Russia In The Cross Hairs. Washington’s Threats have moved Into the Realm of Insanity

RT has a large Western audience. The contrast between RT’s truthful reporting and the lies spewed by US media is undermining Washington’s control of the explanation. This is no longer acceptable.

Ashkenazi Jew, Andrew Lack, newly-appointed chief of US Broadcasting Board of Governors.

Andrew Lack (Reuters / Phil McCarten)

by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts
Crosspost with PaulCraigRoberts.org and Veterans Today

[dropcap]Washington’s[/dropcap] attack on Russia has moved beyond the boundary of the absurd into the realm of insanity.

The New Chief of the US Broadcasting Board of Governors, Andrew Lack, has declared the Russian news service, RT, which broadcasts in multiple languages, to be a terrorist organization equivalent to Boko Haram and the Islamic State, and Standard and Poor’s just downgraded Russia’s credit rating to junk status.


Today RT International interviewed me about these insane developments.

In prior days when America was still a sane country, Lack’s charge would have led to him being laughed out of office. He would have had to resign and disappear from public life. Today in the make-believe world that Western propaganda has created, Lack’s statement is taken seriously. Yet another terrorist threat has been identified–RT. (Although both Boko Haram and the Islamic State employ terror, strictly speaking they are political organizations seeking to rule, not terror organizations, but this distinction would be over Lack’s head. Yes, I know. There is a good joke that could be made here about what Lack lacks. Appropriately named and all that.)

Nevertheless, whatever Lack might lack, I doubt he believes his nonsensical statement that RT is a terrorist organization. So what is his game?

The answer is that the Western presstitute media by becoming Ministries of Propaganda for Washington, have created large markets for RT, Press TV, and Al Jazeera. As more and more of the peoples of the world turn to these more honest news sources, Washington’s ability to fabricate self-serving explanations has declined.

RT in particular has a large Western audience. The contrast between RT’s truthful reporting and the lies spewed by US media is undermining Washington’s control of the explanation. This is no longer acceptable.

Lack has sent a message to RT. The message is: pull in your horns; stop reporting differently from our line; stop contesting the facts as Washington states them and the presstitutes report them; get on board or else.

In other words, the “free speech” that Washington and its EU, Canadian, and Australian puppet states tout means: free speech for Washington’s propaganda and lies, but not for any truth. Truth is terrorism, because truth is the major threat to Washington.


Russia is in grave danger. Russians are relying on facts, and Washington is relying on propaganda. For Washington, facts are not relevant. Russian voices are small compared to Western voices.


Washington would prefer to avoid the embarrassment of actually shutting down RT as its UK vassal did to Press TV. Washington simply wants to shut up RT. Lack’s message to RT is: self-censure.

In my opinion, RT already understates in its coverage and reporting as does Al Jazeera. Both news organizations understand that they cannot be too forthright, at least not too often or on too many occasions.

I have often wondered why the Russian government allows 20 percent of the Russian media to function as Washington’s fifth column inside Russia. I suspect the reason is that by tolerating Washington’s blatant propaganda inside Russia, the Russian government hopes that some factual news can be reported in the US via RT and other Russian news organizations.

These hopes, like other Russian hopes about the West, are likely to be disappointed in the end. If RT is closed down or assimilated into the Western presstitute media, nothing will be said about it, but if the Russian government closes down Washington’s agents, blatant liars all, in the Russian media, we will hear forever about the evil Russians suppressing “free speech.” Remember, the only allowable “free speech” is Washington’s propaganda.

Only time will tell whether RT decides to be closed down for telling the truth or whether it adds its voice to Washington’s propaganda.

The other item in the interview was the downgrading of Russian credit to junk status.

Standard and Poor’s downgrade is, without any doubt, a political act. It proves what we already know, and that is that the American rating firms are corrupt political operations. Remember the Investment Grade rating the American rating agencies gave to obvious subprime junk? These rating agencies are paid by Wall Street, and like Wall Street they serve the US government.

A look at the facts serves to establish the political nature of the ruling. Don’t expect the corrupt US financial press to look at the facts. But right now, we will look at the facts.

Indeed, we will put the facts in context with the US debt situation.

According to the debt clocks available online, the Russian national debt as a percentage of Russian GDP is 11 percent. The American national debt as a percentage of US GDP is 105 percent, about ten times higher. My coauthors, Dave Kranzler, John Williams, and I have shown that when measured correctly, the US debt as a percent of GDP is much higher than the official figure.

