Stephen Lendman

In this game, the house always wins. Bipartisan complicity stacked the deck against millions of working households, needing to know that political Washington is scamming them.

The end result is the banana republicanization of America. American writer O. Henry (William Sydney Porter: 1862 - 1910) coined the term (his fictional Republic of Anchuria) in his book, "Cabbages and Kings."

It refers to a country (often politically unstable and/or repressive) where a small percent of the population has a disproportionate share or wealth and power, where ordinary people are exploited, often persecuted, and where profits are privatized while working households bear the burden of debt.

It's also a kleptocracy run by criminals, complicit with corporate thieves who bribe them to get their way. It's corrupt, rotten to the core gangsterism, run for personal gain, both sides profiting at the public's expense.

It's in plain sight in Washington, the heart of darkness, where bipartisan crooks are destroying personal freedoms, democratic values, and general welfare to grab everything for themselves and their corporate partners.

Previous articles discussed it, accessed through the following links here, here and here.

Read them and weep, or better still, react by refusing any longer to put up with bipartisan corruption, stealing us blind for the Big Monied interests that own them. Obama was made president to play ball, a Democrat engineering what no Republican would dare, at the same time duplicitously claiming populist credentials.

Read more »

Paul Craig Roberts

A reader responded to my recent column about how the US president was becoming a Caesar with a question: "Wouldn't a Caesar be preferable to a democracy in which the people are too ignorant, disinterested, and stupid to engage in self-government?"

Before I became a widely read columnist with many reader responses, I would have disagreed with the reader's characterization of the American people. Today, I cannot answer the reader's question with a "no" as confidently as I would like.

I receive appreciative words from many readers who are well aware of what is going on. I also hear from many who are so partisan and have such strong emotional responses that they are unable to follow an argument. I don't know what percentage these groups comprise in the population, but there seem to be a number of Americans, both on the left and the right, who are prepared to censor, and even to kill, in order to defend their illusions and delusions.

I remain a suspect boogeyman for some on the left, because of my association with the Kemp-Roth bill and Reaganomics. As I, and others, have explained so many times, Supply-Side economics reversed the monetary/fiscal policy mix in order to cure stagflation. But some leftists persist in their insistence that it was all a trick to cut taxes for the rich—the rich being those with more money than they. A stressed-out $100,000 a year guy with a family in a high-cost city is thrown into the rich class with the hedge fund manager who paid himself one billion dollars.

To give the leftists their due, at least they know that I was a member of the Reagan administration. However, the right-wing zealots think that I am a commie-pinko-liberal.

Read more »

Gilad Atzmon

"It (immigration) was a politically motivated attempt by ministers to transform the fundamental make-up and identity of this country (Britain). It was done to destroy the right of the British people to live in a society defined by a common history, religion, law, language and traditions." - (Melanie Phillips, as quoted by mass murderer, Anders Breivik, in his manifesto)

Melanie Philips, a rabid Zionist and the author of “Londonistan: How Britain is Creating a Terror State Within” is not happy to be singled out by Andres Breivik in his 1500 pages manuscript. Are they suggesting that “my writing provoked the mass murder of some 93 Norwegians?” she wonders righteously on her blog. I guess that Phillips knows the answer, as much as she knows how to play with words. But I will use this opportunity to reiterate it for her, and for the rest of us -- there certainly is a clear and strong resemblance between Breivik’s views and Philips’ writing. The most obvious and immediate comparison is that both oppose Islamic immigration and multiculturalism of course, but it goes much further in that both identify the enemy within the ‘left political circuit’.

Breivik cites Philips’ take on Labour's immigration policy: "It was done to destroy for ever what it means to be culturally British and to put another 'multicultural' identity in its place."

I should clearly state here that I do not think that Philips provoked Breivik’s murderous inclination. I also believe that Phillips is fully entitled to express her thoughts and ideas. Yet, it is surely reasonable to suspect that Phillips , amongst others, might have contributed to inspiring Breivik, ideologically and spiritually.

Read more »

Stephen Lendman

Among them is waging war on truth, Western managed news calling lawless imperial wars liberating ones. No wonder John Pilger says journalism is the first casualty of war, adding:

"Not only that: it has become a weapon of war, a virulent censorship (and deception) that goes unrecognised in the United States, Britain and other democracies; censorship by omission, whose power is such that, in war, it can mean the difference between life and death for people in faraway countries...."

In their book, "Guardians of Power," David Edwards and David Cromwell explained why today's media are in crisis and a free and open society at risk. It's because press prostitutes substitute fiction for fact. News is carefully filtered, dissent marginalized, and supporting wealth and power substitutes for full and accurate reporting.

It's a cancer, corrupting everything from corporate-run print and broadcast sources, as well as operations like BBC and what passes for America's hopelessly compromised public radio and TV. They put out daily managed and junk food news plus infotainment, treating consumers like mushrooms - well-watered and in the dark.

During wars, in fact, they cheerlead them, reporting agitprop and misinformation no respectable journalist would touch.

On the Progressive Radio News Hour, Middle East/Central Asia analyst Mahdi Nazemroaya, in Tripoli, said some journalists also perform fifth column duties, collecting intelligence and locating targets to supply NATO bombing coordinates, notably civilian targets called military ones.

In a July 28 email, he said tell listeners that "NATO is trying to negotiate with the government in Tripoli." More on that below. He added that they're also

"planning a new stage of the war against the Libyan people through (predatory) NGOs and fake humanitarian missions."

A likely UN Blue Helmet occupying force also, paramilitaries masquerading as peacekeepers Gaddafi controlled areas won't tolerate.

NATO, in fact, calls civilian targets legitimate ones, including one or more hospitals, a clinic, factories, warehouses, agricultural sites, schools, a university, one or more mosques, non-military related infrastructure, a food storage facility, and others.

Read more »

Justin Raimondo

Following the money trail

What do we really know about Anders Behring Breivik, the Norway mass murderer who killed in the name of his anti-Muslim ideology, nearly a week after his horrific rampage? We know what he did, and why he did it: he left behind not only a 1,500 page manifesto, in which he pours out his hatred of Muslims, but also a day-by-day diary that details his elaborate preparations, in which he claims his crime was nine years in the making.

That’s an awfully long time for a "lone wolf" to keep his plans to himself, yet the head of Norway’s intelligence agency was quick to state Breivik acted alone – this is spite of Breivik’s own contention, in his online "book," that two other cells of his "Knights Templar Europe" exist. Furthermore, according to Breivik, the Knights were founded at a London meeting in 2002, at which his British "mentor" and representatives from across the continent were in attendance.

What we don’t know, however, is how he did it. Oh, he gives us a detailed account of his obsessive preparations, including how much protein he added to his weightlifting regimen. We know he set up a front company, Breivik Geofarm, supposedly devoted to the growing of tubers, which is how he managed to get the fertilizer that was a key component of his car bomb. What we don’t know, however, is where money came from.

Breivik hadn’t had much income recently, as detailed here – yet he seemed to have some assets. The exact source of these assets is unknown. According to him, he "earned his first million kroner as an entrepreneur at the age of 24." Yet a number of news accounts flatly contradict this, notably the Sydney Morning Herald, which reports:

"Government records suggest that despite his management qualifications, his early attempts at business were a failure until he established Breivik Geofarm in eastern Norway for the cultivation of ‘’vegetables, melons and tubers.’ The business would have given Breivik access to nitrogen-based fertilizer – one of the main ingredients of a fertilizer bomb."

Yet "Breivik Geofarm" was, according to Breivik, just a "front" company, a legal shell meant to shield his activities from prying eyes. We don’t know that he ever grew a single tuber.

Read more »

Julio Godoy

"The attacks in Oslo and Utøya “surely [are] not the last acts of terror in the name of the armed fight against Islam”.

Common to the informal North Atlantic neo-fascist coalition is the hatred of Islam, the radical opposition to immigration and to multicultural society, the belief in white racial supremacy and in Christian fundamentalism, the unconditional support of Israel, sympathies for the U.S. ‘Tea Party’ movement, and contempt for democratic institutions.

Sympathetic to these neo-fascist groups are extreme right wing parties functioning in practically all European countries, from the Norwegian Progress Party, the Sweden Democrats, the True Fins, and the Danish People’s Party, to the French Front National (FN), and the Italian Lega Nord. The perpetrator of the massacre on Jul. 22 was a long-standing member of the Norwegian Progress Party.

Further evidence of the pervasiveness of extremist right wing views is the fact that 14 of the 27 countries represented in the European Parliament have at least one MP who defends xenophobic views and calls for stern anti-immigration policies.

While some of the parties – such as the FN in France, the Freedom Party in Austria, and the Lega Nord in Italy – have a relative long history, most of them were founded in the late 1990s and early 2000s, in reaction to the growing multiethnic character of European communities and to immigration, especially of Muslims.

Leaders of all these parties and groups, including the Norwegian Progress Party, are trying to disassociate themselves from the mass murders in Oslo and on Utøya Island.

Read more »

Stephen Lendman

Co-founded (with Meir Marglit) and directed by Jeff Halper, the Israeli Committee Against Home Demolitions (ICAHD) "is a non-violent, direct-action organization established in 1998 to resist Israeli demolition of Palestinian houses in the Occupied Territories."

ICAHD also helps rebuild homes. In addition, it resists "land expropriation, settlement expansions, by-pass road construction, policies of 'closure' and 'separation,' " as well as destruction of agricultural land and crops. It also works for peace, equity, and ending Israel's illegal occupation.

Access its web site through this link.

It estimates over 24,800 West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza houses demolished since 1967 (4,247 during Cast Lead, according to the UN).

It classifies demolition types as:

● punishment for actions associated with the structures (about 8.5%);
● administrative for lacking building permits (about 26%);
● land-clearing/military demolitions for any reason, including achieving IDF goals or accompanying extrajudicial assassinations (about 65.5%); and
● other undefined reasons.

In fact, Israel's demolition and displacement policies are serious international law breaches for any reason. Nonetheless, they continue as official state policy to steal Palestinian land for Israelis, an issue Western media ignore, as well as other Israeli crimes of war and against humanity.

