Sunday, February 27, 2011

The War Party's Atrocity Porn
















"This is a massacre," the frantic Libyan woman, speaking by telephone while cowering in her apartment in Tripoli, told CNN's Anderson Cooper.

"I hope you know that people around the world are watching and praying and wanting to do something," Anderson told her, as if he were a stage prompter hinting at a performer's next line. Whether or not she had been given a copy of the script, the caller performed as expected: "[T]he first step [is to] make Libya a no-fly zone. If you make Libya a no-fly zone, no more mercenaries can come in.... There needs to be action. How much more waiting, how much more watching, how much more people dying?"

It's entirely possible, perhaps even likely, that the subject of Cooper's interview was simply a terrified but resolute woman who risked her life to describe the violence devouring her country amid the death throes of Khadafi's police state.

It's likewise possible that her call for international action to impose a no-fly zone was a desperate plea from a victim, rather than an act of media ventriloquism in which an anonymous figure endorsed the first plank of a military campaign proposed by the same neo-conservative kriegsbund that manipulated us into Iraq.

 Surely it was a coincidence that the "Cry in the Night" from Libya was echoed on the same network a few nights later by Iraq war architect, former World Bank president, and accused war criminal Paul Wolfowitz, who several days prior to Cooper's dramatic broadcast called for a NATO-enforced "no fly zone" over Libya.

In fact, the day following that interview, an ad hoc group calling itself the Foreign Policy Initiative, which coalesced from the remnants of the Project for a New American Century, published an "open letter" to Mr. Obama demanding military intervention -- beginning with a no-fly zone -- in Libya.  The neo-con framework for managing the Libyan crisis would create a regional protectorate administered by NATO on behalf of the "international community." This would nullify any effort on the part of Libyans, Egyptians, Tunisians, and others to achieve true independence.

On previous experience with media campaigns on behalf of humanitarian conquest, my incurable cynicism leads me to hear in Cooper's "Cry in the Night" a faint but unmistakable echo of the tearful, palpably earnest testimony of "Nayirah" --  the wide-eyed Kuwaiti girl who, using an assumed name to "protect her family," described what had befallen her country in the wake of the Iraqi invasion.

Bravely composing herself as she recounted horrors no human eyes should behold, the precociously self-possessed 15-year-old volunteer nurse related to the Congressional Human Rights Caucus how Iraqi soldiers stormed into the al-Addan Hospital, tore newborn infants from incubators, and hurled them to the floor. A short time later this testimony was "confirmed" by others who offered similarly anguished testimony before the UN Security Council.

During the three-month build-up to the January 1991 attack on Baghdad, the image of Kuwaiti "incubator babies" was endlessly recycled as a talking point in media interviews, presidential speeches, and debates in Congress and the UN. A post-war opinion survey found that the story of the "incubator babies" was the single most potent weapon deployed by the Bush administration in its campaign to build public support for the attack on Iraq.

This atrocity account was particularly effective in overcoming the skepticism of people espousing a progressive point of view.

"A pacifist by nature, my brother was not in a peaceful mood that day," recalled Christian Science Monitor columnist Tom Regan, describing his sibling's reaction to "Nayirah's" testimony. "We've got to go and get Saddam Hussein -- now," Regan's brother insisted.

"I completely understood his feelings," Regan pointed out. After all, "who could countenance such brutality? The news of the slaughter had come at a key moment in the deliberations about whether the U.S. would invade Iraq. Those who watched the non-stop debates on TV saw that many of those who had previously wavered on the issue had been turned into warriors by this shocking incident. Too bad it never happened."

"Nayirah" was not a traumatized ingenue who had witnessed an act of barbarism worthy of the Einsatzgruppen; she was actually the daughter of Saud Nasi al-Sabah, Kuwait's ambassador to the United States (and a member of the emirate's royal family). Her script had been written by the Washington-based PR firm Hill & Knowlton, which -- under the supervision of former Bush administration Chief of Staff Craig Fuller -- had put together a campaign to build public support for the impending war.