The Russian national debt per capita is $1,645. The US national debt per capita is
$56,952.

The size of Russia’s national debt is $235 billion, less than one quarter of a trillion. The size of the US national debt is $18 trillion, 76.6 times larger than the Russian debt.

Putting this in perspective: according to the debt clocks, US GDP is $17.3 trillion and Russian GDP is $2.1 trillion. So, US GDP is 8 times greater than Russian GDP, but US national debt is 76.6 times greater than Russia’s debt.

Clearly, it is the US credit rating that should have been downgraded to junk status. But this cannot happen. Any US credit rating agency that told the truth would be closed and prosecuted. It wouldn’t matter what the absurd charges are. The rating agencies would be guilty of being anti-american, terrorist organizations like RT, etc. and so on, and they know it. Never expect any truth from any Wall Street denizen. They lie for a living.

According to this site: [1] the US owes Russia as of January 2013 $162.9 billion. As the Russian national debt is $235 billion, 69 percent of the Russian national debt is covered by US debt obligations to Russia.

If this is a Russian Crisis, I am Alexander the Great.

As Russia has enough US dollar holdings to redeem its entire national debt and have a couple hundred billion dollars left, what is Russia’s problem?

One of Russia’s problems is its central bank. For the most part, Russian economists are the same neoliberal incompetents that exist in the Western world. The Russian economists are enamored of their contacts with the “superior” West and with the prestige that they image these contacts give them. As long as the Russian economists agree with the Western ones, they get invited to conferences abroad. These Russian economists are de facto American agents whether they realize it or not.

Currently, the Russian central bank is squandering the large Russian holdings of foreign reserves in support of the Western attack on the ruble. This is a fools’ game that no central bank should play. The Russian central bank should remember, or learn if it does not know, Soros’ attack on the Bank of England.

Russian foreign reserves should be used to retire the outstanding national debt, thus making Russia the only country in the world without a national debt. The remaining dollars should be dumped in coordinated actions with China to destroy the dollar, the power basis of American Imperialism.

Alternatively, the Russian government should announce that its reply to the economic warfare being conducted against Russia by the government in Washington and Wall Street rating agencies is default on its loans to Western creditors. Russia has nothing to lose as Russia is already cut off from Western credit by US sanctions. Russian default would cause consternation and crisis in the European banking system, which is exactly what Russia wants in order to break up Europe’s support of US sanctions.

In my opinion, the neoliberal economists who control Russian economic policy are a much greater threat to the sovereignty of Russia than economic sanctions and US missile bases. To survive Washington, Russia desperately needs people who are not romantic about the West.

To dramatize the situation, if President Putin will grant me Russian citizenship and allow me to appoint Michael Hudson and Nomi Prins as my deputies, I will take over the operation of the Russian central bank and put the West out of operation.

But that would require Russia taking risks associated with victory. The Atlanticist Integrationists inside the Russian government want victory for the West, not for Russia. A country imbued with treason inside the government itself has a reduced chance against Washington, a determined player.

NGOS

Another fifth column operating against Russia from within are the US and German funded NGOs. These American agents masquerade as “human rights organizations,” as “women’s rights organizations,” as “democracy organizations,” and whatever other cant titles that serve in a politically correct age and are unchallengeable.

Yet another threat to Russia comes from the percentage of the Russian youth who lust for the depraved culture of the West. Sexual license, pornography, drugs, self-absorption. These are the West’s cultural offerings. And, of course, killing Muslims.

If Russians want to kill people for the fun of it and to solidify US hegemony over themselves and the world, they should support “Atlanticist integration” and turn their backs on Russian nationalism. Why be Russian if you can be American serfs?

What better result for the American neoconservatives than to have Russia support Washington’s hegemony over the world? That is what the neoliberal Russian economists and the “European Integrationists” support. These Russians are willing to be American serfs in order to be part of the West and to be paid well for their treason.