Read more »

Robert Morgan

[Photo: Humanitarian intervention being prepared for delivery in Libya... ]

US diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks expose some of the real reasons and diplomatic tensions behind NATO’s ongoing bombardment of Libya. Far from initiating a “humanitarian” intervention to protect civilians against Muammar Gaddafi’s government, Washington backed the NATO intervention for one reason only—the installation of a regime that better serves the strategic interests of the US, as well as the operations of the giant oil and gas companies.

The cables date back to 2007, some three years after the Bush administration had lifted sanctions and formally re-established relations with the Gaddafi regime in a bid to secure access to Libya’s highly prized resources. Until the outbreak of revolutionary uprisings across the Middle East this year, Gaddafi was welcomed with open arms in Washington and internationally.

As the cables show, as recently as August 2009, US Senator John McCain led a high-profile bipartisan congressional delegation to meet with Gaddafi. McCain characterised the “overall pace of the bilateral relationship as excellent”. Senator Joe Lieberman said “we never would have guessed ten years ago that we would be sitting in Tripoli, being welcomed by a son of Muammar al-Qadhafi,” before calling Libya an “important ally in the war on terrorism.”

It comes as no surprise that the cables refer to Libya’s “hydrocarbon producing potential” and the “high expectations” among international oil companies. Significantly, the Gaddafi regime held out to Washington the prospect of even greater riches. According to a September 2009 cable, then acting head of Libya’s National Oil Corporation (NOC), Ali Sugheir, told the US embassy that major “sedimentary basins with oil and gas resources had been discovered in Libya,” with seismic data indicating “much more remained to be discovered across the country.”

The scramble by dozens of international oil and gas companies to cash in on the lifting of sanctions, however, soon produced two major problems for the US government. Firstly, in the words of a November 2007 cable, “Libyan resource nationalism”—policies designed to increase the Libyan government’s “control over and share of revenue from hydrocarbon resources.” The cable ominously concludes that the US should demonstrate “the clear downsides” to the Libyan regime of such an approach.

Gaddafi’s policy forced oil and gas corporations to renegotiate their contracts under the latest iteration of Libya’s Exploration and Productions Sharing Agreement (EPSA IV). Between 2007 and 2008, major companies such as ExxonMobil, Petro-Canada, Repsol (Spain), Total (France), ENI (Italy), and Occidental (US) were compelled to sign new deals with the NOC—on significantly less favourable terms than they had previously enjoyed—and were collectively made to pay $5.4 billion in upfront “bonus” payments.

Read more »

Ellen Brown

Why aren’t banks lending to local businesses? The Fed’s decision to pay interest on $1.6 trillion in “excess” reserves is a chief suspect.

Where did all the jobs go? Small and medium-sized businesses are the major source of new job creation, and they are not hiring. Startup businesses, which contribute a fifth of the nation’s new jobs, often can’t even get off the ground. Why?

In a June 30 article in the Wall Street Journal titled “Smaller Businesses Seeking Loans Still Come Up Empty,” Emily Maltby reported that business owners rank access to capital as the most important issue facing them today; and only 17% of smaller businesses said they were able to land needed bank financing. Businesses have to pay for workers and materials before they can get paid for the products they produce, and for that they need bank credit; but they are reporting that their credit lines are being cut. They are being pushed instead into credit card accounts that average 16 percent interest, more than double the rate of the average business loan. It is one of many changes in banking trends that have been very lucrative for Wall Street banks but are killing local businesses.

Why banks aren’t lending is a matter of debate, but the Fed’s decision to pay interest on bank reserves is high on the list of suspects.

Read more »

Paul Craig Roberts

In my last column I suggested that an unintended outcome of the debt ceiling impasse could be Congress’ loss of the power of the purse. In this column I suggest an intended outcome that the ongoing political theater might be designed to produce.

President Obama has said that he will not resort to the various powers open to him to keep the government running should Congress fail to deliver a debt ceiling increase. This is a suspicious statement, as it is not credible that a president would leave troops at war unpaid and without supplies, Social Security checks unsent and stand aside while the US dollar collapses and the credit rating of the US government is destroyed.

There are national security directives and executive orders already on the books, as well as the 14th Amendment, that Obama can invoke to set aside the debt ceiling. Congress would sigh with relief that Obama had prevented the lawmakers from destroying the country.

So what might be going on?

One possibility is that the political theater is operating to bring about otherwise politically impossible cuts in the social safety net. If the drama continues to the absolute deadline without a deal, Obama, who perhaps favors cutting the safety net as much as do the Republicans, would have to accept the Republican package in order that the troops are not cut off from supplies, Social Security checks can continue to go out, and the dollar be saved. Having opposed the Republicans to the last minute, Obama can say that he had no other recourse.

Read more »

Paul Craig Roberts

Which party is responsible for intransigence on raising the debt ceiling? Republicans say the Democrats are, and Democrats say the Republicans are.

One could blame both parties equally, as both have their positions, but as I see it, it is the Republicans who are the most intransigent. The Democrats have shown more willingness to compromise, even offering cuts in Medicare and Social Security. Moreover, the Republicans started the fight, whereas the Democrats were willing to just raise the debt ceiling routinely, as in the past, and to get on with things.

The Republicans created the issue, so they are responsible. In fairness to the Republicans, it is a more important issue for them than for Democrats. The Democrats have always been more relaxed about debt than the Republicans. At the present time, the Democrats figure that if the financial crisis is reason enough for the Federal Reserve to lend $16.1 trillion, that is, $16,100 billion to private banks in the US and Europe — an amount $1.6 trillion larger than the Gross Domestic Product of the US, the US Treasury can afford to borrow another couple of trillion dollars.

Citibank alone received $2.5 trillion in government loans, an amount larger than the Gross Domestic Product of Great Britain and larger than the GDP of all but five countries in the world. If one bank can borrow this much from the Fed, the US Treasury should be able to continue borrowing as well.

Nevertheless, one has to respect the Republicans for their concern with debt levels.

Fiscal discipline should never be written off as too much trouble. It is easier to spend money irresponsibly if the money can be borrowed, as many American consumers have learned. One should not denigrate Republicans for wanting to control the growth of the public debt, especially when the debt is consistently growing faster than the GDP.

However, for many, and perhaps most, of the Republicans in Congress, the issue is not merely about debt. It is about using a hyped "debt crisis" to slash the social safety net.

Read more »

Justin Raimondo

Anders Behring Breivik and the Axis of Hate

Suggestions that the “counter-jihadist” ideology spread by such websites as Frontpagemag.com, run by neocon David Horowitz, and the affiliated “Jihad Watch,” inspired – and provoked – the Norway killer Anders Behring Breivik have been met with cries of outrage by the neoconservative Right. This is hardly surprising: confronted with the sight of someone who put their hateful and inherently violent ideology into practice, what else are they supposed to do? There is, however, a superficially reasonable case to be made against drawing any larger lesson from the Norwegian tragedy. As Gene Healy, a vice president of the Cato Institute, put it:

“In general, invoking the ideological meanderings of psychopaths is a stalking horse for narrowing permissible dissent. Former New York Times columnist Frank Rich provided a classic in the genre with his February 2010 piece ‘The Axis of the Obsessed and Deranged,’ in which he railed against the dangerous climate of anti-government rhetoric and warned that a ‘tax protester’ who flew a plane into an Internal Revenue Service building in February may be a dark harbinger of Tea Party terrorism to come. (No such luck, Frank.)

“But blaming Sarah Palin for Jared Loughner, or Al Gore for the Unabomber makes about as much sense as blaming Martin Scorsese and Jodie Foster for inciting John Hinckley. There’s little to be learned from the acts of ‘the obsessed and deranged.’ But these incidents ought to teach us not to use tragedy to score partisan points.”

All of which is true – up to a point. This is generally true, but in the case of Breivik, however, what Healy misses is the specific content of the ideas expounded in the killer’s online manifesto [.pdf], and the video which summarizes his stance. For what Breivik and the counter-jihadists are saying is that Islam is at war with the West – and that a “culture of appeasement” prevalent on our side of the barricades is delivering us to the Enemy. If you go through the material published by Robert Spencer, who is quoted in some 64 instances by Breivik, one central idea leaps out at you: we are at war with the one billion Muslims on the planet Earth. Not that we should be at war, or will be at war – the battle, in Spencer’s view, has already commenced, not on account of anything we in the West have done, but because Islamic doctrine is inherently violent and expansionist. Likewise, Pamela Geller, his collaborator in “Stop the Islamization of America” – and its European affiliate, which Breivik supported – denies the very existence of moderates in the Muslim camp.

Read more »

Stephen Lendman

South Korean farmers shout slogans during a rally against
the U.S.-South Korea FTA, Free Trade Agreement in Seoul.

Corporate predators seek cheap labor worldwide in countries like China, India, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Haiti, Jordan, and many others. Employed in global sweatshops, they work up to 90 or more hours a week for sub-poverty wages under horrific conditions, enduring harassment, beatings, sexual abuse and rape.

According to the group Sweatshop Watch:

"A sweatshop is a workplace that violates the law and where workers are subject to:

● extreme exploitation, including the absence of a living wage or long hours;
● poor working conditions, such as health and safety hazards;
● arbitrary discipline, such as verbal or physical abuse, or
● fear and intimidation when they speak out, organize, or attempt to form a union."

It's mainly a women's rights issue as 90% of the workforce is female, between the ages of 15 - 25.

The Institute for Global Labour and Human Rights (IGLHR) "investigates and exposes human and labor rights abuses committed by (transnational) corporations producing goods in the developing world."

Two June reports discussed hellish conditions in Jordanian garment factories, where workers are ruthlessly exploited and abused. According to IGLHR's Charles Kernaghan, they're:

"stripped of their passports, forced to work (up to) grueling 99 and a half hour work weeks (minimally 78 hours), while being shortchanged of their rightful wages, housed in overcrowded, primitive dorms infested with bedbugs (with no heat or hot water), and subjected to verbal and physical abuse."

