Chris Marsden
WSWS

The readiness of the European powers to line up almost unanimously behind the imperialist war against Libya is a defining moment in the political life of the continent.

On January 20, 2003, French Foreign Minister Dominique De Villepin said of Iraq, “We believe that military intervention would be the worst solution.” Paris voted against war in the United Nations Security Council.

Together with opposition to the war from Germany, this led to the unedifying spectacle of putative leaders of the antiwar movement amongst “left” groups and the left social democrats hailing Europe as a counterweight to US militarism and even leading chants of “Vive la France!”

In the run-up to the war against Libya, France was in the forefront of demands for military intervention, with the Sarkozy government aligning itself with Britain and Washington against its longtime German ally and publicly denouncing Berlin’s reluctance to back war. With US support, France pushed through UN Security Council Resolution 1973 authorising an attack on Libya. On March 10, 2011, France became the first country in the world to recognise the National Transitional Council as Libya’s government. It led the first air strikes on March 19.

France’s particular enmity towards Libya and the Gaddafi regime stretches back to the civil war in Chad and was made worse by the cargo hold bomb that destroyed France’s UTA Flight 772 in 1989—less than a year after the destruction of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie. This may have played a part in France’s shift to military intervention in Libya.

More fundamentally, however, it is understandable only from the broader motive of eliminating a regime that France views as an obstacle to its historic imperialist ambitions in Africa. Crucially for Paris, as much as Washington, the mass movement against Western-backed dictatorships in Egypt and Tunisia was seen as a threat to imperialist influence in North Africa. The war against Libya provides the opportunity to install an outright stooge regime and turn Libya in a base of operations against the threat of socialist revolution throughout the region.

More »

Bruce G. Richardson
Dawat Independent Media Center (DIMC)

Tora Bora: For some time, rumors continue to circulate that Osama bin Laden has passed-away due to organ failure during December of 2010. Witnesses have since come forth to report and attest to the fact that they had attended his funeral. Though difficult to corroborate, Osama bin Laden’s medical history suggests a very strong possibility that he has indeed passed on, an event which would render U.S. justification for war, null and void.

Thanks to an obsessive and biased media, who function as the title of a new book suggests, as The Piano Player in the Brothel, and combined with a majority of ill-informed, anti-Islamic Members of Congress; bin Laden has heretofore been cast as a religious zealot and threat to the continued existence of a Christian, democratic world. As the alleged mastermind and architect of the September 11, 2001 attack on America, Osama bin Laden has surfaced as America’s primary justification for war on Afghanistan.

The world has long been aware of bin Laden’s critical, life-threatening kidney disease, disease that requires ongoing, daily organ-dialysis therapy to sustain life. The problems inherent in dialysis are legion: Infection as a result of an unsustainable, bacteria-free treatment environment, are just two of a multitude of problems that may be encountered by attending physicians. The United States Government contends that Osama bin Laden is in hiding in the rugged, mountainous regions of Paktia Province. Yet on examination, the logistical problems inherent in providing such a high degree of medical sophistication and technology required for this treatment in a hostile and mountainous locale, render such statements as self-serving and suspect. If this rendition were indeed factual, where and how would attending medical personnel, transport heavy, fragile equipment into the mountains, create a bacteria-free environment, safe from an armada consisting of an American ground and air posse in hot pursuit, and then have the capability to generate an uninterrupted electrical power source critically necessary for the dialysis equipment to perform properly? The improbability if not impossibility of such a logistical nightmare is mind numbing. When faced with the facts, the U.S. Government’s rendition of events that justifies and led to a war against a people that posed no threat to the country and played absolutely no role in 9/11, defies credibility and logic.

More »

David Michael Green
The Regressive Antidote

Imagine you were a pig.

As a pig, you would care about nothing besides getting fat.

If you could get fat by eating the food shares of other animals, you would readily do so.

If you could get fat by eating up your own little piglet children’s future, you would do so.

If you could get fat by eating your whole farm into ruin, you’d munch right through it without another thought.

Indeed, if you could get fat by scarfing up so much food that you literally imperiled the entire planet, you would not only do so, but you would criticize and mock those who had the temerity merely to point out the consequences of your actions and thereby interfere with the conquering of your global comestible empire.

