Category Archives: Russia

UPDATE II: The ‘Regime Change’ Alliance (Al-Qaida’s On-Board!)

Democracy, Islam, Media, Middle East, Neoconservatism, Propaganda, Russia, War

“It’s clear enough that the Sunni alliance led by Saudia Arabia and Qatar has ensured that the insurgency inside Syria will countenance no ceasefire offers; and that the propaganda machine … will continue a non-stop flow of mendacious bulletins eagerly seized upon by the western press,” writes ALEXANDER COCKBURN, at Counterpunch.

In “Murder on her Mind,” I described our foreign policy as an “‘angels and demons’ Disney production, starring the prototypical evil dictator who was killing his noble people,” until, in the case of Libya, “three amazon warriors—high on estrogen-driven paternalism—rode to the rescue.” The three Gorgon sisters (Medusa’s posse) included Samantha Power (special assistant to the president and member of his National Security Council), UN Ambassador Susan Rice, and Hillary Rodham Clinton.

AISLING BYRNE, also of Couterpunch, sees a similar pattern play out in Syria. “Arguably, the most important component in this struggle for the ‘strategic prize’, he writes, “has been the deliberate construction of a largely false narrative that pits unarmed democracy demonstrators being killed in their hundreds and thousands as they protest peacefully against an oppressive, violent regime, a ‘killing machine’ led by the ‘monster’ Assad,” except that where BYRNE sees a plan, I see only hubris and the heights of stupidity.

Iraq, Libya and, now Syria, all were relatively secular and stable compared to where they are headed with the aid of NATO, the US and the Arab League (and their propaganda arm, Al Jazeera). Just imagine, Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity are now on the same side–and whooping it up–for the Arab League and Al Jazeera!

MORE from AISLING BYRNE:

“Whereas in Libya, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) claimed it had “no confirmed reports of civilian casualties” because, as the New York Times wrote recently, “the alliance had created its own definition for ‘confirmed’: only a death that NATO itself investigated and corroborated could be called confirmed”. “But because the alliance declined to investigate allegations,” the Times wrote, “its casualty tally by definition could not budge – from zero”.In Syria, we see the exact opposite: the majority of Western mainstream media outlets, along with the media of the US’s allies in the region, particularly al-Jazeera and the Saudi-owned al-Arabiya TV channels, are effectively collaborating with the “regime change” narrative and agenda with a near-complete lack of questioning or investigation of statistics and information put out by organizations and media outlets that are either funded or owned by the US/European/Gulf alliance – the very same countries instigating the regime change project in the first place.
Claims of “massacres”, “campaigns of rape targeting women and girls in predominantly Sunni towns” ”torture” and even “child-rape” are reported by the international press based largely on two sources – the British-based Syrian Observatory of Human Rights and the Local Co-ordination Committees (LCCs) – with minimal additional checking or verification.
Hiding behind the rubric – “we are not able to verify these statistics” – the lack of integrity in reporting by the Western mainstream media has been starkly apparent since the onset of events in Syria. A decade after the Iraq war, it would seem that no lessons from 2003 – from the demonization of Saddam Hussein and his purported weapons of mass destruction – have been learnt.

What we are seeing in Syria is a deliberate and calculated campaign to bring down the Assad government so as to replace it with a regime “more compatible” with US interests in the region.
The blueprint for this project is essentially a report produced by the neo-conservative Brookings Institute for regime change in Iran in 2009. The report – “Which Path to Persia?” – continues to be the generic strategic approach for US-led regime change in the region.
A rereading of it, together with the more recent “Towards a Post-Assad Syria” (which adopts the same language and perspective, but focuses on Syria, and was recently produced by two US neo-conservative think-tanks) illustrates how developments in Syria have been shaped according to the step-by-step approach detailed in the “Paths to Persia” report with the same key objective: regime change.
The authors of these reports include, among others, John Hannah and Martin Indyk, both former senior neo-conservative officials from the George W Bush/Dick Cheney administration, and both advocates for regime change in Syria. Not for the first time are we seeing a close alliance between US/British neo-cons with Islamists (including, reports show, some with links to al-Qaeda) working together to bring about regime change in an “enemy” state.