In addition, "the food is awful." It's always the same, low quality, and never enough. For breakfast, it's two pieces of stale bread, lentil soup and tea. Lunch is rice and "old chicken." For dinner, women prefer preparing their own meals in their dorm, using an electric hotplate.

Read more »

Wayne Madsen

Israel’s most secret and tried-and-true weapon is the “false flag” terrorist attack.

State-sponsored terrorism is defined by Encyclopedia Britannica as the “systematic use of violence to create a general climate of fear in a population and thereby to bring about a particular political objective [and] is employed by governments -- or more often by factions within governments -- against that government's citizens, against factions within the government, or against foreign governments or groups.”

On July 22, a bomb, said to be an Oklahoma City-type explosive device, crafted with fertilizer and diesel fuel, blew up in downtown Oslo, Norway, in the heart of the government district. Shortly thereafter, a man dressed in a Norwegian police uniform opened fire on a Labor Party youth camp on the island of Utøya in Tyri fjord. Access to the island was by boat only. Over 100 people were killed in the twin terror attacks.

Almost immediately, the world’s corporate media began pushing the story that those who were responsible for the blast and mass shooting were associated with “Al Qaeda” and other radical Islamist groups. CNN’s Washington, DC chief anchor Wolf Blitzer, a former spokesman for the powerful American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) lobby and a correspondent for the Jerusalem Post, began his late afternoon program by pointing to “Al Qaeda” and radical Islamists as the chief culprits for the terrorist attacks in Norway.

Read more »

Tore Sinding Bekkedal

If a single man can display so much hatred –
think only of how much love we all can display together. ~ Stine Renate Håheim

I wrote a Norwegian post explaining my experience at Utøya. I had taken this blog for dead, and had entirely forgotten that it was syndicated on Planet Debian. I don’t want to let Google Translate make this disaster any worse than it is – the translation of “bullets” into “balls” being particularly bad – so the international attention the massacre has garnered in consideration, I am writing an English translation of my experiences. I feel somehow duty-bound to make people aware of what happened, but I don’t want to get into anything else but a sober description of the events and some very brief reflections. There are many details I have chosen to omit.

Others have written their experiences of the events at Utøya. I wanted to write mine down as well, and “get it out there”. Partly, I want to write this down because I’m unsure if I will remember all the details at a later point in time, although I think I’d prefer it if I couldn’t. I’m also writing this because people are asking about my experiences and it’s much better to have an URL to give them, lest I have to keep going through the same spiel over and over again.

Our former Prime Minister and current labour movement demigod Gro Harlem Brundtland had recently left the island. I had been the cameraman for a video interview of her talking about Utøya, and I was in the media group room encoding the video into a file suitable for YouTube, when someone else in the room startled and said that Twitter was full of messages about a loud explosion in Oslo. As the newspapers brought us information about the extent of the damages, a consensus arose that an informational meeting was in order. As soon as the current round of talks finished, we were gathered into the main hall.

The meeting was duly held, and after the statement was made that a TV feed would be made available, I took it upon myself as the local alpha geek to make it happen. Of course, the situation caused both the wireless network and the GPRS networks to become totally unusable. As I was waiting for someone to set up a password, I took the opportunity to face the consequences of having eaten two bits of a microwavable dish called “Hold-It” – the local equivalent of a Hot Pocket – and went to the bathroom.

As I was in there, I first heard agitated shouting, then screams, then gunshots coming from just outside the bathromm. More than anything else, it sounded like a toy gun. I was convinced that someone was making a joke in incredibly bad taste and I stormed out of the booth with the intent of halting it. As I tore the door open, I saw two of my comrades hiding in a recessed corner. Their facial expressions left absolutely no doubt that this was no toy. They signalled for me to get back in the booth. I closed the door, did a mental double-take in utter, complete confusion, and opened it again. They were still signalling. Had they not stood there, I would have run straight into the gunman; they saved my life. I looked out into the hallway, and I made eye contact with a young boy lying in a pool of blood. He was motioning for me to help him. I heard more gunshots from inside the building and retreated back inside.

Read more »

Gilad Atzmon

For the sake of peace and our general safety, law makers in Europe and America had better quickly put into place the necessary measures to restrain the activity of these Zionist warmongers in our midst.

Thanks to respected anti-Zionist Jeff Blankfort (who provided me with a crucial link) I have now learned that, just one day before last Friday’s Massacre in Norway, former Trotsky-ite turned neo-con David Horowitz carried an article by Joseph Klein in his Front Page magazine, entitled "The Quislings of Norway," which might as well have provided mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik with all the motivation he needed to commit his crime.

You are advised to read the article in full here

Here are some of the ‘pearls’ produced by the pro-war Jewish rightwing magazine, just a few hours before Behring Breivik picked up his guns and launched into his lethal journey:

“The infamous Norwegian Vidkun Quisling, who assisted Nazi Germany as it conquered his own country, must be applauding in his grave...In the latest example of Norwegian collaboration with the enemies of the Jews, Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre declared during a press conference this week, alongside Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, that “Norway believes it is perfectly legitimate for the Palestinian president to turn to the United Nations” to seek recognition of an independent Palestinian state.”

Read more »

Stephen Lendman

Increasingly, it looks like Mossad's fingerprints are all over [the attacks], perhaps cooperatively with CIA and/or MI6.

On July 24, investigative journalist Wayne Madsen suggested a Mossad link, saying "ample evidence" of its involvement exists.

Anders Breivik, the alleged bomber/gunman, calls himself a Christian conservative interested in hunting, body building and freemasonry. He's also expressed strong pro-Israeli views, hostile to Palestinians and Muslims.

Government business records name him the Breivik Geofarm director. Norway's media call it a farming sole proprietorship, cultivating vegetables, melons, roots and tubers.

The Norwegian newspaper Verdens Gang quoted a friend saying he became a wing-wing extremist in his late 20s. He's now age 32. The paper also said he participated in online forums expressing strong nationalistic, anti-multicultural views.

On July 24, the UK Daily Mail said:

"According to witness accounts from Norwegian media, people have described shooting incidents in two different areas on the island, one with a handgun and the other with a 'sniper rifle.' However, there is uncertainty whether the guns belonged to one gunman or there was a second involved."

In the confusion, no one was sure, but the possibility is real, given the implausibility that one person killed over 90 people singlehanded. Perhaps there were multiple undetected gunmen. Police said they don't exclude the possibility.

Madsen connected Breivik to Pam Geller and Richard Pipes,

"ciphers for Israeli intelligence and propaganda elements....provid(ing) a clear link between Breivik and Mossad, which is under orders to stage false flag attacks to garner support for Israel against Palestine, Cyprus and Norway being the two most recent examples of Mossad-staged attacks."

Read more »

John Hanrahan

Part of a Nieman Watchdog series, 'Reporting the Endgame'

The national news media almost totally ignore homefront protests of the Afghanistan war, killer drones, torture, and more, regardless of their newsworthiness. By its lack of coverage, isn’t the press thus helping perpetuate an endless war?

Antiwar activists repeatedly stage dramatic acts of civil disobedience in the United States but are almost entirely ignored by mainstream print and broadcast news organizations. During the Vietnam era, press coverage of the fighting and opposition to it at home helped turn public opinion against the war. This time around lack of homefront coverage may be helping keep military involvement continue on and on.

In the past two years, protests of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, killer drones, torture, nuclear weapons and other war-related issues have been carried out at nuclear weapons silos and production facilities, military bases, unmanned drone facilities, major defense contractors’ headquarters and offices, the Nevada Nuclear Test site, nuclear weapons design laboratories, military recruiting centers, the U.S. Capitol, the White House, federal buildings in various states, the U.S. Strategic Air Command, and numerous other war-oriented sites across the country.

The protests don’t begin to approach the level of those during the Vietnam war or in the early years of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars – but that’s not a reason to ignore them. The fact is, protest is much more widespread than citizens might gauge from coverage in newspapers and television, which seldom report antiwar actions regardless of how significant or newsworthy they may be. As we briefly observed in a previous article:

By ignoring antiwar protests almost totally, editors are treating opposition to the ongoing war in Afghanistan much as they handled the run-up to the war in Iraq: They are missing an important story and contributing to the perception that there is no visible opposition to the U.S. wars and ever-growing military budgets, even as polls show overwhelming support for early U.S. military withdrawal.

Read more »

Stephen Lendman

(Schuyler Ebbets © The People's Voice)

The criminal class in Washington is bipartisan, united against working household interests. In fact, lawmakers yield on virtually everything big money wants, notably when banks and other corporate favorites are affected.

Last December, Obama capitulated to Republicans, rigging a deal for up to $1 trillion dollars in handouts, mostly to corporate giants and America's wealthy with working households almost entirely left out.

They still are, enduring a protracted Main Street depression, stiff-armed by Obama-led bipartisan crooks. In fact, he's more crime boss than president - stealing from the many for the few. More on his dirty scheme below.

As a result, America and other "(e)conomies are being turned into rentier ('tollbooths') to pay debts that ('real' ones) can't sustain," according to Michael Hudson. "It's a losing game," but goes on, criminally defrauding millions of people to assure creditors are paid, sucking massive amounts of wealth to their coffers, unreported by major media scoundrels, suppressing what people most need to know.

In fact, new audit figures show that Bernanke's Fed gave Wall Street and European banksters at least $16.1 trillion (called emergency loans) from December 1, 2007 - July 21, 2010, besides unknown amounts earlier and in the past year.

Moreover, it's well known that trillions of dollars are stolen, handed to corporate interests and never returned, as well as gotten in other illegal ways. As a result, taxpayers get stuck with the bill, the nation with unsustainable mounting debt, heading it eventually for ruin.

About $13 trillion in Fed bailouts went to US financial institutions, the rest to their counterparts in Britain, Germany, France, Switzerland, and Belgium, according to a Government Accountability Office (GAO) analysis.

In addition, asset swaps (good ones for toxic corporate junk) were arranged with banks in Britain, Switzerland, Canada, South Korea, Norway, Mexico, and Singapore.

Moreover, the Wall Street controlled Fed mostly outsourced its lending operations to the same institutions responsible for engineering the financial crisis, letting them profit hugely at the public's expense.