For those of you, like me, who too often find themselves aghast at the state of our nation, jaws dropped to the floor in wonder at the astonishing capacity for American self-destruction, befuddled by the acquiescence of the victims of this pillaging, there’s your answer: If you can imagine what it would be like to be an amoral, sociopathic, singularly focused, devoted consumption machine – that is, to be a pig – then you get it. And then you get our America, too.

More »

Stephen Lendman

Daily reports on efforts to contain Fukushima's disaster remain worrisome. On April 5, New York Times writers Andrew Pollack and Kevin Drew headlined, "Plant Operator Measures Higher Radiation in Sea," saying:

"(C)ompany officials said that seawater collected near the facility contained radiation several million times the legal limit."

According to Tokyo Electric (TEPCO), radioactive iodine-131 in samples collected measured 200,000 becquerels per cubic centimeter, or five million times above normal. Cesium-137's elevated level was 1.1 million times. No information on uranium and plutonium concentrations were given. Clearly, however, growing dangers are worrisome, yet official reports downplay them. Coverup and denial persist. According to TEPCO, radiation levels have "no immediate impact" on the environment or human health. In fact, it's catastrophic. More on that below.

Moreover, thousands of tons of radioactive water are being dumped into the Pacific, likely to continue daily to make room for more runoff despite the great risk to sea life and humans. No amount of radiation is safe. Even dispersed in water, it poses grave dangers, and the more dumped, the greater the hazard.

Official reports, however, claim radiation dissipates quickly in the Pacific. They also say long-term effects of seawater radiation contamination are unclear, especially if dumping continues daily. In fact, they're very clear, posing serious future health risks, being downplayed by so-called experts, perhaps well-paid for their comments.

The Times added:

"The pumping effort is not expected to halt or alter a leak from a large crack in a six-foot-deep concrete pit next to the seawater intake pipes near" Unit 2. "The leak has been spewing an estimated seven tons of highly radioactive water an hour directly into the ocean."

In addition, other leaks "have flooded areas of the plant, complicating" efforts to contain the disaster. According to a Kyodo report, 60,000 tons of radioactive water are flooding the basement of Fukushima's reactor buildings and underground tunnels. So far, nothing done has stopped it.

More »

Gilad Atzmon
Gilad Atzmon's Blog

In a recent article, notorious Zionist Alan Dershowitz reveals the scale of rejection he faced on his recent visit to Norway:

Ahead of his visit to the country, Dershowitz’ lectures were offered (without any charge) at the three leading Norwegian universities. These universities, who on earlier occasions had been happy to host Harvard Scholar Stephen Walt and Israeli historian Ilan Pappe, clearly said ‘no’ to Dershowitz.

The Dean of the Law Faculty at Bergen University told Dershowitz that he would be honoured to have him present a lecture on the O.J. Simpson case -- as long as he was willing to promise not to mention Israel.

I guess that the message was clear -- while the Dean of the Law Faculty thought that his students may benefit from learning about the legal advocacy of a ‘single murder suspect’ -- he probably could not see any academic justification in educating them about the possible defense of a ‘murderous collective’ i.e. the Jewish State.

An administrator at the Trondheim school said that Israel was too ‘controversial.’ That is surely the most polite way possible to refer to a racist expansionist terrorist state -- The University of Oslo simply said "no" without offering any excuse.

But then the shekel dropped: “It was then”, writes Dershowitz, “that I realized why all this happened. At all of the Norwegian universities, there have been efforts to enact academic and cultural boycotts of Jewish Israeli academics.”

Did I miss something here? Dershowitz is not exactly even an Israeli -- he is, actually, an American Jew – so why should he regard himself as a ‘victim’ of the academic and cultural boycotts of ‘Jewish Israeli academics’?

I guess though, that Dershowitz grasps the inevitable truth here: the boycott against Israel is ethically driven -- It obviously identifies Dershowitz and other Jewish lobbyists as an extension of the Israeli crime, and vice versa.

More »

Stephen Lendman

Vehicles belonging to forces loyal to Muammar Qaddafi
explode after an air strike by coalition forces, along a road
between Benghazi and Ajdabiyah March 20. (Tomasevic/
Reuters)

Like Cast Lead against Gaza, Odyssey Dawn is criminal imperial war, willfully attacking non-combatants and civilian targets, including vital infrastructure, hospitals, non-military airports and buildings, ports, power generating facilities, and other sites unrelated to military necessity.

These and more besides so-called rebels killing hundreds on the ground, targeting anyone thought to be pro-Gaddafi, including African guest workers there for employment, not political allegiance.