It wasn't difficult to convince the public that Saddam was a hideous thug. Selling the idea of a major war in the Middle East was a more daunting proposition. In late 1990, Hal Steward, a retired Army propaganda officer, defined the problem for the administration: "If and when the shooting starts, reporters will begin to wonder why American soldiers are dying for oil-rich sheiks. The U.S. military had better get cracking to come up with a public relations plan that will supply the answers the public can accept."

The image of newborn Kuwaiti infants being ripped from incubators was an updated riff on a classic war propaganda theme performed by British intelligence -- and its American fellow travelers -- in their efforts to provoke U.S. intervention in World War I.

That era's equivalent of the Kuwaiti "incubator babies" were the Belgian infants who were supposedly spitted on bayonets by hairy-knuckled Huns in pickelhaube helmets. German soldiers did this to amuse themselves once they could no longer sate their prurient interests by raping Belgian women and then amputating their breasts. So the American public was told, in all seriousness, by people working on behalf of a secretive British propaganda committee headed by Charles Masterman.


In 1915, a official Commission headed by Viscount James Bryce, a notable British historian, "verified" those atrocity stories without naming a specific witness or victim. This didn't satisfy Clarence Darrow, who offered a reward of $1,000 to anyone who could produce a Belgian or French victim who had been mutilated by German troops. That bounty went unclaimed.

"After the war," recounts Thomas Fleming in his book Illusion of Victory, "historians who sought to examine the documentation for Bryce's stories were told that the files had mysteriously disappeared. This blatant evasion prompted most historians to dismiss 99 percent of Bryce's atrocities as fabrications."

War emancipates every base and repulsive impulse to which fallen man is susceptible. So it's certain that some German troops (like their French, Belgian, British, and American counterparts) exploited opportunities to commit individual acts of depraved cruelty. But the purpose of the war propaganda peddled by the Anglo-American elite, as Fleming observes, was to create a widespread public image of Germans as "monsters capable of appalling sadism" -- thereby coating an appeal to murderous collective hatred with a lacquer of sanctimony.

I've described agitprop of this variety as "atrocity porn." It is designed to appeal to prurient interests and manipulate a dangerous appetite -- in this case, what Augustine calls the libido domimandi, or the lust to rule over others.

The trick is to leave the target audience at once shivering in horror at a spectacle of sub-human depravity, panting with a visceral desire for vengeance, and rapturously self-righteous about the purity of its humane motives. People who succumb to it are easily subsumed into a hive mind of officially sanctioned hatred, and prepared to perpetrate crimes even more hideous than those that they believe typify the enemy.

Rhetoric of that kind abounded during the French Revolution, particularly the Jacobin regime's war to annihilate the rebellious Vendee. It also figured prominently in the Lincoln regime's war to conquer the newly independent southern states. However, it's difficult to find a better expression of that mindset than the one offered in an editorial published in 1920 by Krasni Mech (The Red Sword), a publication of the Soviet Cheka secret police:

"Our morality has no precedent, and our humanity is absolute, because it rests on a new ideal. Our aim is to destroy all forms of oppression and violence. To us, everything is permitted, for we are the first to raise the sword not to oppress races and reduce them to slavery, but to liberate humanity from its shackles .... Blood? Let blood flow like water . .. for only through the death of the old world can we liberate ourselves forever." (Emphasis added.)


In pursuing his  Grand Crusade for Democracy, Woodrow Wilson was squarely in that tradition, extolling the supposed virtue of "Force without stint or limit ... the righteous and triumphant Force which shall make Right the law of the world and cast every selfish dominion in the dust." To fortify the American "war will" through a steady diet of atrocity porn, the Wilson administration created a Department of Public Information that liaised with its British equivalent, as well as quasi-private British propaganda fronts such as the Navy League. That organization, Fleming points out, included "dozens of major bankers and corporate executives, from J.P. Morgan Jr. to Cornelius Vanderbilt."