Though unsustainable, the dirty game goes on, a take the money and run scam, leaving hollowed out economies and impoverished millions on their own sink or swim.

Read more »

Gilad Atzmon

I learned last night from an Israeli online journal, that two days before the Utøya Island massacre, AUF’s (Labour Party's youth movement) leader Eskil Pedersen gave an interview to the Dagbladet, Norway's second largest tabloid newspaper, in which he unveiled what he thinks of Israel.

In the course of the interview, Pedersen stated that he “believes the time has come for more drastic measures against Israel, and (that he) wants the Foreign Minister to impose an economic boycott against the country.”

Pedersen went on to say, “The peace process goes nowhere, and though the whole world expect Israel to comply, they do not. We in Labour Youth will have a unilateral economic embargo of Israel from the Norwegian side.”

The AUF Labour Party Youth Movement have been devoted promoters of the Israel Boycott campaign, the newspaper Dagbladet reporting that

“The AUF has long been a supporter of an international boycott of Israel, but the decision at the last congress, demands that Norway imposes a unilateral economic embargo on the country and it must be stricter than before.” “I acknowledge that this is a drastic measure”, [stated Pedersen,] “but I think it gives a clear indication that we are tired of Israel's behaviour, quite simply”.

Yesterday we also learned that mass-murderer Anders Behring Breivik was openly enthusiastic about Israel. According to a variety of internet outlets, Behring Breivik was a regular poster on several Norwegian internet sites, notably the blog Document.no, which is run by Hans Rustad, a former left-wing journalist. Hans Rustad is Jewish, extremely pro-Zionist, and warns against ‘Islam-isation’, violence, and other social problems he assumes to be connected with Muslim immigration.

Read more »

Stephen Lendman

What to make of them is at issue. Many questions are unanswered. Are they similar to previous European and US post-9/11 attacks? Was a single individual responsible or were others unnamed or not known involved? Was it homegrown and/or outside inspired, despite what's been reported?

And why Norway, an unlikely target despite its NATO membership, token participation in Afghanistan, and Libya operations it scaled back and will end entirely by August 1.

Last May, in fact, Defense Minister Grete Faremo told Norway's Parliament that despite taking part in NATO air attacks (dropping 289 bombs), "There is no military solution to the situation in Libya. It must be solved politically." She added that Norway would scale back operations after its three-month commitment ended on June 24, ahead of ending them entirely weeks later.

At the same time, Norway supports Palestinian independence, de jure UN membership, and Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Store heads an international aid committee for Palestine. Moreover, its parliament earlier passed initiatives critical of Israel, and Finance Minister Kristin Halvorsen (from 2005 - 2009, now Education Minister) proposed boycotting Israeli products in 2006 though Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg disapproved.

However, in August 2010, Norway declined to purchase Israeli military products because of tensions between Israel and Palestine as well as its neighbors.

It's not known, but Friday's attack may relate to Norway's support for Palestinian sovereignty. Perhaps it was planned and initiated to influence its policy on granting full Palestinian UN membership in September, and may also be part of Washington's Global War on Terror.

Moreover, the notion of a lone bomber/gunman is very suspect, especially one able to kill 91 people, an unprecedented nearly impossible feat singlehanded. Were there others involved?

These and other questions demand answers, as well as specific bombing details, including whether what happened demanded expertise beyond the capability of untrained people.

Who gains and loses from every terror incident must also be asked, certainly not suspects charged, convicted and imprisoned. Geopolitical interests are central. This time Western and Israeli ones are key.

Read more »

Adnan Al-Daini

Two days ago (22-July-2011) Frank Gardner, the BBC's security correspondent reporting on the terrorist outrage in Norway, speculated that the horrific attack might be "Islamist" inspired with the "al-Qaida" word mentioned. Further speculation then followed as to the likely reasons.

Norway's 400 troops in Afghanistan were advanced as a possible cause why al-Qaida might be responsible. Yesterday morning (23-July-2011) the BBC is reporting a diametrically opposite scenario describing the arrest of a blue-eyed Norwegian as belonging to an extreme rightwing militant group who hate Muslims and multi-culturalism in Norway. Meanwhile, the Sun's headline the same morning (23-July-2011) screams "NORWAY'S 9/11", and above the headline in red capitals 'AL-QAEDA' MASSACRE. It seems Murdoch's Sun has already made up its mind. Terrorism linked to extremism of any hue is deadly, and reporting it responsibly is paramount. Churchill's remark, in another context, of "careless talk costs lives" comes to mind. Extremist groups of any kind are driven by hate. Sensational, inaccurate reporting stokes up this hatred to the point where innocents may suffer, simply because they belong to a certain ethnic or religious group. The humanity of the individual becomes irrelevant, and the hater may only see ethnicity or religion as a justification for violence or even murder.

Read more »

Craig Murray

I watched the disgraceful Islamophobic rantings on the BBC and Sky News last night in mounting disbelief. Security correspondent and security expert vied with each other to tell us that the dreadful attacks in Norway were the work of al-Qaida. One extraordinary American, introduced as from a Centre for Combating Extremism, explained that these Norwegian jihadists had international links and plans to attack London and the New York subway. Norway was a target, we were repeatedly told, because of its NATO membership.

There was at least six solid hours of this poisonous bullshit. I did not pick up on one single person who said that this probably was not Islamic terrorism – despite the glaringly obvious fact that the atrocity had a Norwegian domestic political agenda, being an attack on the Prime Minister’s office, and on a youth camp of the governing party. The internet was buzzing for hours with the news that the attacker on Utoya Island was blonde, without the broadcast media mentioning it. The American security expert I mention above had that base covered – he had obviously seen those reports, but did not mention them. However he said that jihadist groups had probably recruited European looking operatives to carry out the attacks, because they were aware that security services “consciously or unconsciously operated racial profiling.”

This morning Al Jazeera and Russia Today were carrying the news that the attacker was Anders Breivik – and even a picture of him – while the BBC and Sky still were not, and while they had stopped the blatant Islamophobic ranting, had still not admitted it was not an Islamic militant attack.

I would love to believe that this incident would cause the media to reassess the value of the numerous “security experts” whose companies, institutes, funding, profile and standards of living have been spectacularly boosted by the “War on Terror”. But I doubt it.

Read more »

Prableen Kaur Leder i Grorud AUF
(With rush translation from Norwegian into English)

Jeg har våknet. Jeg klarer ikke å sove mer. Jeg sitter i stuen. Føler sorg, sinne, lykke, Gud jeg vet ikke hva. Det er for mange følelser. Det er for mange tanker. Jeg er redd. Jeg reagerer på hver minste lyd. Jeg vil nå skrive om hva som skjedde på Utøya. Hva mine øyne så, hva jeg følte, hva jeg gjorde. Ordene kommer rett fra levra, men jeg vil samtidig anonymisere mange navn i respekt for mine venner.

Vi hadde hatt krisemøte i hovedbygget etter eksplosjonene i Oslo. Etter det var det et eget møte for medlemmene fra Akershus og Oslo. Etter møtene befant mange, mange seg rundt og i hovedbygget. Vi trøstet oss med at vi var trygge på en øy. Ingen hadde visst at helvete ville bryte ut hos oss også.

Jeg sto i hovedgangen da panikken brøt ut. Jeg hørte skudd. Jeg så ham skyte. Alle begynte å løpe. Det første tanken var: ”Hvorfor skyter politiet på oss? Hva faen?!” Jeg løp inn i lillesalen. Folk løp. Skrek. Jeg var redd. Jeg klarte å komme meg inn på et av rommene bakerst i bygget. Vi var mange der inne. Vi lå på gulvet alle sammen. Vi hørte flere skudd. Ble mer redde. Jeg gråt. Jeg skjønte ingenting. Jeg så bestevennen min gjennom vinduet og lurte på om jeg skulle gå ut for hente ham inn til meg. Jeg rakk det ikke. Jeg så frykten i øynene hans.

Vi ble liggende på gulvet inne i rommet i noen minutter. Vi ble enige om ikke å slippe flere inn i tilfelle morderen kom. Vi hørte flere skudd og bestemte oss for å hoppe ut av vinduet. Panikken brøt ut blant oss.

Read more »

Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR)

The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR) strongly condemns the decision taken by the Israeli Prisons Administration on Wednesday, 20 July 2011, to stop the higher education program provided to the Palestinian prisoners. PCHR calls on the international community to exert pressure on Israel and compel it to respect international law and put an end to the systematic and continued inhumane and degrading treatment of more than 6,000 Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails and detention centres.

The gravity of this decision is that it forms part of a series of measures taken by Israeli occupation authorities against Palestinian prisoners following actual orders given to the Israeli Prisons Administration by Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the end of last month to reduce what he termed as "advantages granted" to Palestinian prisoners. Other measures taken against prisoners include intensifying searching prisoners after forcing them to take off their clothes and placing Palestinian leaders, in Israeli jails, in solitary confinement. Palestinian prisoners have responded by declaring a set of actions in protest of such escalations. Prisoners went on a hunger strike for 10 sporadic days over the past two months.

This decision by the Israeli Prisons Administration is part of a general policy adopted by Israeli occupation authorities against Palestinian prisoners who are subjected to cruel living conditions as well as inhumane and degrading treatment, including torture, deteriorating health conditions and medical negligence towards prisoners - including those suffering from serious illnesses. This has, in some cases, led to death. This decision is extremely serious because it is based on instructions given from the top of the Israeli political establishment.

Read more »

Chris Marsden & Julie Hyland

For the last few days, the British public has been told that parliament has reasserted authority over Rupert Murdoch’s media empire and finally called the multibillionaire to order. Some have gone so far as to exclaim that Murdoch’s appearance before a parliamentary select committee Tuesday, alongside his son James, represents a “British Spring”.

This implicit reference to the so-called “Arab Spring”— revolutionary working-class struggles that forced Western-backed dictators in Tunisia and Egypt to resign this winter—is absurd and false. The spectacle of bought-and-paid-for parliamentarians respectfully questioning Murdoch aims to confuse the population and forestall a political accounting with the corporate oligarchy.