As I was interviewed about these developments by RT, the news anchor kept trying to confront Washington’s charges with the facts. It is astonishing that the Russian journalists do not understand that facts have nothing to do with it. The Russian journalists, those independent of American bribes, think that facts matter in the disputes about Russian actions. They think that the assaults on civilians by the American supported Ukrainian Nazis is a fact. But, of course no such fact exists in the Western media. In the Western media the Russians, and only the Russians, are responsible for violence in Ukraine.

neoconservatives-Neoconed1

Washington’s story line is that it is the evil Putin’s intent on restoring the Soviet Empire that is the cause of the conflict. This media line in the West has no relationship to any facts.

In my opinion, Russia is in grave danger. Russians are relying on facts, and Washington is relying on propaganda. For Washington, facts are not relevant. Russian voices are small compared to Western voices.

The lack of a Russian voice is due to Russia itself. Russia accepted living in a world controlled by US financial, legal, and telecommunication services. Living in this wold means that the only voice is Washington’s.

Why Russia agreed to this strategic disadvantage is a mystery. But as a result of this strategic mistake, Russia is at a disadvantage.

Considering the inroads that Washington has into the Russian government itself, the economically powerful oligarchs and state employees with Western connections, as well as into the Russian media and Russian youth, with the hundreds of American and German financed NGOs that can put Russians into the streets to protest any defense of Russia, Russia’s future as a sovereign country is in doubt.

The American neoconservatives are relentless. Their Russian opponent is weakened by the success inside Russia of Western cold war propaganda that portrays the US as the savior and future of mankind.

The darkness from Sauron America continues to spread over the world.

PCRoberts Book 1


Nothing is true, everything is permitted – the US establishment’s attack on RT

Bryan MacDonald is a Russia-based Irish journalist and media commentator who focuses on Russia and its hinterlands and international geo-politics.





 

[dropcap]The new chief [/dropcap]of the US Broadcasting Board of Governors stirred up a storm when he equated RT to two of the world’s most hideous terrorist organizations. While his comments were absolutely without justification, it could be part of a clever funding ploy.

“We are facing a number of challenges from entities like Russia Today which is out there pushing a point of view, the Islamic State in the Middle East and groups like Boko Haram” – Andrew Lack, the newly-appointed chief of the US Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG).

I swear this is not a misprint. The head of a notionally independent US federal agency, responsible for the supervision of all US government-funded international media actually said this in a New York Times interview. The BBG supervises US propaganda networks such as RFE/RL and the Voice of America and had a 2014 budget of $733 million. He believes that little RT (2014 budget $291 million) is not only an existential threat to the US media but he equates the danger it poses to that of barbarous terror organizations.

The US Secretary of State designates Boko Haram as a ‘Foreign Terrorist Organization’ and I’m not arguing with that. According to the UN, the Islamic State had murdered 24,000 innocent people by October 2014. What has RT done to deserve mention in the same breath as these groups? The answer to that is somewhere deep in the mind of Andrew Lack and a few, frankly, deranged neo-cons who often masquerade as ‘journalists.’

Russian perspective

RT was conceived as a method to give Russia’s point-of-view in the extremely crowded international media-landscape. Whilst once the US and UK (via the BBC) held a monopoly on English-language news information, this has changed markedly in the last decade. France 24, CCTV (China), Press TV (Iran) and Al Jazeera (Qatar) are just a few state-backed entities in a jam-packed marketplace.

There are manifold reasons for what makes RT a more frequent target of US bile than the others. Notably, the historic competition between Moscow and Washington for global favor and RT’s relative success compared to similar projects. While the other government funded stations have, largely, settled for a mixture of rolling news and advertorials about the host nation, RT has genuinely attempted to throw a few jabs at the media giants in the UK and America. To say they aren’t too fond of this is similar to arguing that dogs don’t like fleas.

The secret of this network’s, relative, success has been its willingness to focus on stories and topics that the mainstream are either disinterested in or ignore for commercial reasons or those of diktat. RT was already barely tolerated by the US elite as it devoted resources to covering ‘Occupy Wall Street’ and Guantanamo Bay and the like, but sections of the public were grateful for its efforts. However, in late 2013, the Ukraine crisis erupted and grudging sufferance swiftly vanished.

The ‘indispensable nation’

The US is not used to being challenged in its foreign policy adventures. From Vietnam right up to Iraq, the White House only had to worry about dissenting voices in its own domestic media. These ‘problems’ were relatively easy to deal with – a word in an ear here, a letter there. In Ukraine, it was a different story. There was a professional Russian-backed network with a team of talented journalists ready to challenge the US narrative.

