Archive | September 8th, 2014

TV = Weapon of Mass Deception


The television is a weapon of mass deception. Tell your friends, family, and neighbors.

On average, Americans watch over 4 hours of television every single day. 98% of American households have at least one television, and 49% of Americans openly admit they watch too much television.

Television has had profoundly negative impacts on American cultural and social life. It hinders education and learning, promotes excessive materialism and commercialism, and encourages degenerate, narcissistic, and hedonistic lifestyles. Television promotes violence and unrealistic life expectations. It leads to a sluggish, inactive existence, and is extremely disempowering. (See more television statistics and facts here.)Our obsession with the television has had a profoundly harmful impact on our overall health, both physical and psychological, as well. Rather than playing outside and interacting with friends and neighbors, children are cooped up indoors, glued to the television. Rather than having positive, productive discussions and social interactions with their family, friends, and neighbors, many adults instead opt to turn on the television. Very few people read anymore, preferring instead to watch television or movies.

But how many Americans recognize the television for what it truly is? Most naively assume the television is simply a form of entertainment and information, when in reality the television is a weapon of mass deception, social and cultural distortion, and mass mind control.

“Control the manner in which a man interprets his world,” Stanley Milgram, a Jewish social psychologist, once wrote, “and you have gone a long way toward controlling his behavior.” And that’s exactly what the television does. It controls and shapes our perception and interpretation of the world around us.

The entire “New World Order” agenda, which in actuality is nothing more than Jewish imperialism and global subversion and subjugation, is largely perpetuated and advanced by the Jewish-controlled mass media and “entertainment” complex centered around Hollywood and corporate television broadcast companies. The television is indeed a weapon of mass deception and psychological and emotional exploitation. It is the main tool being utilized to advance international Jewry’s agenda of world domination and subjugation.

The Jewish propagandist and public relations specialist Edward Bernays wrote in his 1928 book Propaganda:

The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.

We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. […]

Bernays would go on to write that “it remains a fact that in almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons… who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind, who harness old social forces and contrive new ways to bind and guide the world.”

Bernays defined propaganda as “a consistent, enduring effort to create or shape events to influence the relations of the public to an enterprise, idea or group,” and contended – correctly in my view – that “Propaganda is the executive arm of the invisible government.” And how is propaganda disseminated in America and around the world today? Largely through the television.

In a nutshell, the television, mass media, and Hollywood:

  • Regularly present altered, distorted, manipulated, and/or even outright fabricated photographic and video imagery, coupled with false scripted testimony, in order to advance certain geopolitical and cultural agendas;
  • Manufacture and perpetuate an artificial reality we are all forced to operate in;
  • Promote subversive ideas and values, including homosexuality, pornography, sexual promiscuity and degeneracy, transgenderism, and other debauched lifestyles;
  • Systematically attack, undermine, and debase traditional Western culture, lifestyles, and history;
  • Manufacture demand for unnecessary and often useless products and services;
  • Trivialize the very nature of the world we live in by promoting mindless consumerism, materialism, and celebrity (including professional and collegiate athletics) worship;
  • Distort and fabricate historical and current events in a manner which promotes Jewish interests, perspectives, and narratives; and
  • Use fear and hype to traumatize and control mass populations.

The television, mass media, and Hollywood are no longer benevolent, enlightening forces – if they ever truly were – that seek to entertain and honestly inform the public about important political, economic, social, and historical issues, in addition to holding powerful forces operating in society to account.

No, the television, mass media, and Hollywood have been weaponized, and have been and continue to be used to systematically deceive and psychologically and emotionally exploit the American public in order to advance certain geopolitical and cultural agendas, along with false narratives of history and current happenings.

If you are still watching television, know you are being deceived, programmed, and conditioned. Understand the television is a weapon of mass deception, and spread the word.

Posted in USA, CampaignsComments Off on TV = Weapon of Mass Deception

9/11: The Shocking Truth Laid Bare


This article consists of key 9/11 quotations arranged in the form of a 6500-word dramatic collage so as to give the impression of a live “debate” — an imaginary debate in which the shocking Truth is finally laid bare.

WHO DID 9/11?


1.  Introduction

LASHA DARKMOON: I’d like to start by saying that every statement you read here is a 100 percent authentic quote. Nothing has been fabricated. You can check out every word and phrase on the internet. The only bits you won’t find already published are my own interconnecting comments. As the editor of the article, I have allowed myself the privilege of taking part in this imaginary “debate”.

If the overall effect is at times surrealistic, this is intentional. The entire 9/11 debate, after all, is an exercise in surrealism replete with the most bizarre Alice in Wonderland logic. The mere fact that the chief suspects of the 9/11 crime have been allowed to investigate themselves makes this only too clear.

The aim of the debate is to pose and answer the question: Who did 9/11? My own conclusion has already been stated elsewhere:

“Israel is the rogue state that is arguably responsible for the greatest mass murder in history: the catastrophe of 9-11. If scientific evidence and forensic logic are anything to go on, Israel has to be suspect number one here, given its unbroken record of terrorism and its endless breaches of international law. Any country that can orchestrate such a spectacular crime and get away with it—while somehow managing to pin the blame on nineteen Arabs with box cutters—is clearly a force to be reckoned with.”

Finally, I wish to apologize in advance for any offense given by this article. No offense is intended. My aim is simply to provide the reader with a wide variety of 9/11 quotes in a dramatic format that will, hopefully, have maximum emotional impact.


“Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target US forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act.”

— Comment about Mossad in a report issued by the US Army School of Advanced Military Studies, quoted in the Washington Post on September 10, 2001, the day before 9/11.

DR ALAN SABROSKY (former director of studies at the US Army War College) : What we need to stand up and say is that not only did they, the Israelis, attack the USS Liberty – they did 9/11 also. They did it!

I have had long conversations over the past two weeks with contacts at the Army War College, at the Headquarters Marine Corps, and I have made it absolutely clear in both cases that it is 100 percent certain that 9/11 was a Mossad operation. Period. The Zionists are playing this as an all-or-nothing exercise. Because if they lose this one, if the American people ever realize what really happened, they’re done!

LASHA DARKMOON: Mr President, I can see you are not very happy with this introduction. Would you like to make the opening statement for the defense?

BARACK OBAMA (lamely) : I’m aware that there’s still some who would question or even justify the events of 9/11. But let us be clear: Al Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 people on that day. The victims were innocent men, women and children from America and many other nations who had done nothing to harm anybody. And yet al-Qaeda chose to ruthlessly murder these people, claimed credit for the attack, and even now states their determination to kill on a massive scale. They have affiliates in many countries and are trying to expand their reach. These are not opinions to be debated; these are facts.

TONY BLAIR: There have been the most terrible, shocking events taking place in the United States of America within the last hour or so, including two hi-jacked planes being flown deliberately into the World Trade Centre. I am afraid we can only imagine the terror and the carnage there and the many, many innocent people who will have lost their lives…. For the moment, let me say this: Saddam Hussein’s regime is despicable, he is developing weapons of mass destruction, and we cannot leave him doing so unchecked….

HUGO CHAVEZ: Don’t be shameless, Mr Blair! Don’t be immoral, Mr. Blair! You are one of those who have no morals. You are an imperialist pawn who attempts to curry favor with Bush-Hitler, the number one mass murderer and assassin there is on the planet! Go straight to hell, Mr. Blair!

FRANCESCO COSSIGA (former Prime Minister of Italy): All the intelligence services of America and Europe know well that the disastrous 9/11 attack was planned and realized by the CIA and Mossad, with the help of the Zionist world, in order to pin the blame on the Arab Countries and persuade the Western powers to intervene in Iraq and Afghanistan.

ABRAHAM FOXMAN (furious) :  These hateful conspiracy theories rationalize and fuel global anti-Semitism! . . . Perhaps the most notorious conspiracy theory of modern times suggested that 4,000 Jews were pre-emptively warned to stay away from the World Trade Center the day of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, a myth that quickly morphed into the Big Lie that Israel and Jews were responsible for 9/11.

BRITISH HISTORIAN DAVID IRVING (sarcastically) : We are happy to report that the 4,000 figure dwindled eventually to three (not three thousand, but three), then two, then one: the unfortunate Daniel Lewin!

LASHA DARKMOON (explaining) : On September 12, the Jerusalem Post reported that the Israeli embassy in America was bombarded on 9/11 with calls from 4,000 worried Israeli families. This was a preemptive move. It was a sly attempt to deceive the public into thinking the Israelis were victims of 9/11 like everyone else. In fact, they were not.

Nearly 500 foreign nationals from over 80 different nations had been killed in the World Trade Center. A large number of Israelis had worked in the buildings and so a proportionately large number of Israelis could be expected to have died there. To give the impression that this was the case, President Bush, primed by his Jewish minders,  announced soon after the tragedy that 130 Israelis had died in the towers. To his subsequent  embarrassment, 129 of these Israelis were found to be alive and well. The number of Israelis who died in the Twin Towers turned out to be ridiculously small, in defiance of the law of averages — only one man! And he was a chance visitor who happened to be passing by.

It appears that hundreds of Israelis who ordinarily worked in the buildings, or had business there every day, had either been forewarned to stay away, or, by sheer good luck, had been kept away by mysterious forces.  In total, three Israelis died in the 9-11 attack: two on the ‘hijacked’ planes and one in the Twin Towers, a casual visitor. The rest had been warned to stay away by the Odigo messaging service.

Coincidentally, Odigo had a branch office only two blocks away from the World Trade Center. Even more coincidentally, Odigo’s headquarters were located in Herzliya, Israel, a town just north of Tel Aviv where — wonder of wonders! — Mossad is also headquartered.

ALEX DIAMANDIS (Odigo’s vice president, admitting Israeli foreknowledge) : The messages said something big was going to happen in a certain amount of time, and it did — almost to the minute!

LASHA DARKMOON:  Well, there you have it! A frank admission that Odigo, an Israeli company located a mere stone’s throw away from Mossad in a little town near Tel Aviv , knew that 9/11 was going to happen and warned Jews to stay away! There were many lucky Jews that morning. Consider this. An Israeli government run company called Zim Israel Navigational, the 9th largest shipping company in the world, had 200 employees working in the North tower. One week before 9/11, Zim moved out of its World Trade Center offices with its 200 workers. And they were so keen to get out quickly that they were ready to pay a $50,000 fine for breaking their lease!

Then there was ‘Lucky’ Larry Silverstein, owner of the WTC buildings. He too had a miraculous escape. Every morning, as faithful as clockwork, Lucky Larry would enjoy breakfast at the Windows on the World restaurant atop the North Tower. His daughter Lisa would show up for breakfast too — a regular feature. On the morning of 9/11, both father and daughter (smilingly pictured here)  found excuses for staying away. Lucky Larry discovered he had a dermatologist’s appointment. Daughter Lisa was caught up in a convenient traffic jam.

Lucky Larry had a son. He too was expected in the building that morning. Like his sister Lisa, he too had the extraordinary good luck to be caught in a traffic jam — in a different part of the city.

Truly, God was smiling on his Chosen people that morning.


2.  They lie about everything

LASHA DARKMOON: How can so many Americans still believe in the outrageous lie that Al Qaeda did 9/11 when there are so many Jewish fingerprints all over this crime?

SEYMOUR HERSH:  We lie about everything.

FRANCESCO COSSIGA (former Prime Minister of Italy) : I have always said that the intelligence agencies of the leading nations of the world are certainly very well aware that the official version is a fraud. The largest media networks are also aware of the 9-11 hoax, primarily because of their fundamental role in perpetrating this fraud on the public. The people are always the last to know the truth.

ABRAHAM FOXMAN (angrily):  It is incumbent upon all good people who reject hateful conspiracy theories and anti-Semitism to stand up and speak out! — so that these unacceptable views remain marginalized and relegated to the far fringes of society and the darkest corners of cyberspace!

KEVIN BARRETT (ignoring Foxman) : Recently, Seymour Hersh, America’s top mainstream investigative reporter, broke the news that the US government’s claim to have killed Osama Bin Laden on May 2nd, 2011 was a big lie. “There’s not one word of truth in it,” he said. Hersh went on to harshly criticize his long-time employer, the New York Times, and other big media outlets. He said all big US media outlets should be shut down for lying to the American people.

SEYMOUR HERSH :  Lying has become the staple.

KEVIN BARRETT:  Other mainstream journalists agree that the US government’s story of Osama Bin Laden and 9/11 is a big lie. Sherwood Ross, an award-winning journalist who has worked for the City News Bureau of Chicago, the Chicago Daily News, and for Reuters and other wire services, told me this in a recent radio interview.

SHERWOOD ROSS:  It’s very doubtful that Muslims were behind 9/11. I don’t think 9/11 was an Arab conspiracy. I think it’s an American conspiracy to overthrow the government of the United States and install what is becoming a police state.

KEVIN BARRETT:  Ross has explained that American journalists are no longer free to expose even the most outrageous falsehoods.

SHERWOOD ROSS:  You don’t see any serious questioning by the mainstream media. I thought one of the tip-offs that it was a put-up job was when a cameraman from a little weekly in Pennsylvania went to the site where this airliner had supposedly crashed on 9/11. And he said, “I didn’t see any airliner. I saw a hole in the ground. I didn’t see any bodies. I didn’t see any luggage.” There was no wreckage!Reporters who worked in the Press Room at the Pentagon went out there on the lawn, and they couldn’t see any airliner!

THIERRY MEYSSAN: (famous French author) : How does a plane 125 ft. wide and 155 ft. long fit into a hole which is only 60 ft. across?

KEVIN BARRETT:  I asked Ross whether he is allowed to express such views in his [mainstream] articles.

SHERWOOD ROSS:  Absolutely not! You won’t see me quoted nowadays by theAssociated Press!

KEVIN BARRETT:  Another leading American journalist, Paul Craig Roberts, has also been banned from US mainstream media for telling the truth about 9/11.

PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS (grimly) : Now seen universally as a lawless warmonger and a nuisance, Washington’s soft power has been squandered. With its influence on the wane, Washington has become more of a bully. In response, the rest of the world is isolating Washington.

KEVIN BARRETT:  Dr. Roberts served as Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, won the French Legion of Honor and other awards for his contributions to economics, and has been a regular columnist for the Wall Street JournalBusiness Week, and other mainstream publications. But since he spoke out about the controlled demolitions of the three World Trade Center skyscrapers on 9/11, Paul Craig Roberts has been put on the mainstream media’s no-publish list.

PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS:  One of the worst things that ever happened to America was when President Clinton allowed five companies to concentrate [= buy up] the American media. The so-called mainstream media is no longer the media. It doesn’t tell you anything. It’s a propaganda ministry—the Ministry of Propaganda.

KEVIN BARRETT:  Rather than writing for the mainstream media, Paul Craig Roberts is now exposing the fake killing of Osama Bin Laden.

PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS:  The neoconservatives who advocate America’s hegemony over the world called for “a new Pearl Harbor” that would allow them to launch wars of conquest. No evidence exists that supports the government’s 9/11 story. It is unnecessary for me to report the voluminous evidence that conclusively proves that the official story is a lie! You can read it for yourself. It is available online. You can read what the architects and engineers for 9/11 truth have to say. You can read the scientists’ reports.

LASHA DARKMOON:  More than 200 senior military, intelligence, and law enforcement officials, including two generals, have now questioned the 9-11 Commission’s report. They have been joined by over 1500 top architects and engineers, 250 pilots and aviation experts, 400 university professors, and 250 survivors and their families.

KEVIN BARRETT:  Don’t bother reading the mainstream media! As Seymour Hersh, Sherwood Ross, Paul Craig Roberts, and a rapidly growing number of ordinary Americans realize, the mainstream media’s motto is now: “We lie about everything.”

OSAMA BIN LADEN:  As a Muslim, I do my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks.

PROF. DAVID RAY GRIFFIN (author of eleven books on 9-11) : All the proffered evidence that America was attacked by Muslims on 9-11 appears to have been fabricated.

LASHA DARKMOON: It’s hard to see how Muslim hijackers could have been involved, given that no CCTV pictures exist of the hijackers anywhere in the airports. Moreover, there are no Arab names on any flight lists. No boarding staff were prepared to testify to having seen any Arab-looking persons boarding the planes. Above all, there’s not a single post-mortem indicating any Arab dead bodies at the scene of the crime. On the other hand, the passport of one of the alleged terrorists, Satam Al Suqami, apparently came fluttering down to Ground Zero where the FBI found it intact. Amazing, isn’t it?

DAVID RAY GRIFFIN:   The FBI claimed that, while searching the streets after the destruction of the World Trade Center, they discovered the passport of Satam al-Suqami, one of the hijackers on American Flight 11. For this to be true, the passport would have had to survive the collapse of the North Tower, which evidently pulverized almost everything in the building into fine particles of dust — except the steel and al-Suqami’s passport. This claim is too absurd to pass the giggle test.

The passport of alleged Al-Qaeda mastermind Mohammed Atta was miraculously found intact among the ashes of the Twin Towers.
The passport of alleged Al-Qaeda mastermind Mohammed Atta was miraculously found intact among the ashes of the Twin Towers.

PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS: How could a tiny undamaged passport be found in the rubble of two skyscrapers, each more than 100 stories tall, when bodies, office furniture and computers could not be found?

LASHA DARKMOON: Nothing that could have embarrassed the US government survived the explosions. Even the “indestructible” black boxes containing key flight information had been complete vaporized, contrary to the laws of physics. Even more miraculously and conveniently for the US government, two charred passports of alleged Al Qaeda terrorists, one of them ringleaderMohammed Atta (pictured), had been found intact in the ruins — almost as if someone had placed them there on purpose to be found.  (See here)

CHRISTOPHER BOLLYN:  What many people don’t understand about 9-11 is thatthere was no proper criminal investigation into 9/11. Although the World Trade Center was the scene of the greatest mass murder in U.S. history, the evidence from the crime scene, such as the structural steel, was treated like scrap; cut up into small pieces, mixed with other scrap metal, and shipped to China to be melted down. The public was given an utterly false story and incited to wage war in Afghanistan while the crucial evidence was being destroyed in two junkyards in New Jersey.

"I had no knowledge of these attacks!"
“I had no knowledge of these attacks!”

OSAMA BIN LADEN (pictured) :  I had no knowledge of these attacks!

CHRISTOPHER BOLLYN:  The FBI investigation of the events of 9-11 was being managed by Michael Chertoff, the Assistant Attorney General  who was the US official who was supposed to collect the evidence, find the guilty parties, and prosecute them. Under Chertoff, however, an Israeli-American dual national, there was no 9-11 investigation and no prosecution.

In the end there was not a single trial for any of the families who lost loved ones on 9-11. The US District Judge who oversaw the 9-11 litigation was Alvin K. Hellerstein, a dedicated Zionist in New York whose son lives in an illegal Israeli settlement on the occupied West Bank.

If a crime like 9-11 is not properly investigated and prosecuted, you can be sure there is something to hide.

BIOLOGIST RICHARD DAWKINS (fatuously) Bin Laden has won! (After a jar of honey belonging to him was confiscated by airport security).

OSAMA BIN LADEN:  What is this? Is it not that there exists a government within the government in the United Sates? That secret government must be asked as to who carried out the attacks. I have already said that we are not hostile to the United States. We are against the US Government system, which makes other nations slaves of the United States.

