Stephen Lendman

Romain Grosjean of France and Lotus drives in for a pitstop
during the Bahrain Formula One Grand Prix at the Bahrain
International Circuit on April 22, 2012 in Sakhir (Bahrain).

On Sunday, April 22, Bahrain's Grand Prix went on as scheduled. This year's grand prize is disgrace, not glory.

Formula 1's governing board shamed itself by not pulling out. So did participating drivers. Agreeing to race in a virtual war zone shows nothing matters but winning and money - lots of it. Going along turns a blind eye to state terror.

Mass street protests for justice don't matter. Nor do brutal security force crackdowns. London Guardian writer Richard Williams said F1's "supremo Bernie Ecclestone" has a "habit of taking the money and asking no questions."

Already a billionaire, his money lust is insatiable. Even with race day blood on the streets he wants more. So do participating drivers. Many are multi-millionaires. Passing up one stop on the circuit hardly matters. Sacrifice isn't their long suit. Neither is doing the right thing.

They turn race competition into a perversion of sport. Thanks to Ecclestone, said Williams, "a sport whose conscience was only troubled by its environmental impact now looks like a pariah."

Welcome to Bahrain. Witness two spectacles for the price of one - Grand Prix racing and security force viciousness on street protesters in one of the world's most repressive dictatorships.

One protester death was reported. Salah Abbas Habib's body was found on a Al Shakhoura rooftop. A well-known activist leader, he was arrested the previous night with others. Reportedly they were tortured. His body showed evidence of shotgun injuries and abuse.

Police tried to prevent journalists and others from seeing it. Photos revealed what they tried to suppress.

More »

Stephen Lendman

Grass touched the right nerves. He deserves praise, not condemnation. Nonetheless, he's vilified for discussing Israel's open secret. It's nuclear armed and dangerous. Iran is also threatened. Millions of lives are at risk. Grass explained. Denunciation followed. In America and Israel, whistleblowers are criminalized. Moreover, distinguished figures like Grass are maligned and declared persona non grata.

On April 8, Haaretz headlined, "Interior Minister declares Günter Grass persona non grata in Israel," saying:

On Sunday, Eli Yishai barred Grass from entering Israel for expressing views freely in his poem, "What Must Be Said."

He's unwelcome in Israel. Citing his Nazi past (at age 17 near war's end with Germany in ruins), Yishai said:

"Grass' poems are an attempt to guide the fire of hate toward the State of Israel and the Israeli people, and to advance the ideas of which he was a public partner in the past, when he wore the uniform of the SS."

"If Günter wants to continue publicizing his distorted and false works, I suggest he do it in Iran, where he will find a supportive audience."

If he lands at Ben-Gurion International Airport, he added, "burly policemen" will escort him on the first Lufthansa flight to Frankfurt, or even better, Munich, for once following der Führer's orders.

Yishai heads the extremist right-wing ultra-Orthodox Shas Party. It's part of Netanyahu's coalition government. He also wants Grass' Nobel award revoked.

Ultranationalist Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman called his poem an expression of "egotism of so-called Western intellectuals, who are willing to sacrifice the Jewish people on the altar of crazy anti-Semites for a second time, just to sell a few more books or gain recognition."

Lieberman's extremist background is notorious. Journalist Robert Fisk once called him "the worst thing that could happen to the Middle East." Other critics are as harsh. He's called an embarrassment, a disgrace to Israel, a regional threat, an abomination, a racist of the worst kind, and much more.

The same goes for Netanyahu and close Knesset allies.

More »

Stephen Lendman

Marty Peretz (Photo: Salon.com)

Major media scoundrel reports, commentaries, and editorials distort, misreport, censor, and suppress. Truth and full disclosure lose out. Readers and viewers deserving better are cheated.

The New Republic's (TNR) owner and former editor-in-chief Martin Peretz ranks with the worst. His columns exclude journalism the way it should be.

He's unabashedly pro-Israel, pro-war, and ideologically extreme on all issues mattering most. In December 2010, New York Magazine contributor Benjamin Wallace-Wells called him "a born belligerent (with) an extraordinary capacity for anger."

American Prospect contributor Eric Alterman said he "spread the virus of liberal self-hatred....(D)uring his reign (as TNR editor-in-chief, he's) done lasting damage to the cause of American liberalism."

"By turning TNR into a kind of ideological police dog, (he) tarr(ed) anyone who disagreed (with him) as irresponsible and untrustworthy." He did it based on (a) narrow and ideosyncratic....Israel-centric neoconservatism."

On Peretz's watch, no TNR editorial ever criticized Israel. Its interests alone matter. "Support for Israel," he said, is "deep down, an expression of America's best view of itself." He suggested Israel's worst crimes are justifiable, when, in fact, they violate fundamental international laws and norms.

More »

Stephen Lendman

America, key NATO partners, and Israel target both countries.

Israel wants regional rivals removed. Washington and key NATO partners want independent regimes ousted, replaced with subservient ones.

At issue is establishing regional dominance. New targets can then confronted politically, economically, and/or belligerently.

Fabricated IAEA Iranian documents escalated tensions. Rhetorical saber rattling followed. Stiffer sanctions are threatened and perhaps war.