In his article titled, "Libya and Obama's Defense of the 'Rebel Uprising,'" James Petras said:

Libyans see rebels as "invaders, breaking doors, blowing up homes and arresting and accusing local leaders of being 'fifth columnists' for Gaddafi. (They) and their imperial mentors have targeted the entire civilian economy, bombed Libyan cities, cut trade and commercial networks, blocked the delivery of subsidized food and welfare to the poor, caused the suspension of schools and forced hundreds of thousands of foreign professionals, teachers, doctors and skilled contract workers to flee."

These are Obama's freedom fighters - cutthroat killers, armed, funded and now trained by US and UK Special Forces, as well as CIA and MI 6 intelligence operatives. Besides earlier reports of their presence along with British and Egyptian commandos, London Independent writers Kim Sengupta and David Randall headlined (on April 3), "Western military advisers become visible in Benghazi," saying:

Mission creep is clearly visible, "usually described as experts, consultants and advisors" showing up in the rebel stronghold, downplaying their presence when spotted. Whatever their numbers and mandate, can many more be far behind in the early stages of a protracted, bloody conflict!

So far, shock and awe bombing leads it, killing scores, perhaps hundreds, more. Daily the numbers mount. Even independent and surprising reports confirm it.

In fact, Libya's top Vatican representative, Bishop Giovanni Innocenzo Martinelli, told Agenzia Fides, the Vatican News Service:

"The so-called humanitarian air raids have taken the lives of dozens of civilians in various areas of Tripoli" alone."

More »

Sergei Balmasov
New Eastern Outlook

"It is possible that now, after 40-odd years, the United States and Great Britain intend to put things back to the way they were before 1969."

According to statements made in Washington, the idea of a military intervention in Libya is being discussed. A NATO strike group with American and British troops at its heart is already drawing close to the shores of that country. The US representative to the UN Susan Rice is openly saying that the Pentagon is currently discussing details of an upcoming operation with its NATO allies.

“Peacekeeper” Obama’s arguments in favor of aggression are simple: Gadhafi is unjustifiably employing military force against peaceful demonstrators. We can tell what kind of peaceful demonstrators he is talking about from videos broadcast by Western news media that time and again show heavily armed opposition members.

Military intervention in Libyan affairs could become a reality within the next few days. The Pentagon has acknowledged that it has sent the aircraft carrier Enterprise to Libya from the shores of Somalia, and it will reach its destination within a day’s time. Referencing its Defense Department sources, Fox News reports that the Pentagon intends to send an additional Marine battalion to take part in the upcoming operation.

British Prime Minister David Cameron was one of the first to call for aggressive action against Libya. He said the world public cannot overlook what is happening in Libya.

These preparations were no surprise to Gadhafi. A week ago, when just as the orchestrated uprising against him was gathering force, he railed against Great Britain, whose warships had “suddenly” arrived off Libya’s shores, for preparing aggressive actions against his country.

At the time, however, the British were only showing support for the opposition, as though to say, beat the mad dog; we’ll lend a hand!

However, old man Gadhafi turned out to be a tough nut for the West to crack. The opposition has been unable to overthrow him using their own forces despite support provided by the “big guns” of the Western media, which unleashed a real psychological war against the Colonel.

The tens of millions of dollars that the CIA and MI6 invested to organize the coup have only yielded a partial success. The opposition has seized control of just the eastern part of the country. And even the Western propagandists have been forced to admit that things are not going well for the opposition.

More »

Sami Moubayed
Asia Times

Behind all the media buzz about events in Libya, Yemen and Syria, the Arab-Israeli conflict resurfaced at the weekend in a bizarre manner.

Richard Goldstone, the South African judge who was author of a controversial 2009 report that carried his name - wrote an article for The Washington Post, sending shockwaves throughout the upper echelons of power in the Gaza Strip and Israel.

Goldstone, for two years hailed as a hero by the Arab street, had chaired the fact-finding mission appointed by the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) and its report accused Israel of committing war crimes during the Gaza war of 2008. The report actually was tough on both the Israelis and the Palestinians - but that seemingly did not matter to the Arabs. What mattered to them was the strength of its words.

The Palestinian street eagerly endorsed the report, seeing it as a triumphant victory at the United Nations, although the same cannot be said for the Palestinian governments in Gaza and the West Bank. Although Hamas had facilitated the investigation, it nevertheless was very unimpressed with the report because it also accused the Palestinians of war crimes for deliberately targeting Israeli civilians.

