Redacted: Abby Martin & The Neo-Liberal Plan To Bring Down VenezueIa

Be sure to share these materials with friends, kin and workmates.

THE WELL MERITED DEBUNKING OF JOHN OLIVER

Lee Camp, Abby Martin and Mike Prysner debunk the mainstream media's grotesquely mendacious narratives about the situation in Venezuela, and that includes lacerating critiques of people like HBO comedian John Oliver, whom many young people regard as a source of reliable news about the world. 

Published on Jun 14, 2018

Lee Camp speaks with Abby Martin journalist and host of The Empire Files, who exposes the profit-driven bias of corporate media reporting on Venezuela. Then, he sits down with the hosts of Watching The Hawks to discuss their recent trip to Australia. ~ Redacted Tonight is a comedy show written and performed by Americans, in America covering American news.

NOTE: In the above interview Abby refers to a special program done by Empire Files to refute John Oliver's egregious lies about Venezuela. This is the program, and it certainly deserves to be seen on its own solid merits. The video was prepared by Iraq vet Mike Prysner, whom we salute for this superb job, and his liberating work in general.  We are heartened that America still produces people like him . —PG

Published on Jun 7, 2018

The week of Venezuela's presidential election, John Oliver dedicated an ENTIRE episode of his HBO show "Last Week Tonight" to the country—full of distortions and highly misleading to progressive-minded people. Responding to Oliver's major points, Empire Files producer Mike Prysner walks us through the most glaring omissions and misrepresentations. This video response is an essential guide for progressives to understand the reality in Venezuela, the most common myths used to discredit the Chavez movement, and the role of the US government. [[ Prysner is an Iraq war veteran and journalist. He spent a month in Venezuela during the height of the protest movement in 2017, covering the riots and economic crisis. He has been a Venezuela solidarity activist since 2006. Watch the many documentaries and interviews he produced from Venezuela at TheEmpireFiles.tv ]]

FOLLOW // @MikePrysner // @EmpireFiles

 

[premium_newsticker id=”211406″]

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

PLEASE COMMENT ON OUR FACEBOOK GROUP OR IN THE OPINION WINDOW BELOW.
All image captions, pull quotes, appendices, etc. by the editors not the authors. 

black-horizontal




North Korea: Pelosi Versus Peace

HELP ENLIGHTEN YOUR FELLOWS. BE SURE TO PASS THIS ON. SURVIVAL DEPENDS ON IT.


Pelosi: a typical Democrat malignancy. But the problem is with the counterfeit duopoly, and a regime which is not a real democracy.

Which is worse: The specter of nuclear war, or giving US president Donald Trump credit for a significant diplomatic accomplishment?

In her official statement on Trump’s Singapore summit with North Korea’s Kim Jong-un, US House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi makes it clear that a few million incinerated human beings are a small price to pay  to keep the 68-year-old Korean War going. Maybe not forever, but at least until there’s a Democrat in the White House.

“[T]he President handed Kim Jong-un concessions in exchange for vague promises that do not approach a clear and comprehensive pathway to denuclearization and non-proliferation,” Pelosi complains.

What were these dangerous “concessions?”

First, the US armed forces will, conditional upon progress toward North Korean denuclearization, stop conducting the threatening military exercises that they’ve conducted on North Korea’s border and off its coast since the 1953 ceasefire. Some “concession.” If  US and South Korean forces aren’t prepared for a new outbreak of hostilities after 65 years of training, they never will be.

Secondly, again conditional upon North Korea holding up its end of the developing bargain, the US will provide “security guarantees.” Which means, the US and South Korea won’t invade North Korea, just like they haven’t invaded North Korea since 1953. Again, some “concession.”

Would a Democratic president, at the kind of summit with North Korea’s ruler that Trump managed to swing — unlike any past president, Democrat or Republican — have refused those two obvious first-step “concessions?” Not a chance. They were the bare minimum, and if a Democrat had offered them, Pelosi would have publicly celebrated them as like unto the Second Coming.

“President Trump elevated North Korea to the level of the United States while preserving the regime’s status quo,” Pelosi continues, ignoring the fact that every president since Eisenhower has “preserved the regime’s status quo” — until Trump, who recognized, diplomatically speaking and in relation to the issue at hand, that North Korea is already at “the level of the United States.”

If the Korean War is going to be sorted out, it will be the belligerents — North Korea, South Korea, China and the United States, likely with significant input from Russia — doing the sorting.

But Pelosi,  the Democratic Party, and the party’s allies in the media, would rather it NOT get sorted out.

That’s disgusting.

Posturing America as “the exceptional nation,” Kim as a supplicant in rags, and those other governments as mere hangers-on could have had only two possible outcomes. One was the status quo ante.  The other — a danger faced by then-president Barack Obama in negotiating the Iran nuclear deal — was those other parties negotiating their own deal, leaving a petulant, marginalized America to watch their parade from the sidelines.

A genuine and durable peace on the Korean peninsula may or may not be achievable, but Trump seems to be giving it the old college try. Pelosi and her party, having proven unable to  lead and unwilling to follow on the matter, should at least have the decency to get the hell out of the way.


ABOUT THE AUTHOR
 Thomas L. Knapp is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

black-horizontal
[premium_newsticker id=”154171″]

Things to ponder

While our media prostitutes, many Hollywood celebs, and politicians and opinion shapers make so much noise about the still to be demonstrated damage done by the Russkies to our nonexistent democracy, this is what the sanctimonious US government has done overseas just since the close of World War 2. And this is what we know about. Many other misdeeds are yet to be revealed or documented.

Parting shot—a word from the editors
The Best Definition of Donald Trump We Have Found

In his zeal to prove to his antagonists in the War Party that he is as bloodthirsty as their champion, Hillary Clinton, and more manly than Barack Obama, Trump seems to have gone “play-crazy” — acting like an unpredictable maniac in order to terrorize the Russians into forcing some kind of dramatic concessions from their Syrian allies, or risk Armageddon.However, the “play-crazy” gambit can only work when the leader is, in real life, a disciplined and intelligent actor, who knows precisely what actual boundaries must not be crossed. That ain’t Donald Trump — a pitifully shallow and ill-disciplined man, emotionally handicapped by obscene privilege and cognitively crippled by white American chauvinism. By pushing Trump into a corner and demanding that he display his most bellicose self, or be ceaselessly mocked as a “puppet” and minion of Russia, a lesser power, the War Party and its media and clandestine services have created a perfect storm of mayhem that may consume us all. Glen Ford, Editor in Chief, Black Agenda Report

window.newShareCountsAuto="smart";




WHY VENEZUELA AND SYRIA CANNOT FALL

HELP ENLIGHTEN YOUR FELLOWS. BE SURE TO PASS THIS ON. BREAKING THE EMPIRE'S MEDIA MONOPOLY IS UP TO YOU.