In Yugoslavia, for example, the State Department was assured that TV viewers would only be told what suited its position. If RT didn’t exist, as many in the US establishment would prefer, the same would be true of Ukraine. However, RT’s presence ensures that coverage cannot be restricted to the DC Comics-style simplification of ‘goodies and baddies.’ Cable viewers now have access to information about atrocities carried out by Washington’s allies as well as their enemies.

Elements in the ‘looney-tunes’ wing of the US media world have accused Russia, through RT and the other foreign-language state news agency Sputnik, of ‘weaponizing information.’ You can understand this as meaning that Moscow (and others) are doing exactly what Washington has been at for over half a century. It reminds me of when England wouldn’t play in the initial soccer World Cups, sore that foreigners were in charge of organizing the game they’d invented.

The fight against RT

Of course, there are ways the US could launch a ‘counter-offensive’ against RT and the myriad other national English language stations that have emerged. A TV version of RFE/RL (in Russian and other languages) is one possibility. Of course, this will cost money, quite a lot of it, and this might be what Lack is playing at. By creating the impression, no matter how disingenuous, that the US is faced with an ‘information war,’ the powers that be can, perhaps, be persuaded to increase funding to the BBG.

Andrew Lack is no fool. A former CEO of Bloomberg and President of CBS, he’s one of the most qualified media operators out there. Responsible for 16 Emmy Awards at CBS, the Boston University alumnus (who also attended Paris’ Sorbonne) knows the workings of the US power structure better than most. By equating RT to terror organizations, he plants seeds of hysteria in minds that matter. This wouldn’t be the first time that a ‘Russian threat’ was used to generate a funding increase by a US entity, in fairness.

Over a decade ago, I occasionally wrote for the late, lamented Dubliner Magazine in Ireland. The periodical published a cover story entitled ‘The New Establishment,’ with a bunch of insufferable non-entities pictured. The editor asked me what I thought. I replied that it was useful as a guide to people to avoid in Dublin, pointing out that the gift of youth was to be able question the establishment and the ideas of the older generation. Any newbies who wanted to immediately join the existing order and replicate it were about as interesting and useful as an ice sculptor in the Sahara.

RT’s role in the media welkin is to be disruptive. Not of the mainstream, nor hoping to be accepted by it. As RT’s budget, while small compared to BBC or CNN, is sufficient to produce professional TV and web output, this scares the establishment media stiff. RT is both everything they hate and everything they’d secretly like to be, but never will. It’s akin to wealthy a schoolboy who enjoys the luxury of tennis and piano lessons, secretly envying the poorer classmate who’s taught himself guitar and still gets the girls.

The BBG, and many of the powers-that-be in US society genuinely consider RT a challenge to the propaganda network that Washington has built up over decades. It’s also a convenient bogey-man to use when looking for more cash. Most of this activity is subtle. Andrew Lack, with his ludicrous comparisons, displayed all the nuance of an angry man with a sledgehammer. He should apologise. Journalism is not terrorism.


What is $1 a month to support one of the greatest publications on the Left?






 




Expect Dirty Business as Usual Following Saudi King’s Death

Stephen Lendman


Abdullah entering his main palace in 2011. (YouTube screen grab)

Abdullah entering his main palace in 2011. (YouTube screen grab)

[dropcap]World headlines[/dropcap] announced Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz’s death. At age 90. After being hospitalized on December 31. Suffering from pneumonia.

His half-brother Crown Prince Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud succeeds him. Aged 79. Reportedly suffering from dementia or Parkinson’s disease.

Initially Reuters headlined “New king, same oil policy.” Changed to “New Saudi king seen holding the line on OPEC policy to keep oil output high.”  The Wall Street Journal headlined “Death of King Unlikely to Alter Saudi Oil Policy.”

The Financial Times headlined “Saudi Arabia’s new King Salman bids to reassure markets.” AP headlined “Saudi King Abdullah, a Gradual Modernizer, Dead at 90.” BBC headlined “Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz dies.” Saying prior to announcing his death, “Saudi television cut to Koranic verses, which often signifies the passing of a senior royal.”

He died on Thursday at 22:00 GMT (5:00 PM New York time). The Washington Post called him “a wily king who embraced limited reform.” The New York Times said he became “a force of moderation.”  A litany of praise followed for one of the world’s most repressive rulers heading a ruthless regime.

