Won't Get Fooled Again?: The Truth Behind The Spanish American War (Video)

The Spanish American War had all the familiar elements of today's conflicts: A false flag event, bankers manipulating the presidency and pushing for war behind the scenes,  Rockefeller profiteering, and slick propaganda campaigns about "Spanish brutes" and "fighting for freedom and democracy."—James Perloff

Watching the Battle of Santiago from the deck of USS Iowa, July 3, 1898.
(Photo from Wikimedia Commons)

_________

James Perloff is interviewed by James Corbett

Although it gets short shrift in the history textbooks, in many ways the modern American empire can find its origins in the Spanish-American War. Today we talk to James Perloff of JamesPerloff.com about his article on the war, “Trial Run for Interventionism,” and how the bankers used their media and political connections to launch the war and introduce foreign interventionism to the American psyche.


SHOW NOTES:
JamesPerloff.com  

Interview 925 – James Perloff on “Truth Is A Lonely Warrior”

Trial Run for Interventionism

The Kuwaiti Incubator Babies – LIE

Susan Rice’s Viagra Hoax: The New Incubator Babies

“Facts and Fakes about Cuba” by George Bronson Rea

“America’s 60 Families” by Ferdinand Lundberg

“The Politics of War” by Walter Karp

“The Spanish War: An American Epic, 1898” by G.J.A. O’Toole

Reprinted with permission from The Corbett Report.

Countdown To Armageddon In Syria: Terror Supporting States of Saudi Arabia and Turkey Prepare to Invade Syria

Illustration by DonkeyHotey

A Dramatic Escalation Appears Imminent in Syria

By The Saker
The situation in Syria has reached a watershed moment and a dramatic escalation of the war appears imminent. Let’s look again at how we reached this point.

During the first phase of the operation, the Syrian armed forces were unable to achieve an immediate strategic success. This is rather unsurprising. It is important to remember here that during the first weeks of the operation the Russian did not provide close air support to the Syrians. Instead, they chose to systematically degrade the entire Daesh (Note: I refer to *all* terrorist in Syria as “Daesh”) infrastructure including command posts, communication nodes, oil dumps, ammo dumps, supply routes, etc. This was important work, but it did not have an immediate impact upon the Syrian military. Then the Russians turned to two important tasks: to push back Daesh in the Latakia province and to hit the illegal oil trade between Daesh and Turkey. The first goal was needed for the protection of the Russian task force and the second one hit the Daesh finances. Then the Russians seriously turned to providing close air support. Not only that, but the Russians got directly involved with the ground operation.

The second phase was introduced gradually, without much fanfare, but it made a big difference on the ground: the Russians and Syrians began to closely work together and they soon honed their collaboration to a quantitatively new level which allowed the Syrian commanders to use Russian firepower with great effectiveness. Furthermore, the Russians began providing modern equipment to the Syrians, including T-90 tanks, modern artillery systems, counter-battery radars, night vision gear, etc. Finally, according to various Russian reports, Russian special operations teams (mostly Chechens) were also engaged in key locations, including deep in the rear of Daesh. As a result, the Syrian military for the first time went from achieving tactical successes to operational victories: for the first time the Syrian began to liberate key towns of strategic importance.

Finally, the Russians unleashed a fantastically intense firepower on Daesh along crucial sectors of the front. In northern Homs, the Russians bombed a sector for 36 hours in a row. According to the latest briefing of the Russian Defense Ministry, just between February 4th and February 11th, the Russian aviation group in the Syrian Arab Republic performed 510 combat sorties and engaged 1,888 terrorists targets. That kind of ferocious pounding did produce the expected effect and the Syrian military began slowly moving along the Turkish-Syrian border while, at the same time, threatening the Daesh forces still deployed inside the northern part of Aleppo. In doing so, the Russians and Syrian threatened to cut off the vital resupply route linking Daesh to Turkey. According to Russian sources, Daesh forces were so demoralized that they forced the local people to flee towards the Turkish border and attempted to hide inside this movement of internally displaced civilians.

This strategic Russian and Syrian victory meant that all the nations supporting Daesh, including Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the USA were facing a complete collapse of their efforts to overthrow Assad and to break-up Syria and turn part of it into a “Jihadistan”. The Americans could not admit this, of course; as for the Saudis, their threats to invade Syria were rather laughable. Which left the main role to Erdogan who was more than happy to provide the West with yet another maniacal ally willing to act in a completely irresponsible way just to deny the “other side” anything looking like a victory.

Erdogan seems to be contemplating two options. The first one is a ground operation into Syria aimed at restoring the supply lines of Daesh and at preventing the Syrian military from controlling the border. Here is a good illustration (taken from a SouthFront video) of what this would look like:

According to various reports, Erdogan has 18,000 soldiers supported by aircraft, armor and artillery poised along the border to execute such an invasion.

The second plan is even simpler, at least in theory: to create a no-fly zone over all of Syria. Erdogan personally mentioned this option several times, the latest one on Thursday the 11th.

Needless to say, both plans are absolutely illegal under international law and would constitute an act of aggression, the “supreme international crime” according to the Nuremberg Tribunal, because “it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.” Not that this would deter a megalomaniac like Erdogan.
[...]

In purely military terms, Russia has taken a number of crucial steps: she declared a large scale “verification” of the “combat readiness” of the Southern and Central military districts. In practical terms, this means that all the Russian forces are on high alert, especially the AeroSpace forces, the Airborne Forces, the Military Transportation Aviation forces and, of course, all the Russian forces in Crimea and the Black Sea Fleet. The first practical effect of such “exercises” is not only to make a lot of forces immediately available, but it is also to make them very difficult to track. This not only protects the mobilized forces, but also makes it very hard for the enemy to figure out what exactly they are doing. There are also report that Russian Airborne Warning and Control (AWACS) aircraft – A-50M – are now regularly flying over Syria. In other words, Russia has taken the preparations needed to go to war with Turkey.