Through absolutely no fault of his own, Anderson Cooper is a great-great-grandson of Cornelius Vanderbilt. Of considerably greater interest is the fact that as a student at Yale, Cooper spent two summers as an intern at Langley in a CIA program designed to cultivate future intelligence operatives.

When asked about Cooper's background with the CIA, a CNN spokeswoman insisted that he chose not to pursue a job with the Agency after graduating from Yale. The same can be said, however, of many of the CIA's most valuable media assets. 

As Carl Bernstein documented decades ago, the CIA "ran a formal training program in the 1950s to teach its agents to be journalists. Intelligence officers were `taught how to make noises like reporters,' explained a high CIA official, and were then placed in  major news organizations with help from management. `These were the guys who went through the ranks and were told, `You're going to be a journalist,' the CIA official said. Relatively few of the 400-some [media] relationships described in Agency files followed that pattern, however; most involved persons who were already bona fide journalists when they began undertaking tasks for the Agency."

By way of an initiative called "Operation Mockingbird," the CIA built a large seraglio of paid media courtesans. This was carried out through the Office of Policy Coordination, which was created by Allen Dulles and Frank Wisner  -- the latter being the official who went on to organize coups (and the attendant propaganda campaigns) against governments in Iran and Guatemala. (Wisner's son and namesake, incidentally, was a vice chairman at AIG -- the CIA's favorite global insurance conglomerate -- until 2009; more recently he was tapped by the Obama administration to serve as a back-channel contact with Hosni Mubarak and Omar Suleiman.)

The tendrils of "Operation Mockingbird" extended through every significant national media organ, from the Washington Post and Newsweek to the Time-Life conglomerate, from the New York Times to CBS. As a result, according to former CIA analyst Ray McGovern, the Fourth Estate "has been captured by government and corporations, the military-industrial complex, the intelligence apparatus." It is, in everything but name, an appendage of the Regime. This is clearly seen every time the Regime decides the time has come to mount another campaign of humanitarian bloodshed abroad.

Having "learned nothing from the horrors that they cheer-led like excitable teenage girls over the past 15 years, these bohemian bombers, these latte-sipping lieutenants, these iPad imperialists are back," sighs a wearily disgusted Brendan O'Neill in the London Telegraph. "This time they're demanding the invasion of Libya."

On O'Neill's side of the Atlantic, the Fleet Street Samurai are peddling "rumors of systematic male rape" in Libya . Others insist that the prospective war in Libya would in no way resemble "the foolishness of the Iraq invasion" -- just as similar self-appointed sages promised that the ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, each of which has lasted at least as long as the Vietnam War, would not be "another Vietnam."

For some reason, this brings to mind the image of Bullwinkle repeatedly trying to pull a rabbit from his hat, blithely batting aside Rocky's complaint that the trick "never works" by exclaiming, "This time for sure!" This time, we're supposed to believe -- or at least, pretend to believe -- that the atrocity accounts are true, that military action sanctified by the "international community" is a moral obligation, that warlust and hatred are virtuous, and that the impending bloodshed will be a cleansing stream.

As is the case, one supposes, with any other variety, war pornography is nothing if not predictable. However, unlike Bullwinkle's inept attempts at thaumaturgy, war porn is a trick that seems to work every time.


Your donations are vital to help keep Pro Libertate on-line -- and very much appreciated! Thanks, and God bless.







Dum spiro, pugno!



22 comments:

Wesley 'Whitey Lawful' Mcgranor said...

Aside from the usual paleoconservative argument against intervening in international affairs... I will go on to state that if this was the 1990's and paleoconservative militias were storming Government buildings, as well as other citizens gathering in the streets in such a way as the Libyans, Egyptians and others--would the Government just surrender? Or would they attack the crowd gathering in the streets and shoot the militamen that sieged city halls, state houses and Washington D.C.? Sure using jets and certain ammo as has been used on Libyans is excessive--if the Mercaneries and Libyan Government had used the usual weaponry would there be an appeal to intervene?

ncpagan said...

This should be required reading for all
sheeple.

Outer Hebrides said...