For their part, the Israelis dismissed the Goldstone Report as biased, having refused to even cooperate with the UN probe. Jewish communities around the world trashed the report for being too harsh on Israel. Pro-Palestinian communities around the world trashed it for being too harsh on the Palestinians. Goldstone himself trashed it yet again on April 1, adding to the chorus saying that it was flawed and misleading. To understand what's happening, let's go back to early 2009.

More »

Stephen Lendman

The line from Gilbert & Sullivan's HMS Pinafor explains, saying: "Things are seldom as they seem. Skim milk masquerades as cream."

Goldstone's shameless reversal exposes the true man, a Judas, not what most people believed. Why is at issue? More on that below.

Two previous articles articles discussed his retraction, accessed through the following links, here and here.

On April 1, his Washington Post op-ed headlined, "Reconsidering the Goldstone Report on Israel and war crimes," saying:

"Our report found evidence potential war crimes and possibly crimes against humanity by both Israel and Hamas."

The latter ones, in fact, were minor by comparison, responding only to Israeli provocations. Israel's, however,

"were based on the deaths of and injuries to civilians in situations where....evidence (pointed to no) other reasonable conclusion."

However, dismissing irrefutable evidence, his and other inquiries uncovered, Goldstone softened his initial condemnation, ignoring how all Israeli investigations whitewash crimes of war and against humanity.

According to PCHR:

"Rather than uphold the rule of law, the Israeli investigative and judicial system is artfully manipulated to provide an illusion of investigative and judicial rigour, while systematically perpetuating pervasive impunity" for crimes too extreme to ignore.

Most often, in fact, investigations are avoided, Israel undertaking them only under extreme pressure. When initiated, however, absolution follows every time without exception, no matter how extreme or heinous the crimes. Only occasionally, however, are a few low-ranking soldiers charged minor offenses to distract from major ones.

As a result, IDF Chief of Staff, General Gabi Ashkenazi's investigation concluded that "throughout the fighting in Gaza, the IDF operated in accordance with international law."

In fact, daily crimes of war and against humanity were committed, mostly affecting civilian men, women and children. They were deliberately targeted in residential neighborhoods in clear violation of international law, prohibiting attacks against non-combatants and non-military related sites.

More »

Gilad Atzmon
Gilad Atzmon's Blog

If I had known then what I know now, the Goldstone Report would have been a different document,’ writes Richard Goldstone in an attempt to retract his own UN report.

And yet I wonder: how different would it be? How different could it be? Goldstone is impressed with Israel dedicating some “significant resources to investigate over 400 allegations of operational misconduct in Gaza’, but it somehow leaves me bewildered.

Let us assume that at the time Goldstone and his team looked into the cold blooded murder of more than 1400 Palestinians, they would also be aware of an Israeli enquiry. What difference would it make?

‘For example,’ says Goldstone, ‘the most serious attack the Goldstone Report focused on was the killing of some 29 members of the al-Simouni family in their home. The shelling of the home was apparently (according to the Israeli investigation) the consequence of an Israeli commander’s erroneous interpretation of a drone image, and an Israeli officer is under investigation for having ordered the attack.’

For some peculiar reason, Goldstone allows Israel to reduce its institutional responsibility for a colossal war crime, into a chain of local errors, made by a few low rank officers who may, or may not, face criminal charges.

One should remind Goldstone that the decision to use artillery and carpet bombardment in Gaza wasn’t taken by ‘some’ military commanders on the ground: these decisions were taken by a democratically elected Israeli cabinet. Furthermore, these decisions were supported at the time by 94% of the Israeli Jewish population. The decision to rain barrages of white phosphorous over the most populated place on this planet was a strategic decision, and it was taken by Israeli military high command. The fact that Israel (may) sacrifice the military career of one Moishe’le or two Yank’le doesn’t change the validity of Goldstone original report at all; it only proves that Israel fails to take responsibility for its actions.

More »

James Petras
The James Petras Website

Over the past two weeks Libya has been subjected to the most brutal imperial air, sea and land assault in its modern history. Thousands of bombs and missiles, launched from American and European submarines, warships and fighter planes, are destroying Libyan military bases, airports, roads, ports, oil depots, artillery emplacements, tanks, armored carriers, planes and troop concentrations.