UPDATE I (Feb. 16): MBS (below): Start using your head, or critical faculties. Had you been reading this site with any consistency over the last decade, you’d know that both members of “The Big Government Party” adhere to the neo-liberal or neoconservative ideology. The Counterpunch folks have always been onto—and upfront about—that aspect of the American foreign policy, as have I. Start reading and researching, sir. Times are too dire for you to continue to maintain the delusions of the two-party bifurcation. Certainly on matters of foreign policy, the two parties practically merge.

UPDATE II (Feb. 17): “The US spy chief has told the Congress President Bashar Al-Assad is fighting against Al-Qaeda of Iraq. James Clapper is the first top US official to acknowledge US might indirectly support insurgents. … He added that Syrian opposition groups, fighting against the existing regime of President al-Assad may have been infiltrated by Al-Qaida. ‘However likely without their knowledge,’ he said.” (RT)

Didn’t this happen in Libya, just the other day? Of course not. America would never be so stupid as to repeat mistakes.

In the face of such unadulterated idiocy, conspiracy becomes a viable explanation.

UPDATED: More Reasons to Secede From The Pundit Pantheons of Fox, MSNBC and CNN

America, Israel, Journalism, Media, Pseudo-intellectualism, Russia

Guests who’ve been invited onto the typical American vanity-TV news show must invariably kiss the ring of the ego in the anchor’s chair. The grateful guest will typically offer up platitudes such as, “Only you do so and so,” “Your shows is the only show that, blah, blah,” and, “If not for you, blah, blah.” It seems to be expected—and is a good practice if a commentator seeks membership in the pundit pantheons of Fox, MSNBC and CNN.

Today, in furtherance of freedom (NOT), Freedom Watch featured the “liberventionists” Neal Boortz, who is a “a statist, not a libertarian.” Anything Boortz supports is usually an indication to the contrary. Boortz is also Sean Hannity’s favorite libertarian, a credibility that seems to stand him in good stead with Fox News’ libertarian producers.

So does Stephen Moore of the “War Street Journal” carry the Hannity stamp of approval. He too appeared in furtherance of freedom on Freedom Watch today. No wonder Moore, like Boortz, is Hannity’s in-house freedom fighter. One of Moore’s books was “Bullish on Bush: How the Ownership Society Is Making America Richer.” But that’s no indictment among America’s incestuous teletwits. (“Bush’s bailout society” was an instantiation of the principles upon which “Bush’s ownership society” was founded: credit for those who are not creditworthy.)

To continue the theme of “Closing The Door On Closed, Cloistered American Media,” contra American media, RT draws on a large sample of opinion for its commentary; Left, Right, libertarian; orthodox and unorthodox. It seems to achieve this by avoiding the anointing that goes on in American TV studios, where pundits are picked from among powerful, well-funded, mainstream think tanks, editorial newsrooms, Internet sites, or presidential, congressional and other government staff. The TV tarts who flock to DC or New York to hang around the major studios, and in the fullness of time inflict their insufferable stupidity on us—they have agents, no less (or Fortune 500 fathers, or both).

By embracing Skype, RT also reaches out to different, interesting individuals whose mission is not to make their home close to a major TV studio with the hope of being “discovered” by the dumbos on Fox, MSNBC or CNN.

UPDATE (Feb. 8): Sure, Myron; RT has plenty blind spots. The American moron media, by contrast, is one big, banal, unquestioning blind spot, chockablock with unrealistic rah-rah for America.

When last did you hear an interesting, original thought on MSM America? And American journalism has become mostly bad. Take, for example, the segment on Fox Business about the H1-B tiff with Obama. Not a word did the ego in the anchor’s chair devote to the debate (pro and con) surrounding the Visa. All he wanted to extract from his guest was that the Obama exchange on Google Plus was staged. That’s not journalism. It’s a partisan perversion thereof. Repulsive.