 

 


Despite tremendous hardship which the Venezuelan people are having to face, despite the sanctions and intimidation from abroad, President Nicolás Maduro has won a second six-year term.

Two weeks ago, at the Venezuelan embassy in Nairobi, Kenya, where I addressed several leaders of East African left-wing opposition, an acting Charge d’ Affaires, Jose Avila Torres, declared: “People of Venezuela are now facing a situation similar to the Syrian people's.”

True. Both nations, Venezuela and Syria, are separated by a tremendous geographical distance, but they are united by the same fate, same determination and courage.

During the Spanish Civil War, Czech anti-fascist fighters, volunteers in the International Brigades, used to say: “In Madrid we are fighting for Prague”. Madrid fell to Franco’s fascists in October 1939. Prague had been occupied by German troops several months earlier, in March 1939. It was the blindness and cowardice of the European leaders, as well as the support which the murderous fascist hordes received from populations of all corners of the continent, which led to one of the greatest tragedies in modern history - a tragedy which only ended on May 9, 1945, when the Soviet troops liberated Prague, defeating Nazi Germany and de facto saving the world.

More than 70 years later, the world is facing another calamity. The West, mentally unfit to peacefully end its several centuries long murderous reign over the planet – a reign that has already taken several hundred millions of human lives – is flexing its muscles and madly snapping in all directions, provoking, antagonizing and even directly attacking countries as far apart as North Korea (DPRK), China, Iran, Russia, Syria and Venezuela.

What is happening now is not called fascism or Nazism, but it clearly is precisely that, as the barbaric rule is based on a profound spite for non-Western human lives, on fanatical right-wing dogmas which are stinking of exceptionalism, and on the unbridled desire to control the world.

Many countries that refused to yield to brutal Western force were recently literally leveled with the ground, including Afghanistan, Libya and Iraq. In many other ones, the governments were overthrown by direct and indirect interventions, as well as deceit, as was the case in the mightiest country in Latin America – Brazil. Countless “color”, “umbrella” and other “revolutions” as well as “springs” have been sponsored by Washington, London and other Western capitals.

But the world is waking up, slowly but irreversibly, and the fight for survival of our human race has already begun.

Venezuela and Syria are, unquestionably, at the frontline of the struggle.

Against all odds, bleeding but heroically erect, they stand against the overwhelmingly mightier force, and refuse to give up.

“Here no one surrenders!” shouted Hugo Chavez, already balding from chemotherapy, dying of cancer which many in Latin America believe, was administered to him from the United States. His fist was clenched and heavy rain was falling on his face. Like this, died one of the greatest revolutionaries of our time. But his revolution survived, and is marching on!




[dropcap]I[/dropcap] am well aware of the fact that many of my readers are from the West. Somehow, particularly in Europe, I cannot explain, anymore, what it really is to be a revolutionary. Recently I spoke at a big gathering of ‘progressive’ teachers, which took place in Scandinavia. I tried to fire them up, to explain to them what monstrous crimes the West has been committing all over the world, for centuries.

I tried and I failed. When the lights went on, I was drilled by hundreds of eyes. Yes, there was some applause, and many stood up in that fake cliché – a standing ovation. But I knew that our worlds were far apart.

What followed were pre-fabricated and shallow questions about human rights in China, about “Assad’s regime”, but nothing about the collective responsibility of people of the West.

To understand what goes on in Syria and in Venezuela, requires stepping out of the Western mindset. It cannot be understood by selfish minds that are only obsessed with sexuality and sexual orientation, and with self-interest.

There is something essential, something very basic and human that is taking place in both Syria and Venezuela. It is about human pride, about motherland, about love for justice and dreams, about a much better arrangement for the world. It is not petty, in fact it is huge, and even worth fighting and dying for.

In both places, the West miscalculated, as it clearly miscalculated in such ‘cases’ as Cuba, Russia, China, Iran, DPRK.

Patria no se vende!”, they have been saying in Cuba, for decades – “The Fatherland is not for sale!”

Profit is not everything. Personal gain is not everything. Selfishness and tiny but inflated egos are not everything. Justice and dignity are worth much more. Human ideals are much more. To some people they are. Really, they are, trust me - no matter how unreal it may appear in the West.

Syria is bleeding, but it refused to surrender to the terrorism injected by the West and its allies. Aleppo was turned into a modern-day Stalingrad. At a tremendous cost, the city withstood all vicious assaults, it managed to reverse the course of the war, and as a result, it saved the country.

Venezuela, like Cuba in the early 90’s, found itself alone, abandoned, spat at and demonized. But it did not fall on its knees.

In Europe and North America, analyses of what is happening there have been made “logically” and “rationally”. Or have they, really?

Do people in the West really know what is like to be colonized? Do they know what the “Venezuelan opposition is”?

Do they know about the consistency of the terror being spread by the West, for centuries and all over Latin America, from such places like the Dominican Republic and Honduras, all the way down to Chile and Argentina?

No, they know nothing, or they know very little, like those Germans who were living right next to the extermination camps and after the war they claimed that they had no idea what that smoke coming up from the chimneys was all about.

There is hardly any country in Central or South America, whose government has not at least been overthrown once by the North, whenever it decided to work on behalf of its people.

And Brazil, last year, became the ‘latest edition’ of the nightmares, disinformation campaigns, ‘fake news’ and coups – being spread with ‘compliments’ from the North, through local ‘elites’.

"There is no way to negotiate, to debate with these kinds of people. They are traitors, thieves and murderers...."

[dropcap]Y[/dropcap]ou see, there is really no point of discussing too many issues with the ‘opposition’ in countries such as Venezuela, Cuba or Bolivia. What has to be said was already pronounced.

What goes on is not some academic discussion club, but a war; a real and brutal civil war.

I know the ‘opposition’ in South American countries, and I know the ‘elites’ there. Yes, of course I know many of my comrades, the revolutionaries, but I am also familiar with the ‘elites’.

Just to illustrate, let me recall a conversation I once had in Bolivia, with the son of a powerful right-wing senator, who doubled as a media magnate. In a slightly drunken state he kept repeating to me:

“We will soon kick the ass of that Indian shit [president of Bolivia, Evo Morales] … You think we care about money? We have plenty of money! We don’t care if we lose millions of dollars, even tens of millions! We will spread insecurity, uncertainty, fear, deficits and if we have to, even hunger… We’ll bleed those Indians to death!”

All this may sound ‘irrational’, even directly against their own capitalist gospel. But they don’t care about rationality, only about power. And their handlers from the North will compensate their losses, anyway.

There is no way to negotiate, to debate with these kinds of people. They are traitors, thieves and murderers.