James Petras commented earlier. Calling the Kingdom infested with “all the vices and none of the virtues of an oil rich state like Venezuela.” “The country is governed by a family dictatorship which tolerates no opposition and severely punishes human rights advocates and political dissidents.”

Prince Bandar: most probable mastermind of false flag chemical attack in Syria imputed to Assad. (YouTube screen grab TGP)

Prince Bandar: most probable the mastermind of false flag chemical attack in Syria imputed to Assad. (YouTube screen grab TGP)

It “finances the most fanatical, retrograde, misogynist version of Islam, “Wahhabi” a sect of Sunni Islam.” Prince Bandar bin Sultan masterminds Saudi’s terror network, said Petras. Partnered with high-level “US political, military and intelligence officials.”

State terror enforces repressive policies. No opposition is tolerated. Elections when held are farcical. Ruling family dictatorship thugs run things. Expect no meaningful change under Salman. Repressive business as usual continues. Human Rights Watch called Abdullah’s so-called reforms “largely symbolic.” He “failed to secure the fundamental rights of Saudi citizens to free expression, association and assembly.”

Obama paid tribute to his “valued” ally. Saying “(t)he closeness and strength of the partnership between our two countries is part of King Abdullah’s legacy.” One rogue leader praised another. Obama ludicrously claimed Abdullah “took bold steps” for regional peace. Rogue leadership best describes him. A longstanding destabilizing influence. Partnered with Obama’s war on Syria. Supporting extremist takfiris against Assad. Supplying them with chemical and other weapons. Relatively few in number IS beheadings make headlines. Longstanding Saudi practice gets practically no attention.

A rare October 2014 Newsweek article headlined “When It Comes to Beheadings, ISIS Has Nothing Over Saudi Arabia.”

America’s “closest Arab ally,” said Newsweek. Kingdom “decapitations are routine.” For “crimes including political dissent.” “(A)nd the international press hardly seems to notice.” Dozens of people have “their heads lopped off” annually.

On average, one every four days. Along with other horrendous forms of punishment. Including whippings involving hundreds of lashes. Sometimes 1,000. Administered about 50 at a time. Too many at once assures extremely painful death.

Newsweek said beheadings occur in public. “People…gather to watch…” British author John R. Bradley calls them the “only form of public entertainment” besides football.  One Saudi executioner, Mohammed Saad al-Beshi, said he beheaded up to seven prisoners a day. Calling it “God’s work.” Newsweek’s article is the exception proving the rule. Virtually none of this makes Western headlines. Especially in America.


Absolute monarchal rule is despotic, lawless and brutal. Police state ruthlessness writ large.


 

Horrific Saudi crimes aren’t reported. Obama turned truth on its head calling US/Saudi ties a “force for stability and security in the Middle East and beyond.” The State Department publishes annual human rights reports on over 190 countries. Its latest in April 2014.

Discussing Kingdom “human rights problems. (I)including torture and other abuses…”

sect, race, and ethnicity (remain) common.”

October 2014 Amnesty International (AI) report is titled “Saudi Arabia’s ACPRA: How the Kingdom Silences its Human Rights Activists.” It explains how Saudi officials harass, detain and abuse human rights workers. Going to “extreme lengths to hound critics into silent submission,” said AI.

ACPRA is the Saudi Civil and Political Rights Association. Founded in October 2009. Dissolved in March 2013. On March 9, 2013, a so-called Saudi court sentenced two of its leaders to 15 years in prison. For “offenses that included sedition and giving inaccurate information to foreign media.”

According to AI’s Middle East and North Africa program deputy director Said Boumedouha:

“The Saudi Arabian authorities have consolidated their iron grip on power through a systematic and ruthless campaign of persecution against peaceful activists in a bid to suppress any criticism of the state in the aftermath of the 2011 Arab uprisings.”

AI’s report focuses on 11 ACPRA activists. Saudi authorities targeted its founding members. Three currently serve 15-year prison terms. Two are incarcerated without charge. Three others awaited trial when AI’s report was published. Another three were tried. As of last fall they were free. All 11 were harassed. Most were detained short-term or imprisoned for months or years.

Charges besides the one listed above included one or more of the following:

“(B)reaking allegiance to and disobeying the ruler.”

“(I)nciting public opinion against the authorities.”