Dozens of CIA and SAS special forces have been training, advising and mapping targets for the so-called Libyan ‘rebels’ engaged in a civil war against the Gaddafi government, its armed forces, popular militias and civilian supporters (NY Times 3/30/11).

Despite this massive military support and their imperial ‘allies’ total control of Libya’s sky and coastline, the ‘rebels’ have proven incapable of mobilizing village or town support and are in retreat after being confronted by the Libyan government’s highly motivated troops and village militias (Al Jazeera 3/30/11).

One of the most flimsy excuse for this inglorious rebel retreat offered by the Cameron-Obama-Sarkozy ‘coalition’, echoed by the mass media, is that their Libyan ‘clients’ are “outgunned” (Financial Times, 3/29/11). Obviously Obama and company don’t count the scores of jets, dozens of warships and submarines, the hundreds of daily attacks and the thousands of bombs dropped on the Libyan government since the start of Western imperial intervention. Direct military intervention of 20 major and minor foreign military powers, savaging the sovereign Libyan state, as well as scores of political accomplices in the United Nations do not contribute to any military advantage for the imperial clients – according to the daily pro-rebel propaganda. The Los Angeles Times (March 31, 2011), however described how

“…many rebels in gun-mounted trucks turned and fled…even though their heavy machine guns and antiaircraft guns seemed a match for any similar government vehicle.”

Indeed, no ‘rebel’ force in recent history has received such sustained military support from so many imperial powers in their confrontation with an established regime.

Nevertheless, the ‘rebel’ forces on the front lines are in full retreat, fleeing in disarray and thoroughly disgusted with their ‘rebel’ generals and ministers back in Benghazi. Meanwhile the ‘rebel’ leaders, in elegant suits and tailored uniforms, answer the ‘call to battle’ by attending ‘summits’ in London where ‘liberation strategy’ consists of their appeal before the mass media for imperial ground troops (The Independent (London) (3/31/11).

More »

Patrick Martin
WSWS

Numerous press reports over the weekend add to the evidence that the Libyan rebels fighting the regime of Muammar Gaddafi are under the direction of American intelligence agencies. Despite the repeated claims by Obama administration officials that the rebels are a largely unknown quantity, it is becoming increasingly clear that key military leaders of the anti-Gaddafi campaign are well known to the US government and have longstanding relations with the CIA.

For better than two weeks there had been a virtual ban in the US media on reporting the name of Khalifa Haftar, the long-time CIA collaborator who was appointed chief rebel commander March 17, on the eve of the US-NATO bombing campaign against Libya. Only the regional McClatchy Newspapers chain reported Haftar’s appointment, and ABC News ran a brief interview with him on March 27. Otherwise, silence prevailed.

This de facto censorship abruptly ended April 1, when a right-wing US think tank, the Jamestown Foundation, published a lengthy study of Haftar’s background and record, which was cited extensively by Reuters news service, and then more widely in the US and British media.

The Jamestown Foundation report declared: “Today as Colonel Haftar finally returns to the battlefields of North Africa with the objective of toppling Gaddafi, his former co-conspirator from Libya’s 1969 coup, he may stand as the best liaison for the United States and allied NATO forces in dealing with Libya’s unruly rebels.”

The Jamestown study noted Haftar’s role in organizing the Libyan National Army (LNA), which he founded “on June 21, 1988 with strong backing from the Central Intelligence Agency,” and cites a 1991 interview with him “conducted in an LNA camp in rural Virginia.” Not only did the CIA sponsor and fund the LNA, it engineered the entry of LNA officers and men into the United States where they established a training camp.

Reuters added, using a variant spelling of the name, that it has “repeatedly asked for an interview with Hefta but he could not immediately be contacted.” The news service added, “The CIA declined to comment” on its relationship to the former Libyan military leader.

Other references to Haftar’s role appeared in the online blog of the New Yorker magazine, in Africa Confidential, on National Public Radio, the British daily Guardian, and in the Independent on Sunday, another British newspaper.

More »

Stephen Lendman

Numerous previous articles discussed her case, character, honor, and dedication to justice as the law demands, what it didn't afford her. Two of them covered her imprisonment and re-sentencing, accessed through the following links, here and here.