Far from demonstrating the vitality of the British political system, the sycophancy of Murdoch’s questioners revealed its rottenness and corruption. Prime Minister David Cameron—despite ample evidence of his compromising relations with top personnel from Murdoch’s UK media group, News International—did not even face a motion of no-confidence during Wednesday’s emergency parliamentary sitting. If there were any commitment to democracy left in the British establishment, this would not be possible.

It is a matter of record that representatives of News International were involved in hacking the phones of over 12,000 people, bribing police officers and using ties to the criminal underworld to blackmail and intimidate leading public figures. Moreover, the disturbing and unexplained death on Monday of the chief whistle-blower, Sean Hoare, was immediately declared “not suspicious”.

Every major institution and leading politician is implicated in the Murdoch scandal. Besides their own nefarious relations with Murdoch’s media group, top officials of the Metropolitan Police, the Crown Prosecution Service and successive governments have blocked investigations into criminal behaviour at News International for at least six years.

The ruling establishment’s claims of shock and outrage now are rank hypocrisy. Everyone in the political class knew full well the basic character of Murdoch’s operations, and either acquiesced or played an active part in them. For three decades Murdoch was a kingmaker, not only in Britain but also in the US, Australia, and beyond. Politicians, whether nominally “conservative” or “labour”, pledged fealty to him. That is why not a single individual has been prosecuted, much less held to political account, in the News International scandal so far.

Read more »

Stephen Lendman

Though a long shot at best, her doggedness during hard times makes anything possible. However, the notion of President Bachmann should chill everyone to fight it at a time America already is no fit place to live in. Imagine it under her, making Washington Christian fascist occupied territory. Don't rule her out.

Frances Fitzgerald titled her 2000 book on Reagan's Star Wars Strategic Defense Initiative, "Way Out There in the Blue," leaving [it] unsaid but letting readers conclude that America during his tenure was run by right wing extremists.

He and most others around him were ideologically hard right, their legacy including:

● disdain for working Americans;
● contempt for the rule of law, civil liberties, human rights, and democratic freedoms; and
● support for concentrated wealth, power and budget-busting militarism.

They backed:

● sweeping deregulation;
● destructive "free trade;"
● offshoring high-paying manufacturing, service, and other jobs;
● the war on drugs - in fact, a war on poor minorities, escalating America's prison population to the highest by far in the world, two-thirds in it Blacks and Latinos, most for nonviolent offenses;
● tax cuts for the rich;
● draconian social program cuts;
● support for global despots, apartheid South Africa, star wars, death squads, proxy wars in Central America, Africa, Afghanistan, and Middle East by helping Iran and Iraq wage war; and
● contempt for gays, lesbians, people of color, the poor and disadvantaged, and more.

Age 24 in 1980, Bachmann voted for Reagan and worked for his campaign. In Congress and as a Tea Party presidential candidate, her extremism may be unrivaled.

Read more »

Paul Craig Roberts

This is economic destruction. It always occurs when an oligarchy seizes control of a government. The short-run profits of the powerful are maximized at the expense of the viability of the economy.

Recently, the bond rating agencies that gave junk derivatives triple-A ratings threatened to downgrade US Treasury bonds if the White House and Congress did not reach a deficit reduction deal and debt ceiling increase. The downgrade threat is not credible, and neither is the default threat. Both are make-believe crises that are being hyped in order to force cutbacks in Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security.

If the rating agencies downgraded Treasuries, the company executives would be arrested for the fraudulent ratings that they gave to the junk that Wall Street peddled to the rest of the world. The companies would be destroyed and their ratings discredited. The US government will never default on its bonds, because the bonds, unlike those of Greece, Spain and Ireland, are payable in its own currency. Regardless of whether the debt ceiling is raised, the Federal Reserve will continue to purchase the Treasury’s debt. If Goldman Sachs is too big to fail, then so is the US government.

There is no budget focus on the illegal wars and military occupations that the US government has underway in at least six countries or the 66-year old US occupations of Japan and Germany and the ring of military bases being constructed around Russia.

The total military/security budget is in the vicinity of $1.1-$1.2 trillion, or 70% -75% of the federal budget deficit.

In contrast, Social Security is solvent. Medicare expenditures are coming close to exceeding the 2.3% payroll tax that funds Medicare, but it is dishonest for politicians and pundits to blame the US budget deficit on "entitlement programs."

Entitlements are funded with a payroll tax. Wars are not funded. The criminal Bush regime lied to Americans and claimed that the Iraq war would only cost $70 billion at the most and would be paid for with Iraq oil revenues. When Bush’s chief economic advisor, Larry Lindsey, said the Iraq invasion would cost $200 billion, the White House Moron fired him. In fact, Lindsay was off by a factor of 20. Economic and budget experts have calculated that the Iraq and Afghanistan wars have consumed $4,000 billion in out-of-pocket and already incurred future costs. In other words, the ongoing wars and occupations have already eaten up the $4 trillion by which Obama hopes to cut federal spending over the next ten years. Bomb now, pay later.

Read more »

Charles E. Carlson

Walid Shoebat, available for your anti-Islam shindig...

Anderson Cooper on CNN News’ show, Anderson Cooper 360o, exposed a former Palestinian school boy named Walid Shoebat, who has become a manufactured "terror expert" promoting anti-Islamist hysteria among federal law enforcement officers and in Evangelical, Christian Zionists churches. The CNN piece[1] focused on unraveling Shoebat's claimed history as a "terrorist" into a pile of yarn, showing it consisted of not even half truths. It also revealed how much money Shoebat is being paid by US taxpayers to train federal police and American Christian Zionists.

CNN stopped short of saying what will be tough to prove… that Shoebat is a de-facto Israeli agent operating in the USA. Furthermore, it is likely he was recruited here, because it appears that Israel never heard of him when he lived with his family in Beit Lahor, near Bethlehem, where he claims to have been a "terrorist" trying to kill Jews.

Shoebat's written response, “I Confess…”, to Anderson Cooper’s telling exposé, was immediately spread far and wide by World Net Daily and other news sources in sympathy with Israel and Christian Zionists.[2]

Why is Shoebat so well paid? Here is an example of what he says to earn his money. CNN News researcher Drew Griffin recorded Shoebat's lecture to law enforcement and first respondent personnel in South Dakota. Griffin’s remarks included,

"Shoebat’s message to the law enforcement agencies, churches and universities that pay him to speak is to trust no Muslims, especially the ones that organize. 'All Islamic organizations in America should be the No. 1 enemy. All of them,' he said at the South Dakota conference."

Shoebat has a handler, but we cannot see him. His written rebuttal to CNN is revealing in that it is far more professional than he is capable of himself. Shoebat was stumbling, shamefaced and sometimes belligerent in his CNN interview with Drew Griffin; he could not even recall the names of his Board of Directors, and he had no explanation for why his alleged crimes and arrest time in Israel were unknown there.

Shoebat’s written rebuttal, however, is brilliant in its ability to avoid questions, while scoffing at the CNN documentary, and could only have been done by a PR pro who realized that a lie still has value so long as some will believe it. Shoebat cries, “poor me”, a persecuted philanthropist giving money to save Christians, who he says are being murdered by Muslims. He makes no mention of his largesse from the Department of Homeland Security. Too bad we can not uncover his agent and his writer. I would guess from their style that both are Israelis.

Read more »

Stephen Lendman

After months of ruling Al Khalifa family crackdowns against nonviolent protesters, political opponents, human rights activists, medical professionals, independent journalists, and others wanting democratic change, reports suggest Washington may move its Fifth Fleet elsewhere.

According to the Australian and London Times, "Sources in Washington and the Gulf confirm (a) growing consensus" around the idea of relocating away from Bahrain because of unease over violence and instability.

On July 21, Hugh Tomlinson said:

"Politicians in Washington are concerned the navy's continued presence a few kilometres from the centre of the capital Manama lends tacit support to Bahrain's suppression of the opposition, amid allegations of systematic human rights abuses."

Other concerns are that violence and instability may compromise base security. According to one source:

"There was talk on Capitol Hill about moving the fleet within days of the protests breaking out, and that increased in March and April as people realized that what was happening in Bahrain ran counter to our interests."

In mid-March, however, Obama backed Saudi troops invading Bahrain guns blazing, attacking peaceful protesters, arresting opposition leaders and activists, occupying the country, denying wounded men and women medical treatment, and enforcing Al Khalifa family imposed martial law.

Read more »

Philip Giraldi

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was at it again last week. She was in Turkey attending a NATO gathering dealing with what to do about the succession in Libya, based on the perhaps erroneous assumption that Muammar Gadhafi is on his way out. Clinton and NATO decided, based on their own admittedly partial view of the situation, that the Gadhafi regime is no longer legitimate and that the rebels who are trying to topple him are now to be regarded as the legal government. The “international recognition” will enable them to use the roughly $30 billion in frozen Libyan government assets, mostly located in American and European banks. Hopefully, things will go better than they did in Iraq back in 2003. Washington sent in a proconsul supported by a host of neocon Myrmidons to make sure things would run smoothly. More than $20 billion of Iraqi state “reconstruction” funds were unfrozen and then went missing after liberation took place. The Iraqi people are still waiting for the electricity to come back on.

Clinton also took some heavy-handed swipes at Syria, making clear that both she and her boss want to see regime change. Three hundred fifty representatives of Syrian dissident groups were perhaps not coincidentally present in Istanbul for a “National Salvation Conference,” so Clinton took the opportunity to denounce President Bashar al-Assad’s government as having “lost legitimacy.” The White House backed up Clinton’s possibly impromptu comment, and over at Foggy Bottom, Victoria Nuland, the State Department’s neoconnish press spokeswoman, made the case more explicitly, denouncing “a Syrian government that continues to beat, imprison, torture, slaughter its own people.”

If Syria sounds like any number of regimes that the United States has quite comfortable relationships with, it should. While it would seem that international conferencing and seeking to overthrow two regimes would make for a busy weekend for even the most peripatetic secretary of state, Hillary also decided to take on her host, Turkey.

