Bill Van Auken

There is strong evidence that NATO carried out war crimes in its eight-month war for regime-change in Libya, according to a report released Thursday by Middle East human rights groups.

The United Nations resolution authorizing “all necessary measures” to protect civilians was utilized as the justification for military actions against civilian targets in which many Libyans were killed and wounded, according to the groups’ investigation.

The report is based upon a fact-finding mission to Libya conducted by the Arab Organization for Human Rights, together with the Palestinian Center for Human Rights and the International Legal Assistance Consortium. The investigators conducted extensive interviews with victims of war crimes as well as witnesses and Libyan officials. The mission carried out on-site field investigations in and around Tripoli, Zawiya, Sibrata, Khoms, Zliten, Misrata, Tawergha and Sirte.

While the investigation concluded that the government of Col. Muammar Gaddafi used excessive force against protesters, the report also states: “There does not appear to have been a clear demarcation between peaceful protests and armed opposition, and the Mission received credible information indicating that protestors took up arms in the early stages of the revolution.”

In terms of NATO’s role, the report cites evidence that in addition to NATO air strikes, the US-led alliance deployed troops on the ground, which coordinated the offensive of the so-called “rebels” with the bombing campaign.

“NATO participated in what could be classified as offensive actions undertaken by the opposition forces, including, for example, attacks on towns and cities held by Gaddafi forces,” the report states. “Equally, the choice of certain targets, such as a regional food warehouse, raises prima facie questions regarding the role of such attacks with respect to the protection of civilians.”

Among civilian sites visited by the mission that had been struck by NATO bombs and missiles were schools and colleges, a Zliten regional food warehouse, the Office of the Administrative Controller in Tripoli, and private homes.

More »

Stephen Lendman

Here we go again. We've seen it before strategically timed. Weigh all Israeli claims skeptically. On its face, this one lacks credibility.

Cui bono? Not Syria embroiled for months battling an externally generated insurgency and threats of foreign intervention.

Why provide greater cause while trying to defuse crisis conditions, cooperate with Arab League observers, enlist outside support, and offer opposition elements places in a broad-based government along the lines of a national unity one.

At the same time, Hamas and Fatah plan May elections for unity governance. They both want conflict resolution, not confrontations.

Nonetheless, Israel connects Syria and Hamas with West Bank terror cells.

On January 19, Haaretz headlined, "IDF exposes Syria-funded Islamic Jihad terror cell in West Bank," saying:

"Israeli security forces have recently discovered an Islamic Jihad terror cell which was planning attacks against Israeli soldiers," according to defense officials. "10 Islamic Jihad militants were arrested near Jenin in recent months."

Israel claims connections to Syria-based Islamic Jihad (IJ). Large money transfers went for weapons and other operations. Israel also alleges IJ ties to Gaza and the so-called Islamic Union in Jerusalem. According to Shin Bet (Israel's security service), attacks on IDF soldiers and settlements were planned. In addition, abducting Israelis were involved. Suspects were charged with membership in an illegal organization, transferring funds from abroad, contact with foreign agents, illegal weapons possession, and conspiracy to trade arms and military equipment.

More »

Stephen Lendman

Union Busting in America
Spreading Activism for Change
Reactionary Extremism in Wisconsin and Ohio
Wisconsin Supreme Court Reinstates Anti-Union Law
Wisconsin: Ground Zero to Save Public Worker Rights
Wisconsin's Spirit: Courage for Other States to Emulate
Battleground Wisconsin: Corporate Power v. Worker Rights

Last winter's epic battle between Wisconsin public workers and Republican Governor Walker ended badly for social justice. Nonetheless, struggling for it continues.

As issue was old-fashioned union busting. It included eroding collective bargain rights before ending them altogether. In addition, draconian wage and benefit cuts were imposed.

Brazen politicians conspired with corrupt union bosses. Rank and file interests lost out. Wealth and power ones prevailed. It's the same story nationwide at federal, state and local levels.

After draconian Wisconsin legislation passed, collective bargaining's only permitted on wage issues. In addition, health insurance and pension contributions doubled. Things got tougher for workers already hard pressed to make ends meet. Wage cuts ranged from 8 - 20% ahead of more coming.