This system is totally in control of the American Jews, whose first priority is Israel, not the United States. It is clear that the American people are themselves the slaves of the Jews and are forced to live according to the principles and laws laid down by the Jews.

3.  They kill people to silence them

KEVIN BARRETT:  One of the leading scientists challenging the US government’s version of 9/11, Dr. Crockett Grabbe, has gone on record charging 9/11 cover-up forces with a series of murders and attempted murders — including attempts on his own life.

LASHA DARKMOON:  They’re now actually killing people to silence them?

KEVIN BARRETT:  In a recent interview on my radio show, Dr. Grabbe, a physics professor with a Ph.D. from Cal Tech, described a series of attempts on his life that followed the publication of his 2011 book National Swindle of the World Trade Center.

DR CROCKETT GRABBE:  I’m not just referring to the murders that occurred on 9/11, but also the unexplained murders of both 9/11 witnesses and truth-seekers: Michael Doran, David Graham, Bertha Champagne. The interesting thing is, Bertha Champagne and Nancy Hamilton both had unexplained deaths from automobiles running over them.

LASHA DARKMOON:  I notice quite a few mysterious automobile accidents taking place nowadays. This seems to be the new way of disposing of government whistleblowers and high profile witnesses. I’m thinking here of the Franklin cover-up and the Gunderson case, both involving high-level witnesses to government involvement in pedophile crimes. These witnesses conveniently meet their deaths in car accidents—bumped off  before they can get to court.

DR GRABBE:  The thing that made me a believer is that when I published my first book in 2011, there were unexplained, strange attempts to hit me with an automobile. It was just unbelievable! I’m not a 9/11 witness or anything. I’m just a physicist showing that nothing supports the official version of 9/11.

LASHA DARKMOON:  How did they try to kill you?

DR GRABBE:  There were actually several cases. I’ll mention two from back in 2011. The first one was…one morning I went out for a walk on the street. And there was a pickup that went past me at very high speed…then quickly stopped and started backing up at high speed towards me. I felt he was trying to hit me with the vehicle, but I couldn’t be sure till later, when I was going out to get my mail in the evening.

LASHA DARKMOON: This guy tried to kill you twice on the same day?

DR CROCKETT GRABBE:  When I opened my mailbox, I heard an engine start up and saw a car come around the curve very rapidly about a hundred to two hundred feet away from me. My mailbox was full of mail … if I’d gotten the mail out, that pick-up, the way it was traveling close to sixty miles per hour and coming straight at me, it would have hit me!

KEVIN BARRETT:  Dr. Grabbe’s book, Anatomy of Mass Murders, discussesthe suspicious deaths of nineteen 9/11 witnesses or truth-seekers: Barry Jennings, Beverly Eckart, Kenneth Johanneman, Christopher Landis, Paul Smith, Major General David Wherley, Salvatore Princiotta, Deborah Palfrey, Barbara Olson, Michael H Doran, David Graham, Bertha Champagne, Nancy Hamilton, Suzanne Jovin, Perry and Beth Ann Kucinich (Rep. Dennis Kucinich siblings), David Kelly, Presanna Kalahasthi, and Senator Paul Wellstone.

SENATOR WELLSTONE AND HIS FAMILY The senator asked too many awkward questions about 9/11. Soon he was dead, along with his wife and daughter, in a mysterious plane crash…
The senator asked too many awkward questions about 9/11. Soon he was dead, along with his wife and daughter, in a mysterious plane crash…

LASHA DARKMOON:  Senator Paul Wellstone (pictured), now that’s an interesting case. The Senator was a 9/11 Truther who had said, “There are so many things going on in relation to 9/11 that just don’t make sense.”

Inflammatory comments like that, coming from a US senator, are clearly incompatible with longevity. Soon after he said that the Senator was dead, in a plane crash: along with his wife, his daughter, three staff members and two professionally trained pilots.

The investigation of this mysterious multiple death was a farce, just as the investigation of what really happened on 9/11 was perhaps the ultimate farce — an “investigation” conducted by Israeli American citizen Michael Chertoff (pictured here with his Jewish accomplices) into a crime committed by Mossad in cahoots with American neoconservatives — most of them also Jewish.

The only plausible explanation for Senator Wellstone’s death is that he and his entourage were assassinated.

DR JIM FETZER:  Seymour Hirsch disclosed recently that Vice President Cheney was running “an executive assassination ring” from his office in the White House, where Wellstone appears to have been one of his targets.

LASHA DARKMOON: Why has no one investigated Cheney?

KEVIN BARRETT:  Despite all the murders, the truth continues to spread. As a huge billboard in Times Square trumpeted the “smoking gun of 9/11” — the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 – Americans rose up this fall to stop the planned bombing of Syria. Why? They simply did not believe government and media claims about the al-Ghouta chemical attack. Americans have been dragged into wars by false-flag attacks and government lies too many times.

GEORGE W. BUSH (butting in angrily) : Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists!

PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS:  America is in the toilet, and the rest of the world knows it. But the neocons who rule in Washington and their Israeli ally are determined that Washington start yet more wars to create lebensraum for Israel.

SENATOR  JOHN  McCAIN (taking the high moral ground) : Blaming the US government for the events of 9/11 mars the memories of all those lost on that day! It shakes Americans’ faith in their government at a time when that faith is already near an all-time low! It traffics in ugly, unfounded accusations of extraordinary evil against fellow Americans!

IRANIAN EX-PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD (tactlessly) : The majority of the American people believe some segments within the US  government orchestrated the 9/11 attack to reverse the declining US economy and its grips on the Middle East in order also to save the Zionist regime.

BARACK OBAMA: For him to make a statement like that is inexcusable!

ANN COULTER: We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them all to Christianity!

AL GOLDSTEIN (Jewish pornographer) : Christ sucks!

SARAH SILVERMAN (Jewish comedienne, passing off hate speech as humor) I hope the Jews did kill Christ! I’d fucking do it again — in a second!

KEVIN MACDONALD:  The Jewish elite fears an America that takes Christianity seriously.

SARAH SILVERMAN (insulting the relatives of 9/11 victims) : 9/11 widows give the best hand jobs!

LASHA DARKMOON: Despicable rat!

T.S. ELIOT (intervening tactlessly) : The rats are underneath the piles! The Jew isunderneath the lot!

LASHA DARKMOON:  Watch out, Mr Eliot, or you’ll ruin your reputation!… Suffice to say it’s quite true that there were lots of Jews lurking around “underneath the piles”, so to speak, both on 9/11 and before. There were many Jews in the Bush administration. They had close ties to the Israeli government.

Every one of the following kingpins of the Bush administration was also an Israeli citizen: Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Michael Chertoff, George Tenet (real name Cohen), Elliot Abrams, Donald Kagan, Richard Haas, Kenneth Adelman, Edward Luttwak, Robert Satloff, David Frum, David Wurmser, Steve Goldsmith, Marc Grossman, Ari Fleisher.

EHUD BARAK:  Let there be no illusions! This attack is an attack on everything that Western civilization holds dear!  And we know who the attackers are!

CHRISTOPHER BOLLYN:  Ehud Barak certainly knows “who the attackers are”.  He sees the chief architect of 9-11 every time he looks in the mirror!

DONALD RUMSFELD:  There are things we don’t know we don’t know.

GEORGE W. BUSH (pounding the table with his fist) : If you’re not with us, you’re against us!

BENJAMIN NETANYAHU (smirks) : We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon!


“9/11 was good for Israel!”

4.  The 9/11 war criminals should be rounded up and executed

LASHA DARKMOON:  The chief suspects of the 9/11 crime of the century have often been named. Here are the names of 39 individual

Posted in USAComments Off on 9/11: The Shocking Truth Laid Bare

Pakistan: Defense Day-The State of New War



By Sajjad Shaukat

The 6th of September holds a significant place in the history of our nation, when Pakistan’s

courageous armed forces and the entire nation stood united in 1965 for the defense of the

homeland in thwarting the nefarious designs of the enemy which had threatened the territorial

integrity of our beloved country through an all-out war.

Pakistan Army not only forced Indian troops to retreat from Lahore sector, but also crossed the

Line of Control, occupying various parts of Indian-held Kashmir-the root cause of the war.

This time, the Defense Day has come at a time when Pakistan and its security forces have been

facing a different war, while enemy is also different, which employs subversive activities of

various kinds which also include internal and external challenges. In these terms, Pakistan is in

However, during this very day, Pakistan is in the state of new war, being waged by the security

forces and intelligence agencies against terrorists. In this respect, our Armed Forces are

successfully obtaining their objectives in North Waziristan Agency (NWA) through military

operation Zarb-e-Azb against the terrorists who had challenged the writ of the state, and had

frightened the entire nation by their terror-acts. Pakistan has perennially been facing subversive

activities in Balochistan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Karachi and other parts of the country including

tribal areas where security forces and law-enforcing agencies are coping with the militants.

Externally, Pak Army and Rangers have boldly been responding to India’s unprovoked firing at

the Line of Control in Kashmir including Working Boundary in Sialkot and other sectors. While,

the fundamentalist party BJP led by the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is implementing

anti-Muslim and anti-Pakistan agenda. In this context, BJP leader Dr. Subramaniam Swamy, a

staunch promoter of Hindutva (Hindu nationalism) stated on July 12, this year that India needed

only two years to defeat Pakistan militarily, and the only solution of Kashmir was war, as “there

is no peaceful, democratic solution.

Moreover, Pakistan’s security forces have also been facing cross-border terrorism from

Afghanistan side, encountering heavily-armed militants who from time to time, target check

posts of the Army, and other civil and military installations.

Internally, prevailing political impasse in the country has deepened, as protesting groups

of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) led by Imran Khan and Pakistan Awami Tehreek (PAT)

by Dr. Tahirul Qadri continue AZADI (Freedom) and INQILAB (Revolution) marches,

observing sit-ins at capital city of Islamabad, blocking sensitive Red Zone area and threatening

vital government buildings. They have negatively impacted the entire nation causing fretful

anxiety for all segments of society. The demonstrations have been prolonged and extended

unnecessarily, as the government of PML (N) led by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif could not

grab the initiative to settle the issue through peaceful dialogue due to its irresponsible approach

And Pakistan is facing multi-faceted crises such as soaring prices, energy-shortage,

unemployment, crimes, lack of health facilities, and dependence upon the US-led developed

countries, IMF and World Bank for financial aid.

It is because of lack of unity among our politicians, leaders, security forces and media that

foreign opportunists have been manipulating the chaotic situation of Pakistan in order to fulfill

their secret agenda by destabilizing it, as it is the only nuclear country in the Islamic World. In

the past few years, nefarious designs of the external enemies can be gauged from various anti-
Pakistan developments such as subversive activities, sectarian violence all over the country, and

separatism in Balochistan.

Notably, present drastic situation cannot be comprehended by the general masses and even

the political leaders who abruptly change their opinion without logic. Therefore, they become

unintentional victim of the external plotters who succeed in creating a rift particularly between

the political groups, divided on ethnic and linguistic lines. These foreign enemies also seek to

create a division between the political leaders and the Armed Forces of our country.

It is regrettable that on the one hand, our multiple crises show that Pakistan is rapidly advancing

towards a ‘failed state’ owing to the sinister designs of some external powers, while, on the other

hand, our media, particularly most of the TV channels conduct controversial debate between

politicians and commentators, contesting internal politics. Some, political entities have ignored

the sacrifices of Pakistan’s security forces and country’s intelligence agency, ISI regarding the

security of the country.

At this critical hour, while present different war demands selfless unity, but accusations and

counteraccusations between the rival politicians who distort the image of Pak Army and ISI in

the tone of external enemies have become routine practice. In this regard, they misguide the

people by opining as to what the people want, but conceal as to what people actually need?

Unfortunately, under the cover of democracy and constitution, some politicians of the

government and the opposition parties who want to protect their nefarious designs are targeting

the armed forces. Thus, they are diverting the attention of the general masses from those articles

of the constitution, which are mentioned in the ‘Principles of Policy.’ These articles clearly

mention that people would provide with justice, gap between the rich and the poor would be

reduced, and poverty would be eradicated in the country. However, our politicians and the

subsequent governments of the industrialists and feudlords failed in delivering good governance

to the people in accordance with the constitution. They have only deceived the public mandate

under the cover of democracy which has been named as a ‘corrupt democracy’ in Pakistan.

Nevertheless, as regards the Defense Day, it demands true national unity among every segment

of society. The 6th September reminds that instead of manipulating political turmoil, our

political leaders must resolve it, and their differences through compromise. They must pledge

that they will not exploit their regional, provincial and political differences at the cost of the

national interests so as to continue or grab political power. In this respect, a blind dedication to

one’s own political agenda, race, tribe and creed should not be allowed to create hatred in one

group against the other.

They must avoid manipulating present thorny issues in order to gain the sympathies of general

masses, and to increase the members for their parties. If any controversy has arisen between the

government and the opposition parties, it can better be settled through reconciliation.

For this aim, in order to castigate the plot of the external enemies against the country, our rulers

and politicians must also stop exploiting any crisis, especially the present one against the Armed

Forces and ISI whose image are deliberately being tarnished by the external conspirators.

Besides, Pakistan’s media, especially TV channels must create national cohesion among various

segments of society. For this purpose, the owners of these channels must detect and terminate

the services of some anchors who are working on the payroll of foreign enemies. As electronic

media attract more viewers, so Pakistan’s TV commentators should give a matching response to

malicious propaganda of the US-led some western countries including India and Israel which are

leaving no stone unturned in distorting the image of Pakistan, its army and ISI.

Today our nation is in a state of new war, facing multiple challenges to the security of the

country. So, it is not war of armed forces only nor of intelligence agencies alone. In fact, it is

nation’s war which demands cooperation of every citizen and politician.

Nonetheless, on this very day, imbibing the 1965 spirit of unity, the Defence Day serves as a

motivating force for the civil and military personnel including the public to cope with the new

dangers of this different war through collective unity. The entire nation must also show full unity

with the armed forces and the intelligence agencies, encouraging them in giving equal response

to the Indian aggression at the LoC, besides their fight against terrorism including other internal

and external challenges.

Undoubtedly, the Defense Day demands selfless national unity among all the citizens, political

and religious leaders, members of civil society, media and security forces to cope with the anti-

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants,

Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations

Posted in Pakistan & KashmirComments Off on Pakistan: Defense Day-The State of New War

Block the Boat: the Inside Story

Jane Jewell: 23rd August 2014

What really happened at the Port of Oakland those five days in August

Block the Boat - The march on Saturday 16th August to the Port
Block the Boat – The march on Saturday 16th August to the Port

It’s been an amazing week. San Francisco Bay Area human rights activists managed to prevent an Israeli ship from docking in Oakland and unloading all of its cargo for four solid days!
The container ship Zim Piraeus belongs to Zim Integrated Shipping Services, of which 32% is owned by Israel Corporation. The ship was due to dock in the port of Oakland on Saturday August 16th, 2014, and leave the same day, having unloaded its cargo of 176 containers. It didn’t leave until Wednesday August 20th, with most of its cargo still on board. Human rights activists and other members of the local community, outraged by the Israeli genocide currently being committed by the state of Israel against the Palestinian people in Gaza, launched the “Block the Boat” campaign, to delay or prevent the boat from unloading. Horrific pictures have been coming out of Gaza via social media since early July, of children with limbs sliced off by DIME bombs (dense inert metal explosives), of thousands of homes destroyed, as well as several hospitals, and even UN schools where people were seeking safe haven. Over 2,000 people have now been killed, including over 500 hundred children. Many more have been wounded, with hideous, life changing loss of body parts. The people in the San Francisco Bay Area and beyond gathered in Oakland to say, “Enough”. A massive boycott of Israeli ships has now begun, with other actions continuing the campaign in Los Angeles, Tacoma and Seattle. The blockade of the Zim Piraeus was the longest blockade of an Israeli ship in USA history.

Many false reports have been put out, both by the mainstream media who misunderstood information they had received, and deliberately by Zionist media.
This is what really happened, my own day by day account:

Friday 15th Aug:

Activists tracked the passage of the Zim Piraeus up the west coast of California. I followed it from off San Luis Obispo to Monterey Bay, where it unexpectedly stopped at 5pm.
The other boat associated with the Zim shipping line, the Everlasting, which had been behind the Zim Piraeus, overtook it, went straight past, and docked in Oakland around 3am Saturday morning.

Saturday 16th Aug:

Zim Piraeus had originally been scheduled to arrive early on Saturday, and leave later the same day.

However, it stayed off Monterey the whole of Saturday, drifting 6 nautical miles in one direction and then back again. The schedule was changed to say that the boat would now come in on Sunday evening at 8.30pm, according to the tracking device, VesselFinder.

A large protest was organised by a coalition of groups working for freedom and justice for the Palestinians. The March from West Oakland Bart Station to the port of Oakland, berth 57, was originally scheduled for 5am. The protest changed to 3pm, however, even though the boat was not coming in now until Sunday. The ship spent the whole of Saturday idling off the coast of Monterey Bay. Some activists questioned why the protest was not postponed to the Sunday, when the boat would come in. However, had this protest not been held, there is always the possibility that the boat might have changed plans and come in on Saturday after all

You can see a video of the march to the Port of Oakland here.

Sunday 17th Aug:

At 7am, the Zim Piraeus set off from Monterey Bay to the SF Bay, arriving Sunday 5pm. Since the activists had all been at the port on the Saturday, Zim perhaps assumed that we would not be back again on the Sunday. How wrong they were! Activists scrambled to get to berth 57, and by the time the new shift was due to go to work, there was a sizable picket line, accompanied by a police presence. Because of “concern for the health and safety of the workers” the shift was called off and the longshore workers (dockers) sent home.

Monday 18th Aug:

Once again, the company expected to be able to get their cargo unloaded, this time on the Monday morning shift, as many of the protesters would be at work. However, many of us are retired, or teachers not yet back at school, and about 20-30 protesters got up early to form a picket line at 5am. Once again the police were there (150 of them!), but the activists, although small in number, managed to prevent workers from entering, and this shift, once again, went home. These activists were the real heroes of the whole five days, as without their admirable dedication, the whole thing would have collapsed that dark and drizzly morning.

Buoyed by this success, another protest was organised for Monday afternoon, and again, the workers graciously would not cross our picket line, and went home. Protesters came from near and far. While most of us were from the SF Bay Area, one person drove all the way from Stockton to take part. Outrage over the ethnic cleansing in Gaza and a desire to do something has touched many people.

About 80 – 100 people attended the Monday afternoon protest. This time the police managed to divide us into two groups and herded us onto the sidewalks on either side of the main gate. There was plenty of space for the longshore workers to enter, but they refused to cross our picket line. We discovered later the reason why. Back in April 2003, anti war activists had held a protest at the docks. “The police fired wooden dowels, projectiles, sting balls, concussion grenades, tear gas, and other non-lethal weapons when protesters at the gates of two shipping lines at the port refused an order to disperse. Longshore workers and protestors were injured in the exchange.”
Because of the injuries sustained by the workers back in 2003, they now refuse to pass through a gate that is being held open by the police, citing “Health and safety concerns”. Thus it is not the activists who pose a threat to them but the police! Our own presence, stuffed on the sidewalks behind barricades, had no physical effect on stopping workers from going to work. However, our presence attracted the police, and their presence deterred the workers from entering, doing our job for us!

