Killing the Truth: Mainstream Media Complicit in Western NATO War Crimes in Libya
by Finian Cunningham.
In Libya, not only is there the criminal military assault on a sovereign country, the destruction of civilian infrastructure, the murder of women and children, and all the violation of international law that that entails – we now have the complete lobotomisation of language and normal meaning of words.
And in these crimes against law, humanity and morality, the Western mainstream media have played a disgraceful, vital role.
Over the past five months, as US, British, French and other NATO warplanes pounded Libya with 8,000 strike sorties involving extensive bombing raids, the world has in truth witnessed a concerted campaign of outright war crimes to bring down the government of Muammar Gaddafi. Thousands of civilians have been murdered in this blitzkrieg, which, it will be recalled, was orchestrated through the United Nations as an intervention to "protect civilians".
Whatever the grievances against Gaddafi may have been they cannot be compared with the destruction and slaughter that the NATO powers have inflicted.
How could such deformation of international law be achieved and made to appear normal, acceptable? It is in large part because the Western powers have deformed the normal meaning of language to go along with their criminal actions. This is propaganda taken to a new level where reasonable criticism is rendered nearly impossible because the framework of words has become unintelligible and therefore hardly answerable.
In previous imperialist interventions, for example Afghanistan and Iraq, Western powers at least used the word "war" to go along with their self-serving actions. In former Yugoslavia and Somalia, we at least heard the term "humanitarian war". Before that, we were told of Cold War, "war on communists, "war on drugs". Notwithstanding that these "wars" were but deceptive covers for imperialist control of resources.
However, in the case of Libya, the word "war" has been dropped altogether from all discourse about Western intervention. It’s called a "responsibility to protect civilians lives". This disarticulated language and meaning is repeated even though the factual truth of what is happening is an exact conformation to the word "war". And not only "war" but "criminal war". The murder of civilians by NATO warplanes is a war crime in the normal framework of fact, truth, reality, law and morality. But in the abnormal, hideous framework of Western imperialist propaganda it is called "protecting civilians" and "supporting democracy".
"This is war in all but name," notes Michel Chossudovsky. "These are war crimes in all but name. And the Western mainstream media are complicit in these war crimes. The Western media have made absurdities acceptable through their non-reporting and distortion of crimes by NATO powers. If people can be made to believe absurdities, then they can be made to accept atrocities."
Libya can be seen as the pinnacle of Orwellian function – meaning the nadir in normal reasoning. In its relentless one-eyed coverage of Libya, the Western media has served as the ministry of disinformation for NATO.
For five months, the bombardment of Libya has been presented in the mainstream media as "responsibility to protect civilians". The fact that NATO has gone well beyond even the fake terms of its UN mandate to act as an air force to pave the way for a minor insurrection is not reported; the fact of civilian deaths caused by NATO warplanes is not reported; the fact that NATO special forces have led insurgents on the ground has not been reported; the fact that the Western governments have collaborated with the despotic Arab regimes of Saudi Arabia and Qatar to dismantle a sovereign government and gain control of its huge oil reserves has not been reported
All the while, the Western mainstream media have collaborated with NATO powers to lobotomise truth, reality and normal language to conceal war crimes – the latest episode now being the "triumph in Tripoli".
By contrast, Global Research correspondent Mahdi Nazemroaya and Voltaire network Thierry Meyssan have endeavoured to report the facts and the truth of NATO’s war on Libya. They have backed up their reportage with video footage of the aftermath of bombing raids in which civilians have been targeted and killed. As Nazemroaya said recently: "This has been a campaign of terror by NATO."
Yet, ludicrously, the Western media describe the latest [NATO-led] marauding of Tripoli by anti-Gaddafi insurgents as "a triumph" – as opposed to the simple fact that is a consequence of five months of NATO-imposed terror.
Unlike the Western mainstream media, including CNN and BBC, Global Research has told the truth about NATO actions in Libya. Now the personal safety of independent journalists is at serious risk. Their lives have been threatened. We fear that this is just the beginning of a wider descent into bloody chaos that will befall Libya now that NATO has pushed its agenda of regime change to another notch.