The epic battle ended along party lines after State Assembly members passed Walker's bill 53 - 42, following the Senate voting 18 - 1 with no debate. The measure read in part:

"This bill authorizes a state agency to discharge any state employee who fails to report to work as scheduled for any three unexcused working days during a state emergency or who participates in a strike, work stoppage, sit-down, stay-in, slowdown, or other concerted activities to interrupt the operations or services of state government, including specifically purported mass resignations or sick calls. Under the bill, engaging in any of these actions constitutes just cause for discharge."

In addition, the governor may unilaterally declare "state of emergency" authority to fire striking workers, and under the section titled, "Discharge of State Employees:"

"The Governor may issue an executive order declaring a state of emergency for the state or any portion of the state if he or she determines that an emergency resulting from a disaster or imminent threat of a disaster exists."

In other words, he can dictatorially do what he wants, especially regarding public worker rights and job security. They're gone unless resurrected by mass action, including statewide shutdowns for rights too important to lose.

More »

Nahida Izzat, Exiled Palestinian

Israel's attack dog, Tony Greenstein, operates
from within the pro-Palestinian movement. He
pretends to be anti-Israel but people who have
studied him know better. He leaves a trail of
destruction behind him wherever he goes.

“In the true spirit of anti-racism we call on PSC to examine all links with all Jews-only campaigning groups” ~ The deLIBERATION team

As the AGM of Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) approaches, the drive to control, fragment, agitate and to steer away PSC from its fundamental core issues is at all times high.

The crusade against PSC was ignited by Zionists from outside the movement beginning in September, following an article published on the Zionist hate-website Harry's Place (HP), and a letter from the Board of Deputies of British Jews” (BODBJ), accusing PSC and its branches of publishing anti-Semitic articles and linking to Holocaust denial websites, which arguably is a crude lie. However, the crusade was sustained, promoted and amplified by insiders with questionable loyalty, who roam freely within the Palestine solidarity movement.

Following those attacks and demands by BOD of British Jews, certain elements inside the solidarity movement picked up where Zionists stopped. Since then they have initiated a campaign of defamation against Palestinian activists (including myself) and numerous other supporters.

The smear and defamation campaign, ignited by BODBJ and its mouthpiece HP, is destined to divide and curtail the Palestine solidarity movement. It shrouds itself with a veneer of “ethicality” by invoking bogus concerns about “racism”, while the result is the expulsion of anti-racist activists including Palestinians, and the fragmentation of the Palestine solidarity movement at large, its campaigns being debased, its efficiency being crippled.

More »

Stephen Lendman

Since inaugurated in February 1999, he's faced open US hostility, including by go-along major media scoundrels.

New York Times writer Simon Romero is among them. On January 6, he and William Neuman played both Chavez and Iranian cards headlining, "Increasingly Isolated, Iranian Leader Set to Visit Allies," saying:

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's visiting "some of the United States' most ardent critics: Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba and Ecuador."

Chavez "is Mr. Ahmadinejad's most vociferous ally in the region." Central University of Venezuela Professor Elsa Cardozo said his visit gave Chavez a chance to "project his own style and radical message. His core supporters are very radical and he doesn't want to lose them."

Indeed they're radical for social justice. Chavez delivers so they support him. Imagine the difference from America. Poverty's unprecedented. Recent Census data show half US households impoverished or bordering on it. Millions have no jobs and can't find one. Homelessness and hunger keep growing. When need's greatest, austerity drives people to the edge.

In contrast, Venezuelans get free education to the highest levels, quality healthcare at no cost, subsidized food, affordable electricity and cooking gas, gasoline at 7 cents a gallon, and other social benefits. Moreover, unemployment's 6%. Homelessness is low. Attention Centers help them. So do rehab facilities to get them productive again.

Venezuela is far from perfect. Problems plague the country, including high inflation and blackouts. However, positive steps are taken to improve things. For example, poverty's half its level since Chavez took office, and deep poverty fell from 25% to 7%. In America's, the world's richest country, it's skyrocketing.

