Posts tagged Libya
On occasion one stumbles across a post that rings true to the thoughts one is currently thinking. This post on godfatherpolitics.com rang true to my thoughts entertained this evening.
There was a day, I think back when the dinosaurs were still alive, when journalism schools taught their students about asking hard questions and the importance of being the public’s watchdog against all-too-often-corrupt government.
Woodward and Bernstein were held up as examples, but also people like Edward R. Murrow, Edna Buchanan, Jack Reed and William Marimow, journalists who were smart and tough enough to pin down the politicians and bureaucrats and hammer them until they gave up the information the public needed.
Journalistic role models were typically old guys and gals who had risen through the ranks of crime and government reporters to finally earn that esteemed title of editor, men and women who had devoted their lives to finding the truth, who weren’t afraid to take a phone call from the Secretary of State and demand “what the —- does the president think he’s doing?”
Those journalists, if they ever truly existed as a breed rather than unique individuals, are long gone. What we have now is a cadre of go-along types who mostly regurgitate whatever pablum is doled out by the local government press office.
The old saw about “accuracy, accuracy, accuracy” has been replaced by “lie three times and we’ll say it’s true.”
It’s much easier to just rewrite the press release and file your story. Save the real investigations for the interesting topics, like baby hippo twins born at the zoo.
Case in point, President Obama’s recent million-dollar fantasy golf weekend where he got to play against Tiger Woods. The Washington press corps was incensed at not having access to the president — so much so that they issued a statement of protest saying they would continue to demand “tranparency” from the Administration.
When they finally got a chance to ask the president a question after he’d blown a million taxpayer dollars on yet another vacation, during a time when the government is raising taxes and running huge deficits because it can’t live within a budget, the press members all clamored to know … did the president beat Tiger?
So much for asking tough questions and ensuring transparency. …
Compare the press corps’ outrage over the Tiger blackout to its utter lack of interest in the dearth of information about the September 11 attack in Benghazi, Libya, that left four Americans dead. “Meet the Press” host David Gregory summed up the media’s attitude best: “Cover-up of what?”
“Transparency” on Benghazi doesn’t exist, and the media couldn’t care less so long as they get to cover the president’s round of golf, which mostly entails the press corps hanging around the clubhouse ordering daiquiris on their news outlet’s dime.
The majority of today’s journalists are lazy, sycophantic and dishonest about the job they are doing.
We need to find a real-life Perry White if we’re ever going to hold the government accountable.
As in the cold war, a division of labour requires that western journalism and popular culture provide the cover of a holy war against a “menacing arc” of Islamic extremism, no different from the bogus “red menace” of a worldwide communist conspiracy.
By Ezra Van Auken
As you may know, former Congressman Ron Paul has a weekly talk show, which he uses to deliver opinions on current issues including the economy, civil liberties and foreign policy; this week former Rep. Paul explained some much needed information into the newest Western war of Mali. The retired Texas Congressman first acknowledged that President Obama made a daring statement during his inauguration speech, “A decade of war is now ending.”
Responding to the message of ending war, Paul said, “As he spoke, the US military was rapidly working its way into another war, this time in the impoverished African country of Mali.” So far, the U.S. has provided C130s to the French for transportation of soldiers, deployed trainers to assist in training Mali soldiers and officials have agreed to fueling missions for the French fighter jets. Ramping up even more of a presence in northern Africa, the New York Times reported that AFRICOM’s top officials are seeking the go-ahead to build a drone base in Niger – just east of Mali.
Although American boots are not engaging in gunfire, Ron Paul explained, “Even if US involvement is limited, and, as Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said, US boots on the ground are not being considered “at this time,” this clearly is developing into another war. As usual, the mission is creeping.” Overall, the stern non-interventionist believes that this war will eventually snowball into something more like the Afghanistan war.