A brief timeline of her case was as follows:

● indicted on April 9, 2002;
● on February 10, 2005, convicted on all counts;
● on October, 17, 2006, sentenced to 28 months;
● on November 17, 2009, a US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit three-judge panel upheld the conviction, shamelessly accusing Lynne of "knowingly and willfully making false statements," re-directing her case to District Court Judge John Koeltl for re-sentencing, instructing him to consider enhancements for terrorism, perjury, and abuse of her position as a lawyer - an outrageous mandate intimidating Koeltl to comply.
● on November 19, 2009, Stewart jailed at MCC-NY, 150 Park Row, New York, NY; and
● on July 15, 2010, Stewart re-sentenced to 10 years imprisonment for doing her job honorably, ethically, and admirably with distinction for 30 years.

Disgracefully, Judge Koeltl explained it, saying:

"(C)omments by Stewart in 2006, including a statement in a television interview that she would do 'it' again and would not 'do anything differently' influenced (the) decision....indicat(ing) the original sentence 'was not sufficient' to reflect the goals of sentencing guidelines."

Forgotten were his October 2006 comments, calling Lynne's character

"extraordinary," saying she was "a credit to her profession," and that a long imprisonment would be "an unreasonable result," citing "the somewhat atypical nature of her case (and) lack of evidence that any victim was harmed...."

He also considered her age (70), health (at times poor), distinguished career representing society's disadvantaged and unwanted, and the unlikelihood she'd commit another "crime." However, the Second Circuit Appeals Court intimidated him to comply, his own career perhaps on the line otherwise.

More »

Celine Hagbard
International Middle East Center (IMEMC)

Richard Goldstone and I attended the same event last week – he as an honored guest, and I as an ordinary audience member. It was a debate on the Goldstone Report at Stanford University between two lawyers who had visited Gaza as part of a National Lawyers' Guild Delegation, and two Zionist academics.

In the course of the event, Peter Berkowitz and Abraham Bell, the Zionist academics, both put forward arguments based on logical fallacies (red herring, straw man, ad hominem attacks), contradicted themselves on numerous points, and were forced to make retractions of false statements. Although no one was keeping score, having been on my high school debate team, I think it was pretty clear that the Zionists, who argued against the Goldstone Report, lost that debate hands down.

Apparently Richard Goldstone didn't take high school debate, or didn't really care who based their arguments on lucid and verifiable facts, and who merely floated theories and generalizations followed by personal attacks, because it seems he let himself be convinced by Berkowitz and Bell's spurious arguments. Just a few days after that debate, Goldstone published an op-ed in the Washington Post second-guessing the conclusions of his own investigation and his commission's report!

In his letter, Goldstone criticizes Hamas for failing to investigate and prosecute war crimes, while lauding Israel for doing so. In doing so, he falls prey to the 'moral equivalence' argument challenged by the debate moderator at last week's event. Are Hamas and Israel morally equivalent?

Well, let's see, a democratically-elected Hamas government that had managed to maintain a nearly year-long ceasefire (in 2008) in which cross-border shelling by Palestinian resistance groups dropped to virtually none, while Israeli violations continued. The ceasefire was broken by Israel in December with an extrajudicial assassination of six alleged members of Hamas' armed wing.

On the other side, an Israeli army whose arsenal is the fourth-largest in the world, deciding to launch a massive invasion of a 15-mile wide strip of land that it had already laid siege to for three straight years, thereby weakening the population of 1.4 million and depriving them of their basic human needs. In that invasion, Israeli forces killed 1400 Palestinians, an estimated 80% of whom were civilians (although resistance against an invading military force is permissible under the internationally-recognized laws of warfare). And a jaw-dropping FOUR HUNDRED of these victims were children.

More »

Stephen Lendman

"All governments lie, and nothing they say should be believed" ~ IF Stone

Since WW II, America's gone to war as much to wage as win them because so many profiteers benefit. The prospect of peace, in fact, terrifies government, military officials, and corporate predators, so new enemies are invented when old ones are vanquished, are no longer of interest, or conflicts end for other reasons.

Wars are solely for wealth and power, never humanitarian intervention to liberate oppressed people or promote democracy. They're notions, in fact, US leaders won't tolerate, notably Obama, doubling down on Bush, waging his Iraq and Afghan wars, fighting two others in Pakistan and Libya, another allied with Israel against Palestine, as well as proxy wars in Somalia, Central Africa, Yemen, Bahrain, Haiti, Honduras, Colombia, and at home against Muslims, Latino immigrants, and working Americans.

Perhaps now more than ever, at home and abroad, America always spurned honor, high-mindedness, justice, and rule of law principles, as well as respect for democratic values, human rights and civil liberties.