Read more »

Adnan Al-Daini

There's a slogan that has become the emblem of the revolution in the entire Arab world: “The people want the fall of the regime” - “Alshaab youreed isqat elnidham”. 

The standard response of every dictator in the Arab world is: Who, me? Then they blame everything and everybody except themselves.  What arrogance!  In fact, to any objective observer of the Middle East, the question is not why the revolution is happening, but why it has taken so long!  The reality of politics in the Arab world was succinctly summed up by a Syrian pro-democracy demonstrator with: “We the people are only allowed to open our mouths when we go to the dentist”.

Arab despots see the legitimate demands of their people for justice, human rights and freedom as a challenge to their manliness. It has inhibited them from responding intelligently and flexibly.  Arab society with a culture that generally excludes women from politics, and admires a “fearless” leader, who is ruthless and unable to tolerate dissent, is a poor one with ruinous consequences for its people.

Stubbornness and domination have become characteristics to be admired in the male with varying degrees in the entire Arab world.  Girls are encouraged to defer to their brothers, and taught to hide their intelligence and good sense in discussions with their male counterparts.  Males are burdened from an early age to assume the mantle of family leadership, and encouraged to see themselves as protector of the extended family against all external threats.  This macho tradition is transferred to the politics of an Arab world that largely excludes women, and has produced an unhealthy imbalance between the sexes that has been to the detriment of everyone in society.

Read more »

Khalid Amayreh in occupied Jerusalem

As many as 5000 Christian Zionists gathered this week at the Convention Center in Washington, D.C. for the annual conference of the organization CUFI, Christians United For Israel.

The annual event is considered a key occasion when Christian supporters of Israel reassert their nearly hysterical embrace of the Zionist apartheid regime, including the policies of ethnic cleansing of non-Jews (Muslims and Christians), lebensraum, and even its genocidal designs.

Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu addressed the evangelical conference, telling the huge audience that "when you support Israel, you don’t have to choose between your interests and your values, you get both.."

Netanyahu, like most other Israeli leaders, is a pathological liar who lies as often as he breathes oxygen. He knows deep in his heart that what Israel has been doing and the way it has been behaving ever since its birth 63 years ago represents the ultimate contradiction to true Christian values, the values that Jesus preached and because of which he incurred the wrath of the Jewish establishment of his time.

One of the most enthusiastic Zionist Christian supporters of Israel is Glen Beck, a tomfool par excellence, who would do anything in order to obtain a kosher certificate of good conduct from the very same people who would view Beck himself a slave, and his mother, daughter and sister as Shiksas or whores.

The news commentator, who visited Israel a few days ago in order demonstrate his Zionist credentials, sounded very much as if he was a Kahana disciple.

Meir Kahana is the Judeo-Nazi rabbi and former Knesset member who urged Israel to carry out a genocidal ethnic cleansing of its non-Jewish population and subjects in order to create a goyem-free Talmudic theocracy.

Read more »

Stephen Lendman

Beggar in Jerusalem. No longer allowed at Kotel (Western Wall /
Wailing Wall.) (Photo: Shlomi Cohen)

Notably since the early 1980s, neoliberalism began replacing New Deal/Great Society values to the detriment of millions harmed. It means markets know best so let them, liberating enterprise to move capital, goods and services freely, benefitting the few at the expense of the many.

Britain's Thatcher and America's Reagan were pivotal figures, endorsing elitism, class power, and private enterprise unconstrained by rules, regulations or taxes, producing inequality and social injustice.

It plagues Israel like the West, notably since the mid-1980s when power shifted from various government agencies to the Finance Ministry and central bank (the Bank of Israel), similar to American financialization that empowered Wall Street, the Fed, and US FIRE sector overall (finance, insurance, and real estate).

A race to the bottom followed, especially since the 1990s by mass privatizations, welfare and social benefit cuts, and, like America, shifting wealth to the rich. Predictable results produced social injustice and inequality, harming Jews as well as Arab citizens.

Various studies show it, including annual Latet ones, its latest saying 1.77 million Israelis are poor. About 850,000 children live in poverty. As a result, 75% of those affected miss meals, a 21% increase from 2009. Moreover, 83% of poor children lack proper dental care, most getting none. Some beg for money. Others steal to eat.

Read more »

Peter Smith

Lord Monckton addressed a rowdy crowd at the anti-
carbon tax rally in Sydney. (AAP: Lema Samandar)

Saw Lord Monckton in Sydney this month. It was fittingly cold. I remember my first Sydney winter many years’ ago. It was colder than I expected. Memories play tricks but my impression is that this winter is as cold as it was then. However, I am not putting this forward as evidence for the absence of global warming. Sceptics and warmists are at one in acknowledging that the earth has warmed since the end of the little ice age and, I think, most agree with the proximate extent of the warming; even if sceptics are suspicious of data fiddling and many badly-placed land temperature gauges.

Everyone also agrees that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas and that more of it will warm the planet. Thus far there is agreement. It is therefore annoying (to put it mildly) at this juncture to have people (scientist and non-scientists) say that some ice is melting or that seas levels are rising as though this were additional information to bolster the case of warming. It simply isn’t. Warming is warming and it will have an effect on ice and sea level. For those whose reason has been impaired by mumbo-jumbo climate science, put some cubes of ice in a sieve over a pan of water and warm the pan. Measuring the temperature inside the pan is all that is needed to establish that the pan is warming. You can then observe that the ice cubes have melted and the water level has risen but this gives no added information on the fact of the warming.

If everyone agrees basically with what has happened (though of course not why it has happened from the late 1970’s until about 2000) then disagreement of substance must surely be restricted to what will happen in the future. Back to Lord Monckton. Let us first of all dispense with his credentials. Is he a lord? This seemed to fascinate Adam Spencer on ABC radio. Well no one disputes that he has a hereditary peerage. Does that, as he claims, entitle him to describe himself as a non-sitting member of the House of Lords? I have no idea. His explanation seems okay to me but he may be indulging in a little pedantic vanity. Is this as bad as an imaginary dodging of bullets on an airport tarmac, for example? Would Mr Spencer have quizzed Hillary Clinton about this at the start of an interview on foreign affairs? Spencer also thought it was relevant to get Monckton to concede that he was neither a climate scientist nor an economist. To what point? Surely everyone knows that neither Monckton nor Al Gore, nor anyone on the multi-party climate change committee is a scientist or economist.

Monckton’s credentials are that he has looked thoroughly into the science and drawn conclusions. He has done what we all should do, to some extent at least, rather than to simply fall into line like sheep. His views stand or fall on their merits and have to be challenged on their merits.

Read more »

Stephen Lendman

Pretending to restart Israeli/Palestinian peace talks, Quartet representatives met in Washington on July 11. Attending were Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Catherine Ashton, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, and former UK Prime Minister/reinvented war criminal/current Middle East envoy Tony Blair.

Ahead of talks, Clinton and Ashton expressed determination to overcome previously unresolved issues.

On July 12, an unidentified senior US official called the meeting an "excellent and serious discussion on the next steps. (Representatives) expressed support for (Obama's) May Middle East speech and called to start preparatory phases of talks without any preconditions."

However, "(t)here are still gaps, and they need to be closed before the Quartet can go forward with public statements."

In fact, chasms define still unresolved issues. More on that below.

On July 12, Haaretz writer Barak Ravid headlined, "Israel and Palestinian sources to Haaretz: US peace efforts have failed," saying "Intensive US strong-arming failed. America "was unable to find a formula that (all) parties could accept." Manipulative Washington demands were unacceptable. Netanyahu blamed Palestinians for the impasse.

Last January's Palestine Papers revealed that Obama rejected unacceptable Bush era two state solution "Road Map" terms, effectively accepting settlements as Israeli territory. Or did he?

Read more »

Andy Worthington

[Photo: U.S. “enemy combatant” Jose Padilla’s losing his mind in a U.S. military brig during his ordeal of solitary confinement and torture.]

“Some issues,” the New York Times declared in an editorial on June 25, “require an unwavering stand. Preserving the role of law enforcement agencies in stopping and punishing terrorists is one of them. This country is not and should never be a place where the military dispenses justice, other than to its own.”

Fine words, indeed, although the Times itself has, over the last ten years, in common with most, if not all of the American establishment, failed to thoroughly and repeatedly condemn efforts, first by George W. Bush, and then by the Obama administration, to hold military trials for the mixed bag of soldiers and terrorist suspects held at Guantánamo.

This is where the rot set in, for which everyone in a position of authority, whether in politics or the media, bears responsibility. However, the failure to stem the poison flowing from this wound to the established order — in which terrorists are criminals and soldiers are not terrorists — has led to an outrageous situation in which lawmakers (both Republicans and Democrats) have decided that the aberrations introduced by the Bush administration, which should, by now, have been thoroughly discredited, were, instead, just the first steps in the creation of an all-encompassing military state.

In this dystopian future, coming to America within months, if lawmakers are successful, anyone regarded as a terrorist must be held in military detention, where, it is planned, they may be subjected to abuse with impunity, and, if required, held forever without a trial and without any rights.

This was the aberration initially dreamt up by Bush and his close advisors for their “war on terror” and implemented at Guantánamo, throughout the war zones in Afghanistan and Iraq, and around the world in a network of secret prisons. Although it should have died as an enduring concept when President Obama took office, it took less than a year for supporters of military detention for terror suspects to start proposing its continuation and expansion, suggesting that no foreign terror suspect should ever receive a federal court trial.

Read more »

Medea Benjamin

("ΛΕΦΤΑ" means MONEY)

The people of Greece are fed up with this wasteful military spending.

When U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited Greece, she praised the Greek government’s austerity measures to reduce deficits and cut spending. The U.S. and Greece face a common challenge of dealing with soaring deficits, but they also face something else in common: a refusal to deal with out-of-control military spending. And given that the United States is a major arms seller to Greece, Hillary Clinton will encourage the Greeks to slash workers’ wages and pensions, but not its enormous military appetite.

With a population of just 11 million, Greece is the largest importer of conventional weapons in Europe—and ranks fifth in the world behind China, India, the United Arab Emirates and South Korea. Greece spends a whooping 3 percent of its gross domestic product on military hardware, compared to an average 1.7% in the other European NATO countries, including nations involved in international conflicts such as Britain, France and Germany.