Paul alluded to French officials during the first days of invasion and how they said Mali’s military intervention would be a quick response, fast paced mission that wouldn’t last long. “France announced that it would be forced to send in thousands of troops and would need to remain far longer than the few weeks it initially claimed would be necessary.” To accompany the claim that Mali’s war will turn into another prolong occupation, France’s Defense Minister told France-5 that Mali would be a “total reconquest”.
Jumping back a year or so, Dr. Paul detailed the events leading up to Mali’s war driven country. “When Gaddafi was overthrown in Libya, many fighters from Mali who had lived in Libya and been trained by Gaddafi’s military returned to their home country with sophisticated weapons and a new determination to continue their fight for independence for northern Mali.” Paul then said, “Thus the France-initiated action against Libya in 2011 led to new violence and instability in Mali that France decided it must also address.”
Overall, the former Congressman is calling out blowback for being the reason of instability – by attacking Libya and destabilizing the country – this havoc poured into Mali once extremists were on the move.
Paul summarized his daily talk show on Monday by saying, “By placing that authority in Congress, the people’s branch of government, they intended to blunt the executive branch’s enthusiasm toward overseas adventurism.”
Somewhat agreeing with the clause of Mali being blowback is Michael Scheuer, a former CIA official – however Scheuer thinks this was far from unintended blowback. Scheuer wrote on his online website non-intervention.com, “In Mali, the interventionist establishment already is lying about “unintended consequences”. The ex-CIA official called out Wall Street Journal’s Shiraz Maher, going on to say, “Now, I have never heard of Professor Maher but, clearly, he is an intellectually dishonest jackass.” Scheuer pointed out that “Just as in Iraq and Afghanistan, there is no way to truthfully argue that “unintended consequences” are at work in Libya, Mali, or elsewhere in Africa.”
According to Scheuer, the events in North Africa and the Sahel aren’t seen as a positive to the U.S., Canada and Europe – but Scheuer says these wars were easily predictable because of Libyan intervention.
Regardless of blowback being intended or not, one thing is clear and that is, U.S. and European officials have boiled a greater force in the African region since toppling Gaddafi.
Spotted on http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/
America Sets Its Sights On Controlling African Resources … And Reducing Chinese Influence
The U.S. is sending troops to 35 African nations under the guise of fighting Al Qaeda and related terrorists.
Democracy Now notes:
U.S. Army teams will be deploying to as many as 35 African countries early next year for training programs and other operations as part of an increased Pentagon role in Africa. The move would see small teams of U.S. troops dispatched to countries with groups allegedly linked to al-Qaeda, such as Libya, Sudan, Algeria and Niger. The teams are from a U.S. brigade that has the capability to use drones for military operations in Africa if granted permission. The deployment could also potentially lay the groundwork for future U.S. military intervention in Africa.
[A special American brigade] will be able to take part in nearly 100 separate training and military exercises next year, in nearly three dozen African countries
Glenn Ford writes:
The 2nd Brigade is scheduled to hold more than 100 military exercises in 35 countries, most of which have no al-Qaida presence. So, although there is no doubt that the U.S. will be deeply involved in the impending military operation in Mali, the 2nd Brigade’s deployment is a much larger assignment, aimed at making all of Africa a theater of U.S. military operations. The situation in Mali is simply a convenient, after-the-fact rationale for a long-planned expansion of the U.S. military footprint in Africa.
Timothy Alexander Guzman argues:
AFRICOM’s [the U.S. military's Africa command] goal is to eliminate China and other countries influence in the region. Africa’s natural resources is another important element to consider because it includes oil, diamonds, copper, gold, iron, cobalt, uranium, bauxite, silver, petroleum, certain woods and tropical fruits.
In a must-watch interview, Dan Collins of the China Money Report agrees that the purpose of the deployment is to challenge China’s rising prominence in Africa:
And the U.S. is not shy about backing our “mortal enemies” to topple those standing between us and resources we pine for.
