PROTEST THE NATO/G8-May 20, 2012-Chicago
Join Jesse Jackson, SEIU local,Health Care Illinois/Indiana (HCil),UNAC, Chicago Teachers Union, Kathy Kelly of Voices for Creative Nonviolence, National Nurses Union, United Electrical workers Western Region, Malik Mujahid of the Muslim Peace Coalition, the Fellowship of Reconciliation, Veterans for Peace, Glen Ford of Black Agenda Report, Derrick O'Keefe of the Canadian Peace Alliance, Reiner Braun of the European No to NATO, No to War network and many others in Chicago to oppose the NATO and G8 war and poverty agenda.
At the invitation of the White House, the 28-nation US-commanded and largely US-financed North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is meeting in Chicago, May 20-21,2012. The G8 world economic powers, originally planned to also meet the same week in Chicago, are now meeting at Camp David.
The NATO generals and G8 heads of state and finance ministers are the team that is imposing austerity on the working people of the world in the interest of expanding profits. In many places, economic "reform" is enforced at the point of a gun - by drones, armies, and police.
In May, those of us struggling against the tyranny of the banks and the corporate elite, those of us fighting against job loss, foreclosure, cuts to education, and the restriction of our democratic rights, will march in Chicago. The authorities hope to deny us our constitutional right to legally and peacefully protest. We have begun a campaign to win back our democratic right to mobilize tens of thousands who will stand in solidarity with all those fighting U.S.-backed austerity drives and war around the globe.
Join us for a Mass demonstration on Sunday, May 20, the opening day of the NATO summit 9 am, march with veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan war who will return their medals to NATO. Noon, join the mass march and rally against the NATO and G8 war and poverty agenda. Noon rally at Petrillo Band-shell (corner of Jackson and Coumbus), then march to Mc-Cormick Place. Speakers will include: Jesse Jackson, Malalai Joya, Reiner Braun, Kathy Kelly, Vijay Prashad - author of Arab Spring, Libyan Winter, and more™
People's Summit
Saturday, May I2 and Sunday May 13 at Occupy Chicago.
There will be plenary and workshop sessions and panels.
Speakers will include: Malalai
Joya, Keiaer Braun, Malik Muja-
Md, Kathy Eelly, Col. Ann Wright,
Medea Benjamin, a message from
Mumia Abu Jamal, and more*
Coalition Against NATO/G8 War & Poverty Agenda
www.cang8.org
Showing posts with label NATO. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NATO. Show all posts
Friday, May 18, 2012
Tuesday, May 08, 2012
PROTEST THE NATO/G8-May 20, 2012-Chicago
PROTEST THE NATO/G8-May 20, 2012-Chicago
Join Jesse Jackson, SEIU local,Health Care Illinois/Indiana (HCil),UNAC, Chicago Teachers Union, Kathy Kelly of Voices for Creative Nonviolence, National Nurses Union, United Electrical workers Western Region, Malik Mujahid of the Muslim Peace Coalition, the Fellowship of Reconciliation, Veterans for Peace, Glen Ford of Black Agenda Report, Derrick O'Keefe of the Canadian Peace Alliance, Reiner Braun of the European No to NATO, No to War network and many others in Chicago to oppose the NATO and G8 war and poverty agenda.
At the invitation of the White House, the 28-nation US-commanded and largely US-financed North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is meeting in Chicago, May 20-21,2012. The G8 world economic powers, originally planned to also meet the same week in Chicago, are now meeting at Camp David.
The NATO generals and G8 heads of state and finance ministers are the team that is imposing austerity on the working people of the world in the interest of expanding profits. In many places, economic "reform" is enforced at the point of a gun - by drones, armies, and police.
In May, those of us struggling against the tyranny of the banks and the corporate elite, those of us fighting against job loss, foreclosure, cuts to education, and the restriction of our democratic rights, will march in Chicago. The authorities hope to deny us our constitutional right to legally and peacefully protest. We have begun a campaign to win back our democratic right to mobilize tens of thousands who will stand in solidarity with all those fighting U.S.-backed austerity drives and war around the globe.
Join us for a Mass demonstration on Sunday, May 20, the opening day of the NATO summit 9 am, march with veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan war who will return their medals to NATO. Noon, join the mass march and rally against the NATO and G8 war and poverty agenda. Noon rally at Petrillo Band-shell (corner of Jackson and Coumbus), then march to Mc-Cormick Place. Speakers will include: Jesse Jackson, Malalai Joya, Reiner Braun, Kathy Kelly, Vijay Prashad - author of Arab Spring, Libyan Winter, and more™
People's Summit
Saturday, May I2 and Sunday May 13 at Occupy Chicago.
There will be plenary and workshop sessions and panels.
Speakers will include: Malalai
Joya, Keiaer Braun, Malik Muja-
Md, Kathy Eelly, Col. Ann Wright,
Medea Benjamin, a message from
Mumia Abu Jamal, and more*
Coalition Against NATO/G8 War & Poverty Agenda
www.cang8.org
Join Jesse Jackson, SEIU local,Health Care Illinois/Indiana (HCil),UNAC, Chicago Teachers Union, Kathy Kelly of Voices for Creative Nonviolence, National Nurses Union, United Electrical workers Western Region, Malik Mujahid of the Muslim Peace Coalition, the Fellowship of Reconciliation, Veterans for Peace, Glen Ford of Black Agenda Report, Derrick O'Keefe of the Canadian Peace Alliance, Reiner Braun of the European No to NATO, No to War network and many others in Chicago to oppose the NATO and G8 war and poverty agenda.
At the invitation of the White House, the 28-nation US-commanded and largely US-financed North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is meeting in Chicago, May 20-21,2012. The G8 world economic powers, originally planned to also meet the same week in Chicago, are now meeting at Camp David.
The NATO generals and G8 heads of state and finance ministers are the team that is imposing austerity on the working people of the world in the interest of expanding profits. In many places, economic "reform" is enforced at the point of a gun - by drones, armies, and police.
In May, those of us struggling against the tyranny of the banks and the corporate elite, those of us fighting against job loss, foreclosure, cuts to education, and the restriction of our democratic rights, will march in Chicago. The authorities hope to deny us our constitutional right to legally and peacefully protest. We have begun a campaign to win back our democratic right to mobilize tens of thousands who will stand in solidarity with all those fighting U.S.-backed austerity drives and war around the globe.
Join us for a Mass demonstration on Sunday, May 20, the opening day of the NATO summit 9 am, march with veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan war who will return their medals to NATO. Noon, join the mass march and rally against the NATO and G8 war and poverty agenda. Noon rally at Petrillo Band-shell (corner of Jackson and Coumbus), then march to Mc-Cormick Place. Speakers will include: Jesse Jackson, Malalai Joya, Reiner Braun, Kathy Kelly, Vijay Prashad - author of Arab Spring, Libyan Winter, and more™
People's Summit
Saturday, May I2 and Sunday May 13 at Occupy Chicago.
There will be plenary and workshop sessions and panels.
Speakers will include: Malalai
Joya, Keiaer Braun, Malik Muja-
Md, Kathy Eelly, Col. Ann Wright,
Medea Benjamin, a message from
Mumia Abu Jamal, and more*
Coalition Against NATO/G8 War & Poverty Agenda
www.cang8.org
Sunday, August 28, 2011
NATO's Libya War: A Nuremberg Level Crime - Stephen Lendman
NATO's Libya War: A Nuremberg Level Crime
by Stephen Lendman
NATO's Libya War: A Nuremberg Level Crime - Stephen Lendman
The US/UK/French-led war on Libya will be remembered as one of history's greatest crimes. It violates the letter and spirit of international law and America's Constitution.
The Nuremberg Tribunal's Chief Justice Robert Jackson (a US Supreme Court Justice) called Nazi war crimes "the supreme international crime against peace."
His November 21, 1945 opening remarks said:
"The wrongs which we seek to condemn and punish have been so calculated, so malignant, and so devastating, that civilization cannot tolerate their being ignored, because it cannot survive their being repeated."
He called aggressive war "the greatest menace of our times."
International law defines crimes against peace as "planning, preparation, initiation, or waging of wars of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances, or participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the foregoing."
All US post-WW II wars fall under this definition.
Since then, America waged direct and proxy premeditated, aggressive wars worldwide, killing millions in East and Central Asia, North and other parts of Africa, the Middle East, and Europe, as well as Central and South America.
Arguably they exceed the worst of Nazi and imperial Japanese crimes combined, including genocide, torture mass destruction of nonmilitary related sites, colonization, occupation, plunder and exploitation.
Third Reich criminals were hanged for their crimes. America's remained free to commit greater ones, notably today against Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Palestine, and the ongoing Libya atrocity - a scandalous "supreme international crime against peace," demanding justice not forthcoming.
In fact, US war criminals are considered hostis humani generis - enemies of mankind. War crimes are against the jus gentium - the law of nations. Established international law addressed them, including the UN Charter. It's unequivocal explaining under what conditions violence and coercion (by one state against another) are justified.
Article 2(3) and Article 33(1) require peaceful settlement of international disputes. Article 2(4) prohibits force or its threatened use. And Article 51 allows the "right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member....until the Security Council has taken measures to maintain international peace and security."
In other words, justifiable self-defense is permissible. However, Charter Articles 2(3), 2(4), and 33 absolutely prohibit any unilateral threat or use of force not:
-- specifically allowed under Article 51;
-- authorized by the Security Council; or
-- permitted by the US Constitution only amendments ratified by three-fourths of the states can change.
In addition, three General Assembly resolutions also prohibit non-consensual belligerent intervention, including:
-- the 1965 Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of States and the Protection of Their Independence and Sovereignty;
-- the 1970 Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations; and
-- the 1974 Definition of Aggression.
Moreover, various post-WW II Conventions, including the four Geneva ones and their Common Article 1 obligate all High Contracting Parties to "respect and ensure respect for the present Convention in all circumstances;" namely, to apply its principles universally, requiring High Contracting Parties "search for persons alleged to have committed, or to have ordered to be committed, such grave breaches, and shall bring such persons, regardless of their nationality, before its own courts."
At Nuremberg, the concepts of individual and command criminal responsibility were addressed, the Tribunal Principles holding that "(a)ny person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefor and liable to punishment....(c)rimes against international law are committed by men, not by abstract entities, and only by punishing individuals who commit (them) can the provisions of international law be enforced."