Equating peaceful demonstrators and dissenters with “terrorism.” According to AI’s report:

“ACPRA members spoke out repeatedly against the detention practices of the Saudi Arabian authorities and were especially critical of the Ministry of Interior and its feared security and intelligence branch, the General Directorate of Investigations (GDI) or al Mabahith, whose officers wield extensive powers and are able to arrest, detain, torture and abuse those they suspect with impunity.”

“(V)irtually all the country’s leading human rights activists are the imprisoned victims of an unrelenting official crackdown on criticism, dissent and other exercise of the right to freedom of expression.”

“Saudi Arabia has long evaded effective international scrutiny for its dire human rights record.” It’s a longstanding US ally. One rogue state supports another. Dirty business as usual continues. Expect no meaningful change ahead.


 

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.


What is $1 a month to support one of the greatest publications on the Left?






 




The Charlie Hebdo Massacre: The Right-Wing Benefits

STEVEN JONAS 

A man holds a placard which reads "I am Charlie" to pay tribute during a gathering at the Place de la Republique in Paris

One more “Je Suis Charlie” placard in an outpouring of emotionalism embedded in heavy ignorance and cynical manipulation by the powers that be. (Kino Photography, via flickr).

 

Much has been written about the horror perpetrated on journalists at the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, and shoppers at a kosher grocery store in store in Paris on January 7-8, 2015. One question about which not much has been written, about the attacks and their aftermaths, is the old one from the days of Rome: “Cui Bono” (who benefits)? But before we get to that one, let’s consider who didn’t.

First of all, the two brothers who committed the massacre at Charlie Hebdo, Cherif and Said Kouachi, said that they were doing it avenge the various depictions of the Prophet Mohammed that they found sacrilegious (the latter, of course, like obscenity, all being in the eye of the beholder). Well, A) they are dead and B) their actions will hardly stop others from depicting the Prophet in the terms that Charlie Hebdo did, or worse. (Of course, in their next issue, the Charlie Hebdo survivors came out with a depiction of Mohammed, sympathetically this time, but nevertheless, a prohibited “graven image.”)

Then there was Amedy Coulibaly, the killer at the Jewish grocery. He said that he was protesting against the US, French, and other interventions in the Middle East. Well, there are lots of opponents of those actions, both in the Muslim (and especially Arab) and Western worlds (including yours truly and, I might surmise, many of the readers of BuzzFlash). Coulibaly’s action is unlikely to win over many, if any, converts to his cause. So neither they (to be sure) nor their causes can said to have benefitted.

Next let’s look at the “cause of free speech,” which many commentators in the West said was the principal issue in this case of the Massacre. (There has been an interesting lack of attention to the cause for his action raised by Coulibaly. I wonder why?) Well, first of all, for the perpetrators, “freedom of speech” was never a consideration. Each was protesting something, violently, not with speech. In the case of the Kouachi brothers, certainly they were responding to something they call “blasphemy” by instituting the death penalty, but they were hardly concerned with “free speech” as an issue. Second of all, despite the massive protests in France and elsewhere, the response of certain governments, e.g., France and Great Britain, to the supposed assault on free speech, has been an attempt to limit it, or at least interfere with it, at least when it comes to the internet.

As usual, the mawkish, middlebrow sentimentality imparted by the corporate media have

Once again, the cloying, mawkish, middlebrow sentimentality imparted by the corporate media have shaped the response to the tragedy for the clueless millions in France and elsewhere. (Andreas Klein, via flickr)

Third of all, in the context of the “cause of free speech,” there is at least one U.S. “Christian” “pastor” who described the massacre as “God’s divine retribution for mocking Christianity.” No defender of free speech he. One might raise the question with him of why such a horrible, vengeful God would employ persons who he, the “pastor,” regards as infidels (and they him, of course), but that one is a question for another time. But no matter, how one looks at it, neither “the cause of free speech” nor its defenders benefit from this one.

So who does benefit? Well, when one starts to poke around, the beneficiaries are to be found on the political Right, in a variety of countries and non-national locations. First of all, the set of incidents and the Western response to them has most likely been a major recruiting tool for ISIS (or ISIL of you prefer — remember when Fox”News” was criticizing President Obama for using one term rather than the other) and Al Qaeda (at least the one in Yemen. In Syria, ISIS and Al Qaeda apparently have been at odds), both right-wing organizations.