As with all the demonstrations, it was peaceful, and a lot of camaraderie created an atmosphere of exuberance. People who had been there since the early morning had tweeted that they needed food and water, and the rest of us responded with abundance. There was fried chicken, rice, other platters of cooked meals, bananas, cookies, yogurt and plenty of water to drink. We even offered food to all the police (“Chicken?”) but being on duty they had to refuse. Must have been tough. We had a feast! The two groups on either side of the gate chanted “Free, free Palestine, Don’t cross the picket line!” accompanied by a tuba and trumpet, while activists drummed on the barricades to provide the rhythm. Unfortunately the two groups were one beat out, and, as a music teacher, I pleaded with the police to let me stand in the middle of the road to conduct. They refused. They were all standing in a line with gaps in between, which reminded me of the formation we used to use doing folk dancing when I was a kid. I suggested we all do Hay-for-three, skipping in and out down the line, but they refused that idea too. One policeman said he would love to dance but couldn’t while in uniform. They must have got so bored, just standing there. I managed to get a few to smile to pass the time. They were trying hard to keep a deadpan face, standing in a row like frozen folk dancers. On the whole the Oakland police were reasonable, just regular folk doing their job, unlike the police in Ferguson we have been hearing about recently who have been alarmingly racist and aggressive.

It was past 9 pm when we heard that, once again, the workers were not going to work that night, and we all went home. The lady from Stockton had a long way to drive.

Tuesday 19th August:

Yet another morning picket prevented the early morning shift from going to work, and at 3pm the ship gave up and left the port of Oakland, berth 57, and headed out to sea, stated destination, Los Angeles (so the tracking devices told us). Under the Golden Gate it went, and we all thought “Good riddance” except for one or two protesters with inside knowledge, who insisted that the ship was relocating to berth 22. “Really?”, I thought. It had long gone past berth 22, and was now well past Marin Headlands. However

At 5.30pm the ship suddenly turned around, not far from the Farallons, and headed straight back into port! By the time it had moored at berth 22, the next shift had already gone through the gates and started work on another ship. They were pulled off that ship and sent to work on the Zim Piraeus, much to their irritation. According to one source:

“ILWU Longshoremen didn’t want to work the Zim ship, but one of their leaders, Melvin Mackay, threatened to cite anyone who didn’t work that night. The Longshoremen were pissed and slowed down work in protest. No one, including port managers, wants to deal with the Zim ship…..”
In addition, several workers left the premises at midnight for their meal break, despite the pizza that was brought in to keep them there during that time. (The activists also got pizza brought to them, but not by the Zim shipping line!) One worker who did leave told the activists to get more people there to make sure he couldn’t get back in! “They’re w/ us if we show up!” tweeted one activist. Accordingly, more people showed up and others decided to stay until after 2 am, so even less workers worked the second part of their shift, and those that did were going slow anyway.
We will probably never know if the decision by the longshore workers to “go slow” was because of their solidarity with the Palestinian people, their solidarity with those protesting outside, because of irritation from having been deceived, or a mixture of all three.

176 containers were supposed to be unloaded that night, but no more than 50 got unloaded, comprising the “perishables and high-value goods”. (A corporate Port of Oakland official told one activist that the Zim Piraeus was supposed to unload 176 containers but only unloaded 26. Other reports say 50, but no more than that.)

However, the leader of the longshore workers told the media that they had “unloaded everything that was intended to be unloaded”. No one thought to ask “intended by whom?” The media took this to mean everything that the Zim shipping line intended them to unload. However, it actually referred to everything the longshore workers intended to unload, which was the perishables and the high-value cargo. That was all they did!

Wednesday 20th Aug:

The media duly announced that the unloading had been completed that night, and the ship left the port at 9am. Instead of going out to sea straight away, being 4 days late now (it was supposed to have left on the Saturday) it turned left and went down to anchor in the south bay, just north of Hunters’ Point. Many other ships were anchored there too, as it is much cheaper than staying in port. It anchored there for 8 hours, until 5pm. None of the media who had reported that the unloading had been successfully completed seemed to wonder why the ship was sitting in the south bay for no apparent reason. No one asked why it hadn’t set off to Russia, being already so late. Many of the activists knew the real reason; that the boat was hoping to go in to a berth – any berth – to finish unloading its cargo. However, no berth was found for them. Whether this was because they were all full up (the Zim ship’s space was supposed to have been Saturday morning) or whether the port was fed up with it all and just wanted to see the back of them, we will probably never know. Either way, the boat once again passed under the Golden Gate Bridge, and set out to sea. Of course we were all tracking it obsessively to see if it was going to do another U-turn like it did the previous day, but it continued, and then turned north into the main shipping channel, and by midnight when it was far out to the north west parallel with Eureka we knew we were shot of it at last. Now the Zim Piraeus is on its way to Russia, taking about two thirds of the containers with it that were supposed to have been unloaded in Oakland!

By the time that the Zim Piraeus ship had left, it was four days behind schedule, but the estimated time of arrival in Russia had only been changed by one day, from August 31st to Sept 1st. This means that it will have to cross the Pacific in 12 days flat, instead of 15. It will have to go much faster, and burn up much more fuel which will cost the company a lot of extra money. In addition, the company would have had to have paid increased fees to stay in port longer than planned, as well as having to pay for a pilot going in and out of the SF Bay twice.

Throughout the five days of action, the longshore workers were terrific in supporting us. They have a long history of supporting human rights. For example, they refused to unload South African ships during the Apartheid era. Now they are doing the same against Apartheid Israel.
The whole boycott action was a terrific success, and we really feel that we made history. The four day delay caused considerable inconvenience to the Zim shipping line, and customers in the future will no doubt think twice before using them, especially those whose stuff is now on its way to Russia.

During all this time the Israel propaganda machine was working non stop to spread false information. They even tried their hand at prophesying the future! On Wednesday morning reported that “Members of the ILWU dock workers’ union in Oakland, California on Wednesday afternoon unloaded the ZIM ship that anti-Israel picketers blocked last week.”
(What, while it was anchored in the South Bay? How did they get the cranes out there? Next time they must examine their crystal balls more carefully.)

Our next job is to contact all the companies that use the Zim Shipping Line, to suggest that using Zim could mean delayed deliveries, as our protests will continue. This may persuade them to switch to another company from one that is so heavily involved in human rights abuses.

Other protests scheduled by human rights activists on the West coast involve the Zim Chicago in Tacoma and Seattle, Washington, and the Zim Haifa in Los Angeles from Sat Aug 23rd.
Groups of activists up and down the west coast will be doing their best to prevent Zim ships from unloading on an ongoing basis.
This is the least we can do for the people of Palestine, many of whom have lost their land, their fishing boats, their homes, their limbs, their loved ones, and their lives.

Posted in USA, Europe, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Block the Boat: the Inside Story

The unpublicized impact of a successful BDS action

By Roqayah Chamseddine

There is no question as to how immensely successful the Block the Boat protest at the Port of Oakland, led by Arab Resource and Organizing Center (AROC) and arranged with the help of countless organizations, was. Unless you are a supporter of Israel or a journalist at the Oakland Tribune. Thousands of protesters, including an estimated 5,000 who marched on the Port of Oakland on August 16, prevented the Zim Piraeus from unloading by keeping workers from crossing their picket line to enter the port for a historic four days, making it “the longest blockade of an Israeli ship” according to AROC.

The Oakland Tribune, Haaretz, and a number of other outlets, reported that the Israeli-owned Zim Piraeus unloaded its cargo after “delays” but after speaking to a number of distributors whose cargo was being transported by Zim Piraeus I found this to be unmistakably false and misleading.

According to a document from PIERS, a database of US international trade which provides maritime logistics, at least 23 companies are clearly listed as having goods aboard Zim Piraeus – ranging from cucumber pickles and sparkling wine to ceramic tiles and solar swimming pool heaters – with some goods originating in Israel. Though building materials and agricultural produce were listed by PIERS it should be noted that Zim Integrated Shipping Services imports ammunition “manufactured by Israel Manufacturing Industries by Federal Cartridge (Federal Premium Ammunition)” which makes defense ammunition used by U.S. law enforcement and has a weapons contract with the Department of Homeland Security. Federal Premium Ammunition is a subsidiary of Alliant Techsystems, which produces Bushmaster autocannons used by U.S. forces and NATO, the AGM-88 High-speed Anti-Radiation Missile (an air-to-surface missile), Hellfire missile upgrades, and provides other weapons services to the US military and allies. The import report for Zim shows that the ammunitions originated in Israel, at the Port of Haifa and arrived at the Port of Savannah in Georgia.

Zim’s first ship, the Kedmah, was purchased in 1947, before the creation of the State of Israel, and would carry thousand of immigrants to Palestine. In 1948 Zim ships would carry arms and ammunition used to carry out the Nakba, and according to a video published online by Zim Integrated Shipping Services “Zim would play this crucial role every time Israel faced conflict.” Ze’ev Shind, a key Mossad activist who would become managing director of Zim Israel Navigation Co., president of the American-Israel Shipping Co., and Director-General of Israel’s Ministry of Communications and Ministry of Defense was the organizers and principal figures organizing immigration to Palestine, according to The Canadian Jewish Chronicle. The role of Zim in the ethnic cleansing of Palestine is well documented, even by Zim sources.

Esteson Co., a direct food and beverage importer and distributor in California, posted on their Facebook page that their “garlic is now rotting on its way to Russia to be offloaded unto (sic) another vessel,” and when contacted for comment it was mentioned that a container of Zeos beer never arrived due to the Port action. All in all, Esteson Co. has not receivedany of their products as of September 3.

Good Stuff Distributors, located in San Francisco, California, told Al-Akhbar English that not only did they not receive their shipment of Zadona cucumber pickles as of September 3 they do not know where the cargo is and are still waiting to hear from Zadona as to where the items are. A spokesperson for Good Stuff Distributors informed Al-Akhbar English that not only were they unaware of Zim’s ties to Israel they have made it clear to Zadona, of Sinokrot Food Company, that they are to “find another vessel” as Good Stuff Distributors will no longer be using Zim.

Alfa Omega Co., which has trading partners in France, Spain and Greece, disclosed to Al-Akhbar English that their business was “greatly affected”, as they did not receive any of their products, including olives. The spokesperson was clearly unhappy, stating that the targeting of Zim by the Block the Boat protesters, specifically, is the reason that they will now look for another vessel to use for their products, despite having worked with Zim “for years”.

The sales and marketing manager at Carmichael International Service, a customs broker and freight forwarder with laminated glass aboard Zim Piraeus, told Al-Akhbar English that customers did not receive their products as of September 3, but it was due to “delays” and “port congestion,” which is undoubtedly a brazen spin on what transpired at the Port of Oakland. When examining the vessel schedule for the Zim Piraeus, dating back to July and after August 20, we find that there are no analogous delays as there was in Oakland as the vessels usually left the same day or a day after, unlike at the Port of Oakland where the “delay” was at least four days long.

Cynara Worldwide Sourcing Inc., located in Fresno, California, said that all products on the Zim Piraeus were not only never unloaded but that they were sent to Shanghai and they wouldn’t receive them until at least the end of the month. As a result of Block the Boat, the spokesperson told Al-Akhbar English that they have put an immediate halt to “everything on Zim” and will now be looking for other vessels they can use.

The most curious case in regards to Block the Boat is that of American Metals and Chemicals, located in Hollywood, Florida. A representative toldAl-Akhbar English that they did not receive their shipment of alkyl sulfonic acid, and that the cargo was diverted to Russia. When asked who they were contacted by the representative stated that a letter was delivered from an attorney’s office, though they could not find the letter at the time of the phonecall so as to disclose which office. The letter stated, in part, that their shipment was “turned away because of the strike” at the Port of Oakland. There was also a follow up telephone call from the same office, letting them know that their products were being diverted.

The remaining consignees listed as having cargo delivered to the Port of Oakland by the Zim Piraeus during the Block the Boat campaign were contacted by Al-Akhbar English but did not immediately return calls for comment on the whereabouts of their goods – based on what was revealed by the 6 companies that did supply information it is not difficult to assume that they faced comparable circumstances. Regardless, Block the Boat was not only successful in keeping the Zim Piraeus from unloading the aforementioned cargo but due specifically to this action a number of companies are now either putting a hold on all products using Zim vessels or reconsidering using Zim, which is not only contrary to what the media has reported but an impressive achievement for the movement for boycotts, divestment and sanctions (BDS) against Israel.

Posted in USA, ZIO-NAZI, CampaignsComments Off on The unpublicized impact of a successful BDS action

No cooperation with British war crimes!



Ground the drones

Since Nato launched its illegal and unjustified invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001, drones (aka Unmanned Aerial Vehicles) have gone from being an untried technology to one of the primary means of warfare.

The runaway leader in the field, the US, now operates 7,500 vehicles – more than 40 percent of all US defence aircraft – and trains more drone pilots each year (350 in 2011) than fighter and bomber pilots combined. Meanwhile, some 40 other countries, seeing the writing on the wall, are in the process of buying or developing their own unmanned vehicles.

Although information about British involvement in armed drone strikes is largely kept from the public, the MoD has recently admitted that British pilots have carried out thousands of drone missions in Afghanistan and Libya, flying US drones from US bases. As of 25 April, however, Britain’s first homegrown drone base became operational as airmen at RAF Waddington in Lincoln began piloting armed Reaper drones over Afghanistan.

As a mass hunger strike by inmates brings the US’s concentration camp at Guantanamo back into the media spotlight once again, it is instructive to note that the Nato imperialists’ chosen method of blanket terror and intimidation has shifted since Obama and Cameron replaced Bush and Blair from seizing and locking up a random selection of men of military age to murdering them – and very often their families as well – instead.

A new kind of terrorism

Imperialist politicians claim that drone strikes are aimed at ‘surgically removing’ ‘high-value’ ‘al-Qaeda operatives’ from the ‘field of battle’. In reality, while resistance fighters may sometimes be hit, it seems that anyone is considered ‘fair game’ by the joystick-wielding mercenaries who operate the guns from the safety of their suburban bases.

The truth is that drone strikes are terrorist attacks, killing at least 10 civilians (many of them women and children) for every one resistance fighter, according to a 2009 report by the Brookings Institution. Californian data agency Pitch Interactive, after recording every knowndrone strike in Pakistan since 2004, and recording every known casualty (3,115, but the true figure is certainly much higher), has concluded that a mere 1.5 percent of those killed had been previously identified as ‘high-profile’ targets by the US intelligence agencies. So much for ‘precision warfare’.

Some critics inside the establishment are said to be upset at the switch from detention to assassination as they regret losing opportunities to ‘interrogate’ prisoners, but Obama has certainly learned one lesson from his predecessor in the White House: the longer you keep innocent men locked up, the more likely it is that your lies about them being ‘dangerous terrorists’ will be exposed.

It is so much easier for the imperialists to order a kill, then slander their victims and move on. Particularly when they know that western journalists are not exactly queuing up to find out what really goes on in remote and inaccessible war zones, far from the comforts of their air-conditioned hotels and offices. Most ‘reporters’ for the capitalist press have been well trained in the art of rewriting military and government press releases as if they contained reliable and proven facts.

Journalists whose reports conflict with the interests of the ruling class soon find that their stories are not printed and their services are quickly dispensed with. To the extent that debate on any issue does make it into the pages of the corporate media, it is usually as a result ofdissention within ruling-class circles – and confined to the limits of what is considered acceptable by the capitalists.

So who will listen to the protestations of a poor Aghan, Pakistani or Yemeni community that the latest ‘targeted killing’ has in fact only massacred farmers, village elders, school children or wedding guests?

We are told that drones have ‘pinpoint accuracy’ and are thus a ‘humane’ alternative to ground troops, whose fire just might (accidentally of course) kill civilians during the heat of a battle. But the truth is that remote-control operation simply allows the soldiers with their fingers on the button to kill with total impunity – without having to take the risk of being hit back.

According to US-based FightBack!, ” The US government takes serious measures to cover up and lie about the deaths of civilians from these brutal attacks. A ground-breaking 2012 report by the Stanford International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic called Living With Drones found that the Central Intelligence Agency classifies all military-age male casualties of drone strikes as ‘militants’ unless they find evidence to the contrary after their death – a kind of ‘shoot first, ask questions later’ that allows war-makers to hide their crimes against civilians.

” Further, the report found that US government officials have encouraged media outlets to call the victims of drone strikes ‘militants’ in order to build support for their horrifying pro-war agenda. ” (‘Commentary: Drones in the SunshineState will bring more war and poverty, not jobs’ by Dave Schneider, 23 March 2013)

Meanwhile, the people who are living under the shadow of these devastating weapons are subject to daily terror as they find themselves under constant surveillance, never knowing when a deadly Reaper or Predator drone will stop overhead or where it will fire next. Bitter experience has taught them that nowhere is off limits; no-one is safe.

Parents are powerless to protect their children, whose young minds are inevitably scarred by this insecurity, as well as by the sight of exploded bodies and destroyed homes and by the grief of losing loved ones. The whine of an approaching drone is all it takes to reawaken previous traumas, leading inevitably to psychological problems and recurring night terrors.

Joystick wars

Preparation for this kind of warfare takes place not in the forced hikes and assault courses that squaddies are supposed to endure in their quest to ‘Be the best’, but in the pornographically violent computer games and Hollywood blockbusters that glorify imperialist war, dehumanise the ‘enemy’ as some kind of insane and unknowable ‘other’ and prepare our young people to slaughter without mercy at the push of a button.

This was perfectly illustrated by Prince Harry’s revealing and apparently unembarrassed admission that he saw killing Afghans from an Apache helicopter as being similar to playing video games. Indeed, our fair prince even went so far as to call it “a joy” to have his finger on the trigger, since he was “one of those people that loves playing PlayStation … with my thumbs, I like to think that I’m quite useful”.

Full marks for honesty, if not for tact and diplomacy. But while it may be in the interest of Harry and his parasitic family to inflict collective punishment on peoples who are resisting imperialist aggression, it is not in the interest of most British workers, who have been sold a pack of lies about the dangers that our Afghan (or Pakistani or Iraqi or Libyan or Syrian or Yemeni or Somali) brothers and sisters pose to ‘us’, even as workers in uniform are being made into perpetrators and accomplices of vicious crimes against humanity.

Ironically, as the surveillance technology on board these drones improves, their pilots are starting to lose the disconnect that they previously felt when dropping payloads from 30,000ft in the air. Now, once more, they are having to look at their victims’ faces before they pull the trigger.

But, this small caveat aside, our rulers love drones because they allow them to kill without comeback and to avoid the politically dangerous business of having to justify British casualties.

The consequences of this new warfare are far-reaching indeed. As the imperialists continue to use drones to target anyone who they see as a threat, they are turning our whole world into a battlefield where nothing and no-one is off-limits.

As Chris Cole of Drone Wars UK has pointed out, ” drones are also expanding the battlefield even within conflict zones, as politicians and military commanders have such faith in the perceived accuracy of these unmanned systems that they are much more willing to use them in civilian areas. In short, drones are ‘normalising’ war and simply making war more likely .” (‘Why our leaders love drone warfare: the power of killing without political risk’,stopwar,, 15 April 2013)

Using drones against our own

And, of course, the logical development of all this unlawful shooting down of ‘foreigners’ is the emergence of a new trend among imperialist governments, who are now increasingly using armed drones to wipe out their own citizens without bothering to go through even the most cursory of judicial processes.