Notably, candidate Obama pledged:

● "hope;"
● "change;"
● peace;
● democratic values;
● closing Guantanamo in one year;
● ending torture, illegal spying, and detention without trial;
● "a new era of openness;"
● "sunlight before signing" new legislation to let Americans review and comment;
● doubling the Peace Corp.;
● equitable immigration reform in one year;
● keeping the Internet free and open;
● delivering real healthcare and financial reform;
● support for organized labor, including walking picket lines whenever worker organizing rights are threatened;
● willingness to meet individually with Iranian, Syrian, Venezuelan, Cuban, and North Korean leaders;
● eliminating income taxes for seniors earning under $50,000;
● the Patriot Employer Act to end tax breaks for companies shipping jobs overseas as well as incentives to create new ones at home;
● renegotiating NAFTA to ensure equitable labor and environmental standards are enforced;
● supporting Israeli and Palestinian efforts to "fulfill their national goals: two states living side by side in peace and security;" and
● on Afghanistan saying (October 27, 2007): "I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this (and the Iraq) war(s). You can take that to the bank," and by implication not begin new ones.

As President, Obama broke all the above pledges and others, including every major one, delivering betrayal, not populist change. Make no mistake. His imperial ambitions are reckless, duplicitous, unscrupulous, and lawless - mindless of vital homeland needs and priorities, notably for America's growing millions in poverty or heading there, denied help to wage global wars, bail out Wall Street, and benefit other corporate favorites.

More »

Ayman Qwaider
Voice From Gaza

After recent bombings in my home state of Gaza Strip, I finally had an opportunity to speak with my brother Ahmed, 23 years old on skype. The focus of our conversation was my brother's job search after "recent" graduation from his university in Gaza—The Islamic University. Below are excerpts from our chat.

Ayman Qwaider: Brother, what are you doing now?

Ahmed Qwaider: I am waiting the exam from Government in order to get a job and I am fed up with the situation in Gaza.

Ayman: Which government are you applying for and what is the nature of the job you might get?

Ahmed: I have applied for the government in Gaza because you know our unfortunate situation: we are two governments under occupation. (I applied just) in case I will get accepted, though I am not hopeful. Because I will end up in some office and not be able to practice any of the skills I learned at University because Israel’s government still prevent all construction material to get to Gaza which makes it quite complicated to find a job in the field and to practice what I have leaned at University.

I was proud that my brother was striving to be employed, and wondered how he passes his time.

Ayman: What are you doing nowadays, then?
Ahmed: I spend most of my time taking training and receiving courses; this how the Gaza graduated engineers end up in Gaza.

After a while, the conversation turned to the issues of violence that Gaza experiences daily. Having left Gaza a year ago myself, I rely heavily on information from family members such as my brother, to give me details of my home. Media sources are often inaccurate. Ahmed relayed his experience during an [Israeli] bombing raid and how it affected him personally.

More »

Stephen Lendman

Despite no legitimate provocation, Israel began terror bombing Gaza on December 27, 2008. Invasion followed, attacking innocent civilian men, women and children for over three weeks, using missiles, bombs, shells, and illegal weapons against defenseless people. Mass slaughter and destruction ensued.

Brazen crimes of war and against humanity were committed. No culpable officials were held responsible. Security Council no-fly zone protection wasn't ordered. International community leaders approved or were silent. Washington was complicit by supplying Israel with weapons, munitions, and encouragement. Obama acts the same as Bush, waging a quartet of lawless wars and using proxies in others.

Operation Cast Lead remains one of history's greatest crimes. Yet Israel was green-lighted to wage it with impunity, what it's done numerous times in its history, besides terrorizing Palestinians by:

● illegal military occupation;
● collective punishment and intimidation;
● air and ground attacks;
● isolating Gaza illegally under siege;
● intermittently bombing and shooting its residents, including noncombatant farmers, fishermen and children;
● regular residential neighborhood incursions;
● bulldozing homes;
● dispossessing residents;
● land seizures;
● arbitrary arrests;
● torture as official policy, including against women and children;
● targeted assassinations;
● denying refugees their right of return;
● movement and free expression restrictions;
● violence, not peaceful coexistence;
● confrontation, not diplomacy;
● war, not peace; and
● denying Palestinian sovereignty, as well as equal justice, human rights and civil liberty protections.