By Jason Ditz
Odierno Touts Plan for Fast Deployments Anywhere in the World
The creation of the US African Command (Africom) of course pointed to US involvements in wars on the continent, and indeed the US has since fought a war in Libya, deployed troops of Uganda, and is planning for another war in Mali.
But what they don’t have compared to, say, CENTCOM, is an established collection of nations with US troops stations waiting for wars to break out. That will soon change, as the Army is planning to send troops to “as many as 35 African nations early next year.”
The numbers will be small, at least at first, but done with an eye on Gen. Raymond Odierno’s “Regionally Aligned Forces” plan, giving the US the ability to quickly deploy troops anywhere on the planet.
The comparative lack of things for the US military to do in Africa has long kept the US out of Africa. Since the establishment of Africom, officials seem to figure that with enough troops and enough countries involved, the question of what wars and where can be worked out at their leisure.
Amber Lyon, 3 time Emmy Award-winning Investigative Journalist, appeared on the Next News Network for an insightful interview with Gary Franchi. Amber reflects on her censorship by CNN, the business relationship between CNN and the government in Bahrain with the resulting propaganda, human rights abuses and much more.
See all the interviews, guests and share the information here at the Next News Network with your friends and social network connections. Follow the link on the main N3 (NextNewsNetwork) site to donate to support the efforts of freedom in journalism and reports such as this.
The NYU Student Tweeting Every Reported US Drone Strike Has Revealed A Disturbing Trend … NYU student Josh Begley is tweeting every reported U.S. drone strike since 2002, and the feed highlights a disturbing tactic employed by the U.S. that is widely considered a war crime. Known as the “double tap,” the tactic involves bombing a target multiple times in relatively quick succession, meaning that the second strike often hits first responders. A 2007 report by the Homeland Security Institute called double taps a “favorite tactic of Hamas” and the FBI considers it a tactic employed by terrorists. UN special rapporteur on extrajudicial killings Christof Heyns said that if there are “secondary drone strikes on rescuers who are helping (the injured) after an initial drone attack, those further attacks are a war crime.” The U.S. refuses to discuss the merits of its overtly covert drone program, but the reports featured on @dronestream clearly document that U.S. hellfire missiles have intentionally targeted funerals and civilian rescuers. – Business Insider
Dominant Social Themes: We need to eradicate these terrorists no matter what.
Free-Market Analysis: What we call the Internet Reformation can be seen clearly in reports like this. A young man uses ‘Net technology to track every drone strike and makes a horrible discovery.
A ‘Net facility called Business Insider then blows up the story by publishing it around the world with a keystroke.
Of course, we don’t know for sure whether the report is true. But it sounds likely. And it is very sad.
The US, once an “exception” … once a shining light on a hill … is double-tapping its terrorist enemies.
That is, it is sending drones to blow up and cause death, often killing civilians alongside terrorists. Then those in charge of the program are sending ANOTHER drone on the heels of the first to blow up those who rush to the scene to try to help the survivors.
The rationale, presumably, is that these people are enemies, too. But often they may be civilians, merely, the wives, children or friends of those who were just blown up.
Perhaps they are civilians responding to the cries of other injured civilians. In any event, if this report is true, civilian casualties can be compounded by this wretched strategy.
We also note, as we often do, that the entire war on terror seems phony to us. The State Department has virtually admitted that the Al Qaeda terrorist group has served on the same side as Western powers in both Libya and now Syria. And there seems to be plenty of evidence that the CIA invented Al Qaeda in the first place.
But that doesn’t stop the US military from bombing Al Qaeda terrorists now. Here’s more from the article:
It has happened in Afghanistan as well, and the first instance of “explicit intelligence posthumously proving” that an innocent civilian had been killed happened in Yemen. In September the NYU and Stanford law schools released a report detailing how double taps by U.S. drones affect the Pakistani population, and noted that “high-level” militants killed only accounted for two percent of U.S. drone strike casualties.
From the above excerpt we learn that this issue is known to several US law schools, as well. But it sure hasn’t made the mainstream media yet. Wonder why …
Conclusion: Shouldn’t it?