Needless to say, the Turks and the Saudis have also announced joint military exercises. They have even announced that Saudi aircraft will conduct airstrikes from the Incirlik air base in support of an invasion of Syria.

At the same time, the Russians have also launched a peace initiative centered around a general ceasefire starting on March 1st or even, according to the latest leaks, on February 15th. The goal is is transparent: to break the Turkish momentum towards an invasion of Syria. It is obvious that Russian diplomats are doing everything they can to avert a war with Turkey.

Here again I have to repeat what I have said already a million times in the past: the small Russian contingent in Syria is in a very precarious position: far away from Russia and very close (45km) to Turkey. Not only that, but the Turks have over 200 combat aircraft ready to attack, whereas the Russians probably has less than 20 SU-30/35/34s in total. Yes, these are very advanced aircraft, of the 4++ generation, and they will be supported by S-400 systems, but the force ratio remains a terrible 1:10.

Russia does, however, have one big advantage over Turkey: Russia has plenty of long-range bombers, armed with gravity bombs and cruise missiles, capable of striking the Turks anywhere, in Syria and in Turkey proper. In fact, Russia even has the capability to strike at Turkish airfields, something which the Turks cannot prevent and something which they cannot retaliate in kind for. The big risk for Russia, at this point, would be that NATO would interpret this as a Russian “aggression” against a member-state, especially if the (in)famous Incirlik air base is hit.

Erdogan also has to consider another real risk: that, while undoubtedly proficient, the Turkish forces might not be a match for the battle-hardened Kurds and Syrians, especially if the latter are supported by Iranian and Hezbollah forces. The Turks have a checkered record against the Kurds whom they typically do overwhelm with firepower and numbers, but whom they never succeeded in neutralizing, subduing or eliminating. Finally, there is the possibility that Russians might have to use their ground forces, especially if the task force in Khmeimim is really threatened.

Read More

Russia's Aleppo Gamble Pays Off: The West's Jihadi Mercenaries On Verge of Major Defeat in Syria

When it comes to ISIS, Jabhat Al-Nusra (Syrian Al-Qaeda group), Jaysh Al-Mujahiddeen, Harakat Nouriddeen Al-Zinki, and Harakat Ahrar Al-Sham, Russian leaders have repeatedly said that that they will not relent until the jihadists are either killed or captured. This is why Russia’s airstrikes continued during Geneva, because most of the fighters in Aleppo are dyed-in-the-wool terrorists.

Russia's President Putin has completely outmaneuvered Turkey, Saudi Arabia and President Obama's neocon
cronies. (Illustration by DonkeyHotey)

____________

Putin's Aleppo Gamble Pays Off

By Mike Whitney
Last week’s game-changing triumph in northern Syria has moved the Russian-led coalition to within striking distance of a decisive victory in Aleppo. After breaking a 40 month-long siege on the cities of Nubl and Zahra, the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) has encircled the country’s industrial hub and is gradually tightening the noose. Crucial supply-lines to the north have been cut leaving the Sunni extremists and anti-government militias stranded inside a vast, urban cauldron. It’s only a matter of time before these disparate renegades are either killed or forced to surrender. A victory in Aleppo will change the course of the war by restoring government control over the densely-populated western corridor. This is why the Obama administration is frantically searching for ways to either delay or derail the Russian-led juggernaut and avoid the impending collapse of US policy in Syria.

Recent peace talks in Geneva were convened with one goal in mind, to prevent Syrian President Bashar al Assad and loyalist forces from retaking Aleppo. The negotiations failed, however, when Washington’s mercurial allies, the so called “moderate” rebels, refused to participate. According to the Wall Street Journal, the Syrian opposition withdrew “under pressure from Saudi Arabia and Turkey, two of the main backers of the rebels.” The WSJ’s admission was later confirmed by Secretary of State John Kerry who according to a report in the Middle East Eye “blamed the Syrian opposition for leaving the talks and paving the way for a joint offensive by the Syrian government and Russia on Aleppo.”

“Don’t blame me,” Kerry said, “Blame the opposition. It was the opposition that didn’t want to negotiate and didn’t want a ceasefire, and they walked away.”

None of this will surprise readers who followed the talks closely. The meetings were surrounded by confusion from the very onset. The US delegation headed by Kerry was focused entirely on reaching an agreement that would involve a ceasefire and stop the government-led onslaught. The Saudis, Turks and opposition leaders, however, were on a different page altogether. They seemed oblivious to the dire situation on the ground where their jihadist foot soldiers were taking heavier losses by the day. Kerry, the realist, was looking for a way to stand-down and save US-backed militants from certain annihilation. But the Saudis and Turks felt they had a strong-enough hand to make demands. The clash in viewpoints was bound to produce disappointing results, which it did. The meetings were cancelled before they even began. Nothing was settled. Here’s more from the WSJ:

“About a half-dozen cities and towns targeted in the new regime offensives have one thing in common: All were held by a mix of Islamist and moderate rebel groups funded and armed by Saudi Arabia and Turkey. Complicating the picture is that some, but not all, of these groups collaborate with the al Qaeda-linked Nusra Front. That gives the regime and its allies fodder for their claim that they are fighting terrorism.”

(“Saudi Arabia, Turkey Pushed Syrian Opposition to Leave Talks“, Wall Street Journal)

This should dispel any illusion that that the fighters that are trying to topple the government are merely disgruntled nationalists determined to remove an “evil dictator”. That is not the case at all. While there are a fair amount of indigenous insurgents, the bulk of fighters are Sunni extremists bent on removing Assad and creating an Islamic Caliphate. This is why Moscow refused to implement a ceasefire during the talks in Geneva. Russia adamantly opposes any remedy that allows internationally-recognized terrorists from escaping their eternal reward.