The first known case of this was the intentional assassination of Anwar al-Awlaki and the apparently accidental ‘collateral’ murder of Samir Khan, both of whom were born and grew up in the US but were killed in Yemen on 30 September 2011. A month later, Mr Awlaki’s 16-year-old son, also a US citizen, was ‘mistakenly’ cut down by another drone strike as he went in search of his missing father.

Despite the authorities’ attempts to keep these murders secret, details have slowly leaked out, causing some of the US’s more far-sighted citizens to wonder: if the president can order the assassination of Americans overseas, based on secret intelligence, what are the limits to his power? Moreover, by declining to specify what it means to be “engaged in combat”, the US attorney general has not ruled out the possible scenario of a military drone strike against a US citizen on American soil.

Meanwhile, the ConDems have ramped up a secret programme, initiated by the previous Labour government, whereby British ‘terror suspects’ are being quietly stripped of their citizenship before they are captured or assassinated by British ‘allies’ – a ploy that allows the authorities to ‘wash their hands’ of those to whom, at least in theory, they owe some duty of care and to sidestep the toxic issue of a state in which the death penalty has long been officially outlawed sanctioning the murder of its own subjects without even a token recourse to the courts.

At least five of the 21 people who have are known to have been deprived of their UK nationality so far were born in Britain, and one man had lived in the country for almost 50 years. Those affected have had their passports cancelled, and have lost their right to enter Britain – making it very difficult to appeal against the home secretary’s decision. In most cases, the government has kept its actions out of the public eye by acting when the victims were staying abroad – even, in two cases, while they were on holiday.

The case of 23-year-old Mahdi Hashi is a typical one. A former care worker from Camden in north London, Mr Hashi is now incarcerated in a high-security US prison having been secretly ‘rendered’ from the African state of Djibouti last year.

” Mr Hashi claims that before being sent to the US on charges of working with the terrorist group al-Shabaab he witnessed torture in an African prison, before being handed over to the CIA and forced to sign a confession.

” Despite Mr Hashi being brought up in the UK, the British government has washed its hands of him, having stripped him of his citizenship shortly before he disappeared in Somalia last summer.

” His UK family say that when they lost contact with their son they approached the Foreign Office for help. But they were told by officials that they could not provide assistance because the home secretary had issued an order depriving him of his British citizenship.

” It was only five months later, when he reappeared in the US, that they were able to contact him again. The family’s lawyer, Saghir Hussain, said at the time: ‘The UK government has a lot of explaining to do. What role did it play in getting him kidnapped, held in secret detention and renditioned to the US? 

” The case has led to allegations that Britain may have conspired with the US to strip Mr Hashi of his citizenship knowing he would be arrested in Africa. They have no further obligations towards him and can avoid potentially embarrassing questions about his treatment before his rendition.

The case is all the more bizarre as Mr Hashi gave an interview to The Independent in 2009 when he alleged that MI5 had attempted to recruit him. He claimed that on a previous trip to Africa he was held for 16 hours in a cell at Djibouti airport, and that when he was returned to the UK he was met by an MI5 agent who told him his terror-suspect status would remain until he agreed to work for the security service.

He alleges he was to be given the job of informing on his friends by encouraging them to talk about jihad.” (‘British terror suspects quietly stripped of citizenship … then killed by drones’ by Chris Woods, Alice K Ross and Oliver Wright, Independent, 28 February 2013)

At least two British men are known to have been murdered by US drones after the home secretary stripped them of citizenship – Bilal al-Berjawi, who came from Lebanon as a baby and grew up in London, and his London-born friend Mohamed Sakr. Following harassment by British ‘counter-terrorism’ agents, they left the country and headed for Somalia, where they are said to have become involved with the anti-imperialist al-Shabaab resistance movement.

Berjawi’s murder came just hours after he had called his wife in London to congratulate her on the birth of their first son, further fuelling assumptions that British authorities are actively assisting the US military in locating and killing these ‘former’ citizens. After his murder, an intelligence officer described Mr Sakr as “a very senior Egyptian”, clearly hoping that the reality of his British nationality would never be revealed.

Meanwhile, when it comes to surveillance, drones are becoming extremely attractive to police and secret services – as well as to the hosts of private security contractors and mercenary agencies that the ruling class likes to outsource its nastiest business to. According to Ryan Calo, an assistant professor at the University of Washington School of Law, “Drones drive down the cost of surveillance considerably. We worry that the incidence of surveillance will go up.” (See ‘Current laws may offer little shield against drones, senators are told’ by Matthew L Wald, New York Times, 20 March 2013)

As can be seen, where the US nazis lead, their British counterparts are never shy to follow. In the States, use of both surveillance and armed drones by police and other agencies is set to rise exponentially as the technology becomes cheaper and more reliable.

Here at home, having tested out their use during the Olympic games, it is not difficult to believe that police might soon be using armed drones to control demonstrators or strikers, while the cheapness of surveillance drones is bound to make them ubiquitous among all the various ‘security’ operators – official and unofficial – who do our rulers’ dirty work.

StW jumps on the bandwagon

Meanwhile, the recent anti-drones protest outside RAF Waddington is a classic example of how not to disrupt the war machine – as well as of how the ‘anti-war’ leadership allows its agenda to be set by the ruling class.

Anti-drones protests have been going on for some time in Britain without any particular input from Stop the War (StW). The biggest protests have taken place in Bradford, where there is a large population of Pakistani origin, outraged at the illegal and undeclared war being waged by the CIA against civilian populations in areas of Pakistan that are considered by the US to be sympathetic to the Afghan resistance.

Recently, however, the issue has been receiving considerably more publicity in the corporate media, as members of the ruling class debate whether detention or assassination will serve them best in their wars for domination. With their unfailing nose for ‘respectable’ activity (ie, that which at least some parts of the ruling class will look kindly on), and keen to make itself look ‘relevant’ again, StW belatedly cranked into what passes these days for ‘action’, by calling for a ‘joint demonstration’ with CND, War on Want and Drone Wars.

What transpired was both farcical and instructive. Less than 200 people assembled by the side of a road on the outskirts of Lincoln on Saturday 27 April as a result of this ‘mobilisation’ – and very few of them (with the exception of a few leaders) were members of either StW or CND. In the main, those present were unaffiliated peace-loving people of various religious persuasions, along with some anti-drones campaigners. Despite the topicality and the depth of feeling among many workers on the issue, the entire ‘left’ was absent, with the single exception of the CPGB-ML, who had brought a sizeable contingent.

The march itself was less a display of working-class power than an amble down a deserted country lane. Setting off from a corner of a park on the outskirts of Lincoln town and ending up 3 miles later in a deserted field near to the RAF base, the whole event had been organised so as to have as little impact on the workings of capitalism or the consciousness of workers as possible. We passed no-one to whom we could give our leaflets and we disrupted neither the smooth running of the state nor the war machine that we were supposedly there to oppose.

Not one speaker on the platform called for any kind of direct action that might prevent the drones from operating out of Waddington. There was no suggestion that workers might be mobilised to blockade the gates to stop supplies getting in or to tear down the fences and destroy vital machinery inside. Just an amble to the top of the hill to hear the usual suspects tell us how marvellously we’d done by turning up and to advertise their other activities. The most ‘militant’-sounding speaker turned out to be a charity worker from War on Want whose ultimate vision appeared to be a scenario in which we were able to “ban the drones” by getting “Cameron to the table”!

British workers have got so used to such weekend (sh)ambles taking the place of real political action that they have forgotten that things can be done any differently. But the whole point of a demonstration is that it should be a show of strength.

Demonstrations that are effective in making the ruling class take notice are those that show some determination by workers to join together and put up a fight. That usually means that they take place on a weekday rather than a weekend, and are in the centre of big cities, so that people are pulled out of work (without notice to their employers!) and the daily business of running capitalism is severely disrupted. A demonstration should be a reminder to the ruling class that the workers have the power to disrupt and destroy profit-making; an ultimatum that concessions had better be made if the capitalists want to continue in place.

There is nothing revolutionary about the above proposition: such demonstrations are typical of many countries where the rule of capital is not remotely threatened, but where the working-class movement has retained its basic function of fighting for workers’ rights and interests within the capitalist system.

While the leaders told lies from the platform about their determination to ‘oppose’ the use of drones and about how the assembled marchers made up the “biggest anti-drones demonstration in Britain so far”, the journalists present were at equal pains to give credence to the event and present it as being much bigger and more significant than it was.

Instead of underreporting by a factor of 10 to 1 (the standard technique used by police and media to downplay events that can’t be ignored), the media has persistently reported a crowd that couldn’t have numbered more than 200 (and that’s being generous) as being three times larger, while most TV reports assiduously avoided mentioning numbers at all.

Anyone who has ever been on a massive demo that got little or no coverage on the TV or in the newspapers will be able to confirm that this is decidedly unusual. Only by understanding that the agenda had been set in advance could one account for reporting so sympathetic from the BBC (for example) that the producers went to extraordinary lengths to make sure that the screen always showed marchers during their two-and-a-half-minute film. To do this, they had to edit in footage from the beginning of the demo when the marchers had finished filing past their reporter, and to reposition him at the front for the final part of his presentation.

While StW will no doubt be happy to take the credit for the disproportionate media interest in such a tiny demonstration, the truth is that there is clearly a strong divide of opinion within the ruling class, which is allowing this issue to penetrate into the corporate media. But the limits of their debate “drones vs detention” cannot be the limits of ours!

No cooperation

It is clear that we need to free ourselves from the disabling influence of the capitalists’ propaganda and realise where our real interests lie. We are not ‘all in it together’; British society is split between exploiters and exploited, and if one benefits, the other will suffer.

The billionaires who order these incessant wars to be launched are not doing so to protect us, but to protect their profits. They are the same billionaires who want to stifle all political dissent at home, even as they are dismantling our education and health services and kicking us out of our homes. They want to save their rotten system by making us pay for the worst ever capitalist crisis – and they are doing their best to trick us into blaming each other for the problems their beloved system is creating for the mass of workers.

But if we continue to accept the assassination of those deemed to be ‘enemies’ abroad, how long will it be before British workers are asked to accept drone strikes against working-class leaders and activists at home as being necessary for our ‘security’?

Instead of falling for the capitalists’ lies, we need to unite with all those who are standing up against British imperialism in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria and elsewhere. We need to launch a mass campaign of non-cooperation with British imperialism’s war crimes. Together,we have the power to ground the drones and stop imperialism’s dirty wars, just as we have the power to resist the bedroom tax and hospital closures, for it is workers who ultimately have to carry out these anti-worker programmes.

If we refuse to fight in imperialist wars for profit or help with their logistics; if we refuse to broadcast imperialist propaganda in support of such wars; if we refuse to make or transport munitions or supplies, then the British war effort will collapse.

Moreover, taking such action would give workers a much-needed morale boost in the fight against capitalism here at home, helping us to see in practice that we really are on the same side as those fighting abroad, and that together we can defeat the bloodsuckers and build a new society!


Posted in UKComments Off on No cooperation with British war crimes!

Oppose the neo-Nazi NATO war against Yugoslavia !



NATO (in particular US imperialism and its poodle and junior partner, British imperialism) have been itching to further the break-up of Yugoslavia by effectively turning the Yugoslav province of Kosovo into a NATO protectorate through the deployment of 28,000 NATO troops as `peace-keepers’. When President Milosevic, quite correctly, refused to accede to NATO’s `reasonable and rational’ demands, to use the hypocritically cynical language of US envoy Richard Holbrook, namely that the Yugoslav governm- withdraw its forces from its province of Kosovo and replace them by a NATO-led ‘peace-keeping force’, i.e., an army of occupation, NATO was faced with the alternative of either having to effect a humiliating climbdown or wage a war of aggression against a sovereign state which had attacked no other country. NATO, by its previous conduct, statements and threats had painted itself into a corner. If it did not go to war, it was in serious danger of becoming a laughing stock; if it did go to war, such a course was fraught with great dangers, with the serious possibility of NATO being unable to impose its will by force on the Yugoslavs, and simply imploding through dissension and quarrels among its members, as well as public resentment at its brutal conduct. NATO thus found itself in the unenviable position, of its own making, of the man in the Chinese fable who was dying of thirst when the only drink to hand was a chalice of poison. If he did not drink it he would die of thirst, if he drank it, he would die of poisoning.

24 March – start of unprovoked aggression

NATO has made its choice. And the choice is that of waging a brutal and barbarous war of aggression against an independent and sovereign state. On 23 March, at 11.30 p.m. Brussels time, Javier Solana, the Secretary-General of the war-mongering NATO imperialist alliance, announced that he had authorised General Wesley Clark, NATO’s supreme commander, to `initiate air operations’ against the Republic of Yugoslavia, with the alleged aim of disrupting what he called the Serb forces’ attacks on the Kosovars and “weakening their abilities to cause further catastrophe.” NATO’s decision, he asserted, had been necessitated by the failure of the Yugoslav government to accept the demands of the `international community’.

This was the signal for the commencement of bombing the following day, with over 400 aircraft (valued at more than £5 billion) from the US, Britain, France, Spain, Italy, Germany and Canada taking part in the opening attack. These include F-117 Stealth bombers at £30 million each, F-16s (£25 million each), French Mirage fighters (£25 million each), B52 bombers (£20 million each), and British Harrier GR7 jets (£14.5 million each). Cruise missiles, 300 of which were dropped in just the first two days of air strikes against Yugoslavia, cost nearly £1 million each. Enormous as the above sums are, they pale into insignificance as against the weaponry of the US B2 `Stealth’ bomber, deployed for the first time in a theatre of war, each of which costs £1.45 billion. Two of these purveyors of death and destruction flew non-stop from their base in Missouri to Yugoslavia to drop 32 satellite-guided one-tonne bombs priced at £5 million each. B2, conceived at the height of the Cold War, with technology intended to avoid detection by an enemy, cost in excess of £50 billion to develop. The US Air Force has a fleet of 21, and its combat debut has been eagerly awaited in defence and armament-manufacturing circles, for whom war is no more than fabulous business.

NATO also has at its disposal the US, UK and French aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, destroyers, frigates and other vessels, costing nearly £3 billion.

Since the start of Operation Allied Force – this unjustified war of aggression – on 24 March, aggressors from the 19-strong NATO alliance, with a population of 600 million, possessed of unbelievable wealth and material resources, equipped with the most sophisticated technology and killing machines, and with a combined military budget in excess of $500 billion a year, have been pounding tiny Yugoslavia with a population the equivalent of that possessed by Greater London. Thousands of sorties have been flown and hundreds of cruise missiles launched.

Hitting civilian targets

As was to be expected, breaking its earlier promises that only military targets would be hit, NATO, in true NAZI manner, has been hitting bridges across the Danube, factories, government buildings, chemical plants, oil refineries, fuel depots, car factories, residential blocks, schools, kindergartens, hospitals, trains with hundreds of passengers aboard, and now even the Kosovan refugees (whose plight is the only flimsy pretext for NATO’s assault on tiny Yugoslavia), fleeing NATO terror bombing. On the evening of Monday 5 April, in a `surgical strike’, three `precision’ bombs were dropped by these NAZO gangsters on the southern Serbian town of Aleksinac, which demolished 11 houses and an industrial complex that included an ice-cream factory and an animal feed plant, leaving behind 14 civilians crushed to their deaths under piles of rubble, 40 wounded, flattened cars, and apartment blocks riddled with holes. NATO attributed the carnage to a `technical error’, while at the same time insisting that its target planning was `meticulous’!

On 9 April, NATO strikes seriously damaged the Zastara car plant, which produces the ubiquitous Yugo, wounding 120 workers who, to the full knowledge of the NAZO commanders, were sleeping at the plant. Correctly, the plant’s director characterised the incoming new millennium as `Tomahawk democracy’. On Monday 12 April, NATO warmongers struck a passenger train, killing a dozen people and injuring many more. They also hit radio and television transmitters used by RTS, the state-run broadcaster, as being a “legitimate target which filled the airways with hate and lies over the years.” The NATO spokesman uttering these words ought to have added that, on this criterion, all the broadcasting media in the imperialist countries are proper and legitimate targets for bombardment – aerial or otherwise. And on 14 April, NATO aircraft attacked a convoy of Kosovan refugees fleeing NATO bombardment, killing 70 of them. To begin with, through its spokesman Jamie Shea, who has very quickly established himself as an unscrupulous, cynical and consummate liar – on a par with the likes of Clinton, Blair, Cook, Robertson, Albright and Goebbels – NATO insisted that its aircraft had only attacked military vehicles on a road in Western Kosovo. But faced with the overwhelming evidence produced by the Yugoslav authorities, corroborated by some honest western journalists – rare commodities these days – it is having to admit the truth bit by bit.

Total war

Whatever the lying mercenary NATO spokesmen may say, NATO is waging a total war – military and economic – against a whole people. Its planes and missiles are daily hitting civilian, industrial and residential targets in urban centres. Targets in the centre of Belgrade, as in many other cities, have been hit. Novi Sad, considered the Venice of Yugoslavia, full as it is of cultural and historical sites, is being deliberately targeted, in a manner reminiscent of the notorious Baedeker raids of World War 2. NATO planes may not be painted with swastika signs, but that these NAZO bandits are acting just like the Nazi beasts, of this there cannot be the slightest doubt. The only difference is that the Nazis did not possess the power, the money, the material resources and the technology presently at the disposal of NATO. Further, the Nazis were opposed by some of the most powerful states of the day and, therefore, had to do some real fighting. The NATO neo-Nazis are, however, hurling themselves against small nations, such as Yugoslavia and Iraq, in the most cowardly fashion, compared to which even the bestial conduct of the Hitlerite armed forces begins to assume a somewhat soldierly honour. Even the Independent on Sunday, with all its imperialist prejudices and characteristic dithering, was compelled to observe that ” the war that he [Tony Blair] has taken us into is inept, cowardly and dishonest.” (Editorial, 18 April 1999).


As the neo-Nazi NATO military machine started its blitzkrieg of tiny Yugoslavia, just as Hitlerite Germany did in the spring of 1941, the political leaders of the chief NATO countries went into overdrive to justify this naked and brutal aggression, each vying with the other in uttering cynically false and nauseating hypocritical phrases, in comparison with which those the Nazis uttered in the 1940s almost pale into insignificance. Hitler’s propaganda minister, Goebbels, had he been alive, would have admiringly, if grudgingly, conceded primacy to the modern-day practitioners of the Nazi art of deceit and the big lie – the Clintons, Blairs, Schröders, Jospins, Albrights, Cooks, Robertsons, Fischers, Scharpings and Solanas of our own time. In a vain attempt to paint the neo-Nazi NATO aggression in humanitarian colours, Tony Blair, the British Prime Minister, told parliament that NATO had no alternative but to take action. “We must act,” he said, “to save thousands of innocent men, women and children from humanitarian catastrophe, from death, barbarism and ethnic cleansing by a brutal dictatorship; to save the stability of the Balkan region, where we know chaos can engulf all of Europe.”

