Dan Glazebrook: The War on Libya: A grand Display of NATO's Lynch Mob Mentality!

Review of Maximilian Forte's powerful new book, "Slouching Toward Sirte: NATO's War on Libya and Africa". Now available to order from Global Research. This book presents a withering indictment of liberal humanitarianism and its collusion in imperialist designs on Africa, as seen in NATO's Libya campaign of 2011. The media has gone very quiet on Libya of late. Clearly, liberal imperialists don't like to dwell on their crimes. This is not surprising. The "modus operandi" of the humanitarian imperialist is not one of informed reflection, but only permanent outrage against leaders of the global South, besides, in the 'topsy-turvy' world of liberal interventionism, the failure to act is the only crime of which the West is capable. As Forte puts it, their moral code holds that, if we do not act, we should be held responsible for the actions of others. When we do act, we should never be held responsible for the actions of others. When we do act, we should never be held responsible for our own actions. With Gaddafi dead, the hunt is for a new hate figure, on whom we spew venom, Assad Jong-Un, far more satisfying than actually evaluating our own role in the creation of human misery. This is the colonial mentality of the liberal lynch mob. For the governments that lead to war, of course. it makes perfect sense that we do not stop to look back at the last invasion, before impatiently demanding the next one. If we realized, for example, that the 1999 bombing of Serbia actually facilitated the ethnic cleansing of Kosovo, that it was supposedly designed to prevent, we might not be so ready to demand the same treatment for every other state, that falls short of our illusory ideals. That is why this book is so important. Thoroughly researched and impeccably referenced, it tells the story of the real aims and real consequences of the war on Libya in its historical perspective. Its author, Maximilian Forte, is well placed to do so. A professor of social anthropology in Montreal, much of his writing and research in recent years, has been dedicated to the new imperialism, and especially its humanitarian cover. He was among the first to really expose violent racism within the Libyan insurrection, and its role in facilitating NATOs goals in Africa, and has provided consistently excellent analyses of the media coverage surrounding the conflict. One of the books accomplishments, is its comprehensive demolition of the wars supposed justifications. Forte shows us that there was no mass rape committed by Gaddafi forces, as alleged by Susan Rice, Hillary Clinton, Luis Ocampo and others at the time, but later refuted by Amnesty International, the UN, and even the US army itself. Despite hysterical media reports, there was no evidence of aerial bombing of protesters, as even CIA chief Robert Gates admitted.

Stephen Lendman: Fabricated Intelligence and the WMD Pretext.

Obama heads closer to war on Syria. A previous article discussed spurious allegations of Syrian chemical weapons use. Obama calls using them a game changer. He also said their use crosses are red line. Syrian officials categorically deny using them. According to Information Minister Omran al-Zoabi: Even if Syria does have chemical weapons, our leadership and our military, will not use them either against Syrians or against Israelis, above all for moral reasons, and secondarily on legal and political grounds. On April 24, The New York Times headlined US Says it Suspects Assad Used Chemical weapons, but our leadership and our military will not use them, either against Syrians or against Israelis, above all for moral reasons, and secondarily on legal and political grounds. On April 24, The New York Times headlined "US Says It Suspects Assad Used Chemical Weapons," saying: "American intelligence agencies now assess, with varying degrees of confidence, that the Syrian government has used chemical weapons, but it said it needed conclusive proof, before President Obama would take action. On April 25, the White House Office of Legislative Affairs director Miguel Rodriguez addressed Syria. His letter to Senators John McCain (R.AZ) and Carl Levin
(D. MI) said: At the president's direction, the United States government has been closely monitoring the potential use of chemical weapons within Syria. We have kept the relevant committees of Congress fully informed of our assessment on this issue, consistent with our statutory obligations. Our intelligence community does access with varying degrees of confidence, that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons on a small scale in Syria, specifically the chemical agent sarin. This assessment is based in part on physiological samples. Our standard of evidence must build on these intelligence assessments, as we seek to establish credible and corroborated facts. For example, the chain of custody is not clear, so we cannot confirm how the exposure occurred, and under what conditions. We do not believe that any use of chemical weapons in Syria would very likely have originated with the Assad regime. Thus far, we believe that the Assad regime maintains custody of these weapons, and has demonstrated a willingness to escalate its horrific use of violence against the Syrian people. Because of our concern, about the deteriorating situation in Syria, the president has made it clear,that the use of chemical weapons to terrorist groups, is a red line for the United States of America.

Evan Resnick: The Perils Of Containing China!