Why? Because the business of America is war and grand theft. People are increasingly on their own sink or swim. Duopoly power governs. Rigged elections defile democratic governance. Banker bailouts, imperial wars, policies favoring wealth and power, and repressive police state laws define their agenda.

More »

Philip Giraldi

Defenders of the recently passed National Defense Authorization Act, which declares the entire world to be a “battlefield” against terrorism and authorizes the U.S. military to detain indefinitely anyone suspected of being a terrorism supporter, have claimed that the White House will only use its new power carefully and with due process. Opponents note that the White House has never hesitated to use any new authority, no matter how outrageous, and that the trend of law enforcement and security agencies is to expand on powers granted, not to rein them in or limit them. The track record of the Obama administration on civil liberties is particularly bad, as it has broadened its definition of war powers, reneged on its promise to close Guantánamo Prison, and supported numerous dubious terrorism prosecutions. It has also become adept at silencing critics through the repeated exploitation of the state-secrets privilege, which effectively dismisses any case accusing the government of abuse or malfeasance.

So let us accept that the government now has the power to send a team of military police to anyone’s home in any state in the Union and can demand that that person surrender without any recourse to a lawyer or judicial due process. The military can then detain the individual incommunicado for any length of time and can presumably send him to Guantánamo for special confinement, claiming that the reason for the detention is support of terrorism, which can be almost anything, including a letter to the editor of the local paper complaining about the goonery of the Transportation Security Administration. Once in detention, the suspect only has such options as are granted to him by the military. He cannot see a lawyer, cannot invoke habeas corpus or other constitutional privileges, cannot confront any witnesses against him, and cannot challenge any information prejudicial to him even if it is hearsay or fabricated. In other words, the accused can be arrested for no reason and held indefinitely without any protections that enable him to push back against being detained. Most people would consider a criminal justice system that permits such detention ipso facto a police state.

More »

Andre Damon

The American ruling class sees open communication and the spread of information online as a grave threat, and it is deeply committed to the drive to establish greater control of the Internet.

Millions of people signed online petitions Wednesday against two Internet censorship bills currently under consideration by the US Congress. The petitions were driven by appeals from thousands of websites, some of which, including Wikipedia and Reddit, shut down for the day in protest.

The protests and petitions were aimed against the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the US House of Representatives, and its counterpart in the Senate, the Protect IP Act (PIPA).

The immediate target of the measures would be violators of intellectual property laws, and the acts have been heavily backed by movie and music producers. However, the more fundamental driving force behind these laws is the desire by the US ruling class to create a pseudo-legal and technical mechanism for significantly expanding the power of the US government to regulate the Internet.

While their ultimate form, if they are enacted, remains to be determined, both SOPA and PIPA would grant the US attorney general the power to seek a court order that would effectively shut down access to entire domains. Search engines and other websites would be required to eliminate links to the site in question, and firms such as PayPal would cut off finances. Targeted websites would have effectively no basis of appeal, meaning that they would be denied basic free speech rights without any due process.

More »

Stephen Lendman

Last November, Haaretz said Washington and Israel planned holding their "largest" and "most significant" ever joint military exercise, involving over 5,000 US and Israeli troops. Assistant Secretary of State Andrew Shapiro for Political-Military Affairs confirmed it.

On January 5, Associated Press headlined "Israeli and US troops gear up for major missile defense drill after Iran maneuvers," saying:

As tensions with Iran escalate, "Austere Challenge 12" is "designed to improve defense systems and cooperation between the US and Israeli forces." It follows Iranian naval exercises near the Strait of Hormuz.

Admiral Habibollah Sayyari said they displayed "Iran's military prowess and defense capabilities in the international waters, convey(ed) a message of peace and friendship to regional countries, and test(ed) the newest military equipment among other objectives."

On January 10, Press TV said Ground Forces commander General Ahmad Reza Poursastan announced plans to use Iran's most advanced military equipment in more planned drills.

Scheduled sometime after mid-February, weapons and ground tactics will be evaluated. Objectives include bolstering security along Iran's eastern border, assessing defense and combat capabilities, and giving young officers more experience.