The Rome Statute's Article 25 of the International Criminal Court (ICC) codified this principle, affirming the culpability of persons committing crimes of war and against humanity.
In addition, commanders and their superiors are specifically culpable if they "either knew or, owing to the circumstances at the time, should have known that the forces were committing or about to commit such crimes, (and) failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power to prevent or repress their commission or to submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecutions."
Moreover, Nuremberg established that immunity is null and void, including for heads of state, other top officials, and top commanders. Further, genocide, crimes of war and against humanity are so grave that statute of limitation provisions don't apply.
As a result, every living past and present US president, top and subordinate officials, and Pentagon commanders involved in war(s) should be prosecuted for their crimes before a special Nuremberg-type tribunal, holding them fully accountable.
Genocide, other forms of mass murder, targeted and indiscriminate destruction, and other crimes of war and against humanity are too intolerable to go unpunished.
Nonetheless, America and its conspiratorial allies commit them - today, horrifically against Libya, a small nonbelligerent country being terrorized, destroyed, and plundered lawlessly in the name of "liberation."
America is the lead offender, committing what its 1996 War Crimes Act calls "grave breaches," defined as "willful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, including biological (or other illegal) experiments, willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health."
As a result, Libya is an ongoing atrocity, a Nuremberg level crime, one of history's greatest.
Yet on August 22, Obama had the audacity to say America, its "allies and partners in the international community (are committed) to protect the people of Libya, and to support a peaceful transition to democracy."
In fact, unspeakable war crimes are being committed to "protect the people of Libya." Included are civilians being terror bombed daily, to break their morale, cause panic, weaken their will to resist, and inflict mass casualties and punishment.
However, Geneva and other international laws forbid the targeting of civilians. The Laws of War: Laws and Customs of War on Land (1907 Hague IV Convention) states:
-- Article 25: "The attack or bombardment, by whatever means, of towns, villages, dwellings, or buildings which are undefended is prohibited."
-- Article 26: "The officer in command of an attacking force must, before commencing a bombardment, except in cases of assault, do all in his power to warn the authorities."
Article 27: "In sieges and bombardments, all necessary steps must be taken to spare, as far as possible, buildings dedicated to religion, art, science, or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals, and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not being used at the time for military purposes."
The besieged should visibly indicate these buildings or places and notify an adversary beforehand. Given today's intelligence and high-tech capabilities, belligerents can easily identify civilian and military targets.
Fourth Geneva Convention protects civilians in time of war. It prohibits violence of any type against them and requires treatment for the sick and wounded.
In September 1938, a League of Nations unanimous resolution prohibited the:
"bombardment of cities, towns, villages, dwellings or buildings not in the immediate neighborhood of the operations of land forces....In cases where (legitimate targets) are so situated, (aircraft) must abstain from bombardment" if this action indiscriminately affects civilians.
Long ago Washington trashed international and constitutional laws, planning for Libya what's ongoing in Iraq and Afghanistan - conquest, colonization, occupation, plunder and exploitation, excluding any form of democracy it reviles, including at home.
Major Media Scoundrels Lead Role in America's Wars
When America goes to war, its media are key, reporting disinformation, propaganda, managed news, and straight Pentagon handouts instead of real information, commentaries and analysis people deserve.
In the lead, The New York Times operates as the equivalent of an official information and propaganda ministry, posing as independent journalism.
August 24 was no exception, writers David Kirkpatrick and Alan Cowell headlining, "Qaddafi Defiant After Rebel Takeover," saying:
"Rebel fighters scoured Tripoli on Wednesday in their continued search for an elusive and defiant" (Gaddafi) after NATO landed them on Tripoli's shores with orders to terrorize and loot. They've taken full advantage, what Kirkpatrick and Cowell didn't explain.
Instead they gloated about a "rebel victory" very much not won, especially because nothing from Times or other major media reports is credible. Repeatedly they've been caught lying.
Other same day Times reports headlined:
"Libyans Rejoice in a Castle Filled With Guns and the Trappings of Power," referring to Gaddafi's Bab al-Aziziya compound they reportedly stormed with no verification of precisely what's going on.
"Waves of Disinformation and Confusion Swamp the Truth in Libya," referring mainly to what it calls "a republic of lies," not its own shameless daily propaganda, making everything it reports suspect, unreliable, or falsified.
"Airstrikes More Difficult as War Moves to Tripoli," ignoring NATO's ongoing terror bombing, including Apache helicopter gunships machine-gunning civilians on Tripoli streets, making it unsafe to be out when they're flying.
"After the Revolution, Hurdles in Reviving the Oil Sector," leaving unexplained Western plans for Libya's oil, excluding rivals China and Russia, as well as falsely calling Washington's insurgency a "revolution."
It's standard New York Times policy to represent wealth and power interests, betraying readers in the process who deserve better.
Fabricating Celebratory Tripoli Street Euphoria
On August 23, Metro Gael's Global Research.ca's article headlined, "The Libya Media Hoax: Fabricating Scenes of Jubilation and Euphoria on Green Square," providing another example of media lies, saying:
It "will surely go down in history as one of the most cynical hoaxes committed by corporate media since the manipulated pictures of Iraqis toppling Saddam Hussein's statue" after America's 2003 invasion.
Shamefully, Al Jazeera committed the latest fraud, airing fake live Green Square celebrations, its reporter, Zeina Khodr declaring, "Libya is in the hands of the opposition."
She lied and knew it. In fact, Al Jazeera's footage was "an elaborate and criminal hoax. The report had been prefabricated in a" Doha, Qatar studio.
Qatar is a NATO coalition member, its troops on the ground aiding insurgents along with US and UK special forces.
Libyan intelligence knew about the fake footage in advance, warning about it ahead of its release on "Rayysse state television."
The idea is old and familiar - to create an illusion of non-existant mass support for NATO and insurgents Libyans revile. It's done to diffuse popular resistance against them.
The full article can be read through the following link:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=26155
It explains a classic PsyOps deception, this time aired by an alleged trusted source, showing it's as corrupted as the rest, lying instead of reporting accurately.
A Final Comment
Mahdi Nazemroaya is a friend, a Middle East/Central Asian analyst, a Center for Research on Globalization (CRG) research associate, and a regular Progressive Radio News Hour contributor.
Providing accurate reports from Tripoli, he got death threats. Two other friends - Lizzie Phelan and Franklin Lamb, as well as other independent journalists also faced recriminations for doing what corporate media scoundrels don't - their job.
In an email, Mahdi said: "I am afraid I will be executed in cold blood."
That's been the NATO-wrought danger in Libya, notably in Tripoli, being carpet bombed and strafed by helicopter gunships, machine-gunning civilians in cold blood.
On August 24, CRG Director Michel Chossudovsky wrote about Mahdi, saying:
In Libya for over two months, he was dedicated to "honest factual reporting, with a concern for human life, in solidarity with those Libyan men, women and children who lost their lives in bombing raids on residential areas, schools and hospitals."
He literally risked his life doing it, telling this writer he had to stay supportively for the people he so much cares about. That commitment goes way beyond good journalism and analysis. It's an expression of character too few others have.
Mahdi has it, so do Lizzie, Franklin, and other honest journalists who went to a war zone to report truths - fully, accurately, and courageously, "challeng(ing) the lies of the mainstream media," said Chossudovsky.
In so doing, they "threaten the NATO-media consensus," in the process jeopardizing their own safety.
NATO wants to make Libya an Orwellian society in which "War is peace. Freedom is slavery," and "Ignorance is strength." Orwell also said: "During times of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act."
It's also a courageous one when done at great personal risk. Mahdi, Lizzie, Franklin, and others reporting accurately are true heros, supporting Libyans and free people everywhere while putting themselves in harm's way.
It doesn't get any more heroic than that!
Note:
On August 24 at 4PM Tripoli time, the International Red Cross rescued (or negotiated the release of) over 30 journalists trapped inside the city's Rixos Hotel. A ship heading to Tripoli's seacoast will take them out of the country.
Reports from the London Guardian, CNN, and other corporate media sources falsely claimed Gaddafi loyalists held them hostage, when, in fact, they were threatened by insurgent hooligans.
Hopefully they're now safe, but won't fully be until heading home out of harm's way.
An overnight email from Mahdi said:
"In Corinthia now (peripheral Greek territory). Will head to Malta then home via Europe."
Further updates will follow.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen (at) sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
See also:
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com
This work is in the public domain
by Stephen Lendman
NATO's Libya War: A Nuremberg Level Crime - Stephen Lendman
The US/UK/French-led war on Libya will be remembered as one of history's greatest crimes. It violates the letter and spirit of international law and America's Constitution.
The Nuremberg Tribunal's Chief Justice Robert Jackson (a US Supreme Court Justice) called Nazi war crimes "the supreme international crime against peace."
His November 21, 1945 opening remarks said:
"The wrongs which we seek to condemn and punish have been so calculated, so malignant, and so devastating, that civilization cannot tolerate their being ignored, because it cannot survive their being repeated."
He called aggressive war "the greatest menace of our times."
International law defines crimes against peace as "planning, preparation, initiation, or waging of wars of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances, or participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the foregoing."
All US post-WW II wars fall under this definition.
Since then, America waged direct and proxy premeditated, aggressive wars worldwide, killing millions in East and Central Asia, North and other parts of Africa, the Middle East, and Europe, as well as Central and South America.
Arguably they exceed the worst of Nazi and imperial Japanese crimes combined, including genocide, torture mass destruction of nonmilitary related sites, colonization, occupation, plunder and exploitation.
Third Reich criminals were hanged for their crimes. America's remained free to commit greater ones, notably today against Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Palestine, and the ongoing Libya atrocity - a scandalous "supreme international crime against peace," demanding justice not forthcoming.
In fact, US war criminals are considered hostis humani generis - enemies of mankind. War crimes are against the jus gentium - the law of nations. Established international law addressed them, including the UN Charter. It's unequivocal explaining under what conditions violence and coercion (by one state against another) are justified.
Article 2(3) and Article 33(1) require peaceful settlement of international disputes. Article 2(4) prohibits force or its threatened use. And Article 51 allows the "right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member....until the Security Council has taken measures to maintain international peace and security."