For years and decades, they used the same strategy, betting on the soft-heartedness and humanism of their socialist opponents. They dragged progressive governments into endless and futile debates, then used their own as well as Western media to smear them. If it did not work, they choked their own economies, creating deficits, like in Chile before the 1973 Pinochet’s coup. If that did not work, they’d used terror – naked and merciless. And finally, as the last resort – direct Western interventions.

They are not in it for ‘democracy’ or even for some ‘free market’. They are serving their Western masters and their own feudalist interests.

To negotiate with them is to lose. It is identical with playing the game by their own rules. Because behind them is the entire Western propaganda machine, as well as financial and military machinery.

The only way to survive is to toughen up, to clench the teeth, and to fight. As Cuba has been doing for decades, and yes, as Venezuela is doing now.

This approach does not look ‘lovely’; it is not always ‘neat’, but it is the only way forward, the only way for progress and revolution to survive.

Before Dilma got ‘impeached’ by the pro-Western bunch of corrupt freaks, I suggested in my essay that was censored by Counterpunch but published by dozens of other outlets world-wide, in many languages, that she should send tanks into the streets of Brasilia. I suggested that it was her duty, in the name of the people of Brazil, who voted for her, and who benefited greatly from the rule of her PT.

She did not do it, and I am almost certain that now she is regretting so. Her people are once again getting robbed; they are suffering. And the entire South America is, as a result, in disarray!

*

[dropcap]C[/dropcap]orruption? Mismanagement? For decades and centuries, the people of Latin America were ruled and robbed by the corrupt bandits, who were using their continent as a milking cow, while living in the repulsive opulence of the Western aristocracy. All that was done, naturally, in the name of ‘democracy’, a total charade. Or some unassailable king.

Venezuela is still there – people are rallying behind the government – in terrible pain and half-starving but rallying nevertheless. It is because for many people there, personal interests are secondary. What matters is their country, socialist ideology and the great South American fatherland. Patria grande.

It is impossible to explain. It is not rational, it is intuitive, deep, essential and human.

Those who have no ideology and ability to commit, will not understand. And, frankly, who cares if they will or not.

Hopefully, soon, both Brazil and Mexico – the two most populous nations in Latin America – will vote in new left-wing governments. Things will then change, will become much better, for Venezuela.

Until then, Caracas has to rely on its far-away but close comrades and friends, China, Iran and Russia, but also on its beautiful and brave sister – Cuba.

Evo Morales recently warned that the West is plotting a coup in Venezuela.

Maduro’s government has to survive another few months. Before Brazil is back, before Mexico joins.

It will be a tough, perhaps even bloody fight. But history is not made by weak compromises and capitulations. One cannot negotiate with Fascism. France tried, before WWII, and we all know the results.

The West and its fascism can only be fought, never appeased

When one defends his country, things can never be tidy and neat. There are no saints. Sainthood leads to defeat. Saints are born later, when victory is won and the nation can afford it.

Venezuela and Syria have to be supported and defended, by all means.

These wonderful people, Venezuelans and Syrians, are now bleeding, fighting for the entire non-Western and oppressed world. In Caracas and Damascus, people are struggling, battling and dying for Honduras and Iran, for Afghanistan and West Africa.

Their enemies can only be stopped by force.

*

In Scandinavia, a Syrian gusano, who lives in the West, who smears president Assad and gets fully compensated for it, challenged me, as well as the Syrian ‘regime’ and Iran, during the Q/A session. I said I refuse to discuss this with him, as even if we were to spend two hours shouting at each other, in public, we would never find any common ground. People like him began the war, and war they should get. I told him that he is definitely paid for his efforts and that the only way for us to settle this is ‘outside’, on the street.

Venezuela and Syria cannot fall. Too much is now at stake. Both countries are presently fighting something enormous and sinister – they are fighting against the entire Western imperialism. It is not just about some ‘opposition’, or even the treasonous elements in their societies.

This is much bigger. This is about the future, about the survival of humanity.

Billions of people in all parts of the world have been closely following the elections in the Bolivarian Republic. There, the people have voted. President Maduro won. He won again. Scarred, bruised, but he won. Once again, socialism defeated fascism. And long live Venezuela, damn it!

*

[Originally published by New Eastern Outlook – NEO]


About the Author
Andre Vltchek is a philosopher, novelist, filmmaker and investigative journalist. He has covered wars and conflicts in dozens of countries. Three of his latest books are his tribute to “The Great October Socialist Revolution” a revolutionary novel “Aurora” and a bestselling work of political non-fiction: “Exposing Lies Of The Empire”. View his other books here. Watch Rwanda Gambit, his groundbreaking documentary about Rwanda and DRCongo and his film/dialogue with Noam Chomsky “On Western Terrorism”. Vltchek presently resides in East Asia and the Middle East, and continues to work around the world. He can be reached through his website and his Twitter. [/su_box]



[premium_newsticker id="154171"]

Parting shot—a word from the editors
The Best Definition of Donald Trump We Have Found

In his zeal to prove to his antagonists in the War Party that he is as bloodthirsty as their champion, Hillary Clinton, and more manly than Barack Obama, Trump seems to have gone “play-crazy” -- acting like an unpredictable maniac in order to terrorize the Russians into forcing some kind of dramatic concessions from their Syrian allies, or risk Armageddon.However, the “play-crazy” gambit can only work when the leader is, in real life, a disciplined and intelligent actor, who knows precisely what actual boundaries must not be crossed. That ain’t Donald Trump -- a pitifully shallow and ill-disciplined man, emotionally handicapped by obscene privilege and cognitively crippled by white American chauvinism. By pushing Trump into a corner and demanding that he display his most bellicose self, or be ceaselessly mocked as a “puppet” and minion of Russia, a lesser power, the War Party and its media and clandestine services have created a perfect storm of mayhem that may consume us all. Glen Ford, Editor in Chief, Black Agenda Report 




Demands grow that Australian government act to free Julian Assange

BE SURE TO PASS THESE ARTICLES TO FRIENDS AND KIN. A LOT DEPENDS ON THIS. DO YOUR PART.

By Mike Head, wsws.org



Last Sunday, Australia’s Channel 7 network broadcast an interview with Jennifer Robinson, an Australian-born, London-based lawyer who represents WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange. She issued a clear demand for the Australian government to carry out its responsibility to secure his freedom, as an Australian citizen.

The interview and 10-minute segment on the nationally-televised “Sunrise” morning program was a significant break in the general silence within the Australian corporate media on the more than seven-year detention of Assange. It came amid a renewed international campaign to fight for the unconditional freedom of the courageous journalist, who has continued to expose the war crimes, regime-change operations and mass surveillance conducted by the US and its allies around the world.

One of the central demands of this campaign is that Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull’s government act immediately to secure Assange’s freedom and his right to return to Australia, with guaranteed protection from any US request for his extradition on conspiracy and espionage charges. These charges can carry the death penalty.