Kerry has deliberately misled the public on this matter. Just last week, he said, “Russia has indicated to me very directly they are prepared to do a ceasefire… The Iranians confirmed in London just a day and a half ago they will support a ceasefire now.”

This is false and Kerry knows it. Moscow has tried to be flexible about other so called “moderate” opposition forces, but when it comes to ISIS, Jabhat Al-Nusra (Syrian Al-Qaeda group), Jaysh Al-Mujahiddeen, Harakat Nouriddeen Al-Zinki, and Harakat Ahrar Al-Sham, Russian leaders have repeatedly said that that they will not relent until the jihadists are either killed or captured. This is why Russia’s airstrikes continued during Geneva, because most of the fighters in Aleppo are dyed-in-the-wool terrorists.

It’s worth noting that the Russian-led military offensive clearly hews to UN resolution 2254 which states:

… for Member States to prevent and suppress terrorist acts committed specifically by Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant, Al-Nusra Front (ANF), and all other individuals, groups, undertakings, and entities associated with Al Qaeda or ISIL, and other terrorist groups, […] and to eradicate the safe haven they have established over significant parts of Syria, and notes that the aforementioned ceasefire will not apply to offensive or defensive actions against these individuals, groups, undertakings and entities, as set forth in the 14 November 2015 ISSG Statement.” (Thanks to Moon of Alabama)

In other words, Moscow is not going to comply with any ceasefire that spares homicidal jihadists or undermines UN resolution 2254. Russian military operations are going to continue until ISIS, al Nusra and the other terrorist militias are defeated.

Read More

"The Australian Dream Is Rooted In Racism" — Debate (Video)

Is Australia really a multicultural safe haven of equal opportunity? Or is racism more prevalent than ever before? Stan Grant took to the stage for the last IQ2* debate of 2015. His speech is widely acknowledged to be one of the most powerful ever heard at IQ2.

Indigenous Australians. (Photo by Global Panorama)

*Intelligence Squared is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization. Intelligence Squared U.S. was founded in 2006 to restore civility, reasoned analysis, and constructive public discourse to today’s often biased media landscape.

___________

___________

Racism is Destroying the Australian Dream: Full Debate at IQ2

Australia’s Day for Secrets, Flags and Cowards — The Slaughter of the Aborigines

The only island continent on earth was taken from its inhabitants; the euphemism was “settled”. It was, wrote Henry Reynolds, one of few honest Australian historians, one of the greatest land grabs in world history. He described the slaughter that followed as “a whispering in our hearts”.

British colonizers brought disease and genocide to an Island off the coast of Australia called Tasmania in 1803. There were as many as 15,000 Aboriginals on the island at the time. By the 1860's only four Tasmanians were left on Tasmania.  Truganini (above) was thought to have been the last full-blooded Tasmanian when she died but about four others (including Fanny Cochrane Smith) were eventually discovered living on other islands. After she died Truganini's bones were dug up and placed on display against her expressed wishes. A century later, Truganini's remains were finally cremated and scattered according to her wishes.

By John Pilger
On 26 January, one of the saddest days in human history will be celebrated in Australia. It will be “a day for families”, say the newspapers owned by Rupert Murdoch. Flags will be dispensed at street corners and displayed on funny hats. People will say incessantly how proud they are.

__________

The Voice of Fanny Cochrane Smith, now considered the last Tasmanian.
When she did the Tasmanian language died  with her.

__________

For many, there is relief and gratitude. In my lifetime, non-indigenous Australia has changed from an Anglo-Irish society to one of the most ethnically diverse on earth. Those we used to call “New Australians” often choose 26 January, “Australia Day”, to be sworn in as citizens. The ceremonies can be touching. Watch the faces from the Middle East and understand why they clench their new flag.

It was sunrise on 26 January so many years ago when I stood with Indigenous and non Indigenous Australians and threw wreaths into Sydney Harbour. We had climbed down to one of the perfect sandy coves where others had stood as silhouettes, watching as the ships of Britain’s “First Fleet” dropped anchor on 26 January, 1788. This was the moment the only island continent on earth was taken from its inhabitants; the euphemism was “settled”. It was, wrote Henry Reynolds, one of few honest Australian historians, one of the greatest land grabs in world history. He described the slaughter that followed as “a whispering in our hearts”.

Aborigine at Echo Point, Katoomba (Australia). (Photo by Steve Austin)

The original Australians are the oldest human presence. To the European invaders, they did not exist because their continent had been declared terra nullius: empty land. To justify this fiction, mass murder was ordained. In 1838, the Sydney Monitor reported: “It was resolved to exterminate the whole race of blacks in that quarter.” This referred to the Darug people who lived along the great Hawkesbury River not far from Sydney. With remarkable ingenuity and without guns, they fought an epic resistance that remains almost a national secret. In a land littered with cenotaphs honouring Australia’s settler dead in mostly imperial wars, not one stands for those warriors who fought and fell defending Australia.

This truth has no place in the Australian consciousness. Among settler nations with indigenous populations, apart from a facile “apology” in 2008, only Australia has refused to come to terms with the shame of its colonial past. A Hollywood film, Soldier Blue, in 1970 famously inverted racial stereotypes and gave Americans a glimpse of the genocide in their own mythical “settlement”. Almost half a century later, it is fair to say an equivalent film would never be made in Australia.

In 2014, when my own film, Utopia, which told the story of the Australian genocide, sought a local distributor, I was advised by a luminary in the business: “No way I could distribute this. The audiences wouldn’t accept it.”

He was wrong — up to a point. When Utopia opened in Sydney a few days before 26 January, under the stars on vacant land in an Indigenous inner-city area known as The Block, more than 4,000 people came, the majority non-Indigenous. Many had travelled from right across the continent. Indigenous leaders who had appeared in the film stood in front of the screen and spoke in “language”: their own. Nothing like it had happened before. Yet, there was no press. For the wider community, it did not happen. Australia is a murdochracy, dominated by the ethos of a man who swapped his nationality for the Fox Network in the US.