And, Myron, do follow some of the links provided, and you’ll see that RT gives voice to some fascinatingly bright Israelis (some generals) with whom you and I would not always agree. But, wow, are they brilliant, original and well-informed in their approach to the disputes and wars in which they have fought so valiantly. Click around RT’s Israel coverage, Myron, and you’ll see that, while it is much like CNN in its pro-Palestinian bent, RT showcases some magnificent Israelis who do Jews proud.

RT journos are intellectually curious—as you naturally are—as opposed their dim counterparts (can you say Dana Perrino?) in the American media.

Classic Paul On Obscene Super Bowl Scene

Ilana Mercer, Intelligence, Journalism, Media, Pop-Culture, Psychology & Pop-Psychology, Ron Paul, Russia, Sport

“I don’t pay much attention to it (I’m focused on Nevada”), replied Ron Paul to Piers Morgan’s “Giants or Patriots?” question. My sentiments exactly.

… the American football scene is obscene, starting with its incestuous fraternities, the rock-star status surrounding handlers and players, their pompom-waving, knickers-baring groupies, and the tantrum-prone fans who experience bare-fanged fury when their heroes let them down.

AND THE MEDIA TRACK THIS CRAP!

Superbowl mania is another exhibit in the case made in the post “Closing The Door On Closed, Cloistered American Media.” This event is dominating the moron media. The ads are a big point of contention. Freedom Watch’s Judge Nap struck a blow for “liberty,” apparently, by calling on a middle-aged Madonna to challenge The Censor and repeat the feat of another peer, Janet Jackson. (Yes, “Libertarianism Lite” carries the day.)

The apparition the Judge wishes upon us again, I described in 2004 (“JANET’S SACK OF SILICONE & OTHER SYMBOLISM”), as a “sack of silicone-filled skin, awkwardly positioned on Janet Jackson’s chest. Few will forget how pop singer Justin Timberlake released The Thing from Jackson’s bustier during the Super Bowl halftime show.”

Add the effects of age and gravity to a surgically over-stuffed breast, and you end up with a veiny mass, mounted inorganically on the breastbone. Take my word: This is not something you’d want to wave about. It looks like a stretched-to-the-limits Bota Bag (also known as a wine skin), only not nearly as inviting. The photograph also captures the gaze on Justin Tinkerbelle’s girlie features. The reviewers, mostly groovy hip-hop heads, described the sequence as “a sex-charged duet.” Justin, Jackson’s partner in the “stunt,” looks as turned on as a surgeon removing a suture. The “sensuality” was, er, a bust.

Nice to know that a quaint Old-World gentleman like Ron Paul feels as I do about the national, football mass hysteria.

UPDATE III: Closing The Door On Closed, Cloistered American Media

America, Intellectualism, Journalism, libertarianism, Media, Psychology & Pop-Psychology, Reason, Russia

For news coverage, I’ve now converted almost exclusively to RT (on whose website my Paleolibertarian Column features). I recommend that thinking readers do the same. A few days with RT and you will begin to understand just how impoverished American media are (and how valid this writer’s media critique has been over the years); the degree to which broadcasters and journalists have degraded journalism and contributed immeasurably to the deep stupidity, gargantuan arrogance, and short attention spans of their viewers.

Americans are “a silly people in serious times” (Pat Buchanan’s words). Reason, intellectual honesty and curiosity, and standards of decency have been expunged from the national dialogue.

There isn’t a news story that isn’t biased, contaminated with every conceivable error in thinking, from pop psychology, to addiction and self-esteem fallacies, to obsessive, interminable negrophilia.

If you can no longer stomach the bombast in American broadcast media, the vanity panels, the egos in the anchor’s chair who’ve tailored debate and chosen interlocutors to fit their own limitations; if you’ve had it with Anderson Cooper-type journo-activism, the ubiquitous dog and cat stories, the constant stream of feel-good, feminized, soft news vignettes that festoon news and commentary; if you can stand not a moment more of the America über alles, navel-gazing, chauvinistic, delusions of grandeur and of empire promulgated by the self-important American media—I recommend RT.