Methods to embroil us in endless wars haven't changed since the War of Northern Aggression. From it's infancy Hollywood was employed to transmit propaganda concerning Imperial German atrocities all the while conveniently ignoring those of the British. While German atrocities were largely fictional the British blockade during and AFTER WW1 did kill many German children. George Creel a Hollywood director headed up the Department of Public Information. The methods are the same only the mediums of transmission are different.

liberranter said...

As is the case, one supposes, with any other variety, war pornography is nothing if not predictable. However, unlike Bullwinkle's inept attempts at thaumaturgy, war porn is a trick that seems to work every time.

Proof positive of "our" utter inability, or more likely unwillingness, to learn from history.

castiron said...

I found it interesting that the novel Rilla of Ingleside (1921), the 8th and last book of the Anne of Green Gables series, had all the propaganda about the horrible huns killing babies and this was why so many of the young Canadian men volunteered to go and fight. It also showed how distraught the women were at the thought of innocent babies being slayed. It kind of ruined the novel as L.M. Montgomery probably intended but makes it more interesting on how propaganda effects a community and nation.

Anonymous said...

Very well written. A clarion call for our country to waken from its stupor!

Charlie Hazlett said...

William, I really appreciate your work in opening the eyes of those sleeping but I have a request.

Okay, two requests.........

Many, if not all, of my favorites commentary sites, I print to read at my leisure. Is it possible, using Blogger, to have a "print this" link that eliminates the superfluous matter one has to waste ink on when printing your articles ??

Also, when I decided to ask this, I notice there is not "contact me" link......that might be a nice feature as well.

Thanks for your consideration, and please, please, keep up the good work.

Bob said...

Good grief, Will! Another excellent column!

Lemuel Gulliver said...

Mr. Grigg,

This is the perfect opportunity for me to present to your readers this WWII U.S. Syk (Psychological) Warfare Department propaganda video:

http://www.holocaustdenialvideos.com/buchenwald/index.html

It shows the REAL facts behind the world-famous "Buchenwald Liberation" movie, (of which everyone in the world has seen clips,) directed by Hollywood's very own Billy Wilder, who even appears inadvertently on camera, directing the performers. Complete with Amazonian shrunken heads borrowed from a local museum, artfully stacked piles of bodies of freshly dead prisoners, 1,000 of whom who died as a result of overfeeding by the liberating American troops*, and "human-skin lampshades" allegedly found in Buchenwald, FOUR YEARS after the so-called "Bitch of Buchenwald," Ilse Koch, had left the camp with her Commandant husband, and after her husband had been tried and executed - by the Nazis - for mistreating prisoners. (The significance of that is that any physical evidence against him, such as the fictitious lampshades, would have been removed, years before, by the Nazis for use at his trial.) Some of these planted artifacts, and movie clips of the bulldozers pushing piles of bodies inadvertently killed by the Americans themselves, were later used as so-called "evidence" at the Nuremberg Trials.

(*When the Americans arrived, there were 21,000 live prisoners in the camp, and very few dead ones. Two days later, when Eisenhower arrived for his grand performance before Billy Wilder's camera, there were only 20,000. The difference is what makes up the piles of bodies we have all seen, being pushed by bulldozers. The analysis gives evidential proof that they were killed by misplaced kindness - overfeeding.)

This analysis linked above is a magnificent study of Allied propaganda. Everybody should watch it - it is an entire education in lies, exaggerations, innuendo, false righteousness, staged horror, planted evidence, and assumed indignation. Eisenhower himself deserved an Oscar for his performance.

Why was the movie made? Well, to excuse and justify the heinous war crimes by Churchill and Eisenhower of firebombing German cities, including priceless gems of medieval and Baroque architecture, resulting in the deaths by fire of some 5 million German civilians, about 10 percent of the prewar civilian population.

To paraphrase Talleyrand: This propaganda movie was worse than a crime, it was a blunder - on two counts: (1) It excused and covered up Allied war crimes, as noted, and (2) It gave powerful ammunition to those people who maintain that the Holocaust never happened.