In other words, justifiable self-defense is permissible. However, Charter Articles 2(3), 2(4), and 33 absolutely prohibit any unilateral threat or use of force not:
-- specifically allowed under Article 51;
-- authorized by the Security Council; or
-- permitted by the US Constitution only amendments ratified by three-fourths of the states can change.
In addition, three General Assembly resolutions also prohibit non-consensual belligerent intervention, including:
-- the 1965 Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of States and the Protection of Their Independence and Sovereignty;
-- the 1970 Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations; and
-- the 1974 Definition of Aggression.
Moreover, various post-WW II Conventions, including the four Geneva ones and their Common Article 1 obligate all High Contracting Parties to "respect and ensure respect for the present Convention in all circumstances;" namely, to apply its principles universally, requiring High Contracting Parties "search for persons alleged to have committed, or to have ordered to be committed, such grave breaches, and shall bring such persons, regardless of their nationality, before its own courts."
At Nuremberg, the concepts of individual and command criminal responsibility were addressed, the Tribunal Principles holding that "(a)ny person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefor and liable to punishment....(c)rimes against international law are committed by men, not by abstract entities, and only by punishing individuals who commit (them) can the provisions of international law be enforced."
The Rome Statute's Article 25 of the International Criminal Court (ICC) codified this principle, affirming the culpability of persons committing crimes of war and against humanity.
In addition, commanders and their superiors are specifically culpable if they "either knew or, owing to the circumstances at the time, should have known that the forces were committing or about to commit such crimes, (and) failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power to prevent or repress their commission or to submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecutions."
Moreover, Nuremberg established that immunity is null and void, including for heads of state, other top officials, and top commanders. Further, genocide, crimes of war and against humanity are so grave that statute of limitation provisions don't apply.
As a result, every living past and present US president, top and subordinate officials, and Pentagon commanders involved in war(s) should be prosecuted for their crimes before a special Nuremberg-type tribunal, holding them fully accountable.
Genocide, other forms of mass murder, targeted and indiscriminate destruction, and other crimes of war and against humanity are too intolerable to go unpunished.
Nonetheless, America and its conspiratorial allies commit them - today, horrifically against Libya, a small nonbelligerent country being terrorized, destroyed, and plundered lawlessly in the name of "liberation."
America is the lead offender, committing what its 1996 War Crimes Act calls "grave breaches," defined as "willful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, including biological (or other illegal) experiments, willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health."
As a result, Libya is an ongoing atrocity, a Nuremberg level crime, one of history's greatest.
Yet on August 22, Obama had the audacity to say America, its "allies and partners in the international community (are committed) to protect the people of Libya, and to support a peaceful transition to democracy."
In fact, unspeakable war crimes are being committed to "protect the people of Libya." Included are civilians being terror bombed daily, to break their morale, cause panic, weaken their will to resist, and inflict mass casualties and punishment.
However, Geneva and other international laws forbid the targeting of civilians. The Laws of War: Laws and Customs of War on Land (1907 Hague IV Convention) states:
-- Article 25: "The attack or bombardment, by whatever means, of towns, villages, dwellings, or buildings which are undefended is prohibited."
-- Article 26: "The officer in command of an attacking force must, before commencing a bombardment, except in cases of assault, do all in his power to warn the authorities."
Article 27: "In sieges and bombardments, all necessary steps must be taken to spare, as far as possible, buildings dedicated to religion, art, science, or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals, and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not being used at the time for military purposes."
The besieged should visibly indicate these buildings or places and notify an adversary beforehand. Given today's intelligence and high-tech capabilities, belligerents can easily identify civilian and military targets.
Fourth Geneva Convention protects civilians in time of war. It prohibits violence of any type against them and requires treatment for the sick and wounded.
In September 1938, a League of Nations unanimous resolution prohibited the:
"bombardment of cities, towns, villages, dwellings or buildings not in the immediate neighborhood of the operations of land forces....In cases where (legitimate targets) are so situated, (aircraft) must abstain from bombardment" if this action indiscriminately affects civilians.
Long ago Washington trashed international and constitutional laws, planning for Libya what's ongoing in Iraq and Afghanistan - conquest, colonization, occupation, plunder and exploitation, excluding any form of democracy it reviles, including at home.
Major Media Scoundrels Lead Role in America's Wars
When America goes to war, its media are key, reporting disinformation, propaganda, managed news, and straight Pentagon handouts instead of real information, commentaries and analysis people deserve.
In the lead, The New York Times operates as the equivalent of an official information and propaganda ministry, posing as independent journalism.
August 24 was no exception, writers David Kirkpatrick and Alan Cowell headlining, "Qaddafi Defiant After Rebel Takeover," saying:
"Rebel fighters scoured Tripoli on Wednesday in their continued search for an elusive and defiant" (Gaddafi) after NATO landed them on Tripoli's shores with orders to terrorize and loot. They've taken full advantage, what Kirkpatrick and Cowell didn't explain.
Instead they gloated about a "rebel victory" very much not won, especially because nothing from Times or other major media reports is credible. Repeatedly they've been caught lying.
Other same day Times reports headlined:
"Libyans Rejoice in a Castle Filled With Guns and the Trappings of Power," referring to Gaddafi's Bab al-Aziziya compound they reportedly stormed with no verification of precisely what's going on.
"Waves of Disinformation and Confusion Swamp the Truth in Libya," referring mainly to what it calls "a republic of lies," not its own shameless daily propaganda, making everything it reports suspect, unreliable, or falsified.
"Airstrikes More Difficult as War Moves to Tripoli," ignoring NATO's ongoing terror bombing, including Apache helicopter gunships machine-gunning civilians on Tripoli streets, making it unsafe to be out when they're flying.
"After the Revolution, Hurdles in Reviving the Oil Sector," leaving unexplained Western plans for Libya's oil, excluding rivals China and Russia, as well as falsely calling Washington's insurgency a "revolution."
It's standard New York Times policy to represent wealth and power interests, betraying readers in the process who deserve better.
Fabricating Celebratory Tripoli Street Euphoria
On August 23, Metro Gael's Global Research.ca's article headlined, "The Libya Media Hoax: Fabricating Scenes of Jubilation and Euphoria on Green Square," providing another example of media lies, saying:
It "will surely go down in history as one of the most cynical hoaxes committed by corporate media since the manipulated pictures of Iraqis toppling Saddam Hussein's statue" after America's 2003 invasion.
Shamefully, Al Jazeera committed the latest fraud, airing fake live Green Square celebrations, its reporter, Zeina Khodr declaring, "Libya is in the hands of the opposition."
She lied and knew it. In fact, Al Jazeera's footage was "an elaborate and criminal hoax. The report had been prefabricated in a" Doha, Qatar studio.
Qatar is a NATO coalition member, its troops on the ground aiding insurgents along with US and UK special forces.
Libyan intelligence knew about the fake footage in advance, warning about it ahead of its release on "Rayysse state television."
The idea is old and familiar - to create an illusion of non-existant mass support for NATO and insurgents Libyans revile. It's done to diffuse popular resistance against them.
The full article can be read through the following link:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=26155
It explains a classic PsyOps deception, this time aired by an alleged trusted source, showing it's as corrupted as the rest, lying instead of reporting accurately.
A Final Comment
Mahdi Nazemroaya is a friend, a Middle East/Central Asian analyst, a Center for Research on Globalization (CRG) research associate, and a regular Progressive Radio News Hour contributor.
Providing accurate reports from Tripoli, he got death threats. Two other friends - Lizzie Phelan and Franklin Lamb, as well as other independent journalists also faced recriminations for doing what corporate media scoundrels don't - their job.
In an email, Mahdi said: "I am afraid I will be executed in cold blood."
That's been the NATO-wrought danger in Libya, notably in Tripoli, being carpet bombed and strafed by helicopter gunships, machine-gunning civilians in cold blood.
On August 24, CRG Director Michel Chossudovsky wrote about Mahdi, saying:
In Libya for over two months, he was dedicated to "honest factual reporting, with a concern for human life, in solidarity with those Libyan men, women and children who lost their lives in bombing raids on residential areas, schools and hospitals."
He literally risked his life doing it, telling this writer he had to stay supportively for the people he so much cares about. That commitment goes way beyond good journalism and analysis. It's an expression of character too few others have.
Mahdi has it, so do Lizzie, Franklin, and other honest journalists who went to a war zone to report truths - fully, accurately, and courageously, "challeng(ing) the lies of the mainstream media," said Chossudovsky.
In so doing, they "threaten the NATO-media consensus," in the process jeopardizing their own safety.
NATO wants to make Libya an Orwellian society in which "War is peace. Freedom is slavery," and "Ignorance is strength." Orwell also said: "During times of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act."
It's also a courageous one when done at great personal risk. Mahdi, Lizzie, Franklin, and others reporting accurately are true heros, supporting Libyans and free people everywhere while putting themselves in harm's way.
It doesn't get any more heroic than that!
Note:
On August 24 at 4PM Tripoli time, the International Red Cross rescued (or negotiated the release of) over 30 journalists trapped inside the city's Rixos Hotel. A ship heading to Tripoli's seacoast will take them out of the country.
Reports from the London Guardian, CNN, and other corporate media sources falsely claimed Gaddafi loyalists held them hostage, when, in fact, they were threatened by insurgent hooligans.
Hopefully they're now safe, but won't fully be until heading home out of harm's way.
An overnight email from Mahdi said:
"In Corinthia now (peripheral Greek territory). Will head to Malta then home via Europe."
Further updates will follow.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen (at) sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
See also:
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com
This work is in the public domain
Thursday, August 11, 2011
Imperial Plans for Libya Post-Gaddafi - by Stephen Lendman
Imperial Plans for Libya Post-Gaddafi
by Stephen Lendman
Imperial Plans for Libya Post-Gaddafi - by Stephen Lendman
A previous article suggested NATO's Libya war is unraveling, having misjudged the commitment of Libyans to resist, fight back, and support Gaddafi. Access it through the following link:
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2011/08/natos-libya-war-unraveling.html
Nonetheless, daily bombings continue intensively, averaging 51 daily strike sorties in the last week alone, targeting Tripoli and other Gaddafi controlled areas mercilessly.