Syria's been targeted for months. Libya's insurgency was replicated. Street battles rage daily. Violence engulfs the country. Assad's government is unfairly blamed. Washington's dirty hands are at fault. So are Israel's and other conspiratorial allies.

The Arab League's decision to suspend Syria makes Western intervention more likely. The League's constitution requires unanimity. Lebanon, Yemen and Syria voted "no." Iraq abstained.

Suspension's thus illegitimate. Syria's Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem condemned it. America was blamed for demanding it. Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Jeffrey Feltman attended the League session to assure things went Washington's way.

More »

Stephen Lendman

On June 14, London Independent writer Robert Fisk headlined, "I saw these brave doctors trying to save lives - these charges are a pack of lies," saying:

The Khalifa monarchy "started an utterly fraudulent trial of 48 surgeons, doctors, paramedics and nurses, accusing them of trying to topple the tin-pot monarchy of this Sunni minority emirate."

One of many Bahrain articles addressed this topic, accessed through this link.

Fisk said he witnessed medical heroism firsthand, "drenched in their patients' blood, desperately trying to staunch the bullet wounds of pro-democracy demonstrators, shot in cold blood" by state security force thugs, a Khalifa monarchy specialty.

"The idea that (these doctors) are guilty of (state crimes) is not just preposterous. It is insane, a total perversion, (the) total opposite (of) truth....(Bahrain is) a Saudi palatinate, a confederated province of Saudi Arabia, a pocket-sized weasel state from which all journalists should in future use the dateline: Manama, Occupied Bahrain."

On June 15, Independent writer Richard Hall headlined, "Bahrain 'to sue over Independent reporting,' " saying:

The Khalifa monarchy "commissioned a UK-based law firm to file a case against The Independent for its reporting on the crackdowns on (internal) protests...."

Mainly directed against Fisk's article, it also claims that:

"using columns, features and news to publish misinformation in repeated attacks on our people and rulers amounts to libel and will be treated as such in accordance with the law."

The monarchy, of course, spurns international law and its own constitution, reigning daily terror since mid-February on pro-democracy supporters. In fact, every imaginable barbarity is being inflicted, including Obama administration supported cold-blooded murder, mass arrests, detentions, torture, and bogusly charging medical providers helping victims with baseless crimes.

More »

Silvia Cattori
Silvia Cattori's Blog

Jazz saxophonist Gilad Atzmon has a blog where he denounces the policy of his country of origin, Israel. He is not afraid to bluntly tell what he regards to be the truth. He is impervious to the concept of self-censorship. He tells here how little respect he has for the Western press. (*)

Silvia Cattori: Your political analyses, translated into dozen languages [1], reach a wide readership on the web. For whom exactly do you write?

Gilad Atzmon: I write mainly to myself. I try to understand the world around me. A few years ago, I understood that a lot of people out there are interested in the thoughts I indulge myself with, so I started to let other people have access into my boiling destructive mind.

Silvia Cattori: At a time when the press has reached its lowest point ever, are you among those who still continue to read newspapers?

Gilad Atzmon: No, for many years I do not buy newspapers, because I am interested in Middle East, and the mainstream media has very little to offer on that front. Probably the only expert within the British or even English-speaking media press is Robert Fisk. If I want to know what happens in the Middle East I go to “Counterpunch”, “Information Clearing House”, “Veterans Today”, “Rense.com”, “Uprooted Palestinian”, “PalestineTelegraph”, “Palestine Chronicle”, “Dissident Voice”, “Uruknet”, and other great sites. Our websites and blogs are far more informative than the mainstream media. We are the experts. We are becoming the main source of information. I see how many people are coming to visit my site. If there is a crisis in Gaza for instance, they want to see what Gordon Duff, Ramzy Baroud, Alan Hart, Israel Shamir, Alex Cockburn, Ali Abunimah have to say about it. I have zero respect for the mainstream media. And if the mainstream media wishes to survive, it had better move on quickly, otherwise it is finished.

More »

Stephen Lendman

Perhaps one way to view Obama's speech is saying you can please all the people some of the time, some of them all the time, but not all of them all the time. World reactions were indeed mixed, though policies, not posturing, are key.

Obama's, in fact, have no ambiguity, including imperial wars and rock-solid support for Israel. However, not everyone believes it, including the Zionist Organization of America, the oldest American one, founded in 1897.

On May 19, its press release headlined, "ZOA: AIPAC Should Rescind Invitation for Obama to Speak," saying:

ZOA "strongly condemned President Obama's Mideast speech (favoring) the establishment of a Hamas/Fatah/Iran state on the Auschwitz 1967 indefensible armistice lines. This would almost surely become a Hamas/Iran terror state threatening Israel and further destabilizing the Mideast. President Obama has dealt Israel a severe diplomatic blow, which harms all those who care about peace and fighting terrorism."

The statement's bigoted absurdity requires no comment. Its contempt for truth and justice is self-explanatory.

