Robert Parry

Exclusive: Like a decade ago with Iraq, Official Washington’s pundits and pols are locked shoulder-to-shoulder in a phalanx of misguided consensus on Ukraine, presenting a false narrative that is taking U.S. policy into dangerous directions.

The American people got a nasty taste of the danger that can come with false narrative when they were suckered into the Iraq War based on bogus claims that Saddam Hussein was hiding weapons of mass destruction that he planned to share with al-Qaeda.

Nearly 4,500 U.S. soldiers died in the conflict along with hundreds thousands of Iraqis. The war’s total financial cost probably exceeded $1 trillion, a vast sum that siphoned off America’s economic vitality and forced cutbacks in everything from education to road repair. Plus, the war ended up creating an Iraqi base for al-Qaeda terrorists that had not existed before.

But perhaps an even more dangerous problem coming out of the Iraq War was that almost no one in Official Washington who pushed the false narrative – whether in politics or in the press – was held accountable in any meaningful way. Many of the same pols and pundits remain in place today, pushing similar false narratives on new crises, from Ukraine to Syria to Iran.

Those false narratives – and their cumulative effect on policymaking – now represent a clear and present danger to the Republic and, indeed, to the world. The United States, after all, is the preeminent superpower with unprecedented means for delivering death and destruction. But almost nothing is being done to address this enduring American crisis of deception.

Today, Official Washington is marching in lockstep just as it did in 2002-03 when it enforced the misguided consensus on Iraq’s WMD. The latest case is Ukraine where Russian President Vladimir Putin is accused of committing “aggression” to expand Russian territory at the expense of noble ”democratic” reformers in Kiev.

More »

Eugene Schulman / Gilad Atzmon

Comment by Gilad Atzmon: I am delighted to see the dichotomy between Athens and Jerusalem being discussed and I am very happy to see my writing at the centre of that debate. However, I do not agree with the opinion of Schulman and others that Athens and Jerusalem are the ‘two roots of Western civilization’. I see Jerusalem as a corrosive force that is there to castrate the Athenian West by means of ‘correctness’ (law and righteousness). However, Schulman is spot on, "The Guardian of Judea" is a mere symptom and far from being alone. In fairness, the Guardian often criticises Israel, yet, its criticism is vetted by kosher considerations. You won't find the Guardian’s criticising Jewish political power within British politics. The paper limits its discourse to politically correct anti- Zionist discussion. As such the Guardian, like most progressive outlets, operates as a control opposition and should be exposed for what it is.

______

Jerusalem v. Athens: What Heidegger Hysteria Tells Us About the Press
By Eugene Schulman
Counterpunch

Jerusalem and Athens are the two roots of Western civilization, with Jerusalem representing biblical revelation and Athens representing philosophical rationality. Their relationship is one of “fundamental opposition,” an opposition that constitutes the vitality of western civilization. According to Leo Strauss, to choose between Jerusalem and Athens is to choose between “life in obedience to divine law or life in freedom.” Martin Heiddeger seemed to express the same philosophy.

More »

Tony Cartalucci

King Abdulaziz ibn Saud, and President Franklin D. Roosevelt
aboard USS Quincy, Great Bitter Lake, Egypt, 14 Feb 1945

US President Barack Obama’s recent visit to Saudi Arabia confirms what many even causal political observers have begun to suspect regarding recent US political history, that Washington’s values aren’t just nonpartisan, driven entirely by special interests permeating both sides of the political aisle, but are altogether non-existent. To understand why requires an understanding of both US-Saudi relations, not just during the Obama administration, but over the past several decades, as well as a basic understanding of Saudi Arabia itself.

Despite the integral role Saudi Arabia plays in US foreign policy, particularly but not limited to the Middle East, many know very little regarding this nation. American, British, and European media intentionally serve up disjointed reports regarding the internal affairs of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Should ever a complete picture be given to global audiences and the same amount of attention given to the shortcomings of Saudi Arabia as is given toward the perceived enemies of the Western world, clear limitations would be demanded by the public in regards to their respective governments’ relationship with the Saudis until badly needed reform was undertaken.

More »