Despite clear evidence of war crimes, NATO claims civilians and civilian targets aren't struck. In fact, they're targeted deliberately and repeatedly, killing hundreds and injuring many more as part of a campaign to cow targeted populations into submission.
In the last 48 hours, Tripoli power facilities were bombed, knocking it out to parts of the city. Earlier, Libya's Great Man-Made River system and a factory producing pipe for it were struck to reduce fresh water supplies. A food warehouse was destroyed to decrease available amounts.
Three ground-based satellites were disabled, killing three employees and injuring another 15. Hospitals and medical clinics are targeted so less healthcare can be provided, and oil facilities are bombed, reducing available stockpiles. Numerous other civilian targets are also struck repeatedly, including infrastructure and residential neighbors unrelated to military necessity.
As stated above, it's part of NATO's terror bombing campaign to cow Libyans. So far, they've become more embolden, knowing the unacceptable alternative.
On August 8, AFP reported at least 85 civilians killed in Majer village near Zlitan in western Libya. Government spokesman Mussa Ibrahim called it "a crime beyond imagination," saying the dead included 32 women, 32 children, and 20 men from 12 families, massacred in cold blood.
NATO spokesman Col. Roland Lavoie called the farmhouses bombed (with civilian families, not belligerents) "legitimate target(s)."
He lied, saying "very clear intelligence demonstrat(ed) that 'former' farm buildings were being used as a staging point for (pro-Gaddafi) forces to conduct attacks against the people of Libya. We do not have evidence of civilian casualties at this stage...."
Reporting from Tripoli, independent journalist/activist Lizzie Phelan commented on how Libyans reacted to the massacre, saying:
"I watched their heartbroken and incensed loved ones bury the 33 children, 32 women, and 20 men NATO (called) 'mercenaries.' Most (people in) Zlitan....turned out for their burial, chanting furiously against NATO."
"Person after person came to tell us how NATO was creating a generation of Libyans so filled with rage that they would see no recourse but to send themselves to martyrdom in revenge against the west."
Farmhouses bombed were "some distance apart from one another." They'd "been hosting scores of refugees from....Misrata, who fled from the horrifying (rebel) atrocities," what NATO and western media never report.
In fact, many of those massacred came to help after bombing began. Follow-up attacks slaughtered them, unconscionable war crimes, including by pilots carrying out illegal orders.
"At the funeral, survivors said "they would sacrifice their lives for their leader Muammar Gaddafi." Grief stricken children chanted, "The blood of our martyrs will not be forgotten."
The attack followed a decision by National Transitional Council (NTC) head Mustafa Abdul Jalil to sack his entire executive committee, a sign of further disarray besides the assassination of rebel commander Adbul Fatah Younis and two of his aides last month, allegedly for holding talks with Gaddafi officials. If true, he wanted reconciliation to end the conflict.
For Washington, its NATO partners, and TNC puppets, however, peace and reconciliation aren't options. As a result, Libyans can expect more attacks and/or destabilization to inflict relentless pain and suffering, even if fighting winds down to stalemate and Washington accepts a face-saving solution.
It may be no more than an unacceptable "Kosovo Model," a fifth column resolution, giving anti-Gaddafi extremists a foothold to parlay toward total control.
Post-Gaddafi Planning
On July 25, the Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS) convened a conference, hosting 50 government, diplomatic, and other experts to assess the Libya war and way forward. It concluded the following:
(1) No military solution is possible because rebels can't take Tripoli or other strategic Gaddafi-controlled areas. Moreover, Libya's military adjusted "to its degraded condition, and defections slowed to a trickle. While time is not on Gaddafi's side, neither" does it favor rebels.
(2) "Even so, the post-Gaddafi era" already began. Washington and its NATO partners should adapt to it that way.
(3) Giving too much money to TNC officials is as bad as too little.
(4) Washington shouldn't "become wedded to the TNC," but should flexibly "accept a wide variety of outcomes. TNC officials perhaps are "fragment(ed) and out-of-touch with conditions on the ground."
(5) The UN has some legitimacy in Libya. Gaddafi only fears Washington. A possible new Security Council resolution will be needed for Libyan reconstruction that will be considerable with parts of the country turned to rubble, mostly non-military sites.
On August 9, the Australian posted a London Times Tom Coghlan article headlined, " Iraq haunts plans for post-Gaddafi Libya," saying:
Washington, its NATO partners and TNC officials "prepare(d) a (70 page) blueprint for a post-Gaddafi Libya (that) charts the first months after" he falls, believing it's a fait accompli. In fact, it may be more imperial arrogance, similar to Iraq and Afghanistan, besides America's humiliating defeat in Vietnam and Korea stalemate.
Claiming the document draws from lessons learned, it relies on Gaddafi defections after he's ousted or killed. Whether rebel fighters will accept them is uncertain, given disparate elements in their ranks.
A United Arab Emirates-supported "10,000 - 15,000 strong 'Tripoli task force' " is planned to control Tripoli, "secure key sites and arrest high-level Gaddafi" loyalists.
Whether true or not, it claims 800 government security officials are already covertly recruited, ready "to form the 'backbone' of a new security apparatus." Another 5,000 non-ideologically committed Gaddafi loyalists will become part of the interim government's forces "to prevent a security vacuum."
In addition, it claims rebels in and around Tripoli have 8,660 supporters, including 3,255 in Gaddafi's army. Moreover, mass high-ranking official defections are "considered highly likely, with 70 per cent of them (supporting) the regime out of fear alone."
Again, these unverified claims may be more propaganda than factual. Leaking to the Times, in fact, may be to entice defections. In other words, if Gaddafi loyalists believe others are deserting, and the regime appears near collapse, they may not wish to feel like rats on a sinking ship so will come over to avoid going down.
Notably, TNC planner Aref Ali Nayed expressed regret about the leak, but said:
"It is important that (Libyans know) there is an advance plan, and it is now a much more advanced plan."
Perhaps so or maybe it's propaganda intimidation to discourage resistance and encourage giving up on Gaddafi to end bombings and fighting on the ground. Why continue if defeat is imminent, but is it?
Evidence shows Libyans are winning. Rebels are in disarray, and though NATO bombing inflicted extensive numbers of deaths, injuries and destruction, popular support for Gaddafi is strong. Moreover, Libyans remain emboldened to resist, steadfastly unwilling to have their country colonized and plundered.
Nonetheless, other document details include:
-- securing key security, telecommunications, power, transportation infrastructure, and other important sites;
-- deploying Nafusa Mountain and Zentan fighters, not rebels, in Tripoli;
-- having mostly Tripoli residents serve as interim security forces in Gaddafi loyalist areas;
-- providing an emergency one-month $550 million to supply gas and oil to western Libya after Gaddafi falls;
-- having the UN provide humanitarian aid, supported by the UAE, Qatar and Turkey;
-- "a pre-recorded program of announcements by rebel leaders and clerics would initiate the Tripoli task force plan, call for calm and warn against revenge attacks on regime supporters;" an out-of-country FM radio station was set up for this purpose;
-- if Gaddafi is killed, negotiating with his sons, called "regime captains;" and
-- "multiple rebel groups" will be avoided, as well as having a "clear plan to deal with a hostile fifth column."
A Final Comment
Despite intensive bombing since mid-March, Gaddafi remains firmly in control, enjoying overwhelming support with good reason. The alternative is too grim to accept.
As a result, whether the above document is factual, wishful thinking, or propaganda, imperial Washington is a long way from prevailing.
Nonetheless, make no mistake. Libya is Obama's war. At the same time, America hasn't won one since WW II. Hopefully Libyans will keep that record intact and retain their sovereignty, free from intolerable imperial dominance.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen (at) sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
See also:
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com
This work is in the public domain
by Stephen Lendman
Imperial Plans for Libya Post-Gaddafi - by Stephen Lendman
A previous article suggested NATO's Libya war is unraveling, having misjudged the commitment of Libyans to resist, fight back, and support Gaddafi. Access it through the following link:
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2011/08/natos-libya-war-unraveling.html
Nonetheless, daily bombings continue intensively, averaging 51 daily strike sorties in the last week alone, targeting Tripoli and other Gaddafi controlled areas mercilessly.
Despite clear evidence of war crimes, NATO claims civilians and civilian targets aren't struck. In fact, they're targeted deliberately and repeatedly, killing hundreds and injuring many more as part of a campaign to cow targeted populations into submission.
In the last 48 hours, Tripoli power facilities were bombed, knocking it out to parts of the city. Earlier, Libya's Great Man-Made River system and a factory producing pipe for it were struck to reduce fresh water supplies. A food warehouse was destroyed to decrease available amounts.
Three ground-based satellites were disabled, killing three employees and injuring another 15. Hospitals and medical clinics are targeted so less healthcare can be provided, and oil facilities are bombed, reducing available stockpiles. Numerous other civilian targets are also struck repeatedly, including infrastructure and residential neighbors unrelated to military necessity.
As stated above, it's part of NATO's terror bombing campaign to cow Libyans. So far, they've become more embolden, knowing the unacceptable alternative.
On August 8, AFP reported at least 85 civilians killed in Majer village near Zlitan in western Libya. Government spokesman Mussa Ibrahim called it "a crime beyond imagination," saying the dead included 32 women, 32 children, and 20 men from 12 families, massacred in cold blood.
NATO spokesman Col. Roland Lavoie called the farmhouses bombed (with civilian families, not belligerents) "legitimate target(s)."
He lied, saying "very clear intelligence demonstrat(ed) that 'former' farm buildings were being used as a staging point for (pro-Gaddafi) forces to conduct attacks against the people of Libya. We do not have evidence of civilian casualties at this stage...."
Reporting from Tripoli, independent journalist/activist Lizzie Phelan commented on how Libyans reacted to the massacre, saying:
"I watched their heartbroken and incensed loved ones bury the 33 children, 32 women, and 20 men NATO (called) 'mercenaries.' Most (people in) Zlitan....turned out for their burial, chanting furiously against NATO."
"Person after person came to tell us how NATO was creating a generation of Libyans so filled with rage that they would see no recourse but to send themselves to martyrdom in revenge against the west."
Farmhouses bombed were "some distance apart from one another." They'd "been hosting scores of refugees from....Misrata, who fled from the horrifying (rebel) atrocities," what NATO and western media never report.