Robinson’s interview came three days after she accompanied two Australian consular officials to meet with Assange inside the Ecuadorian embassy in London, where he sought political asylum on June 19, 2012. The visit was the first made by Australian officials to the Australian citizen in the six years since he has been effectively imprisoned inside the embassy, denied the right to obtain medical treatment or sunlight and outdoor physical exercise.

In her “Sunrise” interview, Robinson posed the pressing question: “What diplomatic representation is the Australian government willing to provide to protect Julian Assange from the risk of US extradition?”

Robinson pointed out that the Trump administration had taken “a far more public and aggressive stance” against WikiLeaks and Assange than even the Obama administration, under which a Grand Jury indictment was made for Assange’s arrest.

Since Trump’s election, Robinson explained, key members of his administration had called for WikiLeaks to be “taken down,” and for ways to be found to prosecute Assange, regardless of the US Constitution’s First Amendment guaranteeing free speech.

“When will the Australian government, which is uniquely placed to provide a resolution to this case, step forward to provide assistance?” she asked.

Robinson said Assange was willing to “face British justice, but not the risk of US injustice.” He is prepared to face court for breaching his British bail conditions when Ecuador granted him political asylum, but must have a guarantee against extradition to the US.

Such a guarantee was “standard procedure,” Robinson said. “If the Australian government would come to the fore, the case could be resolved quickly.”

As Robinson emphasised, both US Attorney General Jeff Sessions and CIA Director Mike Pompeo, now secretary of state, had made clear their intent to imprison Assange and shut down WikiLeaks, which Pompeo last year described as a “hostile non-state intelligence service.”

US threats against Assange escalated from March 2017, when WikiLeaks began publishing a massive leak of CIA documents, dubbed “Vault 7.” The documents lay bare a vast system of surveillance, hacking and cyberwarfare directed against the people of the United States and the entire planet.


A rarity: An Australian TV network reporter covering the Assange case in London. The outrage is so great that not even these complicit corporadoes can ignore it much longer.

As the WSWS reported at the time, the documents indicate that the CIA has developed “more than a thousand hacking systems, trojans, viruses and other ‘weaponized’ malware” allowing it to seize control of devices, including Apple iPhones, Google’s Android operating system and devices running Microsoft Windows. By hacking these devices, the CIA can also intercept information before it is encrypted on social media platforms such as WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, Weibo, Confide and Cloackman.”

These revelations came on top of the fury in the US political establishment after WikiLeaks published emails exposing the Democratic Party National Committee’s sabotage of Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign and Hillary Clinton’s secret speeches promising to protect the interests of Wall Street.

Since March 28 this year, Assange has faced further mistreatment, and is now in imminent danger. Under pressure from Washington, Ecuador’s government has deprived him of any form of communication with the outside world, including visitors. It has also threatened to renege on Assange’s asylum, and hand him over to waiting British police. Just before he was cut off, Assange had tweeted links to the WSWS series exposing the unprecedented number of former CIA agents running as Democrats in this year’s US midterm elections.

After Robinson’s interview, New Matilda, an Australian media outlet, published a commentary by Kellie Tranter, a lawyer and human rights activist. She detailed documents, obtained by freedom of information requests, showing that Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop had refused to “seek to ‘resolve’ Mr Assange’s case.” Bishop’s refusal followed the February 2016 findings of the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (WGAD) that Assange was being arbitrarily detained by Britain and Sweden in violation of international human rights law.

On February 12, 2016 Bishop, a former lawyer, signed a Ministerial Submission stating “we are unable to intervene in the due process of another country’s court proceedings or legal matters, and we have full confidence in the UK and Swedish judicial system.”

Tranter disclosed two further statements from Bishop’s department, on June 7 and 8 this year, adhering to the refusal to act on the WGAD verdict, even though in May 2017 Sweden finally dropped its trumped-up “investigation” into the sexual assault allegations against Assange. Among the exposures made of the politically motivated and dubious character of these allegations was a detailed examination undertaken by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s “Four Corners” program on July 23, 2012 (see: “Sex, Lies and Julian Assange”).


Assange's mother, Christine Assange, holding a picture of her son.

Tranter explained that the Swedish decision meant that the only outstanding “court proceeding” was the “relatively minor one of a breach of bail conditions by Assange when he sought asylum in 2012.” Tranter stated: [I]t is incumbent upon a civilised nation to protect its citizens from risks posed by other nations to that citizen’s wellbeing.”

As a legal analysis published yesterday by the WSWS explained, both international and Australian law establishes that the Australian government clearly has the “discretion”—that is, the power—to take action against the United Kingdom in order to protect Assange, including, potentially, legal action in the British courts.

Robinson’s “Sunrise” interview is the second breach in the wall of corporate media silence. On June 2, Fairfax Media newspapers carried an opinion piece by Greg Barns, a barrister who is an adviser to Assange and WikiLeaks.

Barns called on Turnbull and Bishop “to assist in ensuring that this Australian citizen is no longer at risk of being subjected to US detention and can therefore leave the Ecuadorean embassy. This is because a key hurdle to Australian involvement in the Assange case has been removed, namely the Swedish warrant.”

On May 28, the WSWS and the International Committee of the Fourth International called for international action to defend Assange  and endorsed the vigil being prepared by WikiLeaks’ supporters outside the Ecuadorian embassy in London on June 19, and other vigils being organised around the globe.

In the same statement, the Socialist Equality Party (Australia), with the support of journalist and film-maker John Pilger, announced a demonstration to be held at Sydney Town Hall Square on Sunday, June 17 at 1:00 p.m. The rally will demand that the Turnbull government honour its responsibilities to Assange and intervene to secure his right to return to Australia, with guaranteed protection from any US extradition request.

Every effort must be made to mobilise the full strength of the international working class to win Assange’s freedom, as part of the defence of all basic democratic rights. Under the Trump administration, the American state and its allies have ramped up their efforts to destroy WikiLeaks and Assange as part of a broader agenda of censoring, silencing and intimidating every critical and independent media organisation.

Since WikiLeaks was created in 2006, both it and Assange have made an immense contribution to the exposure of great power criminality and abuses. That role will become even more important as the US and its partners, including Britain and Australia, escalate the drive toward trade war and war against China and Russia, and any other country regarded as a threat to Washington’s post-World War II hegemony.

We urge all our readers to join the demonstrations, vigils and other actions that are being organised internationally and to fight for an end to the persecution of Julian Assange and WikiLeaks.

[premium_newsticker id="211406"]

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
The writer is a reporter and analyst with wsws.org, a Marxian publication. 