Number two above is a great pity, because the Holocaust DID happen, in spite of this clumsy U.S. Syk Warfare propaganda movie. The actual numbers of Jews murdered were about 2.7 million, (NONE of them at Buchenwald where the movie was shot,) which is still a horrendous crime, but a number which pleases neither the Zionists and their gullible Jewish sheeple, who claim six million, nor the revisionists, who insist that the number was zero.

(Aside: Those who think I am anti-Jewish, this should disabuse you of that idea. If I was, I would not point you to this fake movie then concede the truth of the Holocaust. Rather, I am intensely and passionately against Zionism, which is a criminal and Satanic cabal, nothing to do with Judaism, out to conquer the world by treachery and lies, to destroy Christianity and Islam, and to enslave the human race.)

BOTTOM LINE:

Propaganda and lies in the service of a "good cause" are always dangerous, because when exposed as such, they tend to destroy all legitimacy of the arguments for that good cause.

Leviathan and its minions among us, please take note.

- Lemuel Gulliver.

Lemuel Gulliver said...

Mr. Grigg,

Forgive me for hogging the limelight here - I'm on a roll now. Have we noticed how WWI was followed by the Battle of Warsaw, the Spanish Civil War, the Sino-Japanese War, WWII, the Korean War, the Cold War, the Vietnam War, War in Central America, War in Southern Africa, War in Colombia, Gulf War I, the War on Terror, Gulf War II, the War in Afghanistan, and on and on? Never seems to end, does it?? Well, children, I'm going to tell the class how the Cold War was manufactured by lies, since that was the basis, (or so the wolves tell us wool-brained sheeple,) of all our wars from 1945 to 1990.

My contact who is acquainted with Putin's Press Secretary is a very interesting man. At the age of 6 in early 1939 he met Hitler in his office in the ReichsKanzlerei in Berlin, where he accompanied an elder relative who had business with the Fuehrer. He recalls Hitler as being very kind and warm, with intense blue eyes, as he shook hands with the kid, who then went off to the corner of the vast office to play with his toy soldiers while the adults did their business.

After the war, he met and became friends with Major-General Reinhard Gehlen, at his villa on the Starnberger See. Gehlen was later recruited out of Pullach by Major James H. Critchfield of the brand-new CIA, to create the Gehlen Organization, supposedly to spy on the Soviets. (CIA Operation 'Rusty'.) BTW, Gehlen, asked at one point to report how many former Nazis he had recruited for his putative spy group, now working for America, counted 1,054. Imagine.

See the details and a photo here:

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB146/index.htm

TADAA! Listen up, now! Here is the immense secret, which nobody knows: Gehlen was tasked to write a completely wacky report for the CIA, saying that the Soviets were massing troops on the borders of the Iron Curtain, and Stalin was stockpiling weapons and material for an invasion of Western Europe.

This was pure and utter fiction. The Russians had just lost 30 million people, Western Russia from Moscow to Berlin was a smoking wasteland, the Russian Army was exhausted, and Stalin was busy tearing up rail lines and dismantling factories, and shipping the steel and machinery back to Russia as war reparations.

Nevertheless, the report was written, and presented to Truman and to certain committees in Congress, causing alarm, terror, hysteria, and damp spots on the armchairs in the Oval Office and on Capitol Hill. America began to rearm, and prepare for war with the Soviets, who had not the slightest intention of attacking anybody. However, alarmed themselves at America's rearming, the Soviets began to rearm also. This, children, is how the Cold War got started.

In this way Hughes, Martin Marietta, Lockheed, General Dynamics, Grumman, Boeing, and all the other war contractors got to keep making vast sums of money, and the generals and admirals, reconstituted in WWII as the Joint Chiefs, got to keep large armed forces over which to preside.

And we, the American taxpayer, paid for it all, to the tune of trillions of dollars, which was real money in those days. (Today a few trillion barely pays bonuses for Wall Street's bankers.)

