they not willing to do their share?

Questions that are so applicable all around the world, it's scary!! :D

Michale.....

Orwell knew the power of the press, our first mass medium, and at the BBC he'd witnessed the first electronic medium (radio) as it was brought to bear on wartime public opinion. He died before broadcast television had fully come into its own, but had he lived I doubt that anything about it would have much surprised him. The media of ''1984'' are broadcast technology imagined in the service of a totalitarian state, and no different from the media of Saddam Hussein's Iraq or of North Korea today -- technologically backward societies in which information is still mostly broadcast. Indeed, today, reliance on broadcasting is the very definition of a technologically backward society.

[...]

Orwell's projections come from the era of information broadcasting, and are not applicable to our own. Had Orwell been able to equip Big Brother with all the tools of artificial intelligence, he would still have been writing from an older paradigm, and the result could never have described our situation today, nor suggested where we might be heading.

[...]

It is becoming unprecedentedly difficult for anyone, anyone at all, to keep a secret.

In the age of the leak and the blog, of evidence extraction and link discovery, truths will either out or be outed, later if not sooner. This is something I would bring to the attention of every diplomat, politician and corporate leader: the future, eventually, will find you out. The future, wielding unimaginable tools of transparency, will have its way with you. In the end, you will be seen to have done that which you did.

...Stan

What are they protesting against, anyway? Do they not understand what everyone has to do to undo the economic damage that has been caused by decades of bad policy? Are they not willing to do their share?

Yeah, the surveillance works both ways. Governments can't easily get away with repressing their people anymore and citizens have to take their responsibilites more seriously, too.