Second of all, speaking of Fox”News,” virtually all they could do, at least for the first few days after the horror, was yell and scream about the President (apparently) not using the words “Islamic terrorism” (he apparently preferred the words “Islamic extremism) and “radical Islam.” According to one F”N” “analyst,” (“propagandist” might be more suitable, one of the principal functions of propaganda is changing the subject) K.T. McFarland (who served in the Reagan Administration), by not using the words, Obama demonstrated that he was a “coward.” Of course McFarland knows about “cowardice:” Reagan immediately withdrew from Lebanon after the bombing of Marine Headquarters. Too, Reagan made sure that he got a backwater job when he was in the military in World War II, while one of his favorite “Peacenik” targets, Sen. George McGovern, was flying 10 over the 25 mission quota in his World War II B-24 Liberator bomber (otherwise known as “flying coffin,” because it was so hard to get out of if hit). But hey, different strokes for different folks.

Third of all, Islamophobes all over the world benefit from this one, from the growing political Right in Europe, to the wing-nuts in the US Republican Party who are convinced that somehow Sharia Law (a major concern of the “historian” Newt Gingrich) is about to be imposed in the United States. In a country in which only a tiny minority of the population is Muslim, they have actually gotten several state legislatures to pass laws banning it. Then there are Likud/Zionists of Israel who used the Paris demonstration as part of the Netanyahu re-election campaign and to promote the Israeli version of Islamophobia.

Of course the Permanent War crowd, mainly in the U.S., but present in other imperialist countries as well, benefits tremendously from these events. I’m just waiting for the Cheney/McCain/Graham cabal to get on all the media, demanding that Obama send in troops. Where? Not exactly sure. The winnable mission? Not exactly sure. How to pay for it? Not exactly sure. How to sell it to the U.S. people? Not exactly sure. But send them in!

But the biggest beneficiaries of this kind of terrorism are the reactionary rulers of many Arab states, from Saudi Arabia on down (or up, depending upon your point of view). To pick one, Saudi Arabia is one of the most reactionary socially and most repressive politically countries in the world. No democracy. No free speech. No even semi-equal rights for women. The use of torture. Authoritarian rule. Public beheadings. You know those current ads for Land Rover taken (apparently) in The Empty Quarter, the world’s largest sand desert? Well, the Saudis have been known to take members of the royal family (it numbers several thousand — you can imagine why) who have committed some infraction, out by air to middle of it and leave them there. Oh yes, why does one not ever hear a word of protest from the “human rights” focused U.S. government? Well, oil’s the word.

ISIS, et al, are funded at least in part by wealthy Saudis and others of the rich from the oil states. They just love having the focus of at least some of their possibly restive youth taken away from the miserable conditions in their own countries and aimed towards the “infidels” in the West. “Color” revolutions? Fuhgeddaboudit. Focus on the “infidels” is so much better. Ah, the use of religion to distract from the people’s real concerns that goes so far back in history. It’s really something, isn’t it? I am not talking conspiracy theory here. I am talking about reality.

Thus, one cannot say that there are no winners here. There are. And many of them speak English, French, German, Hungarian, or Arabic.


 

The 15% Solution: How the Republican Religious Right Took Control of the U.S., 1981-2022: A futuristic Novel, Brewster, NY, Trepper & Katz Impact Books, Punto Press Publishing, 2013, and available on Amazon.


What is $1 a month to support one of the greatest publications on the Left?






 




Monsters of Our Own Creation

"Je Suis Charlie" rally in Paris, Jan. 11, 2015. (YouTube-screengrab)

“Je Suis Charlie” rally in Paris, Jan. 11, 2015.  Most of the participants never asked the right questions. (YouTube-TGP screengrab)

JOHN WIGHT

[dropcap]The huge march[/dropcap] and rally in Paris that took place in the wake of the horrific events that took place in the French capital was a festival of nauseating hypocrisy.

Watching the leaders of governments which, between them, have been responsible for carnage and mayhem on a grand scale – the likes of Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, for example – leading a march against terrorism and extremism qualified not so much as the theatre of the absurd but as the theatre of the grotesque; impostors at an event that millions of people allowed themselves to hope would mark a step-change in a world scarred by war, barbarism, and injustice.