The star Indigenous AFL footballer Adam Goodes wrote movingly to the Sydney Morning Herald demanding that “the silence is broken”. “Imagine,” he wrote, “watching a film that tells the truth about the terrible injustices committed against your people, a film that reveals how Europeans, and the governments that have run our country, have raped, killed and stolen from your people for their own benefit.

“Now imagine how it feels when the people who benefited most from those rapes, those killings and that theft – the people in whose name the oppression was done – turn away in disgust when someone seeks to expose it.”

Goodes himself had already broken a silence when he stood against racist abuse thrown at him and other Indigenous sportspeople. This courageous, talented man retired from football last year as if under a cloud — with, wrote one commentator, “the sporting nation divided about him”. In Australia, it is respectable to be “divided” on opposing racism.

On Australia Day 2016– Indigenous people prefer Invasion Day or Survival Day– there will be no acknowledgement that Australia’s uniqueness is its first people, along with an ingrained colonial mentality that ought to be an abiding embarrassment in an independent nation. This mentality is expressed in a variety of ways, from unrelenting political groveling at the knee of a rapacious United States to an almost casual contempt for Indigenous Australians, an echo of “kaffir”-abusing South Africans.

Read More

America's Human Rights Violators Free to Roam, Write Books, Do Lectures — While Guatamala's Face Trial

Today you have Donald Trump and Ted Cruz competing over how horrible America's torture will be if they get elected - That's because generations of American human rights violators have gone free after they instituted their own programs of assassination, kidnapping and torture.

Top Row, From Left: Byron Diaz, Pablo Mérida, César Morales, Manuel Garcia, and Carlos  López - all recently arrested in Guatemala for human rights violations dating as far back as the 1970's and 80's, including mass murder and torture. Bottom Row, From Left: John Negroponte, James Steele, Henry Kissinger, Dick Cheney, George H. Bush - just a few of the Americans involved in human rights violations in Latin America (including Guatemala) and present-day depredations, and all of whom are walking around free with no fear of prosecution.—Ronald David Jackson

18 Former Guatemalan Military Officers Arrested for Crimes Against Humanity

By Annie Bird
Guatemalan authorities have arrested at least 18 high-ranking Guatemalan military officers yesterday on charges of crimes against humanity and forced disappearance, according to local press reports.

The arrests include retired generals Benedicto Lucas Garcia, head of the military under his now-deceased brother and former dictator Romeo Lucas Garcia, and Manuel Antonio Callejas y Callejas, long known for his high-level positions during the dirty war and his concurrent management of organized crime networks.

The crimes with which they are charged were part of operations conducted from a military base in the department of Coban between 1981 and 1988, including acts that formed part of the Maya Achi genocide. Exhumations at the base in 2012 recovered remains from over 550 victims–a fraction of the tens of thousands of killings the military is believed to have conducted in Alta and Baja Verapaz from that base but an important step in gathering evidence.

Arrests are ongoing. In a press conference Jan. 6, prosecutors declined to provide specific information regarding pending warrants. Journalists suggested that as many as 25 warrants exist. Initial hearings are expected to begin this Friday. There is no possibility of release pending trial on these charges.

These prosecutions are the result of over 20 years of efforts by the victims, coupled with hard-fought gains in cleaning up corruption in the justice system promoted by human rights and judicial reform activists. ADIVIMA, the association of Maya Achi genocide victims, is a co-complainant in the prosecution, along with the national victims associations, the Association of Relatives of the Detained/Disappeeared in Guatemala (FAMDEGUA) and the Mutual Support Group (GAM).

Unearthing Crimes of the Past and Present

The retired general who was in charge of the Coban base during much of the violence, Ricardo Mendez Ruiz, would undoubtedly have been among those arrested today had he not died on January 1, 2016. Mendez Ruiz maintained a high profile in Guatemala over the past several years due to the activities of his son of the same name. The younger Ricardo Mendez Ruiz is director of the Foundation Against Terrorism, which has promoted malicious legal complaints against those pursuing justice for the crimes committed during Guatemala’s dirty war–a form of political persecution backed by influential retired military officers.

[...]

Concern for the safety of those pursuing justice in Guatemala is heightened as the incoming president, Jimmy Morales, a founder of the National Convergence Front (FCN) party, is set to take office on January 14. Guatemala’s last elected president, Otto Perez Molina, was forced to resign in September 2015 to face corruption charges, and his party, the Partido Patriota (PP), partially collapsed in the scandal. Analysts described the FCN as the Plan B for the political networks that formerly backed the PP. The FCN and PP are both dominated by retired military officers.

The newly elected congress convened its first session yesterday. On the first day of the lawmakers four-year term, Congress was asked by prosecutors to impeach the newly elect FCN congressman and former military officer, Edgar Justino Ovalle Maldonado, so he can face charges of crimes against humanity and forced disappearance.

Concerns over the safety of justice advocates have heightened since the arrests. The former military men arrested today have close ties to Guatemala’s organized crime networks. Criminal groups in complicity with politicians operate regionally in Central America’s “Northern Triangle” of Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador, and are largely responsible for some of the highest murder rates in the world.

Read More

WHO Created the Taliban, Al Qaeda and ISIS? — The Answers Might Shock You (Video)

Ibrahim al-Badri (Top: foreground on the left) with whom senator John McCain is talking. After his return from his surprise trip to Syria, McCain claimed that all those responsible for the Free Syrian Army were "moderates who can be trusted." Ibrahim al-Badri (aka Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi: Bottom Left) would later announce the formation of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and installed himself as the "Caliph." Bottom Right: The "Inventor" of the Taliban, Zbigniew Brzezinski (President Jimmie Carter's National Security Adviser and author of The Grand Chessboard), speaks with one of his most famous protégées, Osama bin Laden, who he used to coordinate a proxy war against the Soviet presence in Afghanistan and who would become "leader" of Al Qaeda.—Ronald David Jackson

______________

The ISIS Conspiracy — Part 1: Origins

In the first part of a series, Brandon Martinez of Non-Aligned Media unravels the murky origins of ISIS and unveils how the group’s meteoric rise in Iraq and Syria is a continuation of US psychological warfare designed to facilitate the Zionist-Neocon agenda of toppling seven sovereign Middle Eastern and North African States.