And Gehlen was well compensated for his co-operation. Instead of being hung at Nuremberg like so many of his colleagues, he was appointed the head of the West German Bundesnachrichtendienst, or BND, the equivalent of our FBI, where he served happily until his retirement in 1968. He died in 1979, bearing the highest orders and decorations of the German State. Imagine. The only richly deserved decoration he never received, but which was his and only his to wear, was "The Man Who Started The Cold War."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinhard_Gehlen

I do so love a nice little historical story about little lies, big lies, and whopping lies, especially when it explains so much, about how we all got to be so poor, don't you?

Sweet dreams to all.

- Lemuel Gulliver.

Anonymous said...

Will, as a satirical aside, and as an Internet "homage" so some unknown, I propose that the White House and Pentagons web sites have a splash page that says, "All your PRON belong to us!"

Anonymous said...

Oh, and another thing, the American "Bullwinkels", i.e. the public, need to snap out of their "Get another hat" routine of voting and realize the entire game show is rigged and demand a-la the Arabs, not ask, that our overlords go to hell. And not in just four more but now! I suspect that once cornered the vermin will show their true teeth and stab us in the chest openly instead of our death by a thousand cuts from behind.

liberranter said...

MoT:

To continue your last thought, I wonder more and more with each passing day how many of the rank-and-file within the Imperial Legions will wake up and do the right thing once the truth emerges about the monster they are serving. (I suppose this would most likely occur in the wake of complete economic implosion). Without the numbers to man the heavy weaponry and blindly obey orders from on high to impose raw tyranny upon the rest of us, what are the Regime's real chances of long-term survival?

Sans Authoritas said...

Mr. Grigg,

When I first heard the woman's voice (I believe I heard two similar "calls",) my very first impression was "agit-prop." I'm glad someone else agrees with my suspicion.

Kitty Antonik Wakfer said...

The retelling of WWI and WWII era pro-war propaganda is not new to me, though it is likely to many. I've read several accountings over the past 10+ years of enormous effort by large factions of the US government at the time to get US troops into "the action" - almost as though it was some football game with nothing more than "team pride" at stake... Therefore it didn't surprise me greatly to learn - belatedly since I did not read any of the original likely few reportings - that the Kuwait incubator babies story was a complete fabrication. That properly should have been and continue to be a major example of government theatrics for the sole purpose of selling the public on the justification for government troops initiating harm, something that most (?all?) people would not support if they knew the truth.

I would like to see a an "award" created, akin to the Ig Nobel, given to the individuals who have given the most harm-promoting deceitful public presentations - an ignominious award, the "Iggie", for the truly deceitful enormously harm-causing action by a particular person. This one by Nayirah al-Ṣabaḥ (is this her true first name?) on Oct 10 1991 should IMO be the top winner for that year. Just consider all the loss of life, limb, livelihood and property lost as a result of the US and allies storming into "the Gulf" to save Kuwaiiti preemies from the inhuman Iraq soldiers, urged on by their citizens who had been enraged by her tale! Where is this woman today?! I'd like to see that she is roundly shamed and shunned - public negative Social Preferencing, unless and until she begins serious restitution to the many victims of the war of which she played a key role in starting.
Moving forward in time there is the Iraqi fabricator of evidence of WMD of which Colin Powell convinced the UN and US public to send troops into Iraq to save the world from Saddam Hussein's sure use of them. Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi, code named "Curveball", deserves an "Iggie" for year 2003 - or even that entire decade - for a separate category of proxied most-harm promoting deceit, since al-Janabi did not make his own claimed "evidence" public but rather was "ventriloquist" for Powell, who in actuality was no dummy. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/15/defector-admits-wmd-lies-iraq-war
[cont'd]

Kitty Antonik Wakfer said...

[Cont'd]
Another item, Will, that your entry stimulated from me, and my husband Paul Wakfer, is the accepted practice from science that needs to be kept in mind by everyone - the burden of proof falls to the claimant, followed logically by extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Therefore, when a media representative or anyone makes a claim that is not within the practice of the vast majority of present-day human beings - eg. purposeful physical harm to babies, as claimed by "Nayirah" - that strong evidence be required. Eyewitness accounts by at least 2 parties and corroborating evidence that these individuals were at the location in the time-frame claimed is not too much to require and should be if anyone is to place credence in such testimony. Without it, reports ought properly to be questioned, and even disregarded if the reporters cannot or will not provide such evidence. This has not been done by the mainstream media in all previous US-involved wars to my knowledge and is a considerable indication of their willingness to support whatever stand and direction the government is taking at that point in time in regards to military action.