Unity March in Paris on January 11 (FULL VIDEO) (RT.COM)

Sadly, they will be disappointed, as the circular relationship that exists between Western extremism and Islamic extremism will not be broken anytime soon. Indeed, if at all, it will be strengthened after the massacre in Paris, as the congenital condition of Western exceptionalism reasserts itself.

When Frantz Fanon wrote, “Violence is man re-creating himself,” he could have been describing the Kouachi brothers striding up and down the street outside the offices of Charlie Hebdo, assault weapons in hand, prior to and after murdering the French-Algerian police officer lying on the pavement with the ease of men for whom all restraint had been abandoned.

The irony of men acting in the name of Islam callously taking the life of a fellow Muslim should not have come as a surprise, however. The vast majority of victims of Islamic extremism, after all, are Muslims, just as they comprise the vast majority of victims of Western extremism. The point is that the Kouachis at that point appeared euphoric, filled with a sense of their own power and strength, having broken through the final barrier that exists between the agony of powerlessness and liberation from it. They had been transformed by the ‘deed’.

“What is good?” Nietzsche asks, before answering, “All that heightens the feeling of power, the will to power, power itself in man.”

Netanyahu being courteously received by Gordon Brown at 10 Downing St. Cordiality between fellow war criminals.

Israel’s Netanyahu being courteously received by Gordon Brown at 10 Downing St. Formal cordiality between fellow war criminals. (Via 10DowningSt.flickr)

Behind them the brothers had left a scene of carnage. For us it was an act of sheer evil, for them justice and power. Within them had taken root a more powerful idea than the one they had been inculcated with growing up witHin the heart of Europe. It willed them to seek meaning not in life but in death – that of others and their own.

When confronted by such total rejection of the moral foundations upon which our cultural, social, and human consciousness rests, we dismiss it automatically and unthinkingly, ascribing it to evil, madness, and insanity. Our coping mechanism dare not deviate for a second in this regard. But what if such deeds are acts of rebellion against the evil, madness, and insanity of the status quo, matching evil with evil, madness with madness, and insanity with insanity? What if that?

It is far too simplistic, if understandable, to dismiss such individuals as evil. It allows us to negate their humanity and anything we may recognise in ourselves. They aren’t human beings, such people, they are monsters, beyond the pale and therefore beyond any serious consideration. Ritual condemnation and calumniation is all that society accepts when it comes to those who perpetrate such horrific acts.

Yes, the act of mass murder carried by the Kouachis and Amedy Coulibaly in Paris was monstrous. But was it any more monstrous than the carnage that has been unleashed over many years by men who claim to act in our name? Wasn’t the brutality and barbarism we witnessed on our TV screens, crashing into our collective consciousness, merely a microcosm of the brutality and barbarism that goes by the name Western civilisation? For just as the Enlightenment provided the basis for modern liberal democracy, producing huge advances in science, medicine, and philosophy, it also provided justification for centuries of slavery, colonialism, genocide, ethnic cleansing, and super exploitation.

Je suis Charlie (‘I am Charlie’) describes the delimitation of our solidarity with all victims of extremism and barbarism. It allows us to avoid confronting the ugly truth of our culpability in the fate of those victims. When Aime Cesaire warned that “a civilization which justifies colonization—and therefore force—is already a sick civilization, a civilization which is morally diseased, which irresistibly, progressing from one consequence to another, one denial to another, calls for its Hitler, I mean its punishment,” he was talking to us.

The Kouachis and Coulibaly were not products of radical Islam. They, like it, were the products of Western civilization. They were and are monsters of our own creation.


 

John Wight is the author of a politically incorrect and irreverent Hollywood memoir – Dreams That Die – published by Zero Books. He’s also written five novels, which are available as Kindle eBooks. You can follow him on Twitter at @JohnWight1


 

SOURCE: Counterpunch




What is $1 a month to support one of the greatest publications on the Left?




 

And now a word from the Editors of The Greanville Post


It’s a battle of communications we can’t afford to lose. 

So if you took the time to read this article, and found it worth SHARING, then why not sign up with our special bulletin to be included in our future distributions? And please tell others about The Greanville Post. 


YOUR SUBSCRIPTIONS (SIGNUPS TO THE GREANVILLE POST BULLETIN, SEE BELOW) ARE COMPLETELY FREE, ALWAYS. AND WE DO NOT SELL OR RENT OUR EMAIL ADDRESSES—EVER. That’s a guarantee.