The justification has been the ongoing disputes with Turkey over Cyprus and disagreement over the sovereignty of certain islets of the Aegean. But for years now there has been no military conflict over these decades-old disputes, and relations with Turkey have been steadily improving.

I recently spent time with Greek activists who have been camping out in Athens’ Syntagma Square to protest the austerity program. They are not happy with Clinton’s visit, or her thumbs up for a financial package that slashes wages, reduces pensions, increases joblessness and privatizes government services. And they noted that the very nations in the European Union and the United States that have been pushing the Greek government to squeeze Greek workers are the same ones that have been, for the last decade, pushing Greece to purchase massive amounts of worthless weapons.

Read more »

Stephen Lendman

In July 2011, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR) issued a new report titled, "Education Denied: Israel's Systematic Violation of Palestinian Children's Right to Education," even though it's a fundamental human right.

It involves progressively developing children as individuals and responsible citizens. It's key in helping them "raise their standard of living, and (be able to further their) economic, social and cultural development and growth of society."

PCHR's report addresses Israeli policies that affect primary education achievement for all Palestinians by 2015.

International law recognizes the right to education for everyone, including Article 13 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) stating:

"The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to education....(It) shall enable all persons to participate effectively in a free society, promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations and all racial, ethnic or religious groups," as well as advance activities for peace.

Read more »

Robert Stevens and Chris Marsden

Parliament and its parties are nothing more than the hirelings of an obscenely wealthy oligarchy that has complete liberty to pursue their self-enrichment and impose their counterrevolutionary social agenda by whatever means they see fit.

The two select committees are nothing more than a cover for the refusal to conduct a serious investigation of the News International scandal that would bring the guilty to book.

The appearance of Rupert Murdoch, the chairman and CEO of News Corporation, and his son James Murdoch, its deputy chief operating officer, before the British Parliament’s Culture, Media and Sports Select Committee was a piece of well-choreographed political theatre.

As with Rebekah Brooks, the former chief executive of News International, News Corp’s UK arm, who was questioned afterwards, the Murdochs knew beforehand that there was no danger of them being asked probing questions, let alone suffering any legal consequences from their testimony.

Far from the much vaunted reassertion of the authority of Parliament and the bringing of Murdoch to account, the event took on the character of a PR exercise for News Corp.

One would never have known by the committee’s deference that the three News Corp luminaries were appearing to answer questions relating not only to the News of the World’s phone hacking, but to bribery, corruption and blackmail of police officers, public officials and leading politicians by Murdoch’s media empire.

Read more »

Patrick Martin

An elderly man walks past The National Debt Clock, which displays the current United States gross national debt and each American family's share, on a wall in midtown Manhattan, in New York July 13, 2011. REUTERS/Brendan McDermid

Obama has escalated the war in Afghanistan, launched new military onslaughts in Libya, Yemen and Somalia, continued the Bush administration’s attacks on democratic rights, and now seeks to outdo the Republicans in imposing austerity policies at home.

Official Washington and American media attention will be focused for the next two weeks on the August 2 deadline for raising the federal debt ceiling. Without congressional action to increase the debt limit by that date, according to the Treasury Department, the US government will be unable to borrow money to cover payments, including Social Security checks being sent out to 50 million recipients on August 3, and interest payments on US government bonds due later in the month.

In order to understand the significance of the debt ceiling crisis, and the measures being proposed to resolve it, it is necessary to cut through the lies and distortions of the Democratic and Republican politicians in Washington, reinforced by the commentaries in the corporate-controlled media, both liberal and conservative.

Why is the demand for “deficit reduction” now being voiced so unanimously in every quarter of official American politics? What are the fundamental class issues that underlie this campaign?

The American ruling elite is engaged in the greatest robbery of working people in US history. In the bank bailout of 2008-2009, the financial aristocracy effectively transferred to the federal government its bad debts and losses from a decade of reckless speculation. Now the working class is being compelled to pay the price for Wall Street’s looting of the Treasury through the destruction of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and other social programs in education, the environment, transportation and housing.

When they hear Barack Obama, John Boehner and other political and media representatives of big business declare that “there is no money” to sustain vital programs on which tens of millions of working people depend for their survival, workers should think back to the financial crisis that erupted less than three years ago. There was no suggestion then that “there is no money” to save the banks from collapse. On the contrary, staggering and essentially unlimited sums—as much as $23.7 trillion in combined cash, loans and guarantees from the Treasury, Federal Reserve and other institutions—were made available to defend the capitalist system and the financial interests of the super-rich.

Read more »

Julie Hyland

In the 2010 general election held on 6 May, the Conservatives won 307 seats in a hung parliament and Cameron was appointed Prime Minister on 11 May 2010, at the head of a coalition between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. Using The Sun extensively, Rupert Murdoch had done his darned best to make it happen...

The political crisis surrounding the News of the World phone hacking scandal is now threatening the position of Prime Minister David Cameron.

With the arrest Sunday of former News International Chief Executive Rebekah Brooks, the Metropolitan Police and Rupert Murdoch’s media group are rounding on one another in public.

Brooks is the tenth person to be arrested as part of investigations into phone hacking and the corruption of police officers by News International. None as yet has been charged.

Brooks, a former News of the World editor, was invited to meet with police at the weekend on Friday, only hours after she resigned her post at News International, the company that controls Murdoch’s media outlets in Britain. Initially, there were allegations that the invitation was a ruse cooked up between the news group and the police to prevent her appearing Tuesday alongside Rupert Murdoch and his son James, News International’s chairman, before the parliamentary select committee investigating phone hacking.

The Murdochs had already made clear that their answers to the committee would be limited by the police investigations. Brooks’ arrest, it was argued, could see her exempted from appearing. In the event, a statement by Brooks’ lawyer said her appearance was a matter for the committee itself.

Brooks’ anger at being quizzed for nine hours under caution was made clear in the same statement. While she “is not guilty of any criminal offence,” it read, “the position of the Metropolitan Police is less easy to understand. Despite arresting her yesterday, and conducting an interview process lasting nine hours, they put no allegations to her and showed her no documents connecting her with any crime.

“They will in due course have to give an account of their actions and, in particular, their decision to arrest her with the enormous reputational damage that this has involved.”

The statement is indicative of the acrimony now breaking out at the highest levels of the state and political apparatus.

Murdoch’s Times editorialised that if the allegations of bribery amongst serving police officers proved true, it would mean, “Britain’s police are riven with corruption on an institutional scale. Journalists who bribe policemen are indicative of a flawed industry. Policemen who can be bribed are indicative of a flawed state.”

Read more »

Stephen Lendman

In Israel and Occupied Palestine, only Jews have rights. Arabs are denied them for being Muslims in a Jewish state, even on their own land.

Palestinians bear witness daily to Israeli state terror. Complicit Western and regional nations, in fact, condone it through silence or failure to condemn what never is tolerable and must end.

For nearly a week, Israeli aircraft struck Gaza preemptively. As a result, fear of a new war grows.

Israel claims strikes follow rocket attacks. In fact, when launched, they're few in number and respond to Israeli aggression in self-defense.

● On July 12, IDF jets struck alleged northern Gaza "weapons manufacturing sites," injuring one woman.
● On July 13, three tunnels were bombed. Israel falsely blamed them for "terrorist activity." Two Palestinians were missing after one of the tunnels collapsed. Later one body was recovered. Five or more other Palestinians were wounded.
● On July 14, other targets were struck, wounding four Palestinian civilians.
● On July 15, overnight attacks wounded four Palestinians, including two children. Over the weekend, other preemptive raids followed. Blaming the victims, a July 14 IDF statement said: "The IDF will not tolerate any attempt to harm Israeli civilians, and will respond with determination to any attempt to use terror against the State of Israel. The IDF holds the Hamas terrorist organization solely responsible for any terrorist activity emanating from the Gaza Strip."

In fact, Hamas is Palestine's legitimate government. Israel lawlessly terrorizes West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza residents preemptively, falsely claiming self-defense.

Read more »

Stephen Lendman

Rahm Emanuel, left, and Richard M. Daley. On December 15, 2010, Rahm Emanuel met privately with Chicago’s labor union leaders and informed them that if elected, he plans to cut pensions and not just for new hires. Emanuel must be some tough sob because union leaders having intentionally kept this information from its membership seem to fear Emanuel more than their members. (pbd)

Except for Harold Washington's 1983 - 1987 tenure until his untimely death, Chicago never had populist mayors, notably under father Richard J. (April 20, 1955 - December 20, 1976) and son Richard M. Daley (April 24, 1989 - May 16, 2011).

However, after two months in office, Emanuel looks likely to be Chicago's worst, based on policy initiatives he supports.

As White House chief of staff, he was criminally part of Obama's war cabinet. As Chicago's mayor, he's waging it against labor.

Candidate Emanuel, in fact, promised draconian anti-worker cuts "in attacking our budget deficit, (so) there must be no sacred cows....Chicago will have to make tough choices, (forcing) more than $500 million in efficiencies" on the backs of working Chicagoans already struggling to get by when they need help, not greater sacrifices they can't afford.

No matter, slash and burn now is policy, including layoffs, wage freezes, and benefit cuts, notably targeting healthcare and pensions. Then in June, Emanuel rescinded a contractual 4% raise owed 30,000 teachers, indicating the same policy would follow for other Chicago Public Schools (CPS) employees as part of his war on public education and Chicago workers.

In late June, it continued with 1,000 teachers fired, besides 4,000 since 2009, school closures, larger class sizes, and other draconian measures. Reassigned teachers retain salaries and benefits for one year as "interim" substitute staff. If not kept after 10 months, they're "honorabl(y) terminated."

In other words, fired, no matter their qualifications, tenure, or student needs. In fact, many other teachers were sacked without temporary pay or benefits, according to union officials, who have little to boast about after endorsing Illinois Senate Bill 7 (SB 7).