The fact that US citizen/resident monies via taxes are the source (directly and as interest payments on loans/bonds) of the funds and the source of human bodies to conduct any war, it would follow that it is in their individual best interest to know that the media is not necessarily telling the truth when repeating claims of the US government. Those who are in the mainstream media can only redeem themselves by adhering to the principle of presenting extraordinary evidence for extraordinary claims and demanding such from any and all governments, which by their nature seek situations that promote the idea of their own necessity.

Logan Weiler III said...

Tremendous as usual. Heard your discussion of this on Dr. Stan, where it was mentioned that three deposed leaders have suddenly found themselves in comas. I'm not able to verify that. Can you please guide me to documentation?

William N. Grigg said...

Logan -- thanks!

Anent the matter of "deposed dictator syndrome," here's the key write-up, for what it's worth:

http://timesonline.typepad.com/dons_life/2011/02/mubarak-and-ben-ali-what-would-tacitus-say.html

Bill said...

Completely OT.

Does anyone have a good source for the number of people killed by the police (of whatever flavor) on an annual basis?

Anonymous said...

Kitty, the Kuwaiti fabrications laid the cornerstone for further lying and manipulation. The entire Iraqi/Afghani sand trap is to set up further imperial misadventures down the road. With our current economic mess, thanks to the same thieves and liars, the next shoe to drop will be a massive war to take the peoples minds off the ball and the rats responsible. These swine will then howl and gibber to us about this Muslim/Caliphate "enemy" and stir up the mindless drones into nationalistic blood lust. It has been done countless times before and as much as I hate to admit... it works! Old tricks are the best tricks. One need only pay attention to how the mainstream American propaganda organs covered up Mr. Davis' CIA affiliations etc. while it provided CYA to the White-washed House on 1600. The rest of the world, and indeed the Pakistanis themselves, already knew everything about him before the American public even got a whiff! All to protect spies who, like the roaches they are, scurried out of the country. Nothing new it seems.

Lemuel Gulliver said...

MoT & Friends,

You cannot begin to imagine. This e-book, "Conversations With The Crow":

http://www.shop.conversationswiththecrow.com/Conversations-with-the-Crow-CWC-GD01.htm

is not only wickedly amoral, it is a devastating expose of the CIA. Well worth the $8.99. It is a collection of transcribed phone conversations with Robert Trumbull Crowley, Deputy Director of the CIA for "Clandestine Operations," i.e. assassinations, subversions, and wet operations.

Here you will find a few sample conversations which were put up on the Web:

http://www.tbrnews.org/Archives/a2999.htm#006

http://www.tbrnews.org/Archives/a2941.htm#006

http://www.tbrnews.org/Archives/a2882.htm#006

http://www.tbrnews.org/Archives/a2946.htm#006

http://www.tbrnews.org/Archives/a2885.htm#005

http://www.tbrnews.org/Archives/a2913.htm#005

I recommend you get the e-book. It contains over 100 conversations. You will be aghast, but will also laugh yourself silly, in spite of yourself.

Enjoy!!
- Lemuel Gulliver

Harry O. said...

I have no particular reason to support Paul Wolfowitz, but to refer to him an "accused war criminal" is almost meaningless, even though it sounds dramatic, and tends to make one suspect he is even guilty of the charges.

In fact, if you can afford to hire a lawyer/solicitor/advocat in the U.K. or in Belgium, or can find one who is willing to work pro-bono, you can convert anyone in the world into an accused war criminal. Both countries claim universal jurisdiction for such things. Whether the accusations have merit or not can be worked out in court. In the meantime, the individual is an accused war criminal.