______________

The ISIS Conspiracy — Part 2: US-Israeli-Saudi Intrigue

In part 2 of the “ISIS Conspiracy” series, Brandon Martinez of Non-Aligned Media unravels the intricate web of deceit and double-dealing that lies behind the manufactured ISIS phenomenon, and shows how the US and Israel have for decades plotted behind the scenes to implode the Middle East.

RELATED STORY: CONFIRMED -- US Predicted the Influx of Islamist Mercenaries into Syria Could Lead To ISIS and a 'Caliphate' — Document

They Are Called 'Neo-Cons' — But Are They In Fact Neo-Nazis?: A List of the Deadly Neoconservatives

They were responsible for the invasion of Iraq under false pretenses, the destruction of the secular nations of Iraq, Libya and now Syria and the rise of ISIS. Seven Middle Eastern governments were originally targeted. Their goal is the demolition of the secular Middle Eastern nationalist governments and replacing them with multiple weak, fanatical, infighting Islamic fiefdoms. Mostly for the sake of Israel. They were also recently responsible for the violent neo-Nazi overthrow of the elected government of Ukraine which led to its split into three pieces.
—Ronald David Jackson

The Deadly List
Click on any of the names below for a bio.

Elliott Abrams (PNAC) * Ken Adelman Richard Armitage (PNAC) John David Ashcroft Fred Barnes Gary Bauer William J. Bennett (PNAC)	Jeffrey Bergner (PNAC) John Bolton (PNAC) Max Boot Ellen Bork Paul Bremer Lewis Paul "Jerry" Bremer III David Brooks Shoshana Bryen	Stephen D. Bryen Zbigniew Brzezinski Stephen A. Cambone Eliot A. Cohen Midge Decter Paula J. Dobriansky (PNAC) Thomas Donnelly John Doolittle
Douglas Jay Feith David Frum Francis Fukuyama (PNAC) Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. (PNAC) Reuel Marc Gerecht (PNAC) Newt Gingrich Joshua Goldberg	Owen Harries Bruce P. Jackson Michael Johns Robert Kagan (PNAC) Zalmay Khalilzad (PNAC) Jeane Kirkpatrick Henry Kissinger Neal Kozodoy Charles Krauthammer	Irving Kristol William Kristol (PNAC) Michael Arthur Ledeen Jay Lefkowitz I. Lewis Libby a.k.a. "Scooter" Michael H. Mobbs Joshua Muravchik Rupert Murdoch
Richard J. Neuhaus Michael Novak Victoria Nuland Martin Peretz Richard N. Perle (PNAC) Daniel Pipes Norman Podhoretz Howard Raines Peter W. Rodman (PNAC)	Karl Rove Donald H. Rumsfeld (PNAC) Richard Mellon Scaife Gary J. Schmitt William Schneider, Jr. (PNAC) Abram N. Shulsky Robert W. Tucker Harlan Ullman	Vin Weber (PNAC) Paul Dundes Wolfowitz (PNAC) R. James Woolsey, Jr. (PNAC) David Wurmser Meyrav Wurmser Dov Zakheim Karl Zinsmeister Robert B. Zoellick

*PNAC: Member of Project for the New American Century - The Neocon Think Tank that (just before the 9/11 attacks) called for a "new Pearl Harbor" to galvanize the American populace behind a new push for an ever-expanding global American empire.

_______________

Beware ‘Sunni-Stan’: Neocons are Back and Their ‘Vision’ is Darker than Ever

By Ramzy Baroud
John Bolton is a tarnished character. The once United States Ambassador to the United Nations is now promoted as a ‘scholar’ in the pro-Israel lobby group, the American Enterprise Institute (AEI).

RELATED STORY: Who Are The Neoconservatives?

Bolton is not a peacemaker, nor, in his defense, did he ever try to appear as if one. When he was appointed as the US Ambassador to the UN by George W. Bush, his stint lasted for only one year, starting August 2005. His time in this position was marked with discord and conflict. He stole the limelight with such statements as “The (UN) Secretariat building in New York has 38 stories. If it lost ten stories, it wouldn’t make a bit of difference.”

When the Iraq war failed to achieve any of its objectives, thus signaling an American retreat in the Middle East, neo-conservative politicians like Bolton retreated to their right-wing, neo-conservative institutions. Those who did not have one, established an organization of their own and began issuing press releases at random, hailing Israel at times, and chastising their President, Barack Obama, for one thing or another.

When the so-called ‘Arab Spring’ took place, neocons, like Bolton, saw in it an opportunity, but one that was difficult to discern. On one hand, they understood little of the mechanisms that propelled popular actions, for they are used to operate at the highest level of power with total disconnect from the people. On the other hand, it was clear for them from the start that Obama was taking no chances by stepping back into a Middle East quagmire that was originally designed by his predecessor.

Unable to affect much change in the region, as they once envisioned under the leadership of the likes of Richard Perle and his Project for the New American Century (PNAC), the neocons mounted a strategy predicated mostly on discrediting their administration’s lack of strategy.

In a sense the ‘Arab Spring’ invigorated the neocons, but also reminded them of their political impotence. Gone were the days of concocting foreign policies from neo-conservative think tanks such as the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), the Center for Security Policy (CSP) and the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), of which, among others, Perle is an active member.

In fact, Perle is quite a cherished member of the American Enterprise Institute, where Bolton often mounts his occasional articles in mainstream US media, offering a ‘vision’ regarding how to take on Iran, how to reform Arab states and how to redraw the map of the Middle East in ways that are conducive to US foreign policy interests.