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

PLEASE COMMENT ON OUR FACEBOOK GROUP OR IN THE OPINION WINDOW BELOW.
All image captions, pull quotes, appendices, etc. by the editors not the authors. 

black-horizontal

Parting shot—a word from the editors
The Best Definition of Donald Trump We Have Found

In his zeal to prove to his antagonists in the War Party that he is as bloodthirsty as their champion, Hillary Clinton, and more manly than Barack Obama, Trump seems to have gone “play-crazy” — acting like an unpredictable maniac in order to terrorize the Russians into forcing some kind of dramatic concessions from their Syrian allies, or risk Armageddon.However, the “play-crazy” gambit can only work when the leader is, in real life, a disciplined and intelligent actor, who knows precisely what actual boundaries must not be crossed. That ain’t Donald Trump — a pitifully shallow and ill-disciplined man, emotionally handicapped by obscene privilege and cognitively crippled by white American chauvinism. By pushing Trump into a corner and demanding that he display his most bellicose self, or be ceaselessly mocked as a “puppet” and minion of Russia, a lesser power, the War Party and its media and clandestine services have created a perfect storm of mayhem that may consume us all. Glen Ford, Editor in Chief, Black Agenda Report




THE AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM MYTH AND THE SELLING OF U.S. DOMINATION

BE SURE TO PASS THESE ARTICLES TO FRIENDS AND KIN. A LOT DEPENDS ON THIS. DO YOUR PART.


By Geoffrey O’Neill (Special to Truth and Shadows)


I believe in American exceptionalism with every fiber of my being. – Barack Obama, 2015.

America is a nation with a mission. Our aim is a democratic peace—a peace founded upon the dignity and rights of every man and woman on this earth. – George W. Bush, 2001

America remains the indispensable nation, and there are times when America and only America, can make a difference between war and peace, between freedom and oppression. – Bill Clinton, 1996


Americans are expected from birth to believe in the notion of U.S. superiority over other peoples in other nations. The daily school ritual of pledging allegiance to the flag and playing the national anthem at sporting events—whether the Super Bowl or a neighborhood swim meet—is a given. Americans are taught that they are intellectually, socially, economically, and morally superior toany other people on earth. We believe that we place a higher value on life than others do.

“And God bless these United States of America” – the ever-present phrase that U.S. presidents habitually intone is offensive to millions of non-believers and non-Americans. That leaders of many militaristic and imperialistic countries have assumed that God is on their side does not make the formula any easier to swallow.

Most Americans are unaware of the amount of human suffering the U.S. government has inflicted on others throughout the world, especially post 9/11. We are incessantly told it is our duty to support the troops and our leaders who invade, bomb or otherwise intervene in other nations. The motives offered might be to stop genocide, to take down a maniacal despot, or to spread democracy and American values. Our government purportedly acts with reluctance as well as with compassion, respect for others, and good intent. We are reminded that the troops keep us safe, all the while helping spread the American way of life to a needy world. Why? It is because we are “exceptional.”


September 11, 2001

We are told the United States was “brutally attacked” by Al-Qaeda on 9/11. It was certainly an act of depravity by depraved individuals. That it happened in real time, on our soil, live in our living rooms, made it seem even worse. The event dominated local and national news for weeks.

But thoughtful Americans who have looked closely at all the facts of that day see the small group as being internal criminals. Unlike Pearl Harbor, a blatant act of war by the Japanese, 9/11 was a crime. Did we treat it like a crime or an act of war? How did we respond? And apart from the deaths of 2,977 people, was the event really as devastating as we perceived it to be? And did it mean what we perceived it to mean?

The average citizen viewed the Twin Towers, which dominated the New York skyline, as symbolic of America’s financialstrength. To Americans, the Pentagon was, and is still today, symbolic of U.S. military strength. To watch the towers crash to the ground, and to see a smoldering hole in the side of the Pentagon were gut-wrenching experiences for us all. Our collective psyches were shattered, and we all felt very vulnerable. The “attack” was gruesome and grotesque from a human perspective. From a property damage perspective, not so much.

Few Americans knew that the Twin Towers, owned by the Port Authority of New York, were a financial drain, functionally obsolete and full of asbestos. In their book, 9/11 Revealed: Challenging the Facts Behind the War on Terror, Ian Henshall and Rowland Morgan note that “by 2001 much of the tower space was empty.” On May 21, 2001, the Port Authority lost a 10-year court battle with insurers for asbestos abatement. Finally, in July 2001, ownership of the project was transferred to private investors. The actual victims when the towers collapsed were the tenants and the firefighters trapped inside. As for the new owners, it was a financial windfall. They were awarded more than $4 billion in insurance claims.

The damage to the Pentagon could have been far worse since it came in an area of the building that was under renovation and relatively empty. The event did little structural damage to the building. The victims were the 125 people working inside who were murdered.

Yes, the event was visually shocking—spectacular in a grisly sense—but the real horror lay in the loss of the 2,977 victims. Our response to this abhorrent crime should have been that of a just, democratic society, acting on the rule of law. Instead, it was completely out of proportion, becoming barbaric and grotesque. Yet our response was justified by those who believe that an American life is more valuable than the lives of all others.

The response

Afghanistan

As noted, 9/11 was a criminal act, not a state-sponsored act of war. The United States, however, responded as though it had been an act of war. On October 7, 2001 the United States invaded Afghanistan, violating the UN Charter’s principle of sovereign equality. Justification provided to the world was that Osama bin Laden, a Saudi national and not an Afghan, masterminded 9/11 and was living there in the mountains. The ruling Taliban government offered to extradite bin Laden but needed proof of his guilt, as is customary in extradition cases. George Bush ignored the Taliban’s request and instead invaded one of the poorest countries in the world.

From October 2001 to the present, an estimated 31,000 civilians  have been killed, and approximately 29,900 have suffered war-related injuries. To this day, Americans occupy the country and continue to kill and wound Afghan civilians, with no end in sight. It is now the longest war in U.S. history. Bin Laden, whose alleged involvement in the crime was used as justification for the invasion, has been dead for years. I would challenge any American to explain why our troops are still there. I would ask that American the following: “Would you encourage your son or daughter to join the military and fight the good fight?” I would ask, “Who would your son be trying to kill? Would it be terrorists or perhaps Afghan nationals who don’t want to be occupied and just want to live in dignity and peace with their families? Would you be a proud parent if your son or daughter came home from war in a flag-draped coffin after killing innocent civilians?”

Finally, I would ask whether the 69,000-and-counting Afghan casualties of war, along with a near 18-year occupation of a sovereign country, were just and appropriate responses to 9/11. Or might this response instead be grossly disproportionate, planned and executed by an aggressive cabal of American leaders exceptional only in the way they inflict violence on others?

Iraq

Protests did not stop U.S. from devastating Iraq.