Disturbingly, NATO’s illusion of "responsibility to protect" will be stretched to even further distortion in the coming months and years. As Libya’s state of Western-imposed anarchy looks set to transmogrify into yet another quagmire of Afghanistan and Iraqi proportions, the NATO powers are already preparing to invoke their criminal mandate to "protect" with more boots on the ground, the use of death squads and relentless manipulation of political proxies.
If Western publics seem confused and perplexed by their governments’ "wars without end" – the never-ending mayhem, body bags, dysfunctional administrations in far-off lands, terror blowback and budget-busting military costs – then one of the first things they should do is switch off the "ministry of disinformation". The Western media has shown itself now in Libya – more than ever – to be systematically complicit in an ongoing criminal war on the world by Western capitalist powers.
Original essay Global Research
"KILLING THE TRUTH": Mahdi Nazemroaya Threatened by NATO's "Pro-Democracy" Rebels
by Michel Chossudovsky
Nazemroaya is safe, returning to Canada..
Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, together with Thierry Meyssan are currently stranded in the media centre of the Rixos hotel in Tripoli amidst heavy fighting around the hotel.
We ask our readers to reflect on what Mahdi was attempting to achieve at the media center of the Rixos hotel: honest factual reporting, with a concern for human life, in solidarity with those Libyan men, women and children who lost their lives in bombing raids on residential areas, schools and hospitals.
Mahdi's life is threatened for telling the truth, for exposing NATO war crimes.
"Democracy building" in Libya, we are told, requires the extensive bombing of an entire country, under NATO's "Responsibility to Protect" (R2P).
But Mahdi questions that concept. He challenges the very foundations of war propaganda, which upholds an act of war as a peacemaking endeavor.
In the course of the last few days, all our time and energy have been directed towards ensuring the safety of Mahdi, Thierry and several other independent journalists trapped in the Rixos Hotel.
The atmosphere within the media centre of the Rixos Hotel in Tripoli must be understood.
The mainstream media, including CNN and the BBC have direct links to NATO, the Transitional Council and Rebel Forces. They are serving NATO interests in a direct way through massive media distortion.
At the same time, those within the Rixos Media Centre who are committed to the truth are the the object of veiled threats. In the case of Mahdi, the threats were very explicit.
Those who say the truth are threatened.
Those who lie and accept the NATO consensus, their lives will be protected. NATO special forces operating within rebel ranks will ensure their safety.
In this unsavoury environment, personal ties have broken down. The independent media journalists as well as those from non-NATO countries including China, Iran, Latin America are considered "persona non grata" by the mainstream media groups within the hotel.
Mahdi says the truth. He directly challenges the lies of the mainstream media.
Mahdi's reports threaten the NATO-media consensus.
What he is describing is the destruction of an entire country, of its institutions, its infrastructure.
This killing and destruction, we are told, is required to instate "democracy" under the colonial flag of King Idris.
We are being lied to in the most despicable way. The victims of NATO aggression are designated as "war criminals", whereas the perpetrators of war are welcomed as Liberators.
The lie has become the truth. and that's why Mahdi life is threatened.
Continues at Global Research
NATO destroys yet another country.
Geopolitical notes from India, M D Nalapat
Some years ago, in the Indian site www.bharat-rakshak.com, this columnist had written of the NATO militaries as resembling an army of simians. Such a force - if let loose within a confined space – can create immense damage, but are unable to clean up the resultant mess. This is precisely what the world has witnessed in Iraq. Despite more than a decade of sanctions that directly resulted in nearly a million extra deaths during that period ( because of shortages created by the UN-approved measures), the regime of Saddam Hussein was able to provide food, energy and housing to the people of Iraq, whereas eight years after “liberation” by key NATO members, the country and its population are worse off than before the 2003 invasion that led to the execution of Saddam Hussein. As for Afghanistan, after a decade of the world’s most modern military force fighting against a ragtag band of insurgents, more than a third of the country is back in the hands of the Taliban, while a fifth of the rest is on the brink of a similar fate. As a consequence of its failure to subdue this force, NATO is desperately clutching at plans for engaging the “moderate Taliban”, an oxymoron if ever one was created.