The latest of such intellectual charges by Bolton was published in the New York Times on November 24. Under the title, “To Defeat ISIS, Create a Sunni State,” he theorized once more, raging against “Obama’s ineffective efforts” to destroy ISIS and demanding, instead, a “clear view shared by NATO allies.” The main drive behind his logic is that once ISIS is destroyed, the region that the militant group designated as a ‘state’ should be turned into a Sunni state, which, as a working title he called “Sunni-Stan.”

Bolton’s reasoning is as predictable as it is arrogant. It is predictable in the sense that, like other neocon initiatives in the past, it has no respect for the wishes of the people of the Middle East. His arguments are constructed upon the same world view that sees conflict as an opportunity, and warring nations as pawns in a larger game, aimed at subduing people to achieve ‘security’ and ‘stability’ for the US and its supposed allies.

It is also arrogant for the obvious reason that he believes the world should be designed to fit the narrow, self-serving and often violent visions of failed politicians like himself, who, alas, has access to the US’s most respected newspapers.

Bolton’s conceit has completely blinded him to the failures of the Bush administration and the entire collapse of the neo-conservative’s intellectual discourse during, and following the Iraq war. On the contrary, he is asking to repeat exactly what went wrong in Iraq.

“As we did in Iraq with the 2006 ‘Anbar Awakening,’ the counter-insurgency operation that dislodged Al Qaeda from its stronghold in that Iraqi province, we and our allies must empower viable Sunni leaders, including tribal authorities, who prize their existing social structure,” he wrote.

Only an unreasonable person cannot appreciate how the sectarian seed that the US has sowed in Iraq, based on the recommendations of the likes of Bolton, has resulted in the disfiguring of the Iraqi nation. This massive tampering with the social, cultural, religious and political fabric of society – by first empowering the Shia, oppressing the Sunni, then turning the Sunnis against one another, and so forth – has paved the way for unity among various Sunni groups, which ultimately formed ISIS.

It is the grand experimentations of Bolton and his peers that made ISIS the ‘state’ that it is today, which he is proposing to replace with yet another sectarian state, thus slicing up two Arab countries that were once the seats of the two most prominent Caliphate civilizations in history, the Abbasid and the Umayyad.

Read More

Iraq and Libya Was Invaded to Stop Them From Forcing Countries to Use Gold Instead of Dollars to Buy Oil (Video)

_________________

The American Liberal vs The Revolutionary: Exposing the Wolves in Sheep's Clothing

Liberals, despite their protestations, remain wedded to U.S. imperial rule in the world. They wish only that it morph into a kinder, gentler imperialism. A Revolutionary knows that the only way change will ultimately come is by way of a sustained social revolution, one that engages a critical mass to work collectively in dismantling injustice and oppression.”






By Solomon Comissiong

“Liberals will frequently use pronouns such as, ‘we’ or ‘our’ in reference to the United States' deadly militaristic actions.”

One of the many ways to easily tell the difference between an American "Liberal" and a Revolutionary-minded American is on the topic of war. Liberals will openly use money as a primary reason why they oppose the war. They say things like, "The financial costs associated with these wars are taking away much needed resources from our schools, public works and even health care!" This is very much true, however it is not the most important reason to oppose the United States' imperialist wars. The most important reason would be that these wars destroy innocent lives and decimate entire nations. These wars rip the lives of women, children, men and elderly off of the planet. The Liberal loves to speak about the financial costs of war, however what about the human costs of these wars of aggression? Ultimately the loss of life can never be paid back. And when it comes to the United States government, they routinely get the most “bang” for their buck, slaughtering innocent civilians wholesale. In the most duplicitous manner they call it “collateral damage,” however this is mass murder – plain and simple!

Revolutionary-minded Americans oppose the US government's wars because they are imperialist and because they destroy human lives, and destabilize entire nations. Ending these wars would save countless lives and would bring us one giant step closer to peace. Naturally, this would free up trillions of dollars that could also be used to save lives (healthcare) and to empower communities (i.e., universal education, livable wages, affordable housing). We must always be primarily motivated by humanity, not simply capital. Most Liberals fail in doing this because they, like their conservative counterparts, are also devoted capitalists. There is nothing revolutionary about capitalism. Capitalism is counter-revolutionary.

“We must always be primarily motivated by humanity, not simply capital.”

These Liberals will frequently use pronouns such as, "we" or "our" in reference to the United States' deadly militaristic actions. A Revolutionary knows that this government never asked their approval when making decisions to invade and bomb other countries. They know the US government does not represent their vested interests in peace, justice and humanity. The Revolutionary knows damn well that they oppose imperialism! The average Liberal is continually stuck in an emotional quagmire desperately wanting to believe that this is ‘their’ government and not a government of and for Plutocrats. They believe they can change society by reforming the US government. A Revolutionary knows that the only way change will ultimately come is by way of a sustained social revolution, one that engages a critical mass to work collectively in dismantling injustice and oppression. They then must build a new society (and government), upon a foundation that puts humanity first and people before profits. The Revolutionary also knows that they are citizens of the world, first, and not of the United States of Imperialism! The average American Liberal has been trained to see things radically different (and not in a good radical way). They are so polluted with Americanism; they are beholden to a set of fraudulent ideals they have been indoctrinated with since childhood. Humanity is much lower on their list of priorities than their manufactured nationalism.

“Liberals scorned Bush for his war crimes, however they champion Obama’s wars, aggression and mass murder.”