Moscow has admitted the possibility that the Syrian opposition may emerge victorious as government forces continue to lose more territory as the conflict rages on, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov said.
“We must face the facts: the current tendency shows that the government is progressively losing control over an increasing part of the territory,” Bogdanov told the Public Chamber. “An opposition victory can’t be ruled out.”
The Deputy Foreign Minister warned that Syria would most likely suffer heavy casualties from the ensuing violence.
“The fighting will become even more intense, and (Syria) will lose tens of thousands and, perhaps, hundreds of thousands of civilians,” he warned. “If such a price for the removal of the president seems acceptable to you, what can we do? We, of course, consider it absolutely unacceptable.”
Bogdanov, addressing the “behaviour by some of our partners,” pointed to the disturbing incidence of arms supplies flowing into the embattled country, which he warned “incite the Syrian rebels to make a stake on using force.”
These developments only lead to escalating violence, which hinder the implementation of the goals [the peaceful settlement of the Syrian crisis], the high-ranking diplomat added.
Other Russian officials also weighed in on the deteriorating situation in Syria following the Friends of Syria meeting, which was held in Marrakesh, Morocco, on Wednesday. The delegates officially recognized the ‘National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces’ as the only representative of the Syrian people.
Alexei Pushkov, the State Duma Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman, believes the decision makes the prospects for a peaceful resolution to the conflict exceedingly grim.
By Pete Papaherakles
Could gaining control of the Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran (CBI) be one of the main reasons that Iran is being targeted by Western and Israeli powers? As tensions are building up for an unthinkable war with Iran, it is worth exploring Iran’s banking system compared to its U.S., British and Israeli counterparts.
Some researchers are pointing out that Iran is one of only three countries left in the world whose central bank is not under Rothschild control. Before 9-11 there were reportedly seven: Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan, Libya, Cuba, North Korea and Iran. By 2003, however, Afghanistan and Iraq were swallowed up by the Rothschild octopus, and by 2011 Sudan and Libya were also gone. In Libya, a Rothschild bank was established in Benghazi while the country was still at war.
Islam forbids the charging of interest, a major problem for the Rothschild banking system. Until a few hundred years ago, charging interest was also forbidden in the Christian world and was even punishable by death. It was considered exploitation and enslavement.
Since the Rothschilds took over the Bank of England around 1815, they have been expanding their banking control over all the countries of the world. Their method has been to get a country’s corrupt politicians to accept massive loans, which they can never repay, and thus go into debt to the Rothschild banking powers. If a leader refuses to accept the loan, he is oftentimes either ousted or assassinated. And if that fails, invasions can follow, and a Rothschild usury-based bank is established.
The Rothschilds exert powerful influence over the world’s major news agencies. By repetition, the masses are duped into believing horror stories about evil villains. The Rothschilds control the Bank of England, the Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank, the IMF, the World Bank and the Bank of International Settlements. Also they own most of the gold in the world as well as the London Gold Exchange, which sets the price of gold every day. It is said the family owns over half the wealth of the planet—estimated by Credit Suisse to be $231 trillion—and is controlled by Evelyn Rothschild, the current head of the family.
Objective researchers contend that Iran is not being demonized because they are a nuclear threat, just as the Taliban, Iraq’s Saddam Hussein and Libya’s Muammar Qadaffi were not a threat.
What then is the real reason? Is it the trillions to be made in oil profits, or the trillions in war profits? Is it to bankrupt the U.S. economy, or is it to start World War III? Is it to destroy Israel’s enemies, or to destroy the Iranian central bank so that no one is left to defy Rothschild’s money racket?
It might be any one of those reasons or, worse—it might be all of them.
Pete Papaherakles, a U.S. citizen since 1986, was born in Greece. He is AFP’s outreach director. If you would like to see AFP speakers at your rally, contact Pete at 202-544-5977 .