In September 2002,  the White House Iraq Group (WHIG), consisting of 12 members selected by the Bush administration, was formed to meet in the White House on a regular basis. The group was described by SourceWatch (a website published by the Center for Media and Democracy), as “the marketing arm of the White House whose purpose was to sell the 2003 invasion of Iraq to the public.” Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, yet this group was assembled to create a justification that did not exist for a war they wanted to start. They decided on Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs). There weren’t any. And mushroom clouds. There weren’t any. The selling began in September 2002 and from then on was relentless. A rational person might wonder, how do you sell a war?

According to French academic Dominique Reynié, between January 3 and April 12, 2003, 36 million people across the world took part in nearly 3,000 anti-war protests. On February 15 alone, in more than 800 cities, millions filled the streets to protest the invasion of Iraq before it happened. The Guinness Book of World Records estimated that between 12 and 14 million people from major cities and small towns on every continent came out to voice their dissent. An event like this was unprecedented in world history. Protests within the United States took place in more than 225 communities, but received little media attention.

Before the invasion, Pope John Paul ll stated, “This war would be a defeat for humanity which could not be legally or morally justified.” He and French Archbishop Jean Louis Tauran stated that a pre-emptive strike on Iraq violated the Catholic “just war” theory. Bush, Cheney, et al. ignored the protesters and the religious leaders.

They ignored the United Nations as well, and by doing so violated international law. All members of the Security Council but the United States and Great Britain rejected the call for war with Iraq. The UN Charter requires a unanimous vote of the Security Council for any war to be sanctioned. On September 16, 2004, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan declared that the Iraq invasion “was not in conformity with the UN charter. From our point of view, from the charter point of view, it was illegal.” In the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg after World War ll, British judge Norman Birkett said that “a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from the other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.” It is doubtful that an American president will ever be dragged off to a prison cell no matter the crime. That said, shouldn’t a man cited by the Secretary General of the United Nations for committing a war of aggression, a supreme international war crime, at least be shunned by polite society? Bush and Cheney were re-elected in 2004.

A lone voice for sanity in the media in the run-up to the Iraq war was Phil Donahue. On his final show, weeks before the invasion, his guest was retired Marine General, Anthony Zinni, a former commandant of the Marine Corps and leader of the Central Command, preceding the better-known Tommy Franks. Zinni was in charge of the no-fly zone in Iraq for a time and spoke Farsi. His familiarity with, experience in, and knowledge of the Middle East, particularly Iraq, were extensive. He stated unequivocally that Saddam Hussein was contained and no threat to his neighbors, much less the United States. Donahue’s show, though the most popular on the network at the time, was cancelled by MSNBC, which deemed the show and Zinni’s remarks unpatriotic. As it turns out, Zinni was correct, though it mattered little to the “exceptional” leaders who ordered the invasion.

On March 20, 2003, the United States invaded Iraq. A study done by researchers in Canada, the United States and Baghdad, with the cooperation of the Iraqi Ministry of Health, found that as of December 2017, nearly 500,000 civilians had died from war-related causes. Thousands upon thousands of homes were bombed into rubble, killing members of families and leaving the survivors homeless. The UN reported in 2014 that more than 4.4 million Iraqis were internally displaced, forced to live in refugee camps or neighboring countries.

Let us not forget that this war was created out of thin air by WHIG, marketed and sold to the American public and the world. It was a fraud from the very beginning and never could have been sold to anyone had the 9/11 event not occurred. All the credit for this merciless barbarity needs to be bestowed on our exceptional leaders, George W. Bush and Richard Cheney.

As an aside, on November 28, 2011, American exceptional leaders George Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Condoleezza Rice, in a criminal tribunal held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, were convicted in absentia of war crimes for the illegal (according to Kofi Annan) and immoral (according to Pope John Paul ll) invasion of Iraq. They destroyed the lives and hopes of innocent families numbering in the hundreds of thousands. Too bad the trial was not held in Washington D.C. or The Hague, with the defendants present in handcuffs.

Syria

The Syrian Civil War began in March 2011 in conjunction with the Arab Spring. The protest started out peacefully but then became violent. It was alleged that Bashar al-Assad used brutal methods to put down the uprising. That being said, uninvited intervention by any outside nation state is a violation of international law. For example, when Abraham Lincoln used brutal methods in unleashing Generals Sheridan and Sherman to wage war on civilians in the South during the American Civil War, no exceptional leader from any other nation came to the aid of these civilians and demanded regime change in the United States. No one needs be reminded that Lincoln’s likeness is carved in the side of Mt. Rushmore and he is considered one of America’s greatest presidents. The United States violated Syria’s sovereign equality in violation of Article 2 of the UN Charter.

In 2012, former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan convened a group in Geneva to bring a ceasefire to the hostilities in Syria. The talks ended abruptly when the Obama administration demanded that Assad and his elected staff step down before any ceasefire agreement could be reached. What right did the United States have to make such a demand? The violence continued. Then in late 2012, the CIA launched an operation code-named Timber Sycamore, with the goal of toppling Assad’s regime through the continuous military training and financial support of all types of radical militants.

The estimated civilian death toll in the war in Syria through March 2018 varies from 353,593 to 498,593. Out of a population of approximately 26 million, an estimated 6 million have been internally displaced and 13 million are in need of humanitarian assistance.

It can be argued that the majority of these casualties of war can be directly attributed to a combination of Obama’s intransigence in 2011 and the CIA’s cooperation with Saudi Arabia in arming, funding, and training the radical militant groups in Syria. Their interference has led to one of the most serious humanitarian crises of this century. This intrusion from the United States constitutes a violation of Syria’s sovereign equality as per Article 2 of the UN Charter. It was also another savage, disproportionate act of violence that had nothing to do with 9/11.

Man stands on a burning tank belonging to pro-Gardaffi forces. (Photo: Mads Nissen, courtesy Panos Pictures)

Libya

This is starting to sound repetitive. In March 2011, U.S.-led NATO forces began bombing Libya and continued bombing for seven months. The country, once one of the richest in Africa was, for all intents and purposes, destroyed. At present Libya is lawless, run by radical militants. Hillary Clinton is largely responsible, her role outlined in the “Libya Tick Tock” e-mail, made public by Julian Assange. In this e-mail, “A step-by-step guide to destroy Libya,” the Clinton team listed in chronological order all of the steps she took in order to prove that she was the architect of the U.S. bombing in Libya. It was to be a “brag sheet” to strengthen her foreign policy credentials in the upcoming election debates in 2016.

Estimates of the death toll in Libya range from 10,000 to 50,000. The National Transitional Council puts the dead at 30,000 and the wounded at 50,000. In addition, Libya’s Great Man-Made River, an underground pipeline that supplied water to Libya and other countries in Africa was destroyed by NATO planes, a violation of the UN Charter, thus making this destruction of Libya a war crime.