Read more »

Wayne Madsen

[Photo: Angelina Jolie (left) works closely with the United Nations Human Committee for Refugees as a Goodwill Ambassador in various nations.]

The national aspirations of peoples are governed by rank public relations schemes

On July 9, the Republic of South Sudan became the newest internationally-recognized nation-state. As the result of a civil war truce and peace deal worked out five years previously, South Sudan and its former master, the Republic of Sudan, independent since 1956, mutually recognized their divorce.

Unlike the “velvet divorce” of the Czech Republic and Slovakia from the former Czechoslovakia, the Sudanese divorce of the largely Muslim north and majority Christian south was all but peaceful. The two sides staked rival claims to border regions such as the oil-rich Abyei and a renewed war between north and south Sudan loomed as the south achieved independence.

The independence gala in the South Sudan capital of Juba was attended by such luminaries - some would call them “interlopers” - as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice, former Secretary of State Colin Powell, U.S. Africa Command chief General Carter Ham, British Foreign Secretary William Hague, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, and French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe. The international “glitterati” from the West studiously avoided meeting Sudan’s President Omar al-Bashir, who faces an International Criminal Court arrest warrant for war crimes in Darfur.

The snub of Bashir in Juba by the Western leaders points to the essence of international diplomacy today. International relations have become a “reality television show,” where leaders who do not comport to the standards dictated by a consortium of political leaders representing multi-national corporate interests and international “do-gooders” like actor George Clooney and actress Angelina Jolie representing un-elected and well-paid executives of non-government organizations decide what peoples are repressed, what regions deserve independence, and what leaders are “good guys” and “bad guys.” International diplomacy has become a children’s game and the effects have plunged nations and peoples into civil war and strife.

Read more »

Adnan Al-Daini

The image that pops into my head when I think of “the special relationship” between the US and Britain is of Tony Blair and George Bush wearing tight jeans and windcheaters, walking towards the camera on George Bush’s ranch in Crawford, Texas.  The smirk on Tony Blair’s face projects an image of “Look at me, aren’t I great; I am next to the most powerful person on the planet, and we have just decided to pulverise Iraq”.

The British corporate media is obsessed with the “special relationship” and the “personal chemistry” between British prime ministers and American presidents. When the two meet, the body language and every gesture are nauseatingly analysed, seeking reassurance that Britain is still America’s best friend.  This clinginess is unhealthy; it leads to unquestioning acquiescence and deference to the senior partner, the US. Special relationships should mean being honest and frank, and saying things your special friend may not want to hear.  At least that is what I think it should be. 

According to Wikipedia, the phrase “special relationship” was first used in 1946 by Winston Churchill to describe the close political, diplomatic, cultural and historical relationship between the US and Britain.  Tony Blair’s interpretation of it is that of grovelling sycophancy towards George Bush culminating in the disaster that was the Iraq war. Whatever Blair’s thinking was about the war, he felt that because of the “special relationship” Britain must act as its cheerleader.  This was also the view of most of the British cabinet.

Contrast that with the attitude of France and Germany, who opposed the Iraq war on logical, thoughtful calculations - that the war was unnecessary, illegal and not in the West’s interest. 

That illegal war has caused death, injury and suffering to thousands of British and American people, and inflicted enormous suffering on the entire Iraqi people with death and injury to hundreds of thousands if not millions. It has also caused enormous damage to the reputation of the US and Britain, weakened the rule of international law, and the authority of international institutions. It has also invigorated international terrorism. You would think after such a disaster future British governments would be more circumspect in foolishly and slavishly following America in its future wars. Not a bit of it.

Read more »

Stephen Lendman

On July 14, Mossad-connected DEBKAfile headlined, "The Libyan War ends. Obama makes Moscow peace broker. NATO halts strikes," saying "Bar the shouting, the war in Libya ended Thursday morning, July 14, when (Obama) called Russian President Dmitry Medvedev to hand Moscow the lead role in negotiations with (Gaddafi to end) the conflict - provided only that the Libyan ruler steps down in favor of a transitional administration."

More about Obama's demand below. For now, America's Libya terror bombing continues unabated, despite a White House July 13 Office of the Press Secretary release, saying Obama thanked "Russia's efforts to mediate a political solution in Libya, emphasizing that (Washington) is prepared to support negotiations that lead to a democratic transition....as long as (Gaddafi) steps aside."

In fact, Obama spurns democratic values abroad and at home, intolerable notions he won't accept, nor peace, waging multiple imperial wars with no letup. In Libya, moreover, at issue isn't Gaddafi, it's colonizing another country, controlling its resources, plundering its wealth, and exploiting its people, the same US aim always.

On July 15, Washington and about 30 European and Middle East countries illegally recognized insurgent leaders as Libya's legitimate government - the so-called Transitional National Council (TNC). Meeting in Istanbul (without China and Russia), the Libya Contact Group issued a statement, saying "Henceforth, and until an interim authority is in place, participants agreed to deal with the (TNC) as the legitimate government authority in Libya."

It added that Gaddafi no longer had legitimacy and must leave Libya with his family.

Explaining what's clearly illegitimate, Secretary of State Clinton said:

"We still have to work through various legal issues (in order words, avoid them entirely), but we expect this step on recognition will enable the TNC to access additional sources of funding," including $30 billion of up to $150 billion of Libya's stolen wealth, besides its rich oil, gas, and water resources worth many multiples more.

Read more »

Stephen Lendman

Mount Doom and Sauron's tower of Barad-dûr in Mordor, as depicted
in the Peter Jackson film. (Lord of the Rings)

Famed journalist George Seldes (1890 - 1995) condemned press prostitutes in books like "Lords of the Press," denouncing their corruption, suppression of truth, and news censorship before television reached large audiences, saying:

"The most sacred cow of the press is the press itself - the most powerful force against the general welfare of the majority of the people."

Australian journalist Bruce Page authored a book on Murdock titled, "The Murdoch Archipelago," calling him: "one of the world's leading villains (and) global pirate(s)," rampaging the mediasphere, telling world leaders what he expects from them and what he'll offer in return. It's "let's make a deal," Murdoch-style that's uncompromisingly hardball, some on the receiving end calling it an offer they can't refuse.

On air and in print, his operations support allies and beat up on adversaries, enough at times to affect political outcomes his way, especially in Britain and his native Australia, but also helping hard-right US candidates.

For mass audiences, he specializes in sensationalist pseudo-journalism, distorting the truth, at the same time juicing-up reports on murder, mayhem, mishaps, celebrity gossip and soft porn for audiences that love it.

He's so beyond respectability, in fact, that former Chicago columnist Mike Royko (1932 - 1997) once said "no self-respecting fish would (want to) be wrapped in a Murdoch paper....His goal (isn't) journalism, (it's) vast power, political power," and, of course, bottom line priorities. If ideologically acceptable and sells, he'll feature it and has for decades.

From his early beginnings to his current unrivaled media world status (unless scandal now brings him down), he's wielded unchallenged power ruthlessly as a world class predator, using deception, chicanery, arrogance, artfulness, charm, cunning, sheer muscle, will, intimidation, poisonous influence and toadying to get his way by bullying people to prevail.

Bereft of ethics, his media empire includes a bordello of print and broadcast outlets. In his book titled, "The Man Who Owns the News: Inside the Secret World of Rupert Murdoch," Michael Wolff called him a monarch, gangster and con man, interested only in power, control and profits.

Read more »

Khalid Amayreh in occupied Jerusalem

According to recent reports from Washington, the Obama administration is proposing a trade-off to reach a breakthrough in the stalled Palestinian-Israeli talks.

The new formula, which the U.S. tried (but failed) to sell to other members of the Quartet, proposes a Palestinian recognition of the "Jewishness" of Israel in exchange for an American endorsement of a Palestinian "state" on unspecific parts of the West Bank in addition to a few scattered neighborhoods of occupied East Jerusalem.

The United States has already approached some Arab states, asking them to endorse the American ideas and pressure the weak Palestinian Authority (PA) leadership to do likewise.

Unfortunately, the notoriously obsequious PA is yet to utter a clarion and unequivocal "NO" in response to increasingly daring Israeli and American efforts to force the Palestinian leadership to commit a historic adultery with Palestinian honor, legitimate rights and future, since recognizing the "Jewishness" of Israel would be a historic obscenity exceeding any other obscenity.

Some shallow-minded Palestinian officials seem unable to grasp the actual and potential gravity of the issue at hand. These people must be asked to shut up, or get lost, as they have no right whatsoever to sacrifice the rights of future Palestinian generations to freedom, dignity, and equality.

Russia has had the decency to reject the obscene American demand. This fact should at least silence and embarrass some of the defeatist elements within the PA who go by the adage "feed me today, kill me tomorrow."

In addition to that, a compromising attitude by the likes of Mahmoud Abbas and Yasser Abed Rabbo would really force our friends and allies into a very difficult position. Some of them would argue rather bitterly "we can't be more Catholic than the Pope, we can't be more Palestinian than the Palestinians themselves."

Read more »

Kate Randall

NY Times’ David Brooks on “Death and Budgets”

In an op-ed piece published Friday, New York Times columnist David Brooks reveals the real thinking of America’s financial aristocrats in relation to health care spending. In chilling terms he gives vent to their bitterness over the “squandering” of resources to extend the lives of commoners and their determination to put an end to it.

The column made its appearance in the midst of discussions between the White House and congressional Democrats and Republicans on a bipartisan plan to slash trillions of dollars from health and retirement programs for the elderly and the poor, including Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. The Obama administration has taken the lead in this unprecedented attack on basic social reforms dating back to the 1930s, insisting that any move to raise the debt ceiling must be tied to massive cuts.

The essence of Brooks’ column is summed up in the headline, “Death and Budgets.” In order to resolve the budget deficit, he argues, people will have to die sooner.

“This fiscal crisis is about many things,” he writes, “but one of them is our inability to face death—our willingness to spend our nation into bankruptcy to extend life for a few more sickly months.” It is the American people’s selfish and ignorant desire to live longer, not the mindless greed and extravagant wealth of the ruling elite or the trillions spent on war and bank bailouts, that is bankrupting the country, he argues.

Read more »