Earlier Blair had announced that NATO had been obliged to act by the “vile oppression” of the Serb leader, Milosevic, against the Kosovars. He promised the “courage” and “professionalism” of the British forces involved in the attack on “heavily-defended” Yugoslav bases. The truth, however, is just the opposite of what is contained in the pseudo-patriotic lying assertions of Clinton, Blair, Schröder, Jospin, Solana and other flunkeys of imperialism. The fact is that NATO pilots are the modern-day successors of the Nazi Luftwaffe pilots, involved in wanton destruction and flagrant violation of the sovereignty of nations. And their piratical activity involves very little risk, requires no courage, and needs no professionalism other than that of mercenary mass assassins. This is known even to bourgeois journalists: writing in the Financial Times of 25 March, Mr Quentin Peel made this correct observation:

“Like the US and UK bombing raids on Iraq, whose benefits still appear questionable, it is an action dictated by the luxury of cruise missiles, against which few modern states can retaliate or defend themselves. Not least, it has been designed to ensure that casualties are minimised, that no US boys have to be brought home in body bags.” (‘Lessons of Kosovo’).

Far from entertaining “a real sense of pride at the contribution their loved ones make to peace and stability in Europe,” (which Tony Blair exhorts the families of British servicemen to entertain) the thinking and honourable members of such families, if they possess the least sense of justice, can only feel disgusted at the carnage wrought by British servicemen, among others, in an unprovoked and unjust war of aggression against a tiny country with which we have no justifiable quarrel.

Führer Blair broadcasts the big lie

Finding that the Goebbelsian lies of Messrs Blair, Cook and Robertson in the House of Commons and at various press conferences were failing to attract the sort of support needed for the continuation of this imperialist war, the British establishment put Blair on television to broadcast his lies far and wide. In his 26 March broadcast, wearing a sombre suit and a regimental-style tie, dour of brow and grim of countenance – all in an effort to look the part of a latter-day Führer – Blair, with honey on his lips and murder in his heart, to use a Chinese phrase, went on to say that NATO had gone to war to prevent an“impending humanitarian catastrophe” and to ensure that “barbarity cannot be allowed to defeat justice.” Developing his government’s `ethical’ war policy to match its notorious `ethical’ foreign policy, Blair justified NATO’s war as being essential “to defend our fellow human beings”, obviously being of the view that the Palestinians, Kurds, Iraqis, Lebanese, Indonesians, the nationalist population of the occupied 6 Counties of Ireland, blacks in the US and Britain, do not qualify to be included in the category of “our fellow human beings”, and thus can be subjected to brutal treatment by governments of NATO countries with NATO’s active support. But of this more anon. He concluded by saying: “We are doing what is right, for Britain, for Europe, for a world that must know that barbarity cannot be allowed to defeat justice. That is simply the right thing to do.”

There is one sense in which we share Mr Blair’s sentiment: namely, barbarity must not be allowed to defeat justice – but with this significant difference: it is the war-mongering neo-Nazi NATO alliance which is guilty of barbarity in Yugoslavia and elsewhere and must not be allowed to defeat justice. Justice in this case is on the side of the Yugoslav people who are defending themselves against naked aggression and wanton destruction, and on the side of those who are opposing NATO’s war – who are in fact opposing the very existence of NATO. And that surely is “simply the right thing to do,” for it is good for Britain, for Europe and the world.

Shameless lies of other NATO leaders

US President, Bill Clinton, too, has justified NATO’s air piracy in terms of the need to stop Serbs killing and “ethnically cleansing” the Kosovars and to “limit their ability to make war” on the Kosovars. “We and our allies,” he said, “have a chance to leave our children a Europe that is free, peaceful and stable.”

Other leaders of the aggressive NATO alliance have justified the attempted rape of Yugoslavia in similar stomach-churningly insincere and hypocritical phrases. Jacques Chirac, Lionel Jospin, Gerhard Schröder and others have all repeated the same sickening lie that their war against Yugoslavia is solely motivated by the concerns and demands of `humanitarianism’; that they are carrying out the will and the wishes of the `international community’; that they are bombing “for peace and humanity,” and so on and so forth ad nauseam.

Alluding to his country’s heavy historical burden of fascism and genocide, Joschka Fischer, the Green foreign minister turned Luftwaffe Green, without the slightest inkling of the irony involved in his remark, said the following in justification of Germany’s participation in the war: “Germany couldn’t have acted any other way.” Yes, Mr trench pacifist, you are right! Imperialist Germany, engaged as it is in pursuing the same aims of imperialist expansion which she pursued during the Third Reich and earlier at the time of Kaiser Wilhelm, could not have acted any other way. And you, being its foreign minister, had no option but to carry out that foreign policy of German imperialism – that of pillage, rape and plunder of other countries in furtherance of the expansionist interests of German imperialism. Why should you feel shy about this? After all, your counterparts in other European countries – the social democrats of Britain, France, Italy, etc. – the Blairs, Cooks, Jospins and D’Alemas – are doing just the same as you are, and even more shamelessly than you do. We have a sense of déja vu. It is just like a re-run of the First World War, when social democracy in the imperialist belligerent countries, with the sole honourable exception of the Bolsheviks in Russia, deserted to the side of its own bourgeoisie, with each party justifying its support for its own bourgeoisie, and the treachery to the cause of the international proletariat, by reference to the similar conduct of its sister parties across the border. A lot of water has flowed under the bridge since then. Social democracy has long since become the tried, tested and faithful servant of imperialism, in the service of which there is not a single crime that it will not commit. Why should you, Herr Fischer, be nervous about your role? After all, you are not even a social-democratic `socialist’. Your newness to the job is the only possible explanation of your hesitation and shyness. You will achieve self-assurance and confidence as you immerse yourself deeper and deeper into further crimes on behalf of German monopoly capitalism, and become just like our Cook, Robertson, Blair and `left-wingers’ of the time of Mr Livingstone who, with effortless ease and total lack of conscience, integrity, honesty, and possessing not one iota of humanity, are prepared to wage any war on behalf of British imperialism.

Shameful role of the `free’ media

Taking their cue from imperialist spokesmen, the journalist community – with the odd honourable exception – in all the imperialist countries, especially in Britain, instead of reporting facts, subjecting the statements of imperialist governments and imperialist politicians to a searching examination and analysis, have simply become part of a campaign in which broadsheets vie with the tabloids, and the electronic media with the print media, to turn the Yugoslav government, especially Milosevic, “into a fully-fledged James Bond baddie.” Well-known television anchormen have simply become cheer leaders for the government’s barbarous acts. The jingoist Sun depicted President Milosevic as the evil `Slobba’ – a paranoid drunk who gets through two bottles of spirits a day sitting in the dark – a beast” who gets a sexual kick from power and killing (perhaps the Sun got confused between Milosevic and Bill Clinton?). Naturally the Sun was enthusiastic about what it hoped would be a clobbering of Yugoslavia by NATO. Hence its headline: Clobba Slobba.

Obviously the broadsheets do not use such coarse language. All the same they carry on their menial job, as does every television and radio station, of acting as cheerleaders for NATO’s aggression against Yugoslavia, just as they did during the Gulf War against Iraq, just as they do now over NATO’s continued attacks on Iraq and the strangulation of its population through the rope of starvation under the sanctions regime. Even the Independent on Sunday, which entitled its editorial of 28 March 1999 ‘This is not a just war’, and the opening sentence of which reads: “The best way to support British servicemen in the Kosovo campaign is to pull out and bring them home,” nevertheless goes on mindlessly to assert that “in some ways British interference in Kosovo is admirably inspired: genuinely disinterested [!],vengeful on behalf of the victims, violent against the aggressors [aggressors in their own country?!], biased on behalf of the weak against the strong “ Well, gentlemen, make up your minds! Either this war is unjust, as we firmly maintain it is, in which case there is no justification for British and NATO participating in it; or it is “admirably inspired,” “genuinely disinterested”, and waged “on behalf of the weak,” as you believe, in which case it is a just war in the fighting of which Britain is acting in the interests of justice! One thing or the other – you cannot have it both ways. Be that as it may, let us examine briefly the `reasons’ for this war as put forward by NATO and its leading imperialist spokesmen.

Creating a humanitarian catastrophe in order to `avert’ one.

The chief justification put forward by the NATO governments is that they are acting to “avert a humanitarian catastrophe” in Kosovo, which, they further claim, has resulted from the actions of the Yugoslav government. NATO Supreme Commander, General Wesley Clarke, has said that NATO forces would “attack, disrupt, degrade, devastate and ultimately destroy Yugoslavia’s [armed] forces.”Notwithstanding the unresolved problem of the national rights of the Kosovan people, what is referred to as the “humanitarian catastrophe” did not make its appearance until the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), fully funded and armed by imperialism, especially German imperialism, appeared on the scene, with its attacks on Yugoslav police and army personnel, in response to which the Yugoslav security forces attacked the KLA. The real catastrophe, however, only made its appearance with the start of the NATO terror bombing of Kosovo, which forces people in their hundreds of thousands to flee their homes to escape being incinerated by NATO’s `humanitarian’ bombardment. If before the start of the NATO bombing there were 100,000 Kosovo refugees, today there are 800,000 of them.

Imperialist spokesman, and their docile apologists in the media, claim that NATO did not `foresee’ that bombing would produce a refugee problem of truly catastrophic proportions. This is a blatant lie. Jonathan Eyal, director of the Royal United Services Institute, had this today one day before the start of the bombing:

“The West is justifying the operation as necessary in order to avoid a humanitarian disaster. In fact, the biggest humanitarian disaster will unfold when the air attacks start.” (`The Aerosol myth’,Guardian,24 March 1999).

And what was known to Jonathan Eyal was certainly known to NATO’s political and military establishment, who found it convenient to feign ignorance on this score, for NATO was bent upon creating a real humanitarian catastrophe so as to provide an ex post facto justification for its war against Yugoslavia and at the same time to enable it to practise its `humanitarianism’ after it had indulged in bombing to its heart’s content “for the sake of humanity.”

NATO, not content with forcing these unfortunate victims to flee their homes, now bombards them while they flee, as it did on 14 April near the village of Dakovica, killing more than 70 people. NATO has, through its aggression and round-the-clock terror bombing, created a real humanitarian catastrophe so that it can practise its `humanitarianism’ on the victims of its air piracy. This is the essence of NATO’s humanitarianism. It is not new either. In Yugoslavia alone, NATO has been causing mayhem for several years, presiding over the ethnic cleansing of Croatia and Bosnia, in helping the fascist Tudjman regime, which has rehabilitated the fascist Ustashis responsible for murdering close to a million Yugoslavs in collaboration with their Nazi masters, secure an ethnically pure Croatia, cleansed of its Serb population. NATO spokesmen and Royal Air Force liberals alike maintain a deafening silence about THIS ethnic cleansing of which the Serbs are victims. Their concern for “our fellow human beings” is very selective indeed.

Milosevic – “a new Hitler”

We are told by NATO leaders, who support autocracy, fascism and oppression the world over, that they are waging a war against Yugoslavia because Milosevic is a `new Hitler’ who only understands the language of force. This assertion, however, does not bear even cursory scrutiny. If we look at the Hitler regime in Germany, the most outstanding characteristic of his Third Reich was a cynically scant regard for international law, a total disregard for the sovereignty of states, a flagrant violation of the internally agreed frontiers and flouting of international treaties, hand in hand with ceaseless aggression with its consequent wanton destruction and untold human misery – all in pursuit of the expansionist interests of German monopoly capitalism. Bearing these traits of the real Hitler regime in mind, one does not have to be exceptionally gifted to spot the regimes which today fit this description and the centres where they are located. On the basis of these traits, there is no need to look for Hitler’s heirs in Belgrade, which poses no threat to any other state. Their habitat today is Washington, London, Bonn, Paris. The `democratic’ leaders of the US, British, German and French governments, unlike Hitler, do not don uniforms decorated with swastika insignia, but that they are continuing the Hitler regime’s mission of world domination in the interests of their respective imperialisms, of this there can be no doubt. Particularly guilty in this case is the United States, which dominates NATO because of its overwhelming superiority in armaments, especially in the field of nuclear weapons.

Aiming for world domination

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union and its disintegration into several states, US imperialism has become brazen in its attempts to establish its world hegemony and impose its `new world order’ by bullying, intimidation and force of arms. Before the collapse of the Soviet Union, NATO spokesmen falsely claimed that it was a defensive military alliance which existed solely for the purpose of defending its members against alleged threats to their sovereignty from the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact countries. Now that the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact are no more, leaders of this aggressive alliance assert that NATO must exist precisely because the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact have ceased to exist! More than that, they are busy expanding NATO so as to incorporate within it the former members of the eastern bloc as well as some of the republics of the former Soviet Union. Barely two weeks before the beginning of the latest imperialist war against Yugoslavia, three east European countries – Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic – joined NATO. This development, posing as it does a serious danger to Russia itself, is fraught with the utmost danger as, for all her present weakness, Russia is no pushover for NATO. Further, NATO is no longer prepared to confine itself to its former role of being a `defensive’ alliance. It wants to arrogate to itself the role of world policeman under the slogan “NATO out of area or out of business.”

In characteristic Hitlerian terms, NATO justifies its aggression by the assertion that “modern humanitarian law” now permits, indeed almost requires, military intervention by the `international community’ to ward off `humanitarian catastrophes’ anywhere in the world. Shorn of the euphemisms in which this assertion is shrouded, its plain and simple meaning is this: that there is no international law other than what US imperialism and its junior partners say it is; that the imperialist powers have the right to invade any country if THEY judge that it is in danger of being overwhelmed by a `humanitarian catastrophe’, i.e., a country where the interests of imperialism are threatened. Thus the books on international law can be buried, and professors of international law made redundant – except that, perhaps that won’t be necessary, considering that these mercenary fellows, to protect their lucrative salaries and comfortable lifestyles, will go along with what is required of them and write glowing articles in prestigious bourgeois journals elaborating `modern humanitarian law’ in response to the dictates of the `international community’, namely, the handful of imperialist blood-sucking parasites.

Never before have the Hitlerite aims of world domination pursued by the neo-Nazi NATO alliance, especially by US imperialism, been so clear; and never before has the need for progressive humanity to fight and frustrate this attempt at imperialist world domination been so urgent.

Will of the `international community’

NATO spokesmen never miss an opportunity to assert that their war against Yugoslavia represents the will of the `international community’. They know that this assertion of theirs represents nothing but an utter lie, for the real international community – humanity at large – is opposed to the small clique of imperialist bandits who vainly seek to arrogate to themselves the role of humanity’s spokesmen, is opposed to this dirty and genocidal war. Not only do Russia, China, India and dozens of other countries oppose this war but so do vast numbers of people in the countries which are members of NATO. And this notwithstanding the torrent of non-stop false propaganda put out by the powerful imperialist media portraying this war as a fight of the `international community’ aimed at averting a `humanitarian catastrophe’.

`No alternative’

`There is no alternative; something must be done’, chorus the imperialist spokesmen, and, following them, the organs of imperialist propaganda. If the sole motivation for NATO interfering with the internal affairs of Yugoslavia were nothing other than `humanitarianism’, as its mouthpieces insist, then there are at least a dozen other places where national and human rights of whole peoples are being denied, where vile oppression is being daily perpetrated, where humanitarian catastrophes have been continuously enacted for decades, where whole populations have been brutalised, subjected to degrading and humiliating treatment and where millions of innocent people have been turned into refugees eking out a miserable existence – all of this with the active support of the very imperialist governments who are now waging war against tiny Yugoslavia in the name of `humanitarianism’.

Imperialism’s support for vile oppression by Zionism

Israel, Turkey, Croatia and Indonesia, to name but a few, are the darlings of `humanitarian’ imperialism. They are all guilty of the most brutal violation of the human rights of vast sections of their populations. Israel continues to occupy Palestine, subject the Palestinian people in the Occupied Territories to medieval torture and barbaric and vile oppression. It continues to deny the 4 million Palestinians forced into exile at gunpoint the right to return to their homeland, while allowing any Jew anywhere in the world, with absolutely no connection with Palestine, a right to settle within the boundaries of the Zionist state – which are forever expanding. It continues to build Zionist settlements in the Occupied Territories. It continues to occupy a fifth of the Lebanon. It continues to wage a ceaseless war of aggression against Lebanon. All this is in violation of international law and UN resolutions, but with the full support of imperialism in general and US imperialism in particular.

Imperialism’s support for brutal suppression by the Turkish government

The Turkish military staged three coups – in 1960, 1971 and 1980 – each coup being followed by brutal suppression of the communists and the Kurds, subjecting them to mass military trials in the course of which even the legal representatives of the victims were tortured and murdered. In April 1990, the Turkish government passed Decree 413 giving power to the governors of Kurdish provinces to depopulate their areas. As a result, 3,000 villages have been destroyed, creating a refugee problem of more than 4 million. In August 1990, the Turkish government abrogated the European Convention on Human Rights, to which it was a signatory, openly declaring that it would not abide by this Treaty. 35,000 Kurds, in addition to communists and trade unionists, have been killed in the Turkish state’s dirty and genocidal war against the Kurds and the left opposition. Turkey frequently raids and bombs Northern Iraq. Despite – or, more correctly, because of – its heinous conduct, Turkey is the third largest recipient of US aid after Israel and Egypt.

Imperialism’s support for the murder of 1 million Indonesians

The Indonesian fascist regime of Suharto came to power on the corpses of one million Indonesian workers and peasants. It illegally seized East Timor, killed thousands of East Timorese freedom fighters, receiving whole-hearted plaudits and support from the US and other imperialist countries, right up to the time of its downfall. Our `ethical’ Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook, had little difficulty sanctioning the sale of arms to the Suharto regime for internal suppression of the Indonesian people.

Imperialism’s support for ethnic cleansing in Croatia

Croatia is one of the most ethnically cleansed places in the world, thanks to NATO imperialism, which happily looked the other way while helping the fascist Tudjman with money and weapons to clear Croatia of its Serb minority.

Imperialism’s genocidal war against the Korean and Vietnamese peoples.

We shall mention only in passing the `humanitarianism’ with which US imperialism and its junior partners waged genocidal wars of aggression against the people of Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos and countless other countries, killing in the process millions upon millions of people, spraying them with napalm and Agent Orange, defoliating their countryside and littering it with mines which continue to claim human lives up to the present.

The imperialist genocide against the Iraqi people

Then there are the `humanitarian’ sanctions against Iraq, which have killed over a million innocent men, women and children. And the US Secretary of State, Albright, blithely says that this price in human lives is worth it in the pursuit of the `humanitarian’ foreign policy goals of US and British imperialism. Tiny Cuba, which threatens no one, has similarly been the target of imperialist blockade for four decades – for no other reason than that it has violated the most sacred `humanitarian’ law espoused by imperialism, namely, that of private property and the exploitation of one human being by another.

British imperialism’s genocidal war against the Irish people

Britain has waged a genocidal war against Ireland for centuries and has been indicted by the most respectable of organisations, with impeccable bourgeois credentials, of violations of the human rights of the nationalist population of the occupied Six Counties. It has been guilty of wholesale repression, murder, torture and rigged judicial processes. In the colonies it ruled, Britain practised nothing short of savage brutality in the pursuit of colonial and imperialist exploitation.

Imperialism’s racist immigration and asylum laws

All the imperialist countries are guilty of passing inhumane immigration and asylum legislation to bar entry to victims fleeing imperialist wars and imperialist-inspired civil strife. The number of such refugees is well above the 20 million mark, the majority of whom live a miserable existence in refugee camps in Asia and Africa, with their ranks swelling, on average, by 10,000 people a day.