It shouldn’t be a surprise that the intervention in Libya was another fraud. On September 14, 2016, the British Parliament issued a scathing report. Assessing the evidence, they wrote that the “UK strategy was founded on erroneous assumptions and an incomplete understanding of the evidence.” In less polite rhetoric, the bombing of Libya was based on deception and lies.


Like his predecessor George Bush, Barack Obama was exceptional at committing acts of violence on others.

Once again, our exceptional leaders destroyed a sovereign country and the hopes of its citizens. It was another barbaric, out-of-proportion overkill that never would have happened without 9/11, yet Libya had nothing to do with 9/11.

Could the arrogance of Hillary Clinton and her willingness to destroy Libya just to impress voters be the reason the exceptional Donald Trump is now America’s president? Who knows?

As for Barack Obama, the Nobel Peace Prize recipient dramatically expanded both the air wars via drones and the special operations forces around the globe. In 2016 U.S. forces could be found in 70 percent of the countries in the world—138 nations—a staggering 130 percent increase in special-ops incursions since the days of the Bush administration. In his last year as president, according to Micah Zenko of the Council on Foreign Relations, the United States dropped 26,171 bombs on seven different countries. Obama was the only president in U.S. history who served two terms with the nation at war the entire time of his presidency. Like his predecessor George Bush, Barack Obama was exceptional at committing acts of violence on others.

Torture

Torture? What American leader would ever condone torture much less make it official policy?

Since my childhood, the crime of torture was attributed to other less humane, less enlightened societies – never to Americans. Individuals from the Third Reich and Japan were punished harshly at the Nuremberg trials for torturing prisoners and, in the case of Germany, torturing and murdering Jews in death camps. Torturing another human being as an official doctrine of the state was inconceivable in America. That was then.

Following 9/11, torture became the official Bush administration doctrine. Then Deputy Assistant Attorney General of the United States John Yoo provided the legal cover for Bush, Cheney and the CIA, going as far as asserting that the president had unlimited wartime powers and could order the massacre of an entire village of civilians if he so desired. Yoo, an exceptional American indeed, is currently a professor of law at the University of California at Berkeley.

At the Guantanamo Bay facility prisoners, most innocent of any crime, were subjected to beatings; waterboarding; sodomization; shackling in stress positions; sleep-, sensory-, and dietary deprivation; solitary confinement; and exposure to extreme temperatures. Closing Guantanamo was one of Obama’s campaign promises. He could have done so by a simple executive order. He chose not to, which leads many to speculate if there are forces that get in the way, as in so many other instances.

At Abu Ghraib, detainees were forced to sleep on the floor in flooded cells, stripped naked, then forced to crawl and bark like dogs. There were also attacked by real dogs. The staff regularly sodomized prisoners with foreign objects. General Antonio Taguba issued a scathing report, concluding that the majority of the detainees (70-90 percent of them, according to the Red Cross), arrested in nighttime sweeps of homes, were innocent of any crime. By 2006, at least 100 prisoners had died in U.S. custody, most of them violently.

On December 9, 2014, the government released the long-awaited Senate Intelligence Committee Report on Torture. Techniques used on captives by the CIA included waterboarding, rectal force-feeding, sleep deprivation, solitary confinement, and physical brutality. Former vice president Dick Cheney went on Meet the Press following the release of the report and bragged about authorizing torture. He said he would do it again. A former vice president of the United States appeared on national television and before the world openly admitted to authorizing war crimes with total impunity. Were U.S. citizens repulsed by this man’s criminal arrogance? Apparently not.

In a Washington Post-ABC News poll conducted soon after the Torture Report was released, by a margin of almost 2 to 1 (59 percent to 31 percent) Americans said they supported the CIA’s brutal methods at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo. Post 9/11 America has proved itself comfortable with the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria and now, it seems, even with torture.


Our ‘exceptional’ friends

Our closest allies in the Middle East are two of the most brutal, ruthless, oppressive regimes on earth. I am referring to Saudi Arabia and Israel.

Saudi Arabia

[dropcap]T[/dropcap]he Saudis are bullies on steroids, to both their own people and their neighbors. According to Human Rights Watch, Saudi Arabia internally suppresses freedom of expression, association, and belief by jail sentences or, in some cases, public execution. Women are not permitted to obtain a passport, marry, travel or access higher education without the approval of a male guardian. There is nothing remotely secret about any of this.

In Syria, the Saudis were funding ISIS and other militant groups. An e-mail from Hillary Clinton to John Podesta, dated August 17, 2014 and released by WikiLeaks, notes that Saudi Arabia and Qatar were named as countries arming and funding ISIS. She wrote, “We need to use our diplomatic and more traditional intelligence assets to bring pressure on the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to ISIL and other radical Sunni groups in the region.” But in 2010, during Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State, the United States had sold a $60-billion package of arms to Saudi Arabia. If I understand this correctly, the Saudis supply ISIS with weapons purchased from the United States. ISIS, our mortal enemy, then turns the weapons on American soldiers, and our leaders have full knowledge of this practice.

The Saudi intervention in Yemen started when Obama was in office and continues under Trump. Since the beginning, thousands of civilians have been slaughtered. The Saudis have been found dropping U.S. bombs on schools, hospitals and marketplaces, directly targeting civilians. Yet the United States continues its full support. In the spring of 2015, Saudi Arabia placed a full blockade on all flights into Yemen, including humanitarian aid. The blockade has stopped the flow of medical supplies and food and is on the brink of causing the largest genocide by starvation in modern history. Mark Lowcock, the UN’s humanitarian chief, said, “The continued closure of borders will only bring additional hardship and deprivation with deadly consequences to an entire population suffering from a conflict that is not of their own making.”

Why does the United States tolerate this? It could be because the massive arms sales to the kingdom by Obama and Trump has benefited the military industrial complex. It could also be because of the gifts showered on the Obama family and the Trump family by the Saudi leaders. According to the Federal Registry, in his first year as president, Obama and his family received in excess of $300,000 in gifts from Saudi King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz Al Saud.

During the presidential debates Donald Trump took a hard line against Saudi Arabia for their human rights abuses and slammed Hillary Clinton for the lavish donations her foundation received from Saudi Arabia. As president, to no one’s surprise, Trump did an about-face. He approved a billion-dollar arms sale to the Kingdom and he too received lavish gifts from the Saudis during his visit there in May 2017.

Israel

AMERICA SUPPORTS ISRAELI WAR CRIMES. Like other Israeli leaders who preceded him Netanyahu is both an extremist and a terrorist, not to mention a proficient and shameless liar. No American paper or television channel dare criticize him.

The Balfour Declaration of 1917 paved the way for the creation of the State of Israel in May 1948. With this new nation state came the forced exile of more than 700,000 Palestinians from their homeland. They were not allowed to return. Since then, millions more have been displaced, including those forced into an outdoor prison known as Gaza.

