Stephen Lendman

On September 22, Reuters headlined the news, saying: "UN Experts Condemn Israel Attack on Gaza Flotilla"

It explained that the UN Human Rights Council's (HRC)

"panel of international experts" concluded what was obvious on day one - that Israel's international water attack "was unlawful and resulted in violations of human rights and international humanitarian law...."

A one paragraph AP report said the same thing. America's leading paper, The New York Times (always pro-Israeli), published the above two accounts, not its own, ducking its responsibility to do in detail.

In contrast, Israeli papers covered it prominently, including Haaretz headlining, "UN Human Rights Council: Israel flotilla raid broke international law," saying:

"The UN Human Rights Council's fact-finding mission concluded that Israel's naval blockade of the Palestinian territory was unlawful because of the humanitarian crisis there, and described the military raid on the flotilla as brutal and disproportionate."

Israel's response was unsurprising, Foreign Ministry spokesman Ygal Palmor saying:

"Israel is a democratic and law abiding country that carefully observes international law and, when need be, knows how to investigate itself."

True on the last point, but it never does nor will it. False on the others. As honest observers know, Israel is a lawless, undemocratic, pariah state believing in Jewish exclusivity above all other religions. As a result, its 1,548,000 Israeli Arabs (as of spring 2010) have no rights. In addition, the four million + in Gaza and the West Bank (Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics mid-2010 figures) have been persecuted under military occupation for over 43 years, living in constant terror.

Read more »

Stop AIPAC
Stop AIPAC

Challenging AIPAC. For a New Foreign Policy.

AIPAC, or the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, describes itself as the most important organization affecting the U.S. relationship with Israel. With a budget of $65 million, and membership now standing at over 100,000, it is no wonder that congressional staffers consider it one of the most powerful and effective lobbies on Capitol Hill.

Once a year, AIPAC holds its annual conference in Washington DC. This May it was attended by over 5,000 participants. Its annual policy conference is one of Washington’s largest gatherings of lawmakers, topped only by the President’s State of the Union address. Guests this year included two-thirds of the House, half the Senate, and Vice President Richard Cheney.

Only rarely is a critical word uttered among politicians regarding AIPAC and its associates that support unjust and aggressive (and disastrous) U.S. policies toward the peoples of the Middle East. We aim to change that.

Read more »

Stephen Lendman

"At issue is 9/11 truth, the subsequent bogus "war on terror" based on a lie, America's war on Islam that followed against Iraq, Afghanistan, and Muslim Americans, victimized for political advantage. Her case should incite everyone's moral outrage. It also reveals America's true face, its rogue agenda, targeting Muslims for their faith and ethnicity, making us all equally vulnerable."

On September 23 in federal court, US District Court Judge Richard Berman sentenced political prisoner Aafia Siddiqui to 86 years in prison. Outrage most accurately expresses this gross miscarriage of justice, compounding what she's already endured following her March 30, 2003 abduction, imprisonment, torture, prosecution, and conviction on bogus charges.

Earlier articles explained her case in detail, accessed through the following links, here, here and here.

In modern times, she's one of American depravity's most aggrieved victims, now given a virtual life sentence for a crime she didn't and couldn't have committed, explained in the above articles.

Read more »

Dirk Adriaensens
The BRussells Tribunal

Part I: “Success”, a devastating balance sheet

In the immediate aftermath of the 2003 invasion, the triumphalist verdict of the mainstream media was that the war had been won; Iraq was assured of a benevolent, democratic future. The Times's writer William Rees-Mogg hymned the victory: "April 9 2003 was Liberty Day for Iraq. (…) It was achieved by "the engine of global liberation", the United States. "After 24 years of oppression, three wars and three weeks of relentless bombing, Baghdad has emerged from an age of darkness. Yesterday was an historic day of liberation."[1]

"The problem with this war for, I think, many Americans is that the premise on which we justified going to war proved not to be valid, that is Saddam having weapons of mass destruction," Defense Secretary Robert Gates told reporters while visiting Iraq.

"So when you start from that standpoint, then figuring out in retrospect how you deal with the war — even if the outcome is a good one from the standpoint of the United States — it will always be clouded by how it began." [2]

So here Robert Gates acknowledges that this war was illegal according to international law, because there was no “casus belli”. But in the same sentence he says that the outcome has been good for the United States. What does he mean exactly? How can all the killing and destruction be a good outcome for the USA? And what about responsibilities? If you know that Iraq is still paying reparations for the invasion in Kuwait in 1990, how about the payment of reparations by the USA for the destruction it inflicted upon Iraq?

"We fought together, we laughed together, and sometimes cried together. We stood side by side and shed blood together," Gen. Ray Odierno told Iraqi military leaders and hundreds of American soldiers and officers during the ceremony that officially closed combat operations."It was for the shared ideals of freedom, liberty, and justice."[3] Yes, they laughed together, like in the infamous, by Wikileaks released video of the “Collateral Murder” helicopter gunship attack on Baghdad civilians in July 2007, that killed more than a dozen Iraqis, two of them journalists of Reuters. And blood they surely have shed together! A lot of blood of over a million mothers, fathers, children and elderly Iraqi people. All that for “shared ideals of freedom, liberty and justice”, Mr. Odierno? Well, most Iraqis don’t share that view. For them, the country has slided into the age of darkness.

Read more »