Imperialism kills 35,000 children a day

Last, but not least, 35,000 children a day die throughout the world, most in the so-called Third World countries – one child every 2.4 seconds – from malnutrition and preventable diseases, thanks to the kind mercies of imperialist exploitation. 130 million children of school age do not attend school. Half the world’s children do not have enough to eat.

The above facts are an eloquent indictment of monopoly capitalism, which no amount of `humanitarian’ phrase-mongering by its representatives and apologists can serve to hide.

One could go on forever, but enough.

Real reason for this war

What, then, is the source of this latest war, and by what are the main powers who are waging this war motivated? The answer to this question can be given briefly thus:

First US imperialism and its junior partners are attempting to establish an oil monopoly stretching from the Middle East to the oil-rich Caspian and Black Sea basins.

Secondly, they are all attempting to encircle and enfeeble Russia even further, so as to prevent her from presenting a challenge to them, while at the same time taking measures aimed at ensuring the safety of the capitalist regime in Russia through NATO intervention on its behalf against any proletarian revolutionary movement threatening its existence (the NATO expansion into the former eastern bloc countries and the territories of the former USSR has these as its clear purposes).

Third, while being united in the pursuit of the above two aims, the various imperialist powers are engaged in a furious struggle over the division of the spoils. While German imperialism is hell bent on dominating Central and Eastern Europe (hence its support for the disintegration of Yugoslavia), US imperialism is muscling in to put every other imperialist power in its place. From whichever angle one looks at it, one cannot avoid the conclusion that it is an imperialist war aimed at world domination. Yugoslavia does not much like its own disintegration and has decided to resist the imperialist diktat. Precisely for this reason it has earned the ire of imperialism and brought upon itself the `humanitarian’ attentions of NATO’s awesome armada of death and destruction.

The results so far

The results so far have been the exact opposite of the declared aims of NATO. If it was the aim, at least for public consumption, of NATO to avoid a `human catastrophe’ in Kosovo, NATO terror bombing has helped to bring about a catastrophe on a far bigger scale not only in Kosovo but in other parts of Yugoslavia as well. On top of the 1 million Kosovan refugees forced to flee their homes, several hundred thousand people in Serbia have been displaced as well.

If it was the declared purpose of NATO `peacekeepers’ to bring `peace and stability’ to the region, its action have destabilised the entire Balkans region and turned it into a powder keg ready to explode into a much wider war with unpredictable consequences.

If the NATO terrorists entertained the illusion that their carpet bombing of Yugoslavia would cause the Belgrade regime to crumble, the bombing has merely served to strengthen the regime, with even the most critical opponents of President Milosevic uniting behind the government to oppose, and defeat, NATO’s terrorism. “By targeting cities, factories and bridges,” wrote Simon Jenkins in The Times of 9 April, “and hitting enough houses to kill civilians (including, of all obscenities, native Kosovars in Pristina), the bombs have increased support for the regime and made compromise less likely.” (`Will they never learn?’).

Four days into bombing, ignoring air-raid sirens and breakfast-time attack on the city, over 10,000 Serbs gathered in Central Belgrade for a `Music Against the Bombs’ rock concert in an overwhelming display of anger and defiance against the US and NATO. “Sorry, we didn’t know it was invisible,” read one placard, mocking the US F-117, radar-evading `Stealth bomber’, that was shot down outside Belgrade.

“Clinton, Hitler, fascists,” proclaimed another banner. “New American Terrorist Organisation” is how NATO’s acronym reads on slogans daubed across Belgrade.

As we enter the fifth week of NATO bombing, the Financial Times reports, as indeed do all other newspapers, that “NATO’s strategy of high-level aerial bombardment has damaged Yugoslavia’s infrastructure and killed ethnic Albanian refugees, but broken neither the Serbs’ military forces nor their civilians’ morale”, adding that “NATO’s future will be decided not in Washington’s conference halls but in the Balkan crucible”.

If the NATO bombardment was intended (not publicly on this score) to provide air cover for the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), the result has been a crushing defeat for the KLA at the hands of the Serbian security forces who were freed from all obligations of restraint the moment their country became the target of NATO’s criminal bombardment. Anyway, the KLA “had scant local support until its cause was adopted by Britain and others” (Simon Jenkins, ibid.).

Instead of the neat and short, sharp campaign expected by NATO’s political and military leaders, it is turning out to be a long and messy affair. “The collapse of `bombing alone’ this past fortnight has been spectacular,” said Mr Jenkins in the article quoted above, predicting that “the 24 American ground attack helicopters being sent to Albania are the first swallows of an awesome summer.” The docile British journalist community has begun to talk about “an inauspicious start to Operation Allied Forces” and to say that NATO’s prosecution of its mission “is beginning to look laughable” and that “NATO is at the risk of being humiliated.” Even Pentagon and NATO top brass acknowledge that they have been disappointed by the failure of the air campaign so far to do more damage to Yugoslavia’s resources and morale.

NATO officials, while putting on a brave face and insisting that their air campaign is making headway, have requested an additional 450 combat aircraft, bringing the total committed to this genocidal war to about 900, in addition to other armaments – a clear indication that the bombardment so far has been far from successful in achieving what Wesley Clark, NATO’s supreme commander, set out to do, namely, to “attack, disrupt, degrade, devastate and ultimately destroy Yugoslavia’s forces.” Notwithstanding the devastation wreaked by NATO on civilian targets, Yugoslavia’s armed forces are far from being degraded, let alone destroyed. What NATO has succeeded in degrading so far has been its own ability to prevail, by means of neo-Nazi blitzkrieg, over the forces of a tiny, but defiant, opponent. The US defence secretary, Cohen, has been compelled to admit that this war is “not going to be quick, easy or neat.” No one doubts now that NATO’s war is not going as smoothly as, according to its planners, a late 20th century high-tech war should. It is messy and risky, and risks becoming still messier.

The Times of 12 April makes this perceptive observation:

“The increase in the number of Prowlers being sent to the region, adding to the 18 already there, underlies the sombre fact that after nearly three weeks of bombing, the Yugoslav air defence systems are still running effectively, even at half strength.”

Haunted by memories of Vietnam, Somalia and the Lebanon, NATO leaders had intended to wage a `bloodless war’, i.e., bloodless on the part of the imperialist robber barons, an air war which they had hoped would be over in two or three days, just in time for NATO’s 50th birthday party. They find themselves, however, staring at a ruinous, long and bloody land war, with the prospect of their soldiers returning home in body bags. NATO, if it manages to survive this crisis, may be embroiled in the Balkans for years to come.

The scale of the refugee crisis created by NATO – and which its leaders had hoped to cash in on – turned into a public relations disaster, especially in view of the crude and clumsy attempts of NATO spokesmen to lie their way out of the human disaster created by NATO’s `humanitarian’ bombing, particularly of the civilian Kosovars on the road from Prizren to Dakovica.

NATO’s total disregard for public opinion and international law has split the Security Council, with Russia and China expressing strong opposition to NATO’s Yugoslav adventure that completely violates the norms of international behaviour. In the words of Simon Jenkins, “Slobodan Milosevic has tweaked Uncle Sam’s nose and won grudging support of Russia and China, important if there is to be a land war” (ibid.).

NATO’s relations with Russia have reached a new low. Russian Prime Minister, Primakov, on his way to Washington for his twice-yearly talks with the US Vice-President, Al Gore, when informed of NATO’s decision to start bombing Yugoslavia, turned his plane round mid-air and headed back to Moscow. In protest at NATO strikes against Yugoslavia, Russia has expelled members of NATO’s information office in Moscow and broken off contact with it (NATO). In announcing this move, Igor Ivanov, the Russian Foreign Minister, accused NATO of perpetrating genocide in Yugoslavia, adding that those who have military orders should be held responsible for their “criminal” actions. In a statement reinforcing Ivanov’s message, Moscow accused the western imperialist military alliance of a double crime: “NATO aggression and open genocide against the peoples of that country.”

In a subsequent television broadcast, Russian President, Yeltsin, took up the theme, saying: “They [NATO] want to bring in ground troops, they are preparing for that, they want simply to seize Yugoslavia and make it their protectorate we cannot let that happen to Yugoslavia” (Reported in the Sunday Times of 11 April).

Russia has dispatched its reconnaissance vessel, the Liman, to the Adriatic on an intelligence-gathering mission. There were even reports , later half-denied, that Russia had re-targeted her nuclear missiles “in the direction of those countries which are today fighting Yugoslavia” (ibid.). This report was serious enough to cause alarm bells to be sounded in the NATO countries. Robin Cook responded to it by this placatory lie:

“I would emphasise here that there is nothing we are doing in Yugoslavia or Kosovo that poses the remotest threat to Russia.”

Is that why, may we ask Mr Cook, the master of the art of deception and the big lie, NATO admitted Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic into its ranks on 11 March, barely two weeks before the start of its war against Yugoslavia?

Within two hours, as the Russian message sank in, “France said Nato should not push its military campaign in Yugoslavia beyond what was acceptable to Russia; Germany said there was no need to send Nato ground troops to Kosovo; and America announced that Madeleine Albright, the secretary of state, would meet the Russian foreign minister in Oslo on Tuesday to discuss Kosovo” (Sunday Times, 11 April 1999).

Violent protests have been staged against US and British diplomatic missions in Moscow and Petersburg, such is the extent to which Russian public opinion has been outraged by NATO’s aggression. There is near-unanimous public demand that the Russian government give active material support to the Yugoslav victims of NATO aggression.

On the week-end of 24-25 April, NATO had planned to hold its 50th birthday party to celebrate “the most successful military alliance in history”. Events in the Balkans have forced the organisers to recast what was to be an exultant festival for this imperialist war-mongering alliance into “a low-key council of war,” as the Sunday Times of 18 April put it. The planned fly-past has been cancelled. The champagne banquet at the White House will be a “working dinner”.”Dinner jackets have made way for lounge suits. The commemorative stamp to be issued by the US Post Office has been put on hold. And Barbra Streisand has been disinvited. Kosovo is officially the topic of a single event on Friday morning (23 April), but that arrangement is now as obsolete as the notion that everyone is here [in Washington] for a birthday party” (Jeremy Campbell, Evening Standard, 20 April).

Far from celebrating, the guests at this gathering will have only one thing to concentrate their minds on – the mess into which NATO has got itself in Yugoslavia, and how to extricate itself from this mess with at least a pretence of credibility.

Circumstances being what they are, NATO could hardly afford to be seen participating in a lavish extravaganza. In the words of Mary Dejevsky, writing in the Independent on Sunday: ” with more than a million people displaced – the very people that alliance force was supposed to protect – several fatal mis-strikes by Nato planes, and the stability of neighbouring countries in question, celebration looks inappropriate, if not downright perverse” (‘Can Nato really feast, as its forces fight and Kosovo starves?’ 18 April).

It will, however, be difficult to hide the fact that Russia and other Republics of the former USSR, who had been invited to participate in the stage-managed celebrations, won’t be there. Although no president of the US would be daring enough to cancel the invitations to a dozen multinational corporations such as Ford, General Motors, Kodak and Raytheon (the missile manufacturer), who had paid $250,000 each“for a place on the `host committee’, with guaranteed places at the top tables for their executives, exhibition space for their promotions and the chance to court new customers over cocktails” (ibid.), all the same, the agenda, fixed many months ago, is being rewritten with the focus on: how do we get out of this mess?

All in all it is likely to be a jolly good brawl, with brothers fighting each other. NATO and the US stand a very good chance of emerging from this meeting shorn of their world-transforming ambitions and the ability to undertake the role of self-appointed world policemen. And “such a thin future,” according to David Acheson, son of Dean Acheson (who was present at the creation of NATO), “will ultimately make NATO not worth the expense of keeping as anything but a token and dispirited ghost of its original self” (Evening Standard, 20 April).

If the 50th Anniversary of NATO coincides – and this is on the cards, and we hope it will be the case – with developments that put it on a fast track to demise, progressive humanity will heave a sigh of relief at the impending death of this monstrously blood-thirsty war machine directed at the heart of world culture and civilisation.

An exposure of liberal and labour imperialism

“[F]or all the horror and misery they entail,” observed Lenin, “wars bring at least the following more or less important benefit – they ruthlessly reveal, unmask and destroy much that is corrupt, outworn and dead in human institutions. The European War of 1914-15 is doubtlessly beginning to do some good by revealing to the advanced class what a foul and festering abscess has been developed within its parties, and what an unbearably putrid stench comes from some source” (The Collapse of the Second International, Collected Works Vol. 21).

The genocidal war presently being waged by NATO, too, has begun ruthlessly to reveal all that is corrupt, outworn and dead in our institutions. It too has begun to reveal, at least to the advanced sections of the proletariat, the foul and festering abscess, full of unbearably putrid stench, constituted by lib-lab imperialism – particularly by the vile and rotten `left-wing’ of the equally vile and rotten Labour Party and its hangers-on.

The war in Yugoslavia has furnished new proof of the imperialist nature, of the rottenness and putrefaction, of Social Democracy (the Labour Party in Britain) and a whole host of `liberal’ warmongers, for whom no crime is too big in the service of imperialism, the promotion of their own careers and the maintenance of their comfortable lifestyles, which are entirely dependent on the continued flow of imperialist superprofits consequent upon the plunder of the whole world.

“A wild compulsion appears to have seized Western liberalism as it gazes ogle-eyed at whatever atrocity the networks have selected for the nightly `grief pornography’ slot”, says Mr Simon Jenkins in his article already quoted. Correct though it is, this observation does not go far enough to explain the economic roots of the mass social phenomenon whereby the Labour Party, the Liberal Democrats, the Conservative Party, the Church of England, the BBC and ITV, the entire press, support this war. It does not even begin to explain why Tony Blair, William Hague, Michael Foot, Ken Livingstone – that darling of the Troto-revisionist counter-revolutionary renegades – Vanessa Redgrave, the Archbishop of Canterbury – our gun-toting parson – and a whole host of academics find themselves in the camp of the enthusiastic cheerleaders of warmongering NATO imperialism. It does not explain why, with the honourable exception of Arthur Scargill and the Party he leads, the Socialist Labour Party, not a single trade unionist of note and not a single national party has come out unequivocally against this imperialist war. And it does not explain why the Labour benches have stayed studiously loyal to the government. What is the explanation for this mass desertion to the side of the bourgeoisie?

The explanation is to be found in the monopolistic exploitation of the world by a handful of states, including Britain, each of whom occupies a monopolistic position in the world.

It is precisely this exploitation of the whole world by a handful of states, the parasitism and decay of capitalism, which are characteristic of its highest stage, namely, imperialism, which explains the rise and monstrous growth of opportunism, as well as the split in the working-class movement of the imperialist countries since the beginning of the 20th century (in Britain much earlier), for “obviously out of such enormous superprofits it is possible to bribe the labour leaders and the upper stratum of the labour aristocracy. And that is just what the capitalists of the ‘advanced’ countries are doing: they are bribing them in a thousand different ways, direct and indirect, overt and covert.” This stratum of “bourgeoisified workers,” thoroughly petty-bourgeois in their style of life, the size of their earnings and their world outlook, serve as the “principal social support of the bourgeoisie in the labour movement, the labour lieutenants of the capitalist class, the real carriers of reformism and social chauvinism. In the civil war between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie they inevitably, and in no small numbers, stand on the side of the bourgeoisie, on the side of the ‘Versaillese’ against the ‘Communards” (Lenin, preface to the French and German editions of Imperialism – the Highest Stage of Capitalism, p. 12).

The function of this bribed upper stratum, the aristocracy of labour, is to act as an instrument of class collaboration and as a purveyor of bourgeois corruption into the ranks of the proletariat. The growth and strength of class collaboration and opportunism in the ranks of the working-class movement, not just in Britain but in all the imperialist countries, cannot be explained otherwise than by reference to the extraction of imperialist superprofits. There is unquestionably a profound economic connection between imperialism and opportunism in the labour movement.

Imperialism thus engenders a split in the working class, for it has singled out a handful of exceptionally rich countries and powerful states who plunder the whole world and who are, therefore, able to use a portion of the superprofits so derived to bribe the labour leaders and the upper stratum of the working class – and thus detach them from the vast masses of the working class.

In the words of Lenin: “Unless the economic roots of this phenomenon [opportunism in the working class movement] are understood and its political and social significance appreciated, not a step can be taken toward the solution of the practical problems of the communist movement and of the impending social revolution” (Lenin, ibid.)

Only on the basis of the above explanation is it possible to make sense of the fact that trade-union general secretaries, Labour MPs and prominent `left-wingers’ either fail to speak against this criminal imperialist war, or, worse still, are enthusiastic supporters of it. For their fat salaries, their privileged life styles, their importance, depends entirely on the maintenance of imperialist loot.

Is it surprising, then, that when the House of Commons debated the war on 25 March, at one stage, when the debate should have been at its height, the Chamber attracted no more than 32 MPs of whom only 15 were Labour backbenchers? “This indicated,” commented Alan Watkins in the Independent on Sunday of 29 March, “that colleagues were proving remarkably indolent and incurious even by the suet-pudding standards of the 1997 Labour intake or that they had been instructed by the Whips to make themselves scarce: to adapt Lord Steel at the Liberal conference, go back to your constituencies and prepare to embarrass the Government. As the lobbies and corridors were as bursting with life as Brynamman on a wet Sunday, I suspect the latter.”

Obviously their jobs, the chances of promotion to the front bench, mean a lot more to these miserable lickspittles than the lives of hundreds of thousands of Yugoslavs, or any other, people.

It is in this context that we must view the behaviour of the Social-Democratic parties in Britain, Germany, France, Italy. It is in this light too that we must view the conduct of the German Greens, Ken Livingstone, Mary Kaldor of the European Nuclear Disarmament and what Andrew Murray, in an excellent article – all the more remarkable for being published in the Morning Star, that devoted and unrequited lover of the Labour Party – aptly calls “a whole flight command of Luftwaffe liberals in the comment pages of the Guardian and the Observer.”

As regards Ken Livingstone, our own stock exchange socialist, we would like to quote Andrew Murray’s trenchant characterisation of the Livingstone phenomenon.

Although written in the context of the opportunist Livingstone, these lines have the merit of giving a graphic description of the connection between imperialist loot and opportunism in the working class movement – the corruption of the privileged sections of the working class, the labour aristocracy, by the bourgeoisie, which has been using, and continues to use, a portion of its superprofits to bribe labour leaders and the upper stratum of the working class in order to detach the vast layers of the working class from the working class movement. Let Andrew Murray speak:

“And Ken Livingstone! It would be unkind to accuse Mr Livingstone of opportunism or of a desire to crawl to the mayoralty of London over the wreckage of international law and the sovereignty of states. True as that is, it does not do justice the inner consistency of his position.

“A few days before the government began the attack on Yugoslavia, Mr Livingstone gave the Financial Times an interview.

“Beyond declaring his support for the euro and his regard for Jeffrey Archer, he said: `A few years ago, the left said that the City should be towed out to sea. But if the City went into decline, it would mean that London would be doomed for a century or more.’

“No doubt this reassured the fat cats of the boardrooms and the red-brace-bonus millionaires of the dealing floors that they have nothing to fear from Mr Livingstone.