In fact, many of those massacred came to help after bombing began. Follow-up attacks slaughtered them, unconscionable war crimes, including by pilots carrying out illegal orders.
"At the funeral, survivors said "they would sacrifice their lives for their leader Muammar Gaddafi." Grief stricken children chanted, "The blood of our martyrs will not be forgotten."
The attack followed a decision by National Transitional Council (NTC) head Mustafa Abdul Jalil to sack his entire executive committee, a sign of further disarray besides the assassination of rebel commander Adbul Fatah Younis and two of his aides last month, allegedly for holding talks with Gaddafi officials. If true, he wanted reconciliation to end the conflict.
For Washington, its NATO partners, and TNC puppets, however, peace and reconciliation aren't options. As a result, Libyans can expect more attacks and/or destabilization to inflict relentless pain and suffering, even if fighting winds down to stalemate and Washington accepts a face-saving solution.
It may be no more than an unacceptable "Kosovo Model," a fifth column resolution, giving anti-Gaddafi extremists a foothold to parlay toward total control.
Post-Gaddafi Planning
On July 25, the Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS) convened a conference, hosting 50 government, diplomatic, and other experts to assess the Libya war and way forward. It concluded the following:
(1) No military solution is possible because rebels can't take Tripoli or other strategic Gaddafi-controlled areas. Moreover, Libya's military adjusted "to its degraded condition, and defections slowed to a trickle. While time is not on Gaddafi's side, neither" does it favor rebels.
(2) "Even so, the post-Gaddafi era" already began. Washington and its NATO partners should adapt to it that way.
(3) Giving too much money to TNC officials is as bad as too little.
(4) Washington shouldn't "become wedded to the TNC," but should flexibly "accept a wide variety of outcomes. TNC officials perhaps are "fragment(ed) and out-of-touch with conditions on the ground."
(5) The UN has some legitimacy in Libya. Gaddafi only fears Washington. A possible new Security Council resolution will be needed for Libyan reconstruction that will be considerable with parts of the country turned to rubble, mostly non-military sites.
On August 9, the Australian posted a London Times Tom Coghlan article headlined, " Iraq haunts plans for post-Gaddafi Libya," saying:
Washington, its NATO partners and TNC officials "prepare(d) a (70 page) blueprint for a post-Gaddafi Libya (that) charts the first months after" he falls, believing it's a fait accompli. In fact, it may be more imperial arrogance, similar to Iraq and Afghanistan, besides America's humiliating defeat in Vietnam and Korea stalemate.
Claiming the document draws from lessons learned, it relies on Gaddafi defections after he's ousted or killed. Whether rebel fighters will accept them is uncertain, given disparate elements in their ranks.
A United Arab Emirates-supported "10,000 - 15,000 strong 'Tripoli task force' " is planned to control Tripoli, "secure key sites and arrest high-level Gaddafi" loyalists.
Whether true or not, it claims 800 government security officials are already covertly recruited, ready "to form the 'backbone' of a new security apparatus." Another 5,000 non-ideologically committed Gaddafi loyalists will become part of the interim government's forces "to prevent a security vacuum."
In addition, it claims rebels in and around Tripoli have 8,660 supporters, including 3,255 in Gaddafi's army. Moreover, mass high-ranking official defections are "considered highly likely, with 70 per cent of them (supporting) the regime out of fear alone."
Again, these unverified claims may be more propaganda than factual. Leaking to the Times, in fact, may be to entice defections. In other words, if Gaddafi loyalists believe others are deserting, and the regime appears near collapse, they may not wish to feel like rats on a sinking ship so will come over to avoid going down.
Notably, TNC planner Aref Ali Nayed expressed regret about the leak, but said:
"It is important that (Libyans know) there is an advance plan, and it is now a much more advanced plan."
Perhaps so or maybe it's propaganda intimidation to discourage resistance and encourage giving up on Gaddafi to end bombings and fighting on the ground. Why continue if defeat is imminent, but is it?
Evidence shows Libyans are winning. Rebels are in disarray, and though NATO bombing inflicted extensive numbers of deaths, injuries and destruction, popular support for Gaddafi is strong. Moreover, Libyans remain emboldened to resist, steadfastly unwilling to have their country colonized and plundered.
Nonetheless, other document details include:
-- securing key security, telecommunications, power, transportation infrastructure, and other important sites;
-- deploying Nafusa Mountain and Zentan fighters, not rebels, in Tripoli;
-- having mostly Tripoli residents serve as interim security forces in Gaddafi loyalist areas;
-- providing an emergency one-month $550 million to supply gas and oil to western Libya after Gaddafi falls;
-- having the UN provide humanitarian aid, supported by the UAE, Qatar and Turkey;
-- "a pre-recorded program of announcements by rebel leaders and clerics would initiate the Tripoli task force plan, call for calm and warn against revenge attacks on regime supporters;" an out-of-country FM radio station was set up for this purpose;
-- if Gaddafi is killed, negotiating with his sons, called "regime captains;" and
-- "multiple rebel groups" will be avoided, as well as having a "clear plan to deal with a hostile fifth column."
A Final Comment
Despite intensive bombing since mid-March, Gaddafi remains firmly in control, enjoying overwhelming support with good reason. The alternative is too grim to accept.
As a result, whether the above document is factual, wishful thinking, or propaganda, imperial Washington is a long way from prevailing.
Nonetheless, make no mistake. Libya is Obama's war. At the same time, America hasn't won one since WW II. Hopefully Libyans will keep that record intact and retain their sovereignty, free from intolerable imperial dominance.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen (at) sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
See also:
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com
This work is in the public domain
Sunday, July 31, 2011
Daily NATO War Crimes in Libya - by Stephen Lendman
Markin comment :
Agree or disagree, and mostly disagree on the solutions questions (nothing short of a workers government is going to make a dent, even a small dent in the systemic social problems we face today), I am always glad to put the prolific SteveLendmanBlog on this site. It gives me a feel for the pulse of the old-time (and vanishing) non-party (non-Democratic Party) progressives out there.
*****
Daily NATO War Crimes in Libya
by Stephen Lendman
Daily NATO War Crimes in Libya - by 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.
Notably on July 23, a Brega water pipe factory was struck, killing six guards. It produces pipes for Libya's Great Man-Made River system (GMMR), an ocean-sized aquifer beneath its sands, making the desert bloom for productive agriculture, and supplying water to Libya's people.
The previous day, a water supply pipeline was destroyed. It will take months to restore. The factory produced vital pipes to do it, a clear war crime like daily others. Moreover, the entire GMMR is threatened by a shortage of spare parts and chemicals. As a result, it's struggling to keep reservoirs at a level able to provide a sustainable supply. Without it, a humanitarian disaster looms, very likely what NATO plans as in past wars.
On July 27, AFP said that:
"NATO warned that its warplanes will bomb civilian facilities if (Gaddafi's) forces use them to launch attacks." At the same time, a spokesman said great care is taken to minimize civilian casualties.
NATO lied. Daily, it's attacking non-military related sites to destroy Libya's ability to function in areas loyal to Gaddafi. Earlier, in fact, a spokesman claimed there was "no evidence" civilian targets were hit or noncombatants killed, except one time a major incident was too obvious to hide. Reluctantly it admitted a "mistake," covering up a willful planned attack, knowing civilians were affected.
Libya (satellite) TV calls itself "a voice for free Libya....struggling to liberate Libya from the grip of the Gaddafi regime...." In fact, it's a pro-NATO propaganda service, reporting misinformation on air and online.
On July 25, it headlined, "No evidence to support Gaddafi's allegations that civilian targets were hit," when, it fact, they're struck daily.
Nonetheless, it claimed only military sites are bombed, saying Tripoli-based journalists aren't taken to affected areas, "suggesting NATO's gunners are hitting military targets, at least in the capital."
In fact, corporate and independent journalists are regularly taken to many sites struck. Independent accounts confirm civilian casualties and non-military facilities bombed. Pro-NATO scoundrels report managed news, complicit in daily war crimes.
On July 28, Libya TV claimed "captured Gaddafi soldiers say army morale is low," when, in fact, most Libyans support Gaddafi. Millions are armed. Gaddafi gave them weapons. They could easily oust him if they wish. Instead, they rally supportively, what Western media and Libya TV won't report.
Moreover, captured soldiers say what they're told, likely threatened with death or torture if they refuse, especially in rebel paramilitary hands, under NATO orders to terrorize areas they control.
As a result, civilian casualties mount, up to 1,200 or more killed and thousands wounded in pro-Gaddafi areas, many seriously as war rages. In addition, unknown numbers of combatant casualties on both sides aren't known, nor is the civilian toll in rebel held areas.
Nonetheless, daily sorties and strikes continue. Since mid-July alone through July 27, they include:
July 14: 132 sorties and 48 strikes
July 15: 115 sorties and 46 strikes
July 16: 110 sorties and 45 strikes
July 17: 122 sorties and 46 strikes
July 18: 129 sorties and 44 strikes
July 19: 113 sorties and 40 strikes
July 20: 122 sorties and 53 strikes
July 21: 124 sorties and 45 strikes
July 22: 128 sorties and 46 strikes
July 23: 125 sorties and 56 strikes
July 24: 163 sorties and 43 strikes
July 25: 111 sorties and 54 strikes
July 26: 134 sorties and 46 strikes
July 27: 133 sorties and 54 strikes
Daily patterns are consistent. However, information on numbers and types of bombs, as well as other munitions aren't given. Instead, misinformation claims a humanitarian mission protects civilians - by terrorizing, killing, and injuring them, solely for imperial aims. It's why all US-led wars are fought, never for liberating reasons.
The entire campaign is based on lies. It's standard war time procedure, to enlist popular support for campaigns people otherwise would reject.
In fact, no humanitarian crisis existed until NATO arrived. Moreover, in paramilitary controlled areas, Amnesty International confirmed only 110 pro and anti-Gaddafi supporter deaths combined, most likely more of the former than latter as rebel cutthroats rampaged through areas they occupy. Currently, the numbers of dead and injured civilians are many times that amount, largely from NATO attacks.
NATO, in fact, is code language for the Pentagon, paying the largest share of its operating and military budgets. Except for Germany and Britain, other members pay small shares, most, in fact, miniscule amounts.