In its short history, Israel has violated more UN resolutions than all other UN member nations combined.

On June 8, 1967, the Israel Defense Force (IDF) attacked an American naval vessel, the USS Liberty, killing 34 American sailors and wounding 172 others. Israel was never held accountable.

It is a well-known “secret” that Israel has a nuclear arsenal, yet is not in compliance with the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). It is the law in the United States that no humanitarian funds be sent to any country not in compliance with NPT, except, of course, Israel, which receives $3.6 billion in foreign aid annually from the United States. Blatant hypocrisy like this does not go unnoticed, especially in the Middle East

Israel repeatedly terrorizes the Palestinians living in the open-air prison called Gaza, including through the use of WMDs. During Operation Cast Lead in 2008, the IDF repeatedly exploded white phosphorous canisters in the air over heavily populated areas in violation of international law.

In recent essentially non-violent protests in Gaza, the IDF fired live rounds into crowds of Palestinians. As of April 23, 2018, the death toll was 39, including a Reuters reporter. More than 1,000 have been wounded, many of them seriously.

On May 14, 2018, the IDF fired on unarmed Palestinians in Gaza for protesting the U.S. embassy transfer to Jerusalem, killing 60 and wounding more than 2,700, according to the New York Times. Donald Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, attended the ceremony and predictably blamed the Palestinians for the violence. This is American Exceptionalism on full display for all the world to witness.

As with Saudi Arabia, all Israeli crimes are done with full knowledge of and support from the United States government. Is it any wonder that in polls conducted worldwide since 2013 the United States has been voted the greatest threat to world peace by a wide margin?

Presidential candidates – 2016

Hillary Clinton

Clinton: a “psychopath and a war criminal.”

International human rights attorney and professor of law at Illinois University, Dr. Francis Boyle, was on the legal team that convicted Bush and his cohorts for war crimes in Malaysia. In a radio interview on Information Clearing House, he was asked about the presidential candidates for 2016 and said this about Hillary Clinton: “She is a psychopath and a war criminal.” Based on the Libya “brag sheet” alone, he is not going out on much of a limb. Adding in her vote for the Iraq war and her role in the Syria disaster, it is hard to argue with Dr. Boyle’s contention.

Donald Trump

Donald Trump’s “America First” agenda might just be what gave the “pussy-grabber” racist his nomination and victory in the Republican primaries. But also, anti-war voters were encouraged by his criticism of the Iraq war and claims of non-intervention if elected president. As president he has confirmed his detractors’ worst fears and then some. The narcissistic, practiced liar has thumbed his nose at everyone except our exceptional allies, Israel and Saudi Arabia. We don’t know yet if he is as much of a bully as Bush/Cheney or Obama/Clinton, but it looks like he is headed in that direction. His actions thus far—moving the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, pulling out of the Paris Agreement, reneging on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (the Iran deal), appointing a torturer to head the CIA, and bringing warmonger extraordinaire John Bolton back into a seat of power—do not bode well for all of us everywhere.

An olive branch

Not all Americans are bullies. Millions spend their lives in careers in the service of a better life for others. Health care workers such as nurses, doctors, first responders, physical therapists, hospital volunteers, and the like come to mind. These “heroes” devote their lives to improving ours. The same can be said of teachers and firefighters. These Americans are crucial to our well-being, yet in my view are taken for granted and often disdained.

The Pentagon has manipulated us into lavishing praise on all things military at venues like sporting events and airports. It is perverse. The real heroes in our society get little credit or little financial recompense. Imagine if your house were on fire, you dialed 911 and the operator said, “Sorry, the firemen are out on the town.” Imagine if one of your children were in an accident, and when you called the hospital no one was there. Imagine if there were no teachers in our schools. Our priorities and values seem to have been turned upside down since 9/11.

America

In polls conducted by Gallup worldwide that began in 2013 and have continued every year since, the United States came in first hands down when participants were asked: “Which country is the greatest threat to world peace? “

If an outsider asked me what my country stands for, it would be hard to come up with an answer. I might start with how we break our word, threaten other countries, force regime change, impose sanctions, arm the world, launch drone strikes, bomb countries, invade countries, destroy homes and families, and go from there.

Memorials

There is a fitting tribute to those who were murdered senselessly on 9/11 at Ground Zero. Nearly 3,000 names are inscribed in bronze at the memorial, so at least their loved ones can feel a sense that the country will not forget them.

To be fair, it would be nearly impossible for the governments of Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Libya to build similar memorials to those who have been murdered senselessly by the U.S. government, simply because of the sheer numbers. A possibility might be that each country build one memorial with one name inscribed in bronze. Years ago the Pentagon was kind enough to simplify the mass killings by U.S. bombs and bestow one name to the fallen. The name on the plaques would represent tens of thousands of lives lost in the same brutal fashion as the lives that were lost here on 9/11. They would be memorialized forever in history, thanks to the Pentagon, as “collateral damage.”

Is America “exceptional” in how it inflicts violence and death upon countless innocent people around the world? And is it fair to call American leaders “exceptional” bullies?

Is there any doubt?

[premium_newsticker id="211406"]

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
 Geoffrey O’Neill is a former Marine officer, Vietnam veteran, former business owner, and unexceptional American citizen who believes in the right of all people to live in peace and with dignity with their families. Geoffrey can be reached at goneill460@gmail.com  • TRUTH AND SHADOWS is a site created and edited by CRAIG MCKEE, dedicated to exploring the truth about 9/11 and its multifarious consequences for the US and humanity in general. 

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

PLEASE COMMENT ON OUR FACEBOOK GROUP OR IN THE OPINION WINDOW BELOW.
All image captions, pull quotes, appendices, etc. by the editors not the authors. 

Parting shot—a word from the editors

The Best Definition of Donald Trump We Have Found

In his zeal to prove to his antagonists in the War Party that he is as bloodthirsty as their champion, Hillary Clinton, and more manly than Barack Obama, Trump seems to have gone “play-crazy” — acting like an unpredictable maniac in order to terrorize the Russians into forcing some kind of dramatic concessions from their Syrian allies, or risk Armageddon.However, the “play-crazy” gambit can only work when the leader is, in real life, a disciplined and intelligent actor, who knows precisely what actual boundaries must not be crossed. That ain’t Donald Trump — a pitifully shallow and ill-disciplined man, emotionally handicapped by obscene privilege and cognitively crippled by white American chauvinism. By pushing Trump into a corner and demanding that he display his most bellicose self, or be ceaselessly mocked as a “puppet” and minion of Russia, a lesser power, the War Party and its media and clandestine services have created a perfect storm of mayhem that may consume us all. Glen Ford, Editor in Chief, Black Agenda Report