“But the rest of London’s population may well find themselves `doomed for a century or more’ by Mr Livingstone’s logic.

“For there is a straight line which leads from support for the City’s global financial role, sucking in super-profits from every continent, to Britain’s desire to see the world properly policed by the big powers, to this naked disregard for international law and, finally, to aggression against independent states which will not do the City’s bidding.

“A stock exchange socialist will end up a B-52 socialist as night follows day. Perhaps we should cut out all half-way houses and ask for Sir Charles Guthrie, chief of the defence staff, to run as London mayor instead. He may even make the London Underground run on time too.” (`Re-assessment of a dangerous logic,’ Morning Star, 1 April 1999).

After this war, and the total collapse of the so-called `left’, as well as trade-union, sections of the Labour Party, will the New Communist Party, the Communist Party of Britain and the Socialist Workers Party still be campaigning for Labour in the forthcoming elections to the Welsh Assembly, Scottish Parliament, local councils and the European Parliament? Will the Socialist Workers Party in a year’s time still be campaigning for Ken Livingstone to become the Mayor of London? What crimes does the Labour Party and its illusory and non-existent `left’-wing have to commit before they forfeit the touching trust of these miserable apologists and hangers-on of Social Democracy who have the temerity to call themselves `socialist’ – even `Marxist-Leninist’? We shall see. These are interesting times indeed in which to be living.

Right-wing opposition to the war

It is sad to have to admit, but a sin against the truth not to admit, that some individuals with impeccable bourgeois and right-wing credentials, have OBJECTIVELY played a more honourable role, either by dissociating themselves from this war or by their outright denunciation of it, than our Luftwaffe liberals and stock-exchange socialists. Notable in this context are Lord Denis Healey, Lord Carrington (the former Secretary General of NATO), Henry Kissinger, Alex Salmond (leader of the Scottish National Party), and especially Alan Clark, former defence minister, whose statement, which we publish elsewhere, who literally put to shame the fraternity of Luftwaffe liberals and stock-exchange socialists. We are not concerned here with the motives of any of these individuals, who might be activated by considerations of inter-imperialist rivalry; or by the fear that having bungled this operation NATO might end up totally discredited; or by the fearful and unpredictable consequences of a possible widening of the war; or by the fear that the war might transform itself into another Vietnam; or worse, for them, by fear of the war causing a stir among the proletariat of several east European countries, including especially the countries which once constituted the former USSR, leading to a wave of revolutionary movements for the social emancipation of the proletariat. What is undeniably true is that their voices are helping to strengthen the anti-war movement and to undermine NATO’s warmongering. The essence of their criticism is that NATO air strikes are illegal in international law; that they erroneously assert NATO’s primacy over the UN; that they are an unwarranted intervention in a civil war within a sovereign state; and that they might end up preparing the ground for a wider Balkans war.

Lord Carrington has expressed the “gravest misgivings”, adding that Yugoslavia should never have been threatened by air strikes. Henry Kissinger has said: “I have not been this uneasy [and this is saying something] about any American military action since I left the government.”

As to NATO’s insistence on inserting its troops into a sovereign state to oversee an internal power-sharing deal in Kosovo, Kissinger saw nothing “reasonable or rational” in it. He likened this demand to“asking the US to admit foreign troops to return the Alamo to Mexico because Texas’ ethnic mix has changed.” (Reported in the Financial Times of 24 March, 1999).

War – a continuation of policy by other means

“War is politics continued by other (i.e., forcible) means,” said Clausewitz, one of the most profound writers on military questions. As Lenin correctly remarked, “the Marxists have always considered this axiom as the theoretical foundation for their understanding of the meaning of every war” (Political Report to the All-Russian Conference of the RCP(B), 2 December 1919).

For our part, we too must stress that war is the continuation of the politics of peace, and peace is the continuation of the politics of war. The war in Yugoslavia has grown out of, and is a continuation of, the politics of modern-day capitalism, viz., imperialism. And this war cannot be understood if we leave out of account “class antagonisms in modern society, if we leave out of account the fact that the bourgeoisie in each and every one of its acts, no matter how democratic and humanitarian they may seem, is first of all and most of all protecting its class interests” (Lenin, European Capital and the Autocracy, 15 April 1905).


In the light of the foregoing analysis, we conclude by saying that the war being waged by NATO against Yugoslavia is an unjust imperialist war aimed at cornering and monopolising the world’s energy resources, especially oil, stretching from the Middle East to the shores of the Caspian and Black Seas, that it is a war for world domination and for a share in the booty, and that it is a counter-revolutionary war for strangulating revolutionary proletarian movements.

Tony Blair is lying, as are the other NATO leaders, when he says that “[t]his is a conflict we are fighting not for territory but for values, for a new internationalism where the brutal repression of whole ethnic groups will no longer be tolerated, for a world where those responsible for such crimes have nowhere to hide.

“We are fighting for a world where dictators are no longer able to visit horrific punishments on their own peoples in order to stay in power.” (Quotations reproduced in The Times of 12 April from Blair’s article in Newsweek magazine).

The truth is just the opposite of what is asserted by Tony Blair, and he knows it. NATO is fighting for territory, for spheres of influence and maximum profits of the multinational corporations – from the oil giants to the armament manufacturers – who are rubbing their hands with glee at the juicy prize which, they hope, will come their way during and at the end of the war. This war has nothing to do with internationalism, human rights and democracy. It is a rapacious war made by a most blood-thirsty group of imperialist states on behalf of the robber barons and financial magnates of monopoly capitalism. The truth is that Clintons and Blairs are the political representatives of monopoly capitalism who are waging a genocidal war against tiny Yugoslavia, in the interests of a handful of giant monopolies. They are war criminals and perpetrators of genocide and must be branded as such, clearly loudly and unequivocally.

The wider working class (we are not speaking here of its privileged stratum – the labour aristocracy) have nothing to gain from it. They must oppose this war. More than that, they must work for the defeat of the neo-Nazi war-mongering NATO coalition.

Those who are waging this war against other people abroad are also the very people who are in the forefront of those launching attacks on working people at home – the unemployed, the lone parents, the pensioners, the sick, the low paid, the students and ethnic minorities.

The working class must take its cue from the internationalism of the Greek sailors who have refused to go to war against Yugoslavia and whose courageous statements we reproduce elsewhere in this issue, and not from the servile lackeys of the stock exchange and financial capital – the Blairs, Robertsons, Cooks and Livingstones of the stinking corpse known as the Labour Party.

Finally the working class must, as it ponders over the causes of this war, realise clearly that “it is impossible to escape imperialist war , and imperialist world which inevitably engenders imperialist war, it is impossible to escape that inferno, EXCEPT BY A BOLSHEVIK STRUGGLE AND A BOLSHEVIK REVOLUTION” (Lenin, The Fourth Anniversary of the October Revolution, 14 October, 1921).

This is the message that must permeate the working class movement.

Return to Back issues 2000


Harpal Brar: Nato’s Predatory War Against Yugoslavia (£5.00)
<em>Nato's Predatory War Against Yugoslavia</em> (£5.00)24 March 2009 marked the 10th anniversary of Nato’s war against Yugoslavia.

Waged in the name of stopping ethnic cleansing, it was an exercise in gigantic ethnic cleansing; waged in the name of stopping genocide, it was a genocidal war against the Yugoslav people; waged in the name of averting humanitarian disaster, it caused the worst humanitarian disaster in Europe since the second world war; waged in the name of democracy and human rights, it was a war to impose puppet regimes in the constituent republics of former Yugoslavia; waged in the name of defending the sovereign rights of the Kosovan people, it was a war to set up a Nato puppet state in Kosovo.

Ten years on, even the most dull-witted can see that Nato, led by US imperialism, waged a predatory war for breaking up Yugoslavia into small, easily digestible morsels.

Those who waged this war, the Clintons and Blairs, deserve to be tried as war criminals before a tribunal such as Nuremburg, which tried the Nazi war criminals. And the dupes on the left, who supported this war, deserve to be pilloried for what they really are – the left wing of Anglo-American imperialism.

The proletariat of all Nato countries must join their voices to the call of progressive people everywhere for this aggressive alliance to be disbanded!

The articles in this book chart the build-up to, prosecution of and aftermath of the war against Yugoslavia, with detailed analysis of the real as well as the supposed motivations of those who waged it.


Posted in EuropeComments Off on Oppose the neo-Nazi NATO war against Yugoslavia !

Ethinic cleansing in Nato’s ‘new’ Libya



The resistance to imperialism and its rats will prevail.
We all know that capitalism makes people sick, but the sight of Hillary Clinton’s jubilation at the news that Muammar Gaddafi, a 69-year-old man and a veteran world statesman, had been dragged through the streets of Sirte, stabbed, sodomised and eventually murdered, demonstrated the deep psychological chasm that divides imperialism’s servants from the rest of the human race. Visibly overcome with joy, the US Secretary of State casually flicked through her Blackberry messages, gloating “We came, we saw, he died!”

Her mimicry of Caesar may have more than a touch of irony about it if the Wall Street protestors learn the lessons of history. Perhaps one day in the not-too-distant future we shall hear her gasp out “Et tu, Brute?” on our iPhones. In the meantime, we can take solace in the fact that whilst Mrs Clinton and her fellow Nato cut-throats may indeed have assassinated Gaddafi – they most certainly have not ‘conquered’ Libya.

Response of imperialists and the British ‘left’

Having bombarded Libya with an array of heavy weapons and subjected her people to months of siege, starvation and torture, Nato finally enabled its toy soldiers (‘revolutionaries’ if you’re a British Trotskyist) to put their hands upon the man who had done so much to lift Libya and Africa out of poverty and misery. Their vile treatment of him exposed more than their own wicked savagery – it also helped to expose the thoroughly reactionary, fascistic behaviour of imperialism and its agents in the working-class movement.

These people and their newspapers (imperialists and Trotskyists alike), who scolded British youths for their ‘criminal’ and ‘violent’ behaviour in August, screaming from the rooftops about the ‘criminal mindset’ of those who pinched the odd pair of Nikes, these hypocrites brazenly celebrated the torture and extra-judicial murder of a national leader, and stood quietly by as wholesale looting, rape and murder was perpetrated by their surrogates.

That the imperialists were joined by Trotskyists in celebrating this killing should come as no surprise. We saw it before with the lynching of Saddam Hussein and the ‘mysterious’ death in custody of Slobodan Milosovic. But now these insipid dogs were even more outrageous. The SWP’s Alex Callinicos was one of the most vocal bloodhounds. Likening the fall of Gaddafi to the fall of Mussolini (!), he yapped “The west’s role in the dictator’s downfall shouldn’t stop us celebrating”!

Never mind that Benito Mussolini was the leader of an imperialist nation and a war criminal who was killed by partisans, or that Gaddafi was the leader of a strong anti-imperialist movement among Arabs and Africans, killed by rats. The Trotskyite Callinicos happily equated the two and celebrated Gaddafi’s downfall, hand in hand with Hillary Clinton, thus proving once more that Trotskyism is a counter-revolutionary movement that uses ‘left’ terminology to mobilise the unsuspecting on to the side of imperialism.

Tawergha torture and murder

As if by design (or collusion!) the western media have gone very silent on the internal situation now that Gaddafi has been slain. We know that sharia law will be making a return, along with an expansion of polygamy and who knows what else, but more importantly a slow yet steady trickle of information is already creeping out exposing the crimes that have been committed by Callinicos’s ‘revolutionaries’. An article posted on the Human Rights Watch website reported:

More than 100 militia brigades from Misrata have been operating outside of any official military and civilian command since Tripoli fell in August. Members of these militias have engaged in torture, pursued suspected enemies far and wide, detained them and shot them in detention, Human Rights Watch has found. Members of these brigades have stated that the entire displaced population of one town, Tawergha, which they believe largely supported Gaddafi avidly, cannot return home … 

In the far west, anti-Gaddafi militias from the Nafusa mountains have looted and burned homes and schools of tribes that supported the deposed dictator. Anti-Gaddafi militias from Zuwara have looted property as they demanded compensation for damage they suffered during the war … Both Misratans and Tawerghas say residents there were enthusiastic Gaddafi supporters. Hundreds of erstwhile civilians in that town took up arms to fight for him. 

Misratans say Tawergha volunteers committed rapes and pillaged with gusto, though Misrata officials decline to produce evidence of the alleged rapes, saying family shame inhibits witnesses and victims from coming forward.

In any event, Misratan militia members are venting their anger on all Tawerghas, who are largely descendants of African slaves. Most fled their town as Misratan fighters advanced there between 10 and 12 August.

Witnesses and victims we interviewed provided credible accounts of Misratan militias shooting and wounding unarmed Tawerghas and torturing detainees, in a few cases to death. In Hun, about 250 miles south of Misrata, militias from Benghazi have taken it upon themselves to protect about 4,000 refugees. They say Misratans are hunting down Tawerghas.

One hospitalised Tawergha told Human Rights Watch how he was shot in the side and leg and abandoned to die near Hun: ‘They left us at the edge of the road, put a blanket over us and then started swearing, “You are dogs, hope you die.”’” (Daniel Williams, 28 October 2011)

Another report that appeared on the same website continued:

The people of Tawergha mostly fled in August to the Jufra region, south of Misrata, according to the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR), which put the number of displaced Tawerghans there at 15,000. Local officials in Hun, a town in Jufra, said 4,000 Tawerghans had sought shelter in three camps there as of early October, and an unknown number are in the town of Sokna and nearby agricultural settlements. Since then, at least 5,000 Tawerghans have moved from Jufra to Benghazi and Tripoli, and other groups are in Tarhuna, Khoms, and the far south.

When Human Rights Watch visited Tawergha at the start of October, it appeared emptied of its residents and most of the buildings had been ransacked. Over three days between 3 and 5 October 2011, Human Rights Watch saw militias and individuals from Misrata set 12 houses aflame in the town.

On 25 October, Human Rights Watch spoke with a Misrata brigade that claimed to be ‘guarding’ Tawergha. The deputy commander said his forces were ‘protecting the place from arson and looting’. At the same time, trucks full of furniture and carpets, apparently looted from homes, drove past with men on the trucks honking and waving. Brigade members failed to intervene, arguing passionately that Tawreghans should never return after ‘what they did in Misrata’.” (30 October 2011)

The criminality that is still being played out on the streets of Libya’s towns and villages is but a reflection of the criminality that was played out at the highest level by the leaders of the NTC and their imperialist masters.

The French newspaper Liberation has reported on a letter written in Arabic by the Libyan ‘rebels’ and which was sent to the French via Qatar in April. It is purported to have promised France 35 percent of Libya’s oil wealth in return for overthrowing Gaddafi. Now that Libya’s north coast is under occupation, these promises made in secret and those made at the meetings arranged in London back in April are being exposed with an expectation of fulfilment.

Libya’s National Oil Corporation chief Nuri Berouin has now reported to international investors that the Ras Lanuf oil refinery will be in operation by the end of the year and that production will also resume at the Waha oil field. In a statement reported by Reuters on 14 November he declared that oil production is now at 600,000 barrels a day (still way down on the 1.7m bpd delivered before the start of Nato’s campaign) but that it should have recovered to pre-war levels by 2013 (no doubt by this time it will be leaving Libya at knock-down prices!)

Countries want independence; nations want liberation!

With such brazen criminality on the part of the new regime, it is to be expected that many more thousands will rally to the resistance forces to try to stop the plunder of the Libyan people’s natural resources.

Despite the wall of silence being maintained by western media, small glimpses of the ongoing conflict continue to filter through. Franklin Lamb, who has been reporting for various independent websites, is reportedly inside Libya and has travelled the region extensively. In a report on in early November he spoke about the formation of the Libyan Liberation Front (LLF), which is currently assembling forces in the Sahel (which encompasses parts of Libya’s border with Algeria, Niger, Chad and Sudan):

Today the Sahel is providing protection, weapons gathering and storage facilities, sites for training camps, and hideouts as well as a generally formidable base for those working to organise the growing Libyan Liberation Front (LLF). The aim of the LLF is to liberate Libya from what it considers Nato-installed colonial puppets. The Sahel region is only one of multiple locations that are becoming active as the Libyan counter-revolution, led by members of the Gaddafi and Warfalla tribes, make preparations for the next phase of resistance.

When I entered an office conference room in Niger recently to meet with some recent evacuees from Libya who I was advised were preparing to launch a ‘people’s struggle employing the Maoist tactic of 1,000 cuts’ against the current group claiming to represent Libya, two facts struck me.

One was how many were present and did not appear to be scruffy, intensely zealous or desperate, but who were obviously rested, calm, organised and methodical in their demeanour.

My colleague, a member of the Gaddafi tribe from Sirte explained: ‘More than 800 organisers have arrived from Libya just to Niger and more come every day.’ An officer in uniform added, ‘It is not like your western media presents the situation, of desperate Gaddafi loyalists frantically handing out bundles of cash and gold bars to buy their safety from the Nato death squads now swarming around the northern areas of our motherland. Our brothers have controlled the borderless routes in this region for thousands of years and they know how not to be detected even by Nato satellites and drones.’

However one wishes to explain it away, and whatever degree of credibility we may place upon all the reports we hear, the fact that Libyans continue to engage the forces of the NTC is admitted even by the BBC, the New York Times and other bourgeois media outlets. On 14 November the BBC carried the following piece on armed clashes outside Tripoli:

Several days of fighting between rival factions near the Libyan coastal city of Zawiya have left at least seven people dead, reports say …The country is still awash with weapons and armed groups following the rebellion that led to the collapse of Col Muammar Gaddafi’s rule.

Interim Libyan leader Mustafa Abdul-Jalil said the ruling National Transitional Council (NTC) had brought together elders from the feuding areas – Zawiya and the nearby tribal lands of Warshefana – and that the dispute has been resolved over the weekend.

‘I want to assure the Libyan people that everything is under control,’ he said on Sunday.

However, witnesses said some fighting was still taking place as he spoke.

Reports said trouble flared up on Thursday when fighters from Warshefana set up a checkpoint on a highway near Zawiya, challenging fighters from the city.

Fighters from Zawiya reportedly accused their Warshefana counterparts of having links to the old government.

A fighter from the capital Tripoli, quoted by AP news agency, said the two sides had been battling for control of a military camp of the ousted government on the main road between Tripoli and Zawiya.

Witnesses reported hearing heavy gunfire and the explosions of rocket-propelled grenades.

At least seven people were killed although one report quoting medics in the Warshefana region put the toll at 13 – four from Zawiya and nine from Warshefana.” (‘Libyan factions in deadly clashes near Zawiya’)

Speaking about the same incident, the New York Times added:

Many of the claims and counterclaims could not be independently confirmed, including reports heard through several of hours of confusion Saturday night that the fighters shooting at the Zawiyah men might be led by Seif el-Islam, one of Colonel Gaddafi’s sons.”

Victory to the forces of the Jamahiriya

Exactly what state of health the progressive forces in Libya are in is beyond the direct knowledge of this newspaper. There are two incontrovertible facts, however, which point to the certainty of massive anti-imperialist resistance. The first is that the vast majority of Libyans were Gaddafi supporters; the second is that Gaddafi was overthrown because he diverted Libya’s oil money into providing the Libyan people with a high standard of living and into helping other African countries to escape the worst effects of poverty.