Yes, there is leftist, even statist, programing at RT, but it doesn’t permeate every news segment like at CNN, where today, White House correspondent Jessica Yelling delivered a how-to for Obama on countering bad press about alternative energy. On RT you’ll find interesting segments complied by critical thinkers who pursue the kind of unorthodox angles I’ve pursued in my columns over the years, but which are absent from the American channels. “Exporting Revolution,” for example, with BAB A List writer Nebojsa Malic. (Related topic: “LaHood Is Still In The Egyptian Hood”)

This morning, as the Idiocracy at MSNBC, FoxNews and CNN counted down to the endorsement of Mitt Romney by the unthinking, crass, and Synophobic Donald Trump, RT’s Capital Account was tracking Ben Bernanke’s defense of “the Federal Reserve’s financial repression of savers on Capitol Hill.” Their words. Jim Rogers was on fire.

Sadly, I no longer watch the loud bluster on Freedom Watch, unless Lew Rockwell, always calms and Rothbardian, graces the show. The volume level, the Paul worship (such aggressive allegiance to any politician creeps me out), and the dueling perspectives political panels (featuring horrible, boring truth deniers like Nancy Skinner, Caroline Heldman, Tara Dowdell, Carl Jeffers, Joe Sibila, Erika Payne) are pure torture.

Besides, when an anchor introduces his regulars (and boy are they day-in, and day-out fixtures) as “my good friend (Kirstin Powers),” or as “friend of the show,” it smacks of buddy-buddy influence peddling, not of an honest pursuit of ideas. Don’t get me wrong: I appreciate the work done on Freedom Watch to popularize constitutional principles among the masses, but it has become more like the other cable personality centered ego-driven shoutfests. And, of course, the regular robots from Reason Magazine, representing “Libertarianism Lite,” are tiresome.

Off to catch up on world events …

UPDATE I: Need I say more? Right now, as mainstream American media pretend jobs have materialized out of thin air, you can hear Jeffrey Tucker on RT’s Capital Account, talking about ending the Fed.

UPDATE II: Ann Coulter to Mitt Romeny at a fundraiser, “You owe me and you better be as right-wing a president as I’m telling everybody you’re going to be.’” Schmooze.

But another example of the narrow coterie that makes up the American media elite. Mind you, if the Judge welcomed “My buddy Ann Coulter, good friend of the show,” we’d at least have a few laughs. She’s always sharp and adds information, unlike the banal, boring, never-said-an-original-thing-in-their-lives Colmes and Powers.

UPDATE III: (Feb. 4): Do not distort my words, John D (in Comments). The style issue is minor. In your adulation, you’ve chosen here to do me a disservice by ignoring the repeated substantive comments made over these pixelated pages about the bent of “Freedom Watch.” In particular: 1) The sinecured Left-libertarian bores who’ve take up residence on the show, covered in “Libertarianism Lite.” Reason does not represent American libertarianism (Old Right), nor does it resonate with most Americans. American libertarianism is rightist.

2) As in all the cloistered and closed American programing—and contrary to RT’s which really welcomes many voices, and not only those of pundits and presstitutes who huddle close to Power—the habit on Freedom Watch is to shut out and expunge from the debate the unkosher faction, which is also, again, the libertarianism that most resonates with the American Right at large: paleolibertarianism.

3) In “Fox News And Its Truth Deniers,” I offered a substantive argument against the positively postmodernist “dueling perspectives political panel” perfected on the show. You, John, chose to ignore my case against the “parallel universe” created and paraded as truth, represented by the odious regulars listed: Nancy Skinner, Caroline Heldman, Tara Dowdell, Carl Jeffers, Joe Sibila, Erika Payne, Alan Colmes, Juan Williams, Kirstin Powers, etc. “The above Fox News fixtures,” I argued, “no more represent truth or promote it than does your average Holocaust denier.”

“By presenting the public with two competing perspectives—you mislead viewers into believing that indeed there are two realities, and that it is up to them to decide which one is more compelling.” This Freedom Watch achieves handily.

Alas, in your blind adulation, John, you have chosen to cast substantive critique as a complaint about style (the latter—the delivery—being bloody horrible). What a shame.

CONTINUED IN THE POST, “More Reasons to Secede from the Pundit Pantheons of CNN, Fox and MSNBC.”