Originally scheduled for April, joint US/Israeli exercises are postponed. According to an Israeli defense official, Washington wants regional tensions cooled. Media reports suggest Israel plans strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities. Washington may object over timing and tactics. Likely also is concern over Israel acting preemptively unannounced. Last fall, Joint Chiefs head General Martin Dempsey expressed alarm, telling Obama it's possible.

More »

Stephen Lendman

On May 12, 2011, Senator Patrick Leahy (D. VT) introduced "S. 968: Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act of 2011 (PROTECT IP)." Referred to the Judiciary Committee, May 26 hearings were held. Debate's scheduled for next week.

On October 26, 2011 Rep. Lamar Smith (R. TX) introduced "HR 3261: Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA): To promote prosperity, creativity, entrepreneurship, and innovation by combating the theft of US property, and for other purposes" Referred to the House Judiciary Committee, markup continues.

Leahy, Smith, and congressional supporters claim the measures protect corporate investments against online piracy. In fact, they're about censorship and subverting Internet freedom.

If enacted, Internet service providers (ISPs), search engines, and other information location tools will have to block user access to sites accused (rightly or wrongly) of very loosely defined copyright infringement.

In other words, they'll blacklist and shut them down arbitrarily to silence them. Media giants will have unprecedented powers. So will Congress and the administration. Internet freedom will be jeopardized. So will a free and open society.

Provisions empower the Attorney General to cut off access and funding for alleged "parasite" foreign and domestic sites. An Internet czar will decide if US interests are harmed. Courts will enforce police state rulings.

Both bills are so deeply flawed, they can't be fixed. Killing them is the only option.

More »

Alain Gresh

Interrogé il y a quelques jours pour savoir quand Israël attaquerait l’Iran, Patrick Clawson, chercheur au Washington Institute for Near East Policy (Winep), un think-tank lié au lobby pro-israélien, répondait : « Il y a deux ans » (cité par Scott Shane, « Adversaries of Iran Said to Be Stepping Up Covert Actions », The New York Times, 11 janvier).

Cette déclaration venait après le meurtre à Téhéran d’un jeune physicien nucléaire, qui faisait lui-même suite à plusieurs autres meurtres « mystérieux », dont on s’étonne qu’ils aient été si peu dénoncés par les défenseurs des droits humains — une pétition circule toutefois pour les condamner, « Petition against the Murder of Iranian Scientists »). L’Iran a aussi été victime ces derniers mois de cyber-attaques par le virus Stuxnext (lire Philippe Rivière, « Cyber-attaque contre Téhéran », Le Monde diplomatique, mars 2011).

Cette escalade est incontestablement le fait d’Israël, qui ne cherche même pas à démentir. En revanche, il est plus difficile de saisir quelle est la stratégie du président Obama. Au moment même où l’administration américaine affirme, haut et fort, sa solidarité totale avec Israël et sa détermination à empêcher l’Iran de se doter de la bombe atomique, les manœuvres militaires entre Israël et les Etats-Unis sont reportées et les explications avancées pour ce report sont loin d’être claires ; Hillary Clinton condamne fermement le meurtre du chercheur à Téhéran ; les services de renseignement « occidentaux » (en fait américains) faisaient filtrer des informations sur la responsabilité du Mossad dans les meurtres des scientifiques iraniens (Karl Vick and Aaron J. Klein, « Who Assassinated an Iranian Nuclear Scientist ? Israel Isn’t Telling », Time Magazine, 13 janvier) ; parallèlement, ils divulguaient des informations sur des agents israéliens qui tentent de se faire passer pour des membres de la CIA afin de recruter des combattants sunnites opposés au régime iranien (Mark Perry, « False flags », Foreign Policy, 13 janvier). Enfin, les Etats-Unis ont lancé une sévère mise en garde à Téhéran contre tout blocage du détroit d’Ormuz et mobilisent leurs alliés pour arrêter les achats de pétrole iranien. Comment expliquer ces contradictions ?

More »

Gilad Atzmon
For Jesse

This week, Jesse Lieberfeld an11th-grade American Jewish teenager won the Dietrich College’s 2012 Martin Luther King, Jr. Writing Awards for composing a beautiful piece about his own moral awakening and journey away from Judaism.