As a result of Gaddafi’s overthrow, Libya’s wealth will be rediverted to its ‘proper’ destination, ie, turned into imperialist loot, as a result of which not only will millions of Libyans be very much worse off, but many more millions of other Africans will suffer too – and they will all know that this is as a result of the imperialist intervention in Libya.

Undoubtedly, then, there will be a strenuous and effective mass fightback against imperialism and its puppet rats, as the formation of the LLF already testifies. It can be expected that the occupation of Libya will go even worse for the imperialists than have the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan.

That the resistance will continue is understood even by the imperialists. Our job is to win support for this war of liberation here in the British anti-war movement.

Victory to the Libyan resistance!

Death to imperialism and its stooges!

Posted in LibyaComments Off on Ethinic cleansing in Nato’s ‘new’ Libya

Afghanistan: In imperialism’s bloody wake

NOVANEWSProletarian issue 61 (August 2014)


Lessons of yet another useless vicious and predatory war. 
In March, British soldiers completed their withdrawal from Afghanistan, aside from two bases in Helmand. In some corners, the move has been portrayed as a largely symbolic one, since Nato countries will continue to fund and train the Afghan forces that they set up in the hope of creating enough stability for ‘peace’ to be declared and business to be resumed.

In fact, however, this presentation is rather wide of the mark. Despite the continuing presence of a small contingent of highly-armed British troops – who will no doubt continue to wreak wanton destruction on the lives and livelihoods of Afghan people – and despite the best-laid plans of the imperialist invaders, the withdrawal actually marks a humiliating defeat for British imperialism in Afghanistan.

Despite the massive advantages of finance and equipment, Nato’s armies have totally failed to defeat the Afghan people’s resistance. In one of the poorest countries in the world, fighters with flip-flops and Kalashnikovs have seen off the drones, helicopters, B-52s and super-charged ground forces of the most advanced armies in the world.

In a remarkably frank 26 July report, the New York Times admitted that:

Taliban fighters are scoring early gains in several strategic areas near the capital this summer, inflicting heavy casualties and casting new doubt on the ability of Afghan forces to contain the insurgency as the United States moves to complete its withdrawal of combat troops, according to Afghan officials and local elders.

The report went on to note that the Afghan resistance had “found success beyond their traditional strongholds in the rural south and are now dominating territory near crucial highways and cities that surround Kabul, the capital, in strategic provinces like Kapisa and Nangarhar”.

However: “Their advance has gone unreported because most American forces have left the field and officials in Kabul have largely refused to talk about it. The Afghan ministries have not released casualty statistics since an alarming rise in army and police deaths last year.

In other words, the situation is so dire that the flagship newspaper of the US ruling class feels constrained to point out that both the US aggressors and their local stooges dare not admit the truth as to the real extent of their predicament, floundering as they are on the edge of defeat.

For their part, the resistance is further probing the enemy for weaknesses, in the time-honoured traditions of guerrilla warfare. The New York Times report continued:

“‘They are running a series of tests right now at the military level, seeing how people respond,’ one western official said, describing a Taliban effort to gauge how quickly they could advance. ‘They are trying to figure out: Can they do it now, or will it have to wait’ until after the American withdrawal, the official added, speaking on the condition of anonymity because the coalition has officially ceded security control.

The newspaper’s interviews with “local officials and residents in several strategic areas around the country suggest that, given the success of their attacks, the Taliban are growing bolder just two months into the fighting season, at great cost to Afghan military and police forces.

In Kapisa, a verdant province just north of Kabul that includes a vital highway to northern Afghanistan, insurgents are openly challenging and even driving away the security forces in several districts. Security forces in Tagab District take fire daily from the Taliban, who control everything but the district centre. Insurgents in Alasay District, northeast of Kabul, recently laid siege to an entire valley for more than a week, forcing hundreds of residents and 45 police officers to flee. At least some of the local police in a neighbouring district have cut deals with the Taliban to save themselves.

In the past month, a once-safe district beside the major city of Jalalabad, east of Kabul, has fallen under Taliban control, and a district along a crucial highway nearby is under constant threat from the Taliban. South of Kabul, police forces in significant parts of Logar and Wardak provinces have been under frequent attack, to deadly effect.

And, further confirming the reality of a nationwide insurgency, a popular war of liberation, the newspaper report continues:

The efforts of this fighting season have not been solely in the countryside, or traditional strongholds like those in Helmand. The Taliban have made strides in Nangarhar Province, home to one of the most economically vibrant cities in the country and a strategically important region. Surkh Rod, a district that borders the provincial capital Jalalabad and was safe to visit just three months ago, has become dangerous to enter.

“‘The difference is that five months ago there were more government forces here; now it is the Taliban,’ said Nawab, a resident of Shamshapor village.” (‘Taliban making military gains in Afghanistan’ by Azam Ahmed, 26 July 2014)

Presidential elections

The above-cited report also notes that the resistance surge comes at “a time when an election crisis is threatening the stability of the government”. Following the 14 June run-off between the two leading presidential candidates, Abdullah Abdullah and Ashraf Ghani, the country has been in political gridlock, with both candidates alleging fraud and Abdullah claiming that he has been cheated of victory, whilst periodically threatening that he would unilaterally declare his own government.

The ensuing crisis has seen panic visits to Kabul by US Secretary of State John Kerry, in so-far-unsuccessful attempts to knock the two puppets’ heads together in order to cobble together some sort of credible political order.

The New York Times reported: “‘If Abdullah goes for it and declares himself president, forget it, this is over,’ said a former Afghan official who remains close to many of Afghanistan’s top security officials. ‘Fighting the Taliban won’t even be an issue because who is going to do it? The army will be split. So will the police.’

Indeed: “Some western officials have begun to warn that the crisis poses a greater immediate threat to the Afghan government than the Taliban.” (‘Kerry pushes for solution to Afghanistan election crisis’ by Mathew Rosenberg and Carlotta Gall, 11 July 2014)

Clearly, as in Iraq, Syria, Palestine and Libya, in Afghanistan, too, US imperialism has found itself stuck between a rock and a hard place.

Human cost of the imperialist defeat

While the cost to the country’s people has been huge, nevertheless they are steadily seeing off the invaders and have made it impossible for them to achieve either their real aim – the domination of this strategically vital corner of Asia – or any of the stated aims that have been cobbled together at various times since the invasion for public consumption.

Afghanistan has long been a country blighted by imperialist design. In the 19th century, the competition between the Russian and British empires for control there was dubbed ‘The Great Game’. In recent history, a progressive, socialist-leaning revolution was subverted by US imperialism through a proxy war that cost millions of Afghan lives, destroyed infrastructure and turned back the clock on all the country’s social progress, bringing religious fundamentalism to a country that had formerly been famed for its tolerance.

Since the Nato imperialist invasion of 2001, more than 13 years of war have taken a tremendous toll on the country. While Britain has lost 448 soldiers, and the US has lost 3,450, with many thousands more wounded, nobody on the imperialist side has bothered to take a full and accurate count of the Afghan casualties. Conservative estimates put the civilian death toll at 20,000, but the true numbers are extremely hard to determine.

Australian academic Dr Gideon Polya, author of Body Count: Global Avoidable Mortality since 1950, believes that a scientific analysis of the available figures leads to an estimated violent death toll in post-invasion Afghanistan of between 850,000 and 1.7 million, and he estimates the avoidable non-violent death toll – resulting from disease, poverty and all the other associated ills of the war – to be as high as 5.5 million, leading to a total avoidable death toll of 7.2 million people.

This is a genocide in the true sense of the word – and one that is totally hidden by the complicit western media. No wonder US General Tommy Franks announced from Iraq that, “We don’t do body counts.” (See the Afghan Holocaust, Afghan Genocide website)

As well as creating some 2 million external and half a million internal refugees, the invasion and occupation have brought Afghanistan to such a pass that it now has the distinction of having the highest infant mortality rate in the world (187 deaths per 1,000 live births) by an extremely large margin (war-torn Somalia is in second place with 106). To put that in perspective, Libya had a comparable rate (185 per thousand) in 1950 under the BP-backed monarchy, but this declined rapidly and consistently after the revolution, so that by 2011 it had fallen to 12.26.

Afghanistan today also boasts the second-highest under-5 mortality rate in the world. One in five children born there will die before they reach their fifth birthday. It is hardly surprising, combining such realities with the incessant threat of drone strikes and the incredible levels of impoverishment and insecurity, that an estimated two-thirds of the population now suffer from mental-health problems as a result of the 13-year war.

The costs of the war fall on taxes while profiteers make a fortune

The war we were led into by a social-democratic Labour government has so far cost the UK treasury around £30bn. It is a sad indictment of the imperialist system that such spending must always be prioritised over investment in schools, hospitals, or infrastructure. This is not a ‘choice’, but an inevitable result of a system that feeds off domination of the globe and the extraction of massive superprofits from oppressed populations abroad.

Tens of millions of pounds every year have been spent on private security contracts, awarded mainly to the government’s old friend G4S – the prisoner-losing public-abusing company that seems to be increasingly reaping what Nato governments sow. It was embarrassingly revealed in an inquiry held by the US Senate, who awarded more than £82bn in private contracts to a G4S subsidiary, that this money had largely been spent on funding local warlords.

Halliburton (formerly run by ex-VP Dick Cheney) gained $39.5bn in contracts in Afghanistan over the course of the war, with a further estimate of over $138bn US tax dollars going to private and publicly-listed firms. As of last year, there were over 110,000 private contractors in Afghanistan alone, many of which are private military contractors. These mercenaries are part of a sector that is now worth $100bn a year thanks to imperialism’s incessant warmongering, and its desire to keep the real body counts out of the public eye.

By contrast to these vast figures spent on destroying the country, Britain spends a paltry £180m a year on ‘aid’ for Afghanistan – almost half of which returns to Britain through contractors and corruption, according to a 2008 report.

Opium production

Despite the influx of soldiers and contractors – ostensibly brought to the country in order to ‘capture Osama’, ‘defeat al-Qaeda’ and ‘prevent terrorism’, and later kept there under various pretexts including ‘defeating the ‘Taliban’, ‘liberating women’ and ‘curtailing opium production’ – violence and opium production in Afghanistan have steadily soared since 2001, and the global market for opium is now worth over £35bn annually.

In fact, the only time Afghan opium production dropped was in 2001. A phenomenal 99 percent reduction (accounting for 75 percent of the global supply) was achieved after the Taliban-controlled government decided to ban poppy cultivation in 2000.

The invasion reversed the situation completely, however. Today, heroin users are enjoying the highest supply and cheapest prices of the drug since before the war began, and some 90 percent of the world’s supply is now of Afghan origin, with Nato soldiers routinely protecting the growers and the drug lords (sorry, ‘Nato’s allies in the struggle for democracy’).

If we take at face value the stated aims for the invasion of Afghanistan, then the war has not only failed, but has had theopposite effect in almost every case.

The ‘war on terror’ has done nothing to make imperialist populations safer, but has led to the deaths of millions of men, women, and children in Afghanistan, Iraq, and across Africa, killed en masse indiscriminately and in cold blood. It has resulted in a booming global trade in opium and heroin, the destruction of women’s rights, and a massive increase in global instability.

Loss of rights in Britain

The negative effects of the supposed ‘war on terror’ have been felt at home, too, although we have generally forgotten to be outraged about them any more.

Civilians in Britain are liable to be detained for up to 90 days with no charge under new anti-terrorism laws – introduced by the last Labour government, let us remember. Eighteen British muslims were kidnapped in Afghanistan and Pakistan and shipped off without trial to be tortured in Guantanamo Bay with the cooperation and connivance of British secret services, and many more have been tortured, rendered, extradited, imprisoned and assassinated.

We’re also just now discovering the extent of the huge increase in the surveillance of British people that has become the norm, both by our own state and by the US secret services. We were already the country with the highest number of CCTV cameras per head of the population anywhere in the world, but now we can add blanket wiretapping of phones and online communications to the list of paranoid and intrusive observations of British workers.

Imperialism is a paper tiger

Overall, however, the message for workers from Afghanistan is a positive one. Once again, it has been clearly demonstrated that while imperialist firepower and machinery can wantonly destroy the lives, infrastructure and the very fabric of a nation and its material achievements, the imperialists cannot subdue the people by means of their armed force alone, nor keep a people in subjugation once they have decided to resist.

The fact is that the death knell of open colonial domination was sounded with the victory of the October revolution. Every people on earth has learned from the anti-racism of the Soviets, who disproved in practice the prevailing racism of the European empires. They have learned from the ‘asymmetrical warfare’ of Chairman Mao and the Chinese communists, who showed how a weak, peasant population can defeat a strong imperial power. And they have benefitted from the technology of the USSR, which created that ‘great equaliser’, the AK-47 assault rifle, whose flexibility and sturdiness is legendary.

In such a world, imperialist invasions are ultimately doomed to failure. But since imperialism’s need to control markets and materials, as well as to extract superprofits by exploiting workers and keeping them in the most appalling conditions, knows no limits; and since economic crisis is built into the capitalist system, demands the destruction of previously-produced goods and leads to the intensification of the competition for sources of profit, imperialism will keep driving the world to war all the same, regardless of the doomed outcome, and regardless of the incalculable and unforgiveable waste of people and resources.

What better example could there be of this bloodthirsty system’s utter uselessness to humanity, or of the urgent need to rid ourselves of the exploiters who leech their wealth from the creation of so much unnecessary misery?

Posted in USA, AfghanistanComments Off on Afghanistan: In imperialism’s bloody wake

Disband the neo-Nazi Nato alliance!


Issued by: CPGB-ML

Issued on: 30 August 2014


Disband the neo-Nazi Nato alliance!Nato was founded in 1949 to unite and centralise the military-political power of western imperialism under the leadership and domination of the US (which had emerged from WW2 as the strongest imperialist power) – as a weapon to intimidate the USSR and other European socialist countries.

In response to the integration of West Germany into Nato in 1955, and seeing through Nato’s obviously aggressive designs, the USSR and other east European socialist countries founded the Warsaw Pact on 14 May 1955 – as a defensive bulwark against imperialist military threats.

Although it was formed much earlier, the lying propaganda of the Nato countries asserted to its peoples that Nato was a defensive alliance to counter the Warsaw Pact and to stop the allegedly aggressive designs of the Soviets on western Europe!

When the USSR and the eastern socialist bloc collapsed, the fig leaf for the existence of a warmongering alliance was suddenly removed. Nato, left without an official role, seemed overdue for the scrapyard. Now the new imperialist tune was that Nato must exist precisely because the Warsaw Pact was gone – to ‘ensure peace’, naturally!

The ‘new world order’

In 1993, the US outlined its objective of world domination in brutally clear terms. It wanted to ensure that “no rival power is allowed to emerge in western Europe, Asia or the territory of the former Soviet Union”, and that “no collection of nations can aspire to regional dominance, because that would put them on the path to global rivalry with the American superpower”.

And so, instead of the ‘peace dividend’ promised by imperialist politicians, what Nato brought us in the post-cold war era was more military spending, endless wars, and the encirclement of Russia.

It is no coincidence that the first war actually fought by Nato – against Yugoslavia in 1999 – took place after the disbandment of the Warsaw Pact and after the collapse of the socialist bloc.

That war was waged with nauseating cynicism and hypocrisy. Pretending to want to ‘stop ethnic cleansing’, the Nato warmongers oversaw a gigantic exercise in ethnic cleansing. In the name of ‘halting a genocide’, Nato perpetrated a genocide. Alleging a desire to ‘avert a humanitarian disaster’, Nato created the worst humanitarian disaster in Europe since 1945. Posing as the protectors of ‘human rights and democracy’, the Nato Nazis perpetrated an extraordinary violation of human rights and democracy.

The truth is that it was a war for loot, aimed at seizing territory, markets, raw materials, and avenues of investment. It was a war to establish – through the imposition of puppet regimes in the various parts of former Yugoslavia – an oil monopoly stretching from the Middle East to the Black and Caspian Seas. It was a war to establish military bases, to isolate Russia and to crush independent, sovereign Yugoslavia.

In other words, it was an imperialist war for domination – an opening shot in US imperialism’s new strategy of intervening in the affairs of any sovereign state that might refuse to go along with its diktat.

It was a harbinger of more predatory wars, from Afghanistan to Libya, and set the precedent for the use of Nato as a tool for gaining imperialist world supremacy – stamping underfoot the fundamental rights of nations and principles of international law.

Nato dropped 80,000 tonnes of explosives on Yugoslavia. It targeted schools, hospitals, farms, bridges, roads, railways, TV stations, historic monuments, museums, factories, refineries and residential areas. For 78 days, a coalition of 19 of the richest countries in the world, with a combined military budget of over $500bn, waged a total war to force tiny Yugoslavia to submit to the imperialist ‘new world order’.

The enemy within

The Yugoslav war, just like WW1 in 1914, revealed the moral depravity, corruption, mercenary cynicism, and utter shamelessness of both the corporate media presstitutes and most so-called ‘labour movement’ leaders in Britain.

It gave new proof – as did the later wars waged against Iraq, Libya and Syria – of the rottenness and bankruptcy of the Labour party and union leaders, and all the rest of the ‘liberal’ warmongers and stock-exchange ‘socialists’ who pretend to have some concern for the working class and some affinity with its interests.

When imperialism says jump, that is exactly what these ‘working-class leaders’ do. With the odd honourable exception, instead of opposing Nato’s blitzkrieg of Yugoslavia, they fell over themselves to reinforce media lies that painted Yugoslavia’s leader as a ‘new Hitler’ and the barbaric bombing as a ‘humanitarian intervention’.

For the vast majority of the careerist spivs who mislead workers in Britain, no crime is bad enough to make them question their subservience to our rulers. Their comfortable careers and lifestyles are paid for out of loot that comes from British imperialist plunder of the whole world – and their services in keeping British workers on side are well worth this small bribe.

That is why we communists always point out the urgent need to fight such opportunism in the working-class movement. We will get nowhere in our struggle for freedom until we have kicked such traitors out of our ranks.

Since 1999, twelve east European countries have been incorporated into Nato, including the former Soviet Baltic republics of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. The aim has been to bring Nato to the borders of Russia in order to encircle and enfeeble it, thus eliminating any possible challenge to imperialist domination.

This is precisely what lies behind the current dangerous crisis in Ukraine. In response to Nato’s relentless advance, however, Russia has in no uncertain terms served notice on the warmongers, saying: this far and no further.

It is clear that US imperialism dreams of subjugating Russia, overwhelming the People’s Republic of China and achieving world domination. It is equally clear that it will ultimately be no more successful than were the original Hitlerites.

As surely as the Nazis of yore came a cropper, US imperialism is travelling at breakneck speed towards the buffers. The people of the world will give the US and other imperialists a joyous burial.

We workers in the imperialist countries have a duty to fight for the disbandment of this predatory, warmongering neo-Nazi alliance, which brings death, destruction and misery to our brothers and sisters all over the world.

We must fight for the removal of all foreign military bases, and refuse to cooperate with the imperialist war machine.

And, above all, we need to fight for the complete overthrow of imperialism, which has for so long drenched humanity in blood.

Disband the neo-Nazi Nato alliance!
Death to imperialism! Forward to proletarian revolution!

Posted in USA, EuropeComments Off on Disband the neo-Nazi Nato alliance!

Shoah’s pages


September 2014
« Aug   Oct »