Rebels, with the help of NATO bombs and missiles, drove out Misrata's Black population
The “rebels” in Misrata in Libya have driven out the entire Black population of the city, according to a chilling story in The Wall Street Journal today under the headline Libya City Torn by Tribal Feud.”
The “rebels” now eye the city of Tawergha, 25 miles away, and vow to cleanse it of all Black people once they seize the city. Isn't this the perfect definition of the term “genocide”?
According to The Journal's article, the “rebels” refer to themselves as “the brigade for purging slaves, black skin.” The Journal quotes a rebel commander Ibrahim al-Halbous saying, of Black Libyans, “They should pack up,” and that “Tawergha no longer exists, only Mistrata.”
You won't read this kind of article in The New York Times, which has become as journalistically corrupt and as compromised as the old PRAVDA, during the Soviet era. This editorial page has been insisting since the beginning of the Libya conflict that the “rebels” embraced racism and used the allegation that Muammar al-Quathafi had employed mercenaries from other African countries as a pretext to massacre Black Libyans.
Phi Beta Iota: Congress has no clue–pontificating politicals divorced from reality. Cynthia McKinney, Green Party candidate for President in 2008, has taken a personal interest in this, and personally visited Libya to confirm that NATO is committing war crimes in its indiscriminate attacks against Tripoli, far removed from the “no fly zone” as originally envisioned. What the US Government is doing “in our name” in Libya, and in many countries around the world, is neither Constitutional nor affordable. Congress is lacking in intelligence and integrity. The lunacy continues….
Afghanistan: Special Comment. Longtime Readers know that NightWatch has had a continuing project to monitor the security situation in Afghanistan since mid-2006, using a consistent sample of unclassified reporting. In 2006, when the Taliban resurgence was just beginning, NightWatch began publishing monthly summaries of the security situation.
In the past three years, the number of incidents per month has increased so that compiling and analyzing monthly reports threatened to become a full time job.
NightWatch has continued to track data in detail for all 400 districts of Afghanistan every other month and spot checked fighting reports in between. Preliminary analysis of the data for May 2011 was completed today. The table below shows the data from three tracking measures since last November.
The remarks of the President are beneath contempt in so far as they completely avoid reality. Every statement about Afghanistan is questionable if not an outright misrepresentation. Al Quada and Afghanistan are not the same. This entire statement is a crock of warm, diseased spit. It is offensive in the extreme in its disrespect for public intelligence and the expectation of integrity in governance.
An honest president would admit that we are losing in Afghanistan and the Taliban is gaining (while also resupplying itself from our stocks); that suicide terrorism is directly related to the presence of US troops in countries where there is no public interest, only a special interest.
An honest president would apologize for attacking Libya and committing war crimes in Tripoli, a Congressional declaration of war not being in effect, and an honest president would admit that we are assassinating people–often the wrong people–all over the world.
An honest president would address the fraud that has bankrupted the nation and the corruption in the US government that allows all white collar criminals to avoid justice.
An honest president would admit that the domestic economic and social situation is desperate–the last twenty years have seen what Grover Norquist called the ultimate bi-partisanship: when the two parties get together and agree to screw the American people.
Barack Obama–like his immediate predecessors–is not an honest president. His rhetoric is false, offensive, and if Congress were honest, which it is not, he would be facing impeachment prior to the 4th of July.
Phi Beta Iota: This just in from NIGHTWATCH (forthcoming): …..tells a much different tale than what was said tonight…..
Just finished the first analysis of May 2011 finished. Unprecedented level of engagements of all kinds. Over 2000 for the first time in my data sample. The number of districts under stress is over 280 out of 400, all time high just under three-fourths.
For honest appraisals of Afghanistan, see Spinny Afghanistan. Washington is occupied by people who lack intelligence and integrity, who have abdicated their responsibilities under their Oaths of Office to defend and support the Constitution (not a corrupt chain of command), and who have absolutely no clue how to go about–even if they wanted to–serving the public interest.
Afterthought: The standard retired military flag officers are making fools of themselves across the channels, none more so than MajGen Bob Scales, USA (Ret), who just threw his integrity under the bus on Fox. GO ARMY. This is pathetic. How do we censure retired generals for deceiving any portion of the public?
At the end of May the British press was filled with stories headlined “Gaddafi to be told to stand down or face Apache attack.” As of this writing, the Apaches have attacked, but Gaddafi has not stood down.
The Apache threat is a case study in the sterile but financially lucrative marriage of coercive diplomacy to surgical strikes by precision guided weapons. What passes for a war strategy in Libya is now a comic opera starring NATO as an understrength, self-referencing techno bully, who acts as if he is now so fearsome that he does not even need a carrot to go with his stick.
Believe it or not….NATO appears to be attentive to and leveraging the “intellectual capital” outside the confines of its Member state intelligence services.