Israel is a rogue terror state, a democracy in name only affording rights solely to Jews. Remember Cast Lead, one of history's greatest crimes. Justice Richard Goldstone documented them convincingly in his 575 page report titled, "Human Rights in Palestine and Other Occupied Arab Territories: Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict."

More »

Stephen Lendman

Many hundreds of wrongfully convicted men and women languish unjustly in US federal and state prisons, victims of judicial unfairness, get tough on crime policies, a guilty unless proved innocent mentality, three strikes and you're out, and America's bogus war on terror, entrapping law-abiding people for political advantage, especially Muslim's, Washington's target of choice.

Russell Defreitas is one of many, victimized by what the Innocence Project (IP) calls "McJustice - the crisis of indigent defense," or in Defreitas' case, FBI entrapment. No wonder IP tries to free "the staggering numbers of innocent people who remain incarcerated and to bring substantive reform to the system responsible for their unjust imprisonment."

Prosecutorial misconduct includes:

● targeting the innocent;
● using bogus charges to indict;
● coercing false confessions;
● intentionally lying or misleading jurors;
● withholding or destroying exculpatory evidence;
● using secret evidence withheld from defense; and
● entrapping targets lawlessly with stings and/or criminals induced to cooperate for better treatment.

On June 3, 2007, New York Times writers Cara Buckley and William Rashbaum headlined, "4 Men Accused of Plot to Blow Up Kennedy Airport Terminals and Fuel Lines," saying:

"Four men," including Russell Defreitas, "a onetime airport cargo handler and a former member of the Parliament of Guyana, were charged yesterday...." One was arrested in Brooklyn and two others were detained in Trinidad, (while) the fourth man was still at large."

On June 2, Defreitas, a naturalized US citizen, was arraigned in federal court. New York assistant FBI field office director Mark Mershon said all four men had "fundamentalist Islamic beliefs of a violent nature," suggesting they were guilty of being Muslims in America at the wrong time.

More »

Lichanos
Journey to Perplexity

Sometime ago, I heard a radio interview of a Harvard troglodyte named Harvey Mansfield as he discussed his absurd ideas about manliness and gender. I have since learned, thanks to an excellent Salon.com column by Glenn Greenwald, that he is a right-wing extremist who believes that the prez is above the law. In that column, Greenwald makes the following remark:

I’ll leave it to Bob Altemeyer and others to dig though all of that to analyze what motivates Mansfield and his decades-long craving for strong, powerful, unchallengeable one-man masculine rule.

Well, I followed that link to Mr. Altemeyer’s study of authoritarian followers, and it is fascinating! Have you ever felt the sinking depression I feel when confronted with a rigid, dogmatic, authority-loving, robot follower who spouts slogans and seems to be impervious to simple logic? Wondered how the hell he or she can think that way? Well, Mr. Altemeyer, a professor of psychology, has, and he studied them in depth. He calls them [high scoring] RWAs for right-wing-authoritarians.

More »

Anatoly Tsyganok
Oriental Review

"NATO officials understand that without a land operation it is practically impossible to defeat Gaddafi."

The conference held on March 29 in London made it clear that the initiators of the Libyan war are going to continue it. At the same time, the experience of the previous wars in the Mediterranean Sea and in the Persian Gulf shows that air operation is only the first act of the campaign.

* * *

From the very beginning the Western coalition (namely the forces of the US, France and Britain) chose strange targets for the attacks. It would have been a different matter if they had destroyed only the headquarters of Muammar Gaddafi in Tripoli but the air attacks also hit a hospital for elderly people. On the next day when the Libyan mass media reported that 48 peaceful citizens had been killed and 150 wounded several countries slammed the coalition’s attacks.

In the Arab world the public opinion is more and more taking sides with Tripoli. The position of the Arab League has also changed. Three days after the first air attacks Moscow and Beijing demanded stop to the military operation in Libya. In its statement Beijing warned the coalition that the attacks may lead to “humanitarian catastrophe”. On March 20, the African Union joined China condemning the military actions of the coalition. The African Union's Committee on Libya issued a statement in which it called for an "immediate stop" to the air attacks. Earlier Venezuela and Cuba voiced the same demands.

Now the following countries are taking active part in the campaign against Libya: the US, Great Britain, France, Canada, Denmark, Spain, Norway, UAE, Qatar. As for Germany, Greece and Italy they are only providing their air bases to the coalition forces.

More »