Since NATO began bombing on March 19, daily attacks inflicted lawless collective punishment against millions in Gaddafi supported areas. Affected is their ability to obtain food, medicines, fuel and other basic supplies, exposing another lie about humanitarian intervention.
On July 25, OCHA's fact-finding team said Tripoli contained "pockets of vulnerability where people need urgent humanitarian assistance." Medical supplies are running low. The last major delivery was in January, and concerns are increasing about the "unsustainable food supply chain for the public distribution systems, especially as Ramadan approaches (on or around August 1 to about August 29) and the conflict persists."
Moreover, "Libyan oil experts warned that fuel stocks could run out in two weeks." Public transportation costs have tripled. Food prices have also soared. Tripoli residents experience electricity cuts, and clean water supplies are endangered.
Before conflict erupted, Libyans had the region's highest standard of living and highest life expectancy in Africa because Gaddafi's oil wealth provided healthcare, education, housing assistance and other social benefits. Imperial war, of course, changed things. Libyans now hang on to survive.
Seeking an End Game
On July 26, UPI headlined, "NATO seeks urgent exit strategy in Libya," knowing this phase of the war is lost. Nonetheless, future strategies and campaigns will follow.
For now, however, "NATO is seeking an urgent exit strategy (to end) fighting and decide the future of (Gaddifi), even if that means letting him stay in the country though out of power, it emerged Tuesday after British and French foreign ministers met in London."
In tribal Libya, Gaddafi's power, in fact, is far less than reported, social anthropologist Ranier Fsadni saying:
"Gaddafi's feeling for tribal Libya is certainly one factor that explains how he has managed to rule the country for so many years. (However), (t)here is no tribal office giving a single man a monopoly of institutional power at the apex....Several factors account for his longevity in power," including sharing Libya's oil wealth.
UPI said diplomacy is driven by a failed military campaign. As a result, "(i)ntense mediation efforts are underway at different levels at the United Nations and Europe, in African, European and Middle Eastern capitals and Russia."
Neither side is commenting, but some observers think operations may wind down in weeks, based on an unannounced face-saving solution, despite continued destabilization and future conflict planned. It's similar to Balkan and Iraq war strategies, a combination of tactics until Washington prevailed.
Libya faces the same end game, though years could pass before it arrives. As a result, Libyans can expect continued hardships. When imperial America shows up, that strategy persists until it prevails, no matter the pain and suffering inflicted.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen (at) sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
See also:
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com
This work is in the public domain
Agree or disagree, and mostly disagree on the solutions questions (nothing short of a workers government is going to make a dent, even a small dent in the systemic social problems we face today), I am always glad to put the prolific SteveLendmanBlog on this site. It gives me a feel for the pulse of the old-time (and vanishing) non-party (non-Democratic Party) progressives out there.
*****
Daily NATO War Crimes in Libya
by Stephen Lendman
Daily NATO War Crimes in Libya - by 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.
Notably on July 23, a Brega water pipe factory was struck, killing six guards. It produces pipes for Libya's Great Man-Made River system (GMMR), an ocean-sized aquifer beneath its sands, making the desert bloom for productive agriculture, and supplying water to Libya's people.
The previous day, a water supply pipeline was destroyed. It will take months to restore. The factory produced vital pipes to do it, a clear war crime like daily others. Moreover, the entire GMMR is threatened by a shortage of spare parts and chemicals. As a result, it's struggling to keep reservoirs at a level able to provide a sustainable supply. Without it, a humanitarian disaster looms, very likely what NATO plans as in past wars.
On July 27, AFP said that:
"NATO warned that its warplanes will bomb civilian facilities if (Gaddafi's) forces use them to launch attacks." At the same time, a spokesman said great care is taken to minimize civilian casualties.
NATO lied. Daily, it's attacking non-military related sites to destroy Libya's ability to function in areas loyal to Gaddafi. Earlier, in fact, a spokesman claimed there was "no evidence" civilian targets were hit or noncombatants killed, except one time a major incident was too obvious to hide. Reluctantly it admitted a "mistake," covering up a willful planned attack, knowing civilians were affected.
Libya (satellite) TV calls itself "a voice for free Libya....struggling to liberate Libya from the grip of the Gaddafi regime...." In fact, it's a pro-NATO propaganda service, reporting misinformation on air and online.
On July 25, it headlined, "No evidence to support Gaddafi's allegations that civilian targets were hit," when, it fact, they're struck daily.
Nonetheless, it claimed only military sites are bombed, saying Tripoli-based journalists aren't taken to affected areas, "suggesting NATO's gunners are hitting military targets, at least in the capital."
In fact, corporate and independent journalists are regularly taken to many sites struck. Independent accounts confirm civilian casualties and non-military facilities bombed. Pro-NATO scoundrels report managed news, complicit in daily war crimes.
On July 28, Libya TV claimed "captured Gaddafi soldiers say army morale is low," when, in fact, most Libyans support Gaddafi. Millions are armed. Gaddafi gave them weapons. They could easily oust him if they wish. Instead, they rally supportively, what Western media and Libya TV won't report.
Moreover, captured soldiers say what they're told, likely threatened with death or torture if they refuse, especially in rebel paramilitary hands, under NATO orders to terrorize areas they control.
As a result, civilian casualties mount, up to 1,200 or more killed and thousands wounded in pro-Gaddafi areas, many seriously as war rages. In addition, unknown numbers of combatant casualties on both sides aren't known, nor is the civilian toll in rebel held areas.
Nonetheless, daily sorties and strikes continue. Since mid-July alone through July 27, they include:
July 14: 132 sorties and 48 strikes
July 15: 115 sorties and 46 strikes
July 16: 110 sorties and 45 strikes
July 17: 122 sorties and 46 strikes
July 18: 129 sorties and 44 strikes
July 19: 113 sorties and 40 strikes
July 20: 122 sorties and 53 strikes
July 21: 124 sorties and 45 strikes
July 22: 128 sorties and 46 strikes
July 23: 125 sorties and 56 strikes
July 24: 163 sorties and 43 strikes
July 25: 111 sorties and 54 strikes
July 26: 134 sorties and 46 strikes
July 27: 133 sorties and 54 strikes
Daily patterns are consistent. However, information on numbers and types of bombs, as well as other munitions aren't given. Instead, misinformation claims a humanitarian mission protects civilians - by terrorizing, killing, and injuring them, solely for imperial aims. It's why all US-led wars are fought, never for liberating reasons.
The entire campaign is based on lies. It's standard war time procedure, to enlist popular support for campaigns people otherwise would reject.
In fact, no humanitarian crisis existed until NATO arrived. Moreover, in paramilitary controlled areas, Amnesty International confirmed only 110 pro and anti-Gaddafi supporter deaths combined, most likely more of the former than latter as rebel cutthroats rampaged through areas they occupy. Currently, the numbers of dead and injured civilians are many times that amount, largely from NATO attacks.
NATO, in fact, is code language for the Pentagon, paying the largest share of its operating and military budgets. Except for Germany and Britain, other members pay small shares, most, in fact, miniscule amounts.
Since NATO began bombing on March 19, daily attacks inflicted lawless collective punishment against millions in Gaddafi supported areas. Affected is their ability to obtain food, medicines, fuel and other basic supplies, exposing another lie about humanitarian intervention.
On July 25, OCHA's fact-finding team said Tripoli contained "pockets of vulnerability where people need urgent humanitarian assistance." Medical supplies are running low. The last major delivery was in January, and concerns are increasing about the "unsustainable food supply chain for the public distribution systems, especially as Ramadan approaches (on or around August 1 to about August 29) and the conflict persists."
Moreover, "Libyan oil experts warned that fuel stocks could run out in two weeks." Public transportation costs have tripled. Food prices have also soared. Tripoli residents experience electricity cuts, and clean water supplies are endangered.
Before conflict erupted, Libyans had the region's highest standard of living and highest life expectancy in Africa because Gaddafi's oil wealth provided healthcare, education, housing assistance and other social benefits. Imperial war, of course, changed things. Libyans now hang on to survive.
Seeking an End Game
On July 26, UPI headlined, "NATO seeks urgent exit strategy in Libya," knowing this phase of the war is lost. Nonetheless, future strategies and campaigns will follow.
For now, however, "NATO is seeking an urgent exit strategy (to end) fighting and decide the future of (Gaddifi), even if that means letting him stay in the country though out of power, it emerged Tuesday after British and French foreign ministers met in London."
In tribal Libya, Gaddafi's power, in fact, is far less than reported, social anthropologist Ranier Fsadni saying:
"Gaddafi's feeling for tribal Libya is certainly one factor that explains how he has managed to rule the country for so many years. (However), (t)here is no tribal office giving a single man a monopoly of institutional power at the apex....Several factors account for his longevity in power," including sharing Libya's oil wealth.
UPI said diplomacy is driven by a failed military campaign. As a result, "(i)ntense mediation efforts are underway at different levels at the United Nations and Europe, in African, European and Middle Eastern capitals and Russia."
Neither side is commenting, but some observers think operations may wind down in weeks, based on an unannounced face-saving solution, despite continued destabilization and future conflict planned. It's similar to Balkan and Iraq war strategies, a combination of tactics until Washington prevailed.
Libya faces the same end game, though years could pass before it arrives. As a result, Libyans can expect continued hardships. When imperial America shows up, that strategy persists until it prevails, no matter the pain and suffering inflicted.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen (at) sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
See also:
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com
This work is in the public domain
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Washington's Ongoing Libya Terror Bombing - by Stephen Lendman
Monday, July 18, 2011
Washington's Ongoing Libya Terror Bombing
Washington's Ongoing Libya Terror Bombing - by Stephen Lendman
On July 14, Mossad-connected DEBKA file 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.
At the same time, frustration grows after four months of stalemated ground and air operations. As a result, despite saying Gaddafi must go, some NATO partners seem willing to let him stay, though not in his present capacity.
Gaddafi, in fact, vows never to leave or surrender to insurgents or NATO. In a July 16 audio address, he told supporters:
"They are asking me to leave. That's a laugh. I will never leave the land of my ancestors or the people who have sacrificed themselves for me. After we gave our children as martyrs, we can't backtrack or surrender or give up or move an inch."