Robert Rowley, 48, supervisor of a Dairy Queen in Arizona, said he has already seen results from his Twitter activism. He was among the first to notice fuel tankers slipping past NATO warships and docking at ports controlled by Col. Gadhafi, which led to NATO interdictions.
He also wonders whether his tweets might be connected to the bombing of a Gadhafi communications centre in Tripoli. Combing through satellite images, he noticed that a property listed as a commercial warehouse had a yard containing what appeared to be military vehicles. He published his observations; 10 hours later, the spot was hit by a NATO air strike.
“I’m 5,000 miles away,” he said, in an interview before his shift at the ice-cream parlour. “It’s a very weird feeling.”
An embedded reporter snaps war footage. The U.S. military-industrial complex and media work together to propagate the agenda of government.
NATO’s decision to intervene in Libya on humanitarian grounds has become an alarming and revealing assessment of America’s understanding of war. The way the “established” media portrayed the Libyan conflict, and its subsequent reception, illustrates our society’s failure to recognize how the power dynamics of plutocratic governance shape our realities. There is significant historical evidence that during times of war propaganda is used to justify military action for special interests. If we are to believe the theme of “change” will define our generation, we must pierce through both the media and the government’s rationalization of war.
I have found the established media’s reporting on Libya to be lacking in depth and consideration of an alternative to military intervention. This is not unusual. History repeatedly shows that during times of war, the established media have a tendency to mislead, deceive, and (in some instances) fabricate to serve the interests of the rich and powerful. This is shown through the writings of Carl Bernstein, the Nayirah testimony, the treatment of former U.S. Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, and the beginning of the Iraq and Afghan wars. Essentially, the media has been used to facilitate consent, not dissent.
Given the assumption that we learn from history, our passive acceptance of such reporting is surprising. In 1758, author Samuel Johnson wrote, “Among the calamities of war may be justly numbered the diminution of the love of truth, by the falsehoods which interest dictates and credulity encourages.” Later, President Dwight Eisenhower warned us of the emerging military-industrial complex, which we learned has a tradition of lying in addition to tremendous governmental influence. If the military has to go to such lengths for approval, it is clearly not what we naturally desire. Thus, why has there not been more widespread skepticism and objection with regard to Libya?
Led by the U.S., NATO used reports of imminent danger to civilians as justification for humanitarian intervention. Yet, history shows that there is a good reason to approach this explanation with skepticism. In fact, it was recently reported that President Barack Obama exaggerated the humanitarian threat. Once we consider issues such as who the Libyan rebels are and what role oil, banking, previous planning, and geopolitics play in the situation, it seems that history is repeating itself.
The question for our generation becomes: At what point do we categorically reject war and its mechanisms from the beginning rather than in retrospect? We can do this by repudiating all war. We must reject the seemingly righteous theory of humanitarian intervention because it is divorced from how social conflicts actually arise and are resolved. The idea that bombing — an indiscriminate killing method the U.S. has become notoriously inaccurate at — can improve a situation is untenable. The most recent example is Kosovo; it was the nonviolent movement that ultimately resolved the conflict. Moreover, what right does any country have to determine the affairs of another country? This is the same expression of moral superiority used to justify imperialism.
If we want to live in a world of peace, we must learn from our history and see that war is an unnatural phenomenon; we need to reject it on a philosophical and spiritual level. Removing war from our conscience creates space for dialogue and diplomacy, and brings us closer to a shared utopia.
Was born in Kingston, Jamaica, raised in Atlanta, Georgia, attended high school in Torino, Italy, obtained a history degree from the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada, and is currently a Juris Doctorate candidate at the University of the District of Columbia, David A. Clarke School of Law. Coy's primary interests are stimulating our natural impulse to collaborate with one another, exploring and deepening our collective consciousness, and building small-scale, sustainable communities where appreciation of the environment, and our role within it, is deeply embedded within the culture. For more, check out the website: http://www.everythingology.com
Phi Beta Iota: Standard elite distortions of reality occur through Forbidden Knowledge, Rule by Secrecy, Lost History, Manufacturing Consent, Propaganda, Weapons of Mass Deception, Fog Facts, and Missing information, among others. All of these terms are titles of books. Information Forensics, and Public Intelligence in the Public Interest, are the antidotes.
But they still cannot distinguish between a person taking a dump and one planting a bomb…..technology does not win wars. This does not improve the analytical ability of the force.
Phi Beta Iota: It also perpetuates the twin evils of spending money we don't have to kill, maim, and anger people who have nothing to do with anything that matters to the US public. The BEST use of micro-drones is to provide eyes and ears for the infantry. The WORST use of armed drones is to give the power to kill to someone remote from reality with no ethical grounding. As we now know, bandwidth is more expensive than a human pilot, who also comes with situational awareness.