“I once belonged to a wonderful religion. I belonged to a religion that allows those of us who believe in it to feel that we are the greatest people in the world—and feel sorry for ourselves at the same time,” says young Jesse. However, it seems that it didn’t take too long before Jesse found out for himself that what he was part of was neither flattering or glorious.

To read Jesse's text click here.

Jewish tribal cultural indoctrination is a full-on, comprehensive process. “Although I was fortunate enough to have parents who did not try to force me into any one set of beliefs, being Jewish was in no way possible to escape growing up”, says Jesse. “It was constantly reinforced at every holiday, every service, and every encounter with the rest of my relatives.”

Inherent to the culture and its maintenance is self-love. “I was forever reminded how intelligent my family was, how important it was to remember where we had come from, and to be proud of all the suffering our people had overcome in order to finally achieve their dream in the perfect society of Israel.”

Jewish ideological and cultural ‘programming’ is rather sophisticated. It is a unique dynamic pattern practiced in both a collective and an individual way. But those who carry the message aren’t themselves fully aware of their role within the tribal ideology they aim to maintain.

Of course Jews hold many different, and even contradictory, political beliefs. But however diverse their views may be somehow, those who are identified as Jews politically always unite against any attempt to criticise the cultural and ideological foundation of their tribal bond. Young Jesse is clearly aware of this. On the surface, it was the crimes against the Palestinians that provoked his ethical sense. “I grew more concerned. I routinely heard about unexplained mass killings, attacks on medical bases, and other alarmingly violent actions for which I could see no possible reason. ‘Genocide’ almost seemed the more appropriate term, yet no one I knew would have ever dreamed of portraying the war in that manner; they always described the situation in shockingly neutral terms.”

More »

Bill Van Auken

The march towards an oil embargo against Iran and continuing military threats against the country from both the US and Israel are escalating global tensions.

Having recently doubled the number of US aircraft carrier battle groups within striking distance of the Persian Gulf, the Obama administration reportedly used back channels last weekend to deliver a threatening ultimatum to the Iranian government. It identified “red lines”, which, if Iran crosses them, would trigger a US attack.

Chief among these is Tehran making good on a threat made last month to close the Strait of Hormuz, through which at least a fifth of the world’s oil must pass, in retaliation for what amounts to a looming US-European sanctions blockade designed to strangle the Iranian economy and permit “regime change” in this country of 70 million people.

Washington and its European allies claim that such economic warfare is necessary to halt Iran’s development of nuclear weapons. Tehran insists that its nuclear program complies with international treaties, that it has taken no steps to weaponize uranium at its nuclear plants, and that it is developing its nuclear capacity solely as a source of power.

Direct US threats have grown in tandem with Israel’s increasingly provocative actions. The Sunday Times published a detailed investigative piece on January 15, citing multiple Israeli sources as confirming that the January 11 car bomb assassination of Iranian nuclear scientist Mostafa Ahmadi-Roshan in Tehran was the work of Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency, which had prepared the murder through extensive surveillance by multiple agents working in the Iranian capital.

US officials formally distanced themselves from the killing. “We were not involved in any way with regards to the assassination that took place there,” claimed US Defense Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, who did allow that he had “some idea” of who was behind it.

In reality, the line of demarcation between the covert operations against Iran carried out by Mossad and those conducted by the CIA is decidedly murky. This was made clear in an article in Foreign Policy magazine last week entitled “False Flag,” in which military analyst Mark Perry cites US intelligence officials as saying that Mossad agents have posed as CIA agents while recruiting members of the Sunni Islamist group Jundallah for terrorist operations inside Iran.

More »

Stephen Lendman

Photo: Israel plans more "war". This is what the
Zionists in Tel Aviv call "war". The world at large
however would consider it to be mass murder.
Anyway, the Zionists want more of it. Much more.

Israel already threatens war on Iran. It's also involved with Washington, Turkey, Jordan, and other rogue Arab states behind Syria's externally generated insurgency.