The American Liberal is often a willing cheerleader for imperialism, so long as a Democrat is orchestrating that war. We need to look no further than the most recent historical example with US president Barack Obama. Since becoming president of the United States Empire, Obama has launched numerous drone strikes (far more than George W. Bush), and vastly expanded the theater of war, bombing at least seven different nations. George W. Bush lied about Iraq as a justification to bomb, invade and destabilize that country. President Obama lied about Libya, stating Muammar Gaddafi was mass killing his people, as a justification to initiate a US and NATO led bombing campaign in the North African nation. Tens of thousands of people were killed as a result. Liberals scorned Bush for his war crimes, however they champion Obama’s wars, aggression and mass murder. Ostensibly the American Liberal adores imperialism so long as it is a Democrat overseeing it. It was doubly pathetic to witness countless African-Americans supporting, or remaining silent in regard to Obama’s imperialist actions. White liberals in Democratic Party clothing have politically domesticated African-Americans. African-Americans used to oppose the United States’ imperialist wars, however since the rise of Obama they now support them. Barack Obama was the white liberal’s most perfect Trojan horse.

The American Liberal is a fraud. And as Malcolm X admonished us, liberals are foxes in sheep clothing. It is especially important that people of color recognize this simple fact: Liberals/Democrats are not our friends anymore than Conservatives/Republicans are. It is long past due that more of us develop a more revolutionary-minded way of thinking. Our humanity depends on it.

“The white conservatives aren't friends of the Negro either, but they at least don't try to hide it. They are like wolves; they show their teeth in a snarl that keeps the Negro always aware of where he stands with them. But the white liberals are foxes, who also show their teeth to the Negro but pretend that they are smiling. The white liberals are more dangerous than the conservatives; they lure the Negro, and as the Negro runs from the growling wolf, he flees into the open jaws of the ‘smiling’ fox.”—Malcolm X

________________
Solomon Comissiong (www.solomoncomissiong.com) is an educator, community activist, author, and Founder of the Your World News Media Collective (www.yourworldnews.org). Solomon is the author of A Hip Hop Activist Speaks Out on Social Issues. Solomon is also the writer and producer of the documentary, Hip Hop, White Supremacy & Capitalism: Why Corporations Infiltrated RAP Music. He can be reached at: solo@yourworldnews.org

 Reprinted with permission from Black Agenda Report.

American Hell for Yemen: Americans 'Behave Like Zombified Cogs in an Imperial Death Machine'

The U.S.-spawned whirlwind of carnage and destruction has wrecked the societies of Iraq, Libya, Syria, Somalia and Yemen, yet most Americans feel themselves blameless. “The people, the corporate media and the political system all accept that their government has the right to intervene in the affairs of other nations and that it is always right and moral in its claims.” They behave like zombified cogs in an imperial death machine.





By Margaret Kimberley, BAR editor and senior columnist

“American imperialism and the war of terror unleashed on that region are ultimately at fault and continue to destroy nation after nation.”

The United States used the Al Anad airbase in Yemen as the staging area for drone attacks which killed some 1,000 people since 2009. Those crimes were committed under the guise of fighting terrorism but now that same place is the location of karmic justice for the American government and its ally, Saudi Arabia. United States Special Forces fled from Al Anad before it was overrun by Ansar Allah rebels, also known as the Houthis.

It is true that Saudi Arabia bombed Houthi positions and threatens to start a ground invasion with the help of Egypt. Both of these countries are American client states and would not contemplate these actions without having a green light from Washington.

The story of Yemen and the shifting international alliances which have brought it to civil war are somewhat complicated. The Houthis ousted the American and Saudi backed president Hadi who is now on the run. His predecessor, Ali Abdullah Saleh, was at one time also a Saudi favorite but is now leading the Houthi advance. While the details can be confusing, one thing is simple. American imperialism and the war of terror unleashed on that region are ultimately at fault and continue to destroy nation after nation.

In its zeal to have and maintain hegemony the United States resorts to brute force and supports others who do likewise. The result is dead bodies in Iraq, Libya, Syria, Somalia and Yemen, but the decisions that lead to these crimes are endemic to American policies.

“America fights with al Qaeda and ISIS in Syria but against those same two groups in Iraq.”

To say that Barack Obama and his Oval Office predecessors made a mess of the Middle East is the very definition of understatement. Because America’s goals are never benevolent its policies lurch from one awful decision to the next with human suffering being the only common denominator.

Washington used jihadists in Libya to overthrow the Gaddafi government only to have those same groups kill the American ambassador. Now the U.S. is fighting the same people it supported there just a few years ago. America fights with al Qaeda and ISIS in Syria but against those same two groups in Iraq. Washington eventually chose to accept the overthrow of Mubarak in Egypt but now supports the restoration of a dictatorial regime with another leader. The United States calls the president of Sudan a war criminal but now fights on the same side in Yemen. When imperialism is the intention, events will never turn out as predicted.

The chaos makes sense only when the true nature of American foreign policy is acknowledged. The shifting alliances and seemingly strange bedfellows are part of the longstanding doctrine of Manifest Destiny. Manifest Destiny asserts that the United States has the right to expand its reach anywhere it wants to. The term originally referred to the conquest of North America in the 19th century, but the thinking behind it is still a part of this country’s consciousness.

Most Americans know little or nothing about Yemen or Saudi Arabia, but still happily refer to themselves in the first person plural when speaking of their government. They ask, “What should ‘we’ do about Syria/Iraq/Yemen/Libya?”

“Manifest Destiny asserts that the United States has the right to expand its reach anywhere it wants to.”

While presidents go in and out of office, the people, the corporate media and the political system all accept that their government has the right to intervene in the affairs of other nations and that it is always right and moral in its claims. The numbers of Americans who question whether Barack Obama ought to be in the business of ousting the president of Syria or supporting the president of Ukraine are quite slim.

The examples of foolish decisions are endless. President Reagan made deals with Iran but then instigated an Iraqi attack on Iran. Later the U.S. attacked Iraq in two different wars. The destruction of that country led to a brutal sectarian war, and to the rise of the Houthis in Yemen.