Serbia has yet to recover from its brief burst of battle with NATO, and now Libya has joined the lengthening list of countries devastated by the attentions of NATO. Clearly, the top brass in a military alliance designed to do battle in Europe against the USSR were reluctant to close shop. They have therefore redesigned NATO as a military instrument with multiple uses, especially against “asymmetric threats”, a term which refers to countries that have ramshackle militaries. Both Saddam Hussein and Moammar Gaddafy followed the dictates of the NATO powers in surrendering whatever WMD was in their possession, unlike Syria and North Korea, two countries that have been left undisturbed by NATO as a consequence. Clearly, military planners within the alliance are ready for action only against those rivals that have had their conventional capabilities degraded to the point at which they do not represent any significant risk against the alliance. Had George W Bush and Tony Blair truly believed their own rhetoric about Saddam Hussein having WMD, they would never have sent their armies into Iraq the way they did.
As mentioned in these columns, Gaddafy’s fate got sealed when he accepted the advice of his Europe-dazzled sons to disarm and place the survival of his regime in the hands of NATO. Since 2003, Muammar Gaddafy dismantled his WMD program, synchronised his intelligence services with that of NATO and generally accepted each of the prescriptions handed over to him. Had NATO been an alliance that respects reciprocity, all this ought to have made NATO turn as blind an eye to his battle with sections of the population as we have seen in the case of Bahrain, where the ruling family has been given a free hand to sort out the situation. Instead, the situation changed when Nicholas Sarkozy was informed by French banks that Colonel Gaddafy may withdraw the immense bank deposits of Libya from them to institutions in China, and when he learnt that several contracts that French enterprises were expecting to come to them would vanish because Gaddafy wanted to spend less on French military and other toys and more on social services. Libya had to be made an example of, lest other Arab governments think of shifting their money elsewhere than within the NATO bloc as a consequence of the loss of $1.3 trillion by the GCC and its people alone because of the financial fraud perpetrated in 2008 by banks and other financial entities headquartered within the NATO bloc.
These days, companies based within NATO are finding it difficult to retain the monopoly position they have enjoyed, sometimes for generations. In particular, Chinese companies are challenging them in numerous markets, as are companies based elsewhere in Asia, including within South Korea and India. As a consequence, they now rely on military force to retain their privileges. This has been illustrated with commendable transparency in the case of Iraq and Libya. In the latter case, even though the fumes of battle have not ceased (and are unlikely to), oil companies such as ENI and Total are hard at work figuring out the assets they can seize because of the local victories of the Sarkozy-appointed “National Transitional Council”. Interestingly, even though the NTC is a creation of Paris, the UN has accepted it as the legitimate government of Iraq. Indeed,in the 21st century the UN seems to have regressed into the period between 1919 and 1939,when the League of Nations awarded “mandates” to dominant countries that permitted them to rule weaker ones. In the past decade, similar mandates have been proferred in the case of Iraq, Kosovo and Afghanistan. In the case of Libya, President Sarkozy’s takeover of the Libyan state via the creation of the NTC has been similarly legitimized by the UN in an astonishing abdication of principle.
However, just as in other locations, facts on the ground may not follow the script favoured by NATO. In the case of Libya, this columnist has warned for five months that the NATO intervention would only result in civil war and in the steady destruction of the infrastructure that made Libya one of the more prosperous countries in the region. All this is at risk today, as chaos descends in the form of armed gangs set loose by NATO across the country. Not that there is ever any chance of those responsible for such a catastrophe being held accountable by so-called “international” bodies, most of which are now firmly in the control of the NATO powers in a way that their own economies are not. Over the past decade, tens of thousands of civilian deaths have resulted from NATO operations, without even a mild protest from the International Court or the Human Rights Council. Such inaction is leading to the same loss of respect for the UN system as took place in the past with the League of Nations, which became seen as being controlled by a small group for their own purposes. /continues at Pakobserver.net
Other notable writings
NATO: World racketeer (Thanks to Google machine translation)
Refuting Juan Cole
The Myth of Libyan Liberation by Conn Hallinan
Dr. Webster Tarpley Analysis:
This is an exercise in mass brainwashing
Video - Qaddafi Forces Still Resisting NATO's Rape of Libya
The Real Obama by Alexander Cockburn
In 2008, liberals and most leftists were deeply in love with Obama and genuinely believed the promissory notes about a better America that he strewed along the campaign trail and has since welshed on at a rate of well over 95 per cent.
People whose vote he courts are genuinely confused. Does he believe in anything beyond raising a billion dollars for the 2012 campaign?
News updates in comments at http://my.telegraph.co.uk/clothcap