Libyans overwhelmingly back him, rallying in images (and reports) major media suppress, accessed through the following links:
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=25630
http://tv.globalresearch.ca/2011/07/libya-ground-scenes-tripoli-july-2011
No one called them out. No one demanded support for Gaddafi. They came on their own, what usually happens when nations are lawlessly attacked. People rally overwhelmingly behind leaders against foreign aggressors. Libyans know Washington and NATO, not Gaddafi, is their enemy.
Moreover, they're armed, ready to defend their country against invaders because Gaddafi gave about two million civilians weapons, more than enough to oust him if they wished. They don't!
DEBKA also said that:
"From July 9, (its) military sources (said) NATO discontinued its air strikes against Libyan pro-government targets in Tripoli and other places. (Though unannounced, it signaled) that 15,000 flight missions (actually 15,308 through July 15) and 6,000 (actually 5,767 through July 15) bombardments of Qaddafi targets had failed to achieve their object."
In fact, NATO's web site (http://www.aco.nato.int/page424201235.aspx) states the following:
For July 9: 112 sorties conducted, including 48 strike missions;
For July 10: 139 sorties conducted, including 54 strike missions;
For July 11: 132 sorties conducted, including 49 strike missions;
For July 12: 127 sorties conducted, including 35 strike missions;
For July 13: No data posted. The above pattern likely continued.
For July 14: 132 sorties conducted, including 48 strike missions.
For July 15: 115 sorties conducted, including 46 strike missions.
Reporting from Tripoli on July 17, Middle East/Central Asian analyst Mahdi Nazemroaya emailed that "(l)ast night was very bad here. They bombed like crazy and everything was shaking."
He elaborated in a Global Research.ca article, accessed through the following link:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=25658
Calling it an overnight "Blitzkrieg," he cited "large explosions....heard in the distance. Multiple urban areas were bombed simultaneously this morning."
According to eyewitnesses, about 60 - 75 bombs hit Tajura (14 km east of Tripoli) and the city's Seraj area. Continuing a regular pattern, civilian targets were struck, including residential areas. On July 16, Libyan state television reported mostly civilian casualties without specific numbers.
So far, in fact, for every combatant death, 10 civilians have been killed as a result of non-military sites struck, including residential neighborhoods.
Over night near bombing areas, "it was like an earthquake. Large buildings as far away as Al-Fatah Street....were shaking."
July 16 strikes, however, differed from previous ones. Burning smells and "a strange smoldering filled the air" and lingered. "It even remained on the skin (after) the bombings....The sounds (and smoke plumes) were different."
After previous bombings, smoke rose vertically "like a fire, but tonight (it was white and) horizontal....hovering above Tripoli."
One explosion caused "a huge mushroom cloud, pointing to the possible use of (nuclear) bunker buster bombs." Within a 15 km radius of targets, people "experienced burning eyes, lower back pain, (and) headaches," unexplained symptoms not previously felt.
Last week, in fact, Libya's prosecutor general Mohammed Zikri al-Mahjoubi accused NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen of war crimes, saying he'll be criminally charged with:
"deliberate aggression against innocent civilians, the murder of children, as well as trying to overthrow the Libyan regime....(He's) responsible (for) attack(ing) unarmed people, killing 1,108 and wounding 4,537 others in bombardment of Tripoli and other cities and villages."
He also charged him with trying to murder Gaddafi.
On July 14, Rasmussen tried having it both ways, "encouraging all allies that have aircraft at their disposal to take part in operation," while calling for a pro-Western political solution Libyans won't accept, nor should they.
A Final Comment
Securing imperial control is the issue, an objective putting America at odds with millions of Libyans determined to resist and prevail.
In fact, Washington's strategy may have backfired. Most Libyans united behind Gaddafi, together with regional and other allies, including China and Russia (for their own strategic interests), against exploitive Western "liberation."
Though no end of conflict is imminent, perhaps this time people power may triumph. If so, the message to other imperial victims is don't quit. Struggling long enough to prevail at times succeeds. Maybe this time for Libyans.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
posted by Steve Lendman @ 12:47 AM
Washington's Ongoing Libya Terror Bombing
Washington's Ongoing Libya Terror Bombing - by Stephen Lendman
On July 14, Mossad-connected DEBKA file 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.
At the same time, frustration grows after four months of stalemated ground and air operations. As a result, despite saying Gaddafi must go, some NATO partners seem willing to let him stay, though not in his present capacity.
Gaddafi, in fact, vows never to leave or surrender to insurgents or NATO. In a July 16 audio address, he told supporters:
"They are asking me to leave. That's a laugh. I will never leave the land of my ancestors or the people who have sacrificed themselves for me. After we gave our children as martyrs, we can't backtrack or surrender or give up or move an inch."
Libyans overwhelmingly back him, rallying in images (and reports) major media suppress, accessed through the following links:
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=25630
http://tv.globalresearch.ca/2011/07/libya-ground-scenes-tripoli-july-2011
No one called them out. No one demanded support for Gaddafi. They came on their own, what usually happens when nations are lawlessly attacked. People rally overwhelmingly behind leaders against foreign aggressors. Libyans know Washington and NATO, not Gaddafi, is their enemy.
Moreover, they're armed, ready to defend their country against invaders because Gaddafi gave about two million civilians weapons, more than enough to oust him if they wished. They don't!
DEBKA also said that:
"From July 9, (its) military sources (said) NATO discontinued its air strikes against Libyan pro-government targets in Tripoli and other places. (Though unannounced, it signaled) that 15,000 flight missions (actually 15,308 through July 15) and 6,000 (actually 5,767 through July 15) bombardments of Qaddafi targets had failed to achieve their object."
In fact, NATO's web site (http://www.aco.nato.int/page424201235.aspx) states the following:
For July 9: 112 sorties conducted, including 48 strike missions;
For July 10: 139 sorties conducted, including 54 strike missions;
For July 11: 132 sorties conducted, including 49 strike missions;
For July 12: 127 sorties conducted, including 35 strike missions;
For July 13: No data posted. The above pattern likely continued.
For July 14: 132 sorties conducted, including 48 strike missions.
For July 15: 115 sorties conducted, including 46 strike missions.
Reporting from Tripoli on July 17, Middle East/Central Asian analyst Mahdi Nazemroaya emailed that "(l)ast night was very bad here. They bombed like crazy and everything was shaking."
He elaborated in a Global Research.ca article, accessed through the following link:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=25658
Calling it an overnight "Blitzkrieg," he cited "large explosions....heard in the distance. Multiple urban areas were bombed simultaneously this morning."
According to eyewitnesses, about 60 - 75 bombs hit Tajura (14 km east of Tripoli) and the city's Seraj area. Continuing a regular pattern, civilian targets were struck, including residential areas. On July 16, Libyan state television reported mostly civilian casualties without specific numbers.
So far, in fact, for every combatant death, 10 civilians have been killed as a result of non-military sites struck, including residential neighborhoods.
Over night near bombing areas, "it was like an earthquake. Large buildings as far away as Al-Fatah Street....were shaking."
July 16 strikes, however, differed from previous ones. Burning smells and "a strange smoldering filled the air" and lingered. "It even remained on the skin (after) the bombings....The sounds (and smoke plumes) were different."
After previous bombings, smoke rose vertically "like a fire, but tonight (it was white and) horizontal....hovering above Tripoli."
One explosion caused "a huge mushroom cloud, pointing to the possible use of (nuclear) bunker buster bombs." Within a 15 km radius of targets, people "experienced burning eyes, lower back pain, (and) headaches," unexplained symptoms not previously felt.
Last week, in fact, Libya's prosecutor general Mohammed Zikri al-Mahjoubi accused NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen of war crimes, saying he'll be criminally charged with:
"deliberate aggression against innocent civilians, the murder of children, as well as trying to overthrow the Libyan regime....(He's) responsible (for) attack(ing) unarmed people, killing 1,108 and wounding 4,537 others in bombardment of Tripoli and other cities and villages."
He also charged him with trying to murder Gaddafi.
On July 14, Rasmussen tried having it both ways, "encouraging all allies that have aircraft at their disposal to take part in operation," while calling for a pro-Western political solution Libyans won't accept, nor should they.
A Final Comment
Securing imperial control is the issue, an objective putting America at odds with millions of Libyans determined to resist and prevail.
In fact, Washington's strategy may have backfired. Most Libyans united behind Gaddafi, together with regional and other allies, including China and Russia (for their own strategic interests), against exploitive Western "liberation."
Though no end of conflict is imminent, perhaps this time people power may triumph. If so, the message to other imperial victims is don't quit. Struggling long enough to prevail at times succeeds. Maybe this time for Libyans.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
posted by Steve Lendman @ 12:47 AM
Saturday, November 22, 2008
On The Slogan-Independence For Kosovo
Commentary
Last month as part of my commemoration piece on the anniversary of the great Chinese Revolution of October 1949 (See The Heroic Age Of The Chinese Revolution, October 26, 2008.) I mentioned that the thorny question of militants supporting and raising the call for the right of national self-determination in the pre-revolutionary period in China before 1949 was filled with potholes. Clearly up until 1941 this question was fairly simple in the fight against Japanese imperialism that had been waged for most of the 1930’s. That situation got much dicier once the Chinese fight became a part of the inter-imperialist war in the Pacific between American and Japan. More so when Chiang Kai-shek (old style) and his KMT forces subordinated themselves under American military command. (The question of the Chinese Red Army organized as the Fourth and Eight Route Armies that did not do so is a separate question).
I also mentioned in that commentary that I believed, and still believe, that in light of my readings on the Chinese application of the right to national self-determination under conditions of military subordination to imperialist policy the question of whether we should have raised the slogan of independence for Kosovo earlier this year, given its still virtual position as a UN protectorate, has to be reevaluated. I repost that part of my commentary here believing this to be a still open question although I am more inclined today to say, at this preliminary point, that militants should not have raised nor today should raise this call. Comments, please.
From “The Heroic Age Of The Chinese Revolution, October 26, 2008.”
“Finally, while we are discussing the question of the national right to self-determination in its Chinese application I should mention that our support for, or call for that right is not absolute. The right to national self-determination is one of the more important rights associated with the bourgeois revolutions. Thus it is a democratic rather than an explicitly socialist demand. Our approach, as least as I have come to look at it in going over the checkered history of this question in the international working class movement, is to take the national question off the table and put the class question to the fore. Sometimes that axis does not come into play. In the Chinese context the early self-contained struggle against Japanese imperialism made it applicable.