Yemen is now the epicenter of imperialism run amuck. The Saudis fear that the Shi’a Houthis will be supported by their rival Iran, which the United States now wants to come to terms with in nuclear energy negotiations. Saudi Arabia is therefore on the side of Israel in attempting to scuttle any agreement. There is still no honor among all the thieves.

Whatever policy decisions Washington chooses to make will result in unintended consequences and more violence. Every escalation brings greater danger and America still has no rival for bringing destruction to millions of people. Violence and chaos have become not just the means to certain ends, but ends in and of themselves. That is just how America rolls.

______________
Margaret Kimberley's Freedom Rider column appears weekly in BAR, and is widely reprinted elsewhere. She maintains a frequently updated blog as well as at http://freedomrider.blogspot.com. Ms. Kimberley lives in New York City, and can be reached via e-Mail at Margaret.Kimberley(at)BlackAgendaReport.com.

 Reprinted with permission from Black Agenda Report.

Obama Is Surrounded by War Mongering Psychos: He Could Have Dumped The Left-Over Neocons As Soon As He Was Elected — He Didn't

Obama Surrounds Himself With Neocons and Other Hawkish Lunatics

Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland. The
neocon helped engineer the overthrow of an elected government in Ukraine and helped
hand-pick the leader of the post-coup government. (State Department Photo)

By John Rachel
People often don't see the obvious.

I constantly get criticized for maintaining that Obama is a warmonger. The president's actions are proof positive: His escalating of the war in Afghanistan, his engineering the destruction of Libya, his manufacturing the crisis in Ukraine, his demonizing Putin and resurrecting the Cold War with Russia, his infamous kill lists and callous use of drones in countries like Pakistan and Yemen.

RELATED: The Neocons — Masters of Chaos - They Didn't Go Away With Bush. They're Thoroughly Embedded in the Obama Administration

Most recently, there was his request for unlimited war powers, a new AUMF, a shrewdly and deceptively worded legislative authorization which allows him to attack any country, anywhere on the earth, targeting individuals, groups and nations which he alone decides are deserving of some tough love __ aka annihilation by military force.

If this weren't incriminating enough, just look at the people he is surrounded by.

First, the hard-core psychopaths . . .

Ashton Carter is Obama's new Secretary of Defense. He wants confrontation with Russia; advocates a "preventive war" on North Korea, i.e. blow them to kingdom come now rather than later; and thinks we need to mount an aggressive campaign to fight ISIS. I guess he finds it easy to overlook the fact that our other aggressive campaigns created ISIS, that they are using the armaments we introduced into the region for their aggressive campaign, that every aggressive campaign we have mounted in the Middle East has recruited more fanatics and terrorists, a fact which has been verified by our own security agencies. Carter is an unapologetic proponent of projecting America's military across the globe, without respect for the national interests of any other sovereign powers and without patience for the niceties of diplomacy.

RELATED STORY: Welcome to Nulandistan - Obama Neo-Con Victoria Nuland Engineers Bloody Coup Then Handpicks Ukraine's New President - How She Did It (Video)

James Clapper is Director of National Intelligence, and is by any measure Spy-Master-In-Chief. He recently distinguished himself by lying under oath to the U.S. Congress, evidence that he believes that as head of a major law enforcement agency, he himself is above the law. Like other neocon exceptionalists, he believes the U.S. itself is above the law, thus entitled to ignore treaties, international legal precedents, and anything America finds bothersome. He recently threw his flaming hat into the ring of international politics by advocating sending lethal weapons to Ukraine, violating the terms of the Minsk II agreement which is offering some hope for the end of the bloody conflict, and more destructively, antagonizing Russia, which has over the past year worked relentlessly to broker peace there. But why would Clapper want peace? That might end up reducing his bloated share of the federal budget.

Victoria Nuland is Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs and married to Robert Kagan, one of the founders of the neocon Project for the New American Century. She was instrumental in turning the Maidan demonstrations into a full-blown coup, an illegal, violent overthrow of the admittedly corrupt but still democratically elected government. She continues to sabotage any hope for a negotiated solution to the crisis she helped to orchestrate and create. She is virulently anti-Russian and militantly in favor of dismembering the country to expedite the control and plundering of Russia's abundant natural resources, as well as those of the Ukraine, for the benefit of American-backed banks and corporations.

General Philip M. Breedlove, is the current Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) of NATO Allied Command Operations. He has had a remarkable career indeed, but his recent detachment from reality and delusions of grandeur have made him the major proponent for war on Russia in the E.U. theater of command. His constant spewing of venomous anti-Russian rhetoric and wild claims have made him both a laughingstock and a thorn in the side of the saner members of the European community, who for some reason don't want Europe to become an incinerated pile of rubble in service to the American dream of world hegemony. If Russian troops and equipment had invaded Ukraine as many times as General Breedlove has claimed __ against all evidence to the contrary __ half of the Russian military would be set up in vast emplacements visible from the moon with a cheap pair of binoculars. But you know those cagey Russians! They made everything invisible! They're there! Really. Just ask Breedlove.

U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt is a California guy with a very shallow, checkered career in the diplomatic services, which makes him the perfect tool to go about the business of spreading propaganda, sidling up to chocolate king Petro Poroshenko __ current President of Ukraine __ for photo ops and general glad-handing, and promoting the depraved neocon agenda, unburdened by a comprehension of the complexities of international relations, indifferent to the human suffering being inflicted on citizens in the East of the country, and cavalier about the potential for nuclear war the machinations of the U.S. is creating. Snatching war and death from the jaws of peace and harmony? All in a days work!


Then, there are those without official neocon credentials but who embrace undisguised bullying and unrestrained militarism.

Samantha Power, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, seemed over the course of much of her career to have her heart in the right place. She cared so much about victims of genocide, she even wrote a Pulitzer Prize-winning book about it, A Problem From Hell: America and the Age of Genocide. She has stood strong for religious freedom, human rights, women's and LGBT rights, and campaigned against human trafficking and for protection of refugees and religious minorities.

Read More