Gaza's also threatened. On January 1, Haaretz writer Amos Harel headlined "Will 2012 bring another Israeli war against Hamas in Gaza?" saying:

Repeated Israeli air strikes and incursions target Gaza. Perhaps they precede a broader offensive. Israel's IDF chief Benny Gantz "said on Army radio that 'Operation Cast Lead was carried out in a professional, determined manner, and significantly strengthened Israel's deterrent strength.' "

At the same time, he suggested another round of fighting is likely. "Particularly worrisome (are the alleged) weapons smuggl(ed) into the Gaza Strip. Hamas and Islamic Jihad have....many thousands of rockets; hundreds" able to reach central Israel, said Harel.

As a result, "the IDF is preparing itself for the possibility of a land operation in another few months."

On January 16, Jerusalem Post writer Yaakov Katz headlined, "IDF preparing for major Gaza action within months," saying:

"The IDF General Staff has ordered the Southern Command to prepare for a possible large Gaza operation that could occur within the next few months, the Jerusalem Post has learned."

If true, preparations have been ongoing much longer. Three years ago, Southern Command head General Yoav Galant trained forces for two years prior to Cast Lead. Plans involved inflicting major damage while limiting Israeli casualties.

Now, said Katz, operational plans are being finalized and distributed to IDF units to be deployed against Gaza.

More »

Andre Damon

Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia, is shutting down for 24 hours today to protest internet censorship bills currently being considered by the US Congress.

The Wikipedia Foundation announced its plan to make the English-language Wikipedia “go dark” in a press release posted on its site Monday. The move will coincide with similar actions by a number of sites, including Reddit, the link sharing site, and BoingBoing, a technology blog.

The protest is aimed against two bills, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), currently under consideration in the US House of Representatives, and its counterpart in the Senate, the Protect IP Act (PIPA). The laws would increase the government’s power over the Internet and its ability to shut down sites in the name of enforcing copyright law. They have strong support from both Democrats and Republicans

“If passed, this legislation will harm the free and open Internet and bring about new tools for censorship of international websites inside the United States,” the Wikimedia foundation, Wikipedia’s parent organization, said in its statement Monday.

The bills would give the US government and major corporations the power to shut down access to web sites on the basis of court orders sought by the office of the Attorney General, which is subordinate to the White House. The court orders would force other companies, including search engines, to halt financial transactions and disable any links to the relevant sites.

In their current forms, the bills would allow sites to be removed from domain name registrars (which connect Internet addresses such as www.google.com with particular computer servers) and be blocked by Internet service providers.

The laws would allow the government to prosecute the owners of websites that link to any site providing copyrighted material, including search engines. They would also encourage web hosts and payment providers to extra-judicially blacklist websites they suspect of providing copyrighted content.

More »

Jason Ditz

Boko Haram Leader, Mohammed Yusuf.

Heavy-Handed Policy Turns Loopy Sect Into Terrorist Powerhouse

US officials have repeatedly made a point to emphasize the “threat” posed by Nigerian militant outfit Boko Haram to American interests. It is unsurprising, as Nigeria is one of America’s largest suppliers of oil and the campaign against the faction has turned much of the nation’s northeast into a no-go area.

To that end US officials have pledged major support for the Nigerian government, with the belief that their usual anti-terror policy of large scale military operations against the affected regions will provide a solution. Always unspoken, of course, is that this strategy doesn’t seem to be working for the US anywhere else.

But Boko Haram is interesting not so much for what it is — another militant faction using the the same strategy of violence against rivals and suicide bombings — but for what Boko Haram was: a mostly irrelevant Luddite sect.

The group’s name, Boko Haram, is a combination of the Hausa word “Boko” meaning Western education, and the Arabic word “haram” used to refer to religiously forbidden or sinful things, usually seen in the context of Muslim dietary laws. The group was founded in 2002 by Mohammed Yusuf, a Western educated cleric, and was virtually unknown for several years.

Yusuf’s faction was reportedly something of a laughingstock early on, with some claiming that Boko Haram was originally a term of ridicule for the group’s backwards belief system. In an interview with the BBC, Yusuf claimed that the idea that the Earth was round was “heretical” and also mocked the idea that rain was the result of condensation, insisting that it was clearly a miracle instead.

The group’s membership also eschewed firearms for the most part, arming themselves with bows and arrows and machetes on the grounds that there was no mention of guns in the Qu’ran.

More »