The Obama Administration's policy of "rebalancing" to the Asia Pacific appears to be a nascent attempt to contain China. It would behoove US policymakers to recognize a key distinction between Washington's current proto-containment of China, and its successful containment of the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Obama Administration officials have emphatically denied that the much discussed US policy of "rebalancing" towards the Asia Pacific, represents an attempt to contain China. Sceptics may be forgiven, however, for taking these denials with the proverbial grain of salt. The military, diplomatic, and economic components of the re-balance, which the administration previously dubbed the "pivot" collectively make little sense, other than as a nascent effort to thwart China's geopolitical expansion. Laying the foundations for containment. Militarily, the US has deployed Marines to Australia, dispatched Littoral Combat Ships to Singapore, and engaged in intensified defense cooperation with its formal allies of Japan, South Korea, Thailand, and the Philippines, as well as with other states in the region, such as New Zealand, Indonesia, Vietnam, Cambodia, and India. Additionally, the Department of Defense has pledged to recalibrate its distribution of naval capabilities between the Atlantic and Pacific theaters by the year 2020, from a 50-50 split, to a 60-40 split favoring the latter. These initiatives, in turn, followed on the heels of the administration's early 2010 announcement of a US $6.4 billion sale of advanced weaponry to Taiwan. The US has complemented these military moves with a more assertive diplomatic posture in Southeast Asia. The most high profile initiative in this regard, has been its constructive engagement of the reformist Thein Sein regime in Myanmar, which was exemplified by President Obama's highly symbolic visit to that country, as well as Cambodia, in the immediate wake of his November 2012 reelection. The administration has also adopted a more intrusive position, regarding the ongoing maritime dispute regarding the South China Sea, striking a posture that directly contravenes China's expansive claims. Finally, even the economic pillar of the re-balance, the proposed Trans Pacific Partnership, a regional free trade zone, consisting of 12 potential partner states, appears designed to exclude China. The TPP framework is restricted to countries capable of meeting high US standards, in such areas as intellectual property rights, labor, and environmental standards, in which China lags far behind the other prospective members.     

Tomgram: Todd Gitlin, The Tinsel Age of Journalism!

After all these decades, here is the strange thing: What I remember are his hands, not his face. But perhaps that is fitting for a writer. His name is Robert Shaplen, and he was a correspondent for the New Yorker. My parents knew him and, as a boy, I idolized him. From World War II on, he covered Asia. He seemed to me the most adventurous man on the planet. With him in mind, I was sure that there could be nothing better or more romantic than being a foreign correspondent. That, of course, was before I grew up and discovered that I did not even like to travel. It was a dream of the newspaper itself, and the habit learned in boyhood, now disappearing from much of our world, of reading the paper daily, sports section first, then front to back. Even now, it's an addiction I can't shake. When it comes to the print paper, however, I'm increasingly part of a lonely crowd. I first realized the change was coming in the early 2000s. Back then, I used to parachute into the Berkeley journalism school every spring to be an editor to a crew of future reporters. Every morning, you could get free copies of the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Financial Times, and a couple of other papers. As a lifelong news junkie, it seemed like heaven to me. But to my surprise, my students often did not take the papers at all, free or not. One day, one of them explained that by the time she hits school, she had already checked out the New York Times, and the LA Times online twice, the night before and that morning. The actual paper was already older than Methuselah in her eyes. Today, Todd Gitlin, who wrote a classic account of how the news misreported the New Left and antiwar movements of the 1960s The Whole World Is Watching, and how TV worked back in the 1980s Inside Prime Time, offers a reminder that my journalistic dreams were just that. The news, with the usual notable exceptions, was generally a tawdry affair in the service of power. Still, can there be any question that, as the newspaper fades, we are entering a new age of conglomerated mainstream chaos? You only needed to check out the "coverage" of the Boston bombing aftermath, which you would have had to be blind, deaf, and dumb to miss, to know that. What possible dreams, other than coverage nightmares could emerge from that? If we got what must have been the largest, most militarized manhunt in our history, for two young men briefly on the run in one city, I suspect we also got the largest, most intensive, least impressive media coverage for a single event of probably little long term import. It was the sort of thing that gives the word overkill a bad name. Have we learned nothing from the over the top reaction to the 9/11 attacks? The case itself may fade, but the example of shutting down a city, and flooding it with thousands of heavily up armored police and SWAT teams won't, nor will the flooding of it with just about every media resource that exists on the planet!