Once the war in the Pacific turned into an inter-imperialist rivalry with the entry of the United States into the equation as de facto leader of Chinese military forces (through the personal agency of General Stilwell as symbolic figure of that transference) then for socialist purposes the national question was off the agenda. At that point one gets into a choice of which imperialist camp one wants to support. No thank you. In a further twist to the Chinese situation revolutionaries COULD support the CCP’s New Fourth Route and Eight Route Armies (essentially red armies) which were independently fighting the Japanese despite the formal arrangements with the KMT government.
All of this is by way of saying that this thorny question of the national right to self-determination is, with the delays and defeats of the socialist revolution, still with us. Case in point- Kosovo. Earlier this year I called fro independence for Kosovo as a reflection of that right to self-determination. After thinking about that situation in light of my recent reading of the Chinese situation in 1941, I am not at all sure that that was a correct call under the circumstances. In the abstract Kosovo certainly qualifies as a nation. Certainly, unless it separated from Serbia, the national question would trump the class question (and that does not exclude the national rights of those Serbians still in Kosovo). Thus, while it is not out of the question for revolutionaries to support the same national rights as the Western imperialists do (as is clearly the case here) the NATO factor as the de fact guarantor of Kosovar independence makes me extremely uneasy about that earlier call for independence. I think the better course is right now to support the “real” right to national self-determination in combination with a call for ALL NATO troops out of Kosovo now!”
Last month as part of my commemoration piece on the anniversary of the great Chinese Revolution of October 1949 (See The Heroic Age Of The Chinese Revolution, October 26, 2008.) I mentioned that the thorny question of militants supporting and raising the call for the right of national self-determination in the pre-revolutionary period in China before 1949 was filled with potholes. Clearly up until 1941 this question was fairly simple in the fight against Japanese imperialism that had been waged for most of the 1930’s. That situation got much dicier once the Chinese fight became a part of the inter-imperialist war in the Pacific between American and Japan. More so when Chiang Kai-shek (old style) and his KMT forces subordinated themselves under American military command. (The question of the Chinese Red Army organized as the Fourth and Eight Route Armies that did not do so is a separate question).
I also mentioned in that commentary that I believed, and still believe, that in light of my readings on the Chinese application of the right to national self-determination under conditions of military subordination to imperialist policy the question of whether we should have raised the slogan of independence for Kosovo earlier this year, given its still virtual position as a UN protectorate, has to be reevaluated. I repost that part of my commentary here believing this to be a still open question although I am more inclined today to say, at this preliminary point, that militants should not have raised nor today should raise this call. Comments, please.
From “The Heroic Age Of The Chinese Revolution, October 26, 2008.”
“Finally, while we are discussing the question of the national right to self-determination in its Chinese application I should mention that our support for, or call for that right is not absolute. The right to national self-determination is one of the more important rights associated with the bourgeois revolutions. Thus it is a democratic rather than an explicitly socialist demand. Our approach, as least as I have come to look at it in going over the checkered history of this question in the international working class movement, is to take the national question off the table and put the class question to the fore. Sometimes that axis does not come into play. In the Chinese context the early self-contained struggle against Japanese imperialism made it applicable.
Once the war in the Pacific turned into an inter-imperialist rivalry with the entry of the United States into the equation as de facto leader of Chinese military forces (through the personal agency of General Stilwell as symbolic figure of that transference) then for socialist purposes the national question was off the agenda. At that point one gets into a choice of which imperialist camp one wants to support. No thank you. In a further twist to the Chinese situation revolutionaries COULD support the CCP’s New Fourth Route and Eight Route Armies (essentially red armies) which were independently fighting the Japanese despite the formal arrangements with the KMT government.
All of this is by way of saying that this thorny question of the national right to self-determination is, with the delays and defeats of the socialist revolution, still with us. Case in point- Kosovo. Earlier this year I called fro independence for Kosovo as a reflection of that right to self-determination. After thinking about that situation in light of my recent reading of the Chinese situation in 1941, I am not at all sure that that was a correct call under the circumstances. In the abstract Kosovo certainly qualifies as a nation. Certainly, unless it separated from Serbia, the national question would trump the class question (and that does not exclude the national rights of those Serbians still in Kosovo). Thus, while it is not out of the question for revolutionaries to support the same national rights as the Western imperialists do (as is clearly the case here) the NATO factor as the de fact guarantor of Kosovar independence makes me extremely uneasy about that earlier call for independence. I think the better course is right now to support the “real” right to national self-determination in combination with a call for ALL NATO troops out of Kosovo now!”
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Independence For Kosovo!
As the fight for independence in Kosovo heats up with the recent parliamentary elections and the attempts by the Europeon Union and others to stall on this question I am reposting a recent commentary.
COMMENTARY
SUPPORT THE RIGHT OF NATIONAL SELF-DETERMINATIONS FOR THE KOSOVARS –UNITED NATIONS, NATO-OUT OF KOSOVO. SERBIA HANDS OFF KOSOVO!
In an irony that is probably wasted on both Democratic and Republican bourgeois politicians caught up in the midst of an Iraq War the justification for which the Bush Administration has declared as its objectives ‘peace, freedom, democracy’ and all kinds of other good things the question of Kosovo rates nothing but space on the back pages, if that. For those with short political memories a few years ago that was the American-led NATO air war against Serbia in ‘support’ of the besieged Kosovo Albanians. That too was supposedly fought under the democratic banner – yet today it still has not produced the national right to self-determination for the Kosovars that it was allegedly fought for. And the Kosovars are rightly mad as hell about it. If one will recall Serbia claimed (and still claims) Kosovo as part of historic Serbia. Like many another oppressor nation it plunged its jack boot into the predominantly Albanian province of Kosovo in an attempt to ‘ethnically cleanse’ that little trouble spot. The professed goal of the American-led NATO air war, a goal that was unquestioningly supported by these same Kosovar, was to ‘stop’ the genocide. Of course in that attempt NATO tried to bomb Serbia back to the Stone Age, and came close. Now almost eight years later the province is still part of Serbia, still administered by the United Nations and defended by NATO and the Kosovars are still no closer to real independence. If the Kosovars think that they were the witting or unwitting pawns in an international con game they are, of course, right. However, there is a lesson for leftists to be learned here, as well.
Let us be clear, socialists support the democratic right to national self-determination where the basis for a nation exists not as some supra-historical advance for humankind but as a way to take the national question off the agenda and place the class question to the fore. There are thus occasions where we do not raise that demand just as on other occasions we not only support the demand but call for independence. We call, for example, today for independence for Quebec. Kosovo calls for the same slogan as well. However, during the NATO air war, as I mentioned above, the main political organization of the time- the Kosovo Liberation Front- acted as direct military agents for those same NATO forces therefore subordinating themselves to an arm of international imperialism. At that point to invoke, as many on the international left did, the Kosovars’ right to self-determination, as the rationale for supporting the war against Serbia was incorrect. As witnessed by subsequent history that support moreover did not advance the Kosovo cause a step. An analogous situation to that of Kosovo then applies today in Kurdish Iraq. The Iraqi Kurds have voluntarily placed themselves and their militias under direct American military power and thus in Iraq we do not raise the call for the formation of an independent Kurdish state. But, as an indication of how complicated the dispersed Kurdish nation’s national self-determination question is (to speak nothing of other situations like the almost intractable Palestinian question) we certainly would today call for a separate Kurdish state in places like Turkey and Iran. More later. But for now- Independence for Kosovo! Serbia Hands Off!
COMMENTARY
SUPPORT THE RIGHT OF NATIONAL SELF-DETERMINATIONS FOR THE KOSOVARS –UNITED NATIONS, NATO-OUT OF KOSOVO. SERBIA HANDS OFF KOSOVO!
In an irony that is probably wasted on both Democratic and Republican bourgeois politicians caught up in the midst of an Iraq War the justification for which the Bush Administration has declared as its objectives ‘peace, freedom, democracy’ and all kinds of other good things the question of Kosovo rates nothing but space on the back pages, if that. For those with short political memories a few years ago that was the American-led NATO air war against Serbia in ‘support’ of the besieged Kosovo Albanians. That too was supposedly fought under the democratic banner – yet today it still has not produced the national right to self-determination for the Kosovars that it was allegedly fought for. And the Kosovars are rightly mad as hell about it. If one will recall Serbia claimed (and still claims) Kosovo as part of historic Serbia. Like many another oppressor nation it plunged its jack boot into the predominantly Albanian province of Kosovo in an attempt to ‘ethnically cleanse’ that little trouble spot. The professed goal of the American-led NATO air war, a goal that was unquestioningly supported by these same Kosovar, was to ‘stop’ the genocide. Of course in that attempt NATO tried to bomb Serbia back to the Stone Age, and came close. Now almost eight years later the province is still part of Serbia, still administered by the United Nations and defended by NATO and the Kosovars are still no closer to real independence. If the Kosovars think that they were the witting or unwitting pawns in an international con game they are, of course, right. However, there is a lesson for leftists to be learned here, as well.
Let us be clear, socialists support the democratic right to national self-determination where the basis for a nation exists not as some supra-historical advance for humankind but as a way to take the national question off the agenda and place the class question to the fore. There are thus occasions where we do not raise that demand just as on other occasions we not only support the demand but call for independence. We call, for example, today for independence for Quebec. Kosovo calls for the same slogan as well. However, during the NATO air war, as I mentioned above, the main political organization of the time- the Kosovo Liberation Front- acted as direct military agents for those same NATO forces therefore subordinating themselves to an arm of international imperialism. At that point to invoke, as many on the international left did, the Kosovars’ right to self-determination, as the rationale for supporting the war against Serbia was incorrect. As witnessed by subsequent history that support moreover did not advance the Kosovo cause a step. An analogous situation to that of Kosovo then applies today in Kurdish Iraq. The Iraqi Kurds have voluntarily placed themselves and their militias under direct American military power and thus in Iraq we do not raise the call for the formation of an independent Kurdish state. But, as an indication of how complicated the dispersed Kurdish nation’s national self-determination question is (to speak nothing of other situations like the almost intractable Palestinian question) we certainly would today call for a separate Kurdish state in places like Turkey and Iran. More later. But for now- Independence for Kosovo! Serbia Hands Off!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)