Archive for the Al Jazeera bias, distortion and lies Category

“Why CCTV Yang Rui Must Not Quit Despite Criticisms Mostly From The West” – on backlash from al-Jazeera’s Melissa Chan expulsion [The 4th Media]

Posted in Africa, Al Jazeera bias, distortion and lies, Anti-China media bias, Anti-China propaganda exposure, Beijing, China, Indonesia, Japan, National Endowment for Democracy, Philippines, South China Sea, Vietnam on June 18, 2012 by Zuo Shou / 左手

by Yoichi Shimatsu

May 25, 2012

…[CCTV ‘Dialogue’ host] Yang Rui used the word “shrew” to describe the anti-Cihna reporter Melissa Chan and not “bitch” as reported, and it is true that her reporting fixated on and became hysterical about abuses in China, which in most cases are no different and often of lesser degree than similar problems in Western countries or other developing economies. Balance was not her act.

Yang Rui criticized some Jews not all, and do not some Jews support the bombing of civilians in Gaza? Are Jews above criticism? And on what grounds – that they were chosen by their God? If so, God has chosen to treat quite badly at times, which presents a major ethical questions about the Jewish God. No, the fact is Jews are not better than the rest of us and not above criticism.

Yang Rui is harsh on anti-China elements, who do in fact act in a conspiratorial manner…in the name of democracy, but in reality did it for their own self-interest and privileges…

…the critics are not putting a few objectionable characterizations in the context of a larger body of writing and analysis. Yang Rui is among the best interviewers in Asia, and certainly not a tenth as biased as the popular Rush Limbaugh or Bill O’Reilly in the USA.

The foreign critics of Yang Rui use far more abusive and obscene language than he ever does to denounce Yang Rui and not just him.

The four-letter word is standard parlance among the Twitteratti.

Most of this critics are – and this is my opinion, if I am free to say it – self-centered yuppies who came to exploit China and follow lifestyle choices inappropriate to Chinese morals, and by that I mean…promoting dissent with no well-founded philosophy or legal grounds as foreigners…

Many are the children of wealthy parents, or they would not be able to afford the bohemian joy ride in an increasingly expensive Beijing.

Thus, it turns out that Yang Rui, like Shakespeare, has captured an unpleasant part of the social reality and describes it appropriately – because there is no nice and proper way to describe foreign trash, of which too much has flooded into China.

Since some of this foreign trash behaves not like professional journalists but like tawdry yellow-journalism sensationalists, their credentials and writings need to be reviewed and if found lacking in reason and fact, and suffering from racist attitudes against Chinese people, their visas should be revoked and entry into China denied forever.

Given its century of sheer abuse from the Western powers and Japan, China has every right to demand respect from foreign guests, especially professional journalists.

Of course, we (I am one of the professional journalists) have our differences in viewpoint, interest and ideology, but our conduct in China should reflect a basic understanding of the terrible ill-treatment that the Chinese people suffered from our own countries’ demands and interventions.

The foreign bloggers complain about the anti-foreign backlash in Beijing as equivalent to the Boxer Rebellion. I have news for your wilting flowers – you have seen nothing yet.

I have put up with a few waves of anti-Japanese sentiment and even riots in China, and while I oppose such nationalistic activity because I am personally threatened by it, it is important also to realize the context and background of the memories that trigger the anti-foreign feelings and which side, in fact, has been the greater offender.

Countries like China, Vietnam, the Philippines, Indonesia and most of Africa and Latin America have been the victims of Western colonialism. Citizens from powerful countries, even if we as individuals are not powerful ourselves, need to remember the historical inequality of the relationship and the countless crimes that were committed to benefit the our homelands at the expense of other peoples.

Though I am from the Vietnam War generation, which saw the terrible crimes against the Southeast Asian people, I expect no less respect to be shown by the younger generation of Americans, Europeans and Japanese who come to China.

The narcissicism of the Facebook generation is simply no excuse for feigned ignorance and nonchalant arrogance, as shown in the feigned outrage against Yang Rui. Grow up, kids, and admit you say far worse things about Chinese and other people of color.

While white young adults should learn a modicum of humility in the “real world”, I am equally disgusted by young Asian-Americans who pathetically act like a bunch of bananas, aping their white classmates. You not only fail as journalists, you fail as humans for your racial self-hatred.

The last thing that needs to be pointed out is the gutlessness of the younger reporters, who like Melissa Chan take only cheap shots at Chinese society at the behest of their editorial masters, and never dare really confront the powers that be on issues that count. Without the NED and its corps of paid propagandistic NGOs, you would be nowhere and have nothing to report.

Yes, continue believing that China is the bad guy and the Western corporations and bankers are not here to exploit the Chinese people.

Yes, continue your self-deception that the Chinese are the aggressors and not the Western oil companies that control the oil reserves of the South China Sea and Andaman Sea.

Continue believing in the myths they fed you at the Ivy League.

And then go home, and see what a crap place it’s become for the majority of American, European and Japanese citizens – and try to blame that on the Chinese, you pack of whingers.