In contrast, the Anti-Defamation League, no paragon of virtue, applauded Obama's Israeli support, saying:

The ADL "commended (Obama) for his statement of US priorities in the Middle East, his strong affirmation of the deep and 'unshakeable' relationship between the United States and Israel, and expressed support for his vision of a negotiated Israeli-Palestinian settlement with strong security provisions for Israel and a non-militarized Palestinian state."

On May 22, Obama will address AIPAC at its annual Washington conference, affirming America's commitment to Israel, as will other top US officials. They include Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, House Speaker John Boehner, and other congressional members, genuflecting to the Israeli Lobby's power in their annual pilgrimage to AIPAC.

More »

Stephen Lendman

A previous article profiled him in-depth, accessed through this link.

It explained he represents the worst of Israel's lunatic fringe, sort of a combination Dick Cheney/John McCain/Joe Lieberman, too extremist to be entrusted with power, but he's got it.

Robert Fisk once said he "out-Sharons even Ariel Sharon. (He's) talked of drowning Palestinians in the Dead Sea or executing Israeli Palestinians who talked to Hamas. (His) incendiary language (promotes) executions....drownings....hell and loyalty oaths," perfect for the role he assumed, allied with Israel's most extremist ever Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, who also out-Sharons Sharon, no easy feat by any means.

Israel under Netanyahu/Lieberman institutionalized racism in its worst form - potential expulsion or extermination. Gideon Levy called him a "nightmare (who's) here and now. (Extremist Rabbi Meir) Kahane is alive and kicking - is he ever - in the person of his thuggish successor."

He promotes "hatred for Arabs, hatred of democracy and the rule of law, and the stink of nationalism, racism and bloodthirstiness. (He's) the voice of the mob, and the mob craves hatred, vengeance and bloodshed."

He's a malignancy on the body politic, a "cancerous growth (throughout) society, (a dangerous, embarrassing) abomination," one step removed from being Prime Minister.

An unnamed Meretz party member once said "If you liked Mussolini, if you were missing Stalin, you'll love Lieberman."

More »

Stephen Lendman

America's major media never met an imperial war it didn't love and promote, never mind how lawless, mindless, destructive and counterproductive.

Despite Washington already bogged down in two losing ones, Obama's heading for another on Libya, the media pack in the lead clamoring for it, perhaps by "shock and awe," supplemented by special forces death squads on the ground recruiting, inciting, and arming opposition elements.

Notably favoring intervention, a New York Times February 24 editorial headlined, "Stopping Qaddafi," saying:

Unless he's stopped, he'll "slaughter hundreds or even thousands of his own people in his desperation to hang on to power."

Where's the Times outrage over millions Washington slaughtered, hundreds more killed daily, its ties to global despots, its funding and support for Israeli brutality against Palestinians, and its imperial insanity to achieve unchallengeable global dominance, no matter how many corpses it takes to do it.

Nonetheless, the Times hailed Libyan courage, asking for more Western support, implying the belligerent kind. "Colonel Qaddafi and his henchmen have to be told in credible and very specific terms the price they will pay for any more killing. They need to start paying now. (The) longer the world temporizes, the more people die."

On February 28, the Times editorial headlined, "Qaddafi's Crimes and Fantasies," saying:

[His] "crimes continue to mount. Rebel commanders said (his) warplanes bombed rebel-controlled areas in the eastern part of the country." However, Russian satellite imagery showed no bombing evidence or destruction on the ground. So much for The Times or other major media credibility, reporting the same unverified accounts.

On March 8, the Times headlined, "Washington's Options on Libya," saying:

"....some way must be found to support Libya's uprising and stop (Gaddafi) from slaughtering his people....It would be a disaster if (he) managed to cling to power by butchering his own people."

Indisputably, Gaddafi is a despot, but he didn't initiate conflict. Western powers did, sending in covert intelligence and special forces to incite, arm and support it.

More »

Fred Reed
Fred on Everything

Date: The following is a somewhat amplified letter to a friend. I know I've said some of this before.

Jim,

Permit me respectfully to disagree about the potency of American intelligence agencies. It seems to me that they are clowns, incompetent at their assigned work but adept at causing grave problems for the United States. Their almost comic ineptitude lies hidden behind a veil of romantic secrecy a la James Bond. But look at their known record.

Your belief that a few jets and Marines would have changed the outcome in the Bay of Pigs rests on the characteristic inability of US intel to grasp how other people look at things. Cubans hated Batista, did not yet hate Castro to whatever extent they ever would, and the exiles used to invade the island were agents of the people Cubans hated most—that is, the rich property owners who fled Castro. The Americans, remember, had always supported Batista, as they had supported every ugly dictator in Latin America. America itself is detested throughout South America. No warm welcome was in the cards.

Americans still have no understanding of how other people work, and therefore of what they are likely to do. I remember that in Afghanistan the Pentagon was going to conquer Marjah and give it a “government in a box.” That is, the Afghans were going to fall in love with brutal invaders who destroyed most of their city. Fat fucking chance. Iraq would be a cakewalk? A friend of min--Jack McGeorge--on Blix’s team briefed Langley on WMD before the invasions of Iraq. I asked him whether the CIA really believed the cakewalk theory or were lying for political reasons. They really believed it, he said.

More »