Colin Todhunter: Political Opportunism. The Boston Marathon Tragedy

used as a pretext to extend the Global War on Terrorism. In a 2011 interview for an Australian TV channel, US Republican Senator John McCain talked about Islamic extremism, spreading if left unchecked by military intervention in Afghanistan and elsewhere. In the same interview, he spoke of the US having held fast in Iraq, and having succeeded there. He stated that we must do the same in Afghanistan, because we are succeeding there too. In the warped world of neo-con mouthpieces like McCain, the ongoing carnage and turmoil that US led criminality has caused in the two countries in question, equates with success. Given the problems at home, it comes as little surprise that US public support for militarism abroad has been waning for some time. McCain is fully aware of this. His comments were little more than an attempt to hoodwink the public into continuing to support the US war of global terror, because he knows that people have other things in their minds, such as housing foreclosures, the outsourcing of jobs and livelihoods, increasing impoverishment, the crackdown on civil liberties, and the slaughter of often poor men who fight wars that have no end in sight. The public is also becoming increasingly aware, that over half of government spending goes to the military, when it could be better spent in other areas. In 2006, former US military commander and CIA boss General Petraeus said the US strategy is to conduct a war of perceptions continuously through the news media. People like McCain are the foot soldiers in such a war, and hope that the public mindset can be manipulated with propaganda about US national security interests, perceived military successes, and fear about Islamic extremism. No doubt both Petraeus and McCain have taken their cue from US commentator Walter Lippmann, who in the 1920s said that responsible men make decisions, and had to be protected from the bewildering herd of the public. Lippman believed that the public should be subdued, obedient, and distracted from what is really happening, and should be admiring with awe the leaders, who save them from destruction from what is really happening, and should be admiring with awe the leaders, who save them from destruction and provide peace. The words of Lippman might have been ringing loud and clear in the minds of many observers, as people came onto the streets of Boston to celebrate and chant USA, USA, after the authorities had suspended civil liberties, and effectively implemented Martial Law in the aftermath of the Boston Marathon explosions. Saved from destruction and admiring their leaders with awe!

Roi Tov: Israel's Lag BaOmer: On a Failed Revolt, a Fake Zohar and a Festival

of Fraudulent Empire-hood. Bomer! Bome! Bomeh! What does that mean? The man in front of me was shouting, it was typical. Bolivians think that linguistic misunderstandings are solved by shouting. If that doesn't work, they opt for physical violence. That teaches you well! Next time answer properly, was the answer I feared. In a desperate effort to avoid being beaten, I remembered that we were just after Easter. Do you mean Lag Ba' Omer? I asked, and got a positive answer. It was not the first time that members of my congregation displayed impossible knowledge on non Biblical Hebrew. It was a sign that Israel had visited them. Suddenly they knew how to pronounce "SSS." It celebrates a failed revolt, a fake Zohar, and the Festival of Fraudulent Empire-hood, I said and moved away hurriedly. Who knew how he would react to the word Zohar? The event highlighted a recurrent problem regarding Israeli affairs. Hebrew is practically unknown, and its speakers often purposely confuse things. For example, the recently produced Oliver Stone's The Untold History of the United States was killed with silk gloves by the Israeli Administration. How Heraclius turned the Jews out of Jerusalem Image in the 15th Century Histoire des Empereurs Manuscript Orderly and Humane: The Expulsion of the Germans after the Second World War. It was broadcast by a secondary channel, its reviews were misplaced and oddly phrased, and its name was mistranslated as The Secret History of the USA, making it difficult to find references, unless discovering the dirty trick. One of the reviews inversed the blame in a typical Hebrew fashion, hinting that Stone was attempting a 1984 style manipulation. The purposeful misnaming caused it to be obscured by reviews of Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States. There is no better testimony to the excellence of Stone's work that this carefully staged censorship. This is repeated almost in every affair. State agents have one Hebrew name, but they spell it in various ways in Roman script. Even festivals are disguised under Biblical roots, while their nature was changed. Lag Ba' Omer, to be celebrated in the last weekend of April 2013, is a good example of this. When a Nation Forgets God: 7 Lessons We Must Learn from Nazi Germany. The logo shown above belongs to Chabad, a proselyting Haredi organization. Revealing the esoteric soul of Torah, it says below the name of the festival. It hints to the relationship between Lag Ba' Omer and the Zohar, which is the basic text behind Kabbalah, the most mystical stream of Judaism, which is closely related to Hasidic communities. In recent years, it has become popular in Hollywood. Singer Madonna likes to be portrayed with tattoos of Hebrew letters, which according to Kabbala have magical powers. 

Stephen Lendman: Terrorists Are Us!

State sponsored terrorism defines US policy. Double speak duplicity conceals it. Double think manipulates public opinion to ignore inconvenient truths. Howard Zinn once asked: How can you make war on terrorism, if war is terrorism? Waging war on terrorism gives government a perpetual war and a perpetual atmosphere of repression, and it generates perpetual profits for corporations. But it is going to make the world a far more unstable and dangerous place. Terrorism replaced communism as the rationale for the militarization of the country, for military adventures abroad, and for the suppression of civil liberties at home. Since WW II, there has not been a more warlike nation in the world than the United States. Zinn added that governments are terrorists on an enormously large scale. None in world history match America. Waging war on humanity is official policy. US law calls international terrorism activities involving violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States, or of any State, or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State: are intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population. Influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping, and occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States. The US Army Operational Concept for Terrorism (TRADOC Pamphlet No. 525-37, 1984, called it the calculated use of violence or threat of violence to attain goals that are political, religious, or ideological in nature, through intimidation, coercion, or instilling fear. Merriam Webster calls it the systematic use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims. In his book, Terrorism, Theirs and Ours, Eqbal Ahmad called state sponsored terrorism most important of all. It includes torturte, burning of villages, destruction of entire peoples, and genocide on a massive scale. It's called self defense, protecting national security, and or promoting democracy. Doing so conceals America's dark side. War on humanity follows.