For me, Yang Rui has been a professional peer and a challenger across the interview table, and he has fired many a shot at me and we have often been at great odds.

But after the vile abuse he has endured in reaction to some frank statements he made on his personal blog, which do reflect some of the unpleasant realities of contemporary society – and the contempt shown toward HIS freedom of expression – I now see him as both a friend and an important and incisive voice in the international dialogue.

When the rest of you grow up, you might understand what I am saying.

By Yoichi Shimatsu, former editor at The Japan Times Weekly and Pacific News Service

Article link:


Al Jazeera director resigns amid scandal; WikiLeaks cable reveals he met with U.S. intelligence, agreed to remove ‘disturbing’ content [Yahoo! News / Sweet & Sour Socialism Essential Archives]

Posted in Al Jazeera bias, distortion and lies, Corporate Media Critique, Hillary Clinton, Qatar, Sweet and Sour Socialism Essential Archives, USA, Wikileaks on June 18, 2012 by Zuo Shou / 左手

By Dylan Stableford, Yahoo! News | The Cutline – Tue, Sep 20, 2011

Al Jazeera’s longtime managing director Wadah Khanfa announced his resignation on Tuesday amid a scandal unearthed by a diplomatic cable from the U.S. embassy in Doha.

According to the cable published by WikiLeaks, Khanfa met with a U.S. intelligence official to discuss “disturbing Al Jazeera website content.” According to the report, Khanfa agreed to delete the content. “Not immediately, because that would be talked about, but over two or three days,” Khanfa said, according to the cable…

…The announcement of Khanfa’s departure on Al Jazeera’s website makes no mention of the WikiLeaks controversy…

On Tuesday, the Qatar-funded network named Sheik Ahmad bin Jasem bin Muhammad Al-Thani, a member of the Qatar royal family, to replace Khanfa…

…a defiant Khanfa wrote… “[N]ot long ago, then US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld unfairly attacked our coverage of Iraq while today, US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, hails our news coverage…” [you’re proud of that? Check out the full article if you’ve a stomach for detestable Orwellian doublespeak, Khanfa blubbering that he’s NOT a tool. This guy cannot go out with dignity. – Zuo Shou]

Edited / excerpted by Zuo Shou

Full article link:

“WikiLeaks cables claim al-Jazeera changed coverage to suit Qatari foreign policy” – al-Jazeera exposed as ‘useful tool’ of Qatari monarchy; covering up Qatar’s lack of media freedom [Guardian / Sweet & Sour Socialism Essential Archives]

Posted in Al Jazeera bias, distortion and lies, Egypt, Jordan, Obama, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sweet and Sour Socialism Essential Archives, Syria, US imperialism, USA, Wikileaks on June 17, 2012 by Zuo Shou / 左手

[FYI – This exposure happened before al-Jazeera emerged as blatant imperialist propagandists for terrorist death squads and US-NATO interventionism in Libya and now Syria, while Qatar distributed massive arms flows to the ‘oppositionists’. Also, enjoy this quote from the US embassy, when regarding al-Jazeera’s hypocritical stance on their reporter Melissa Chan getting expelled from China: “The Qatari government claims to champion press freedom elsewhere, but generally does not tolerate it at home…” – Zuo Shou]

* US embassy memos contradict Arabic satellite channel’s insistence that it is editorially independent despite being heavily subsidised by Gulf state *

by Robert Booth

6 Dec 2010

Qatar is using the Arabic news channel al-Jazeera as a bargaining chip in foreign policy negotiations by adapting its coverage to suit other foreign leaders and offering to cease critical transmissions in exchange for major concessions, US embassy cables released by WikiLeaks claim.

The memos flatly contradict al-Jazeera’s insistence that it is editorially independent despite being heavily subsidised by the Gulf state.

They will also be intensely embarrassing to Qatar, which…controversially won the right to host the 2022 World Cup after presenting itself as the most open and modern Middle Eastern state.

In the past, the emir of Qatar has publicly refused US requests to use his influence to temper al-Jazeera’s reporting.

But a cable written in November 2009 predicted that the station could be used “as a bargaining tool to repair relationships with other countries, particularly those soured by al-Jazeera’s broadcasts, including the United States” over the next three years.

Doha-based al-Jazeera was launched in 1996 and has become the most watched satellite television station in the Middle East. It has been seen by many as relatively free and open in its coverage of the region, but government control over its reporting appears to US diplomats to be so direct that they said the channel’s output had become “part of our bilateral discussions – as it has been to favourable effect between Qatar and Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria [!] and other countries”.

In February, the US embassy reported to Washington how “relations [between Qatar and Saudi Arabia] are generally improving after Qatar toned down criticism of the Saudi royal family on al-Jazeera”. In July 2009, the US embassy said the channel “has proved itself a useful tool for the station’s political masters”.

In one dispatch, the US ambassador, Joseph LeBaron, reported that the Qatari prime minister, Hamad bin Jassim al-Thani, had joked in an interview that al-Jazeera had caused the Gulf state such headaches that it might be better to sell it. But the ambassador remarked: “Such statements must not be taken at face value.” He went on: “Al-Jazeera’s ability to influence public opinion throughout the region is a substantial source of leverage for Qatar, one which it is unlikely to relinquish. Moreover, the network can also be used as a chip to improve relations. For example, al-Jazeera’s more favourable coverage of Saudi Arabia’s royal family has facilitated Qatari-Saudi reconciliation over the past year.”

Although LeBaron noted that the station’s coverage of the Middle East was “relatively free and open”, he added: “Despite GOQ protestations to the contrary, al-Jazeera remains one of Qatar’s most valuable political and diplomatic tools.”

US allegations of manipulation of al-Jazeera’s content for political ends also contradict Qatar’s claim to support a free press. “The Qatari government claims to champion press freedom elsewhere, but generally does not tolerate it at home,” the US embassy said after the French director of the Doha Centre for Media Freedom resigned in June 2009, citing restrictions on the centre’s freedom to operate.

In a clear example of the regional news channel being exploited for political ends, the Doha embassy claimed Sheikh Hamad (HBJ) told the US senator John Kerry that he had proposed a bargain with the Egyptian president, Hosni Mubarak, which involved stopping broadcasts in Egypt in exchange for a change in Cairo’s position on Israel-Palestinian negotiations.

“HBJ had told Mubarak ‘we would stop al-Jazeera for a year’ if he agreed in that span of time to deliver a lasting settlement for the Palestinians,” according to a confidential cable from the US embassy in Doha in February. “Mubarak said nothing in response, according to HBJ.”

The US has benefitted, too. “Anecdotal evidence suggests, and former al-Jazeera board members have affirmed, that the United States has been portrayed more positively since the advent of the Obama administration,” a cable in November 2009 said. “We expect that trend to continue and to further develop as US-Qatari relations improve.” [At least a recent survey by Pew Research Center shows that al-Jazeera’s pro-Obama bent does not fool the typical Muslim, who like him less than Bush – ZS]

In 2001 the emir, Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, refused a US request to stop al-Jazeera giving so much airtime to Osama bin Laden and other anti-American figures, saying: “Parliamentary life requires you to have a free and credible media, and that is what we are trying to do….

…Qatar maintains a working relationship with Iran, and the US embassy was concerned by the lack of al-Jazeera coverage of the civil unrest in Iran after the disputed presidential election in the summer of 2009.

“Al-Jazeera’s coverage of the Iranian election and its aftermath has been scanty by comparison to other hot topics in the region, such as Gaza,” reported the embassy at the time.

Al-Jazeera “has proved itself a useful tool for the station’s political masters”, the cables said.

Local media are also affected by government interference. “Over the past three [visits] we have assessed as steady the lack of overall media freedom in Qatar,” the November cable said.

“Although overt and official censorship is not present, self and discreet official censorship continue to render Qatari domestic media tame and ineffective…”

Excerpted by Zuo Shou

Full article link:

“China: Al Jazeera reporter expelled for ‘breaking Chinese laws'” – CSM obscures reporters’ fraternity [Christian Science Monitor]

Posted in Al Jazeera bias, distortion and lies, Capitalist media double standard, China, China-bashing, Corporate Media Critique on June 17, 2012 by Zuo Shou / 左手

CSM’s editor discloses that the writer of this article is Vice President of the “Foreign Correspondents’ Club of China”. HOWEVER, there is no disclosure that the illustrious Melissa Chan in question was Secretary of the Board in 2011-2012, when Ford was serving as VP. [] Thanks for disclosing, CSM. (In an indication of the FCCC’s bizarre colonial mentality, you can buy a t-shirt on their website showing revolutionary era CHINESE people marching under an FCCC banner; in your dreams, guys).

As a blog which has at one of its goals to expose capitalist media lies and rumors about China, its a joke the way these yellow journalists hide behind holy poses of righteous indignation…despite rumor after rumor, lie after lie and gross inabilities to hew to their own ethics, the presstitutes can’t admit to a single misstep in China.

Al-jazeera English is Qatar/Arab corporate news, fully stocked with smooth-talking China-bashing executives and journalists from the BBC and the whole warped capitalist media pantheon. Despite appearing to criticize or promote some diversions from US policy, Al-jazeera emanates from absolute monarchy Qatar — a puppet state of the US, (occupied by major US military bases) as subsequent posts here will reveal.

At the time of the Beijing 2008 Summer Olympics, Al-jazeera English’s executive board was almost exclusively non-Arab, its stable of foreign correspondents had virtually no Arabs, if any at all. Al-jazeera pumps out some of the most scurrilous lies imaginable about China’s internal affairs. CSM itself…simply pseudo-venerable. – Zuo Shou

* Chinese authorities forced Al Jazeera English to close its China news operations, and suggested that its reporter had broken unspecified laws and behaved unethically. *

by Peter Ford
May 8, 2012


The Chinese government refused to explain Tuesday why it had expelled the the English language correspondent of Al Jazeera, but hinted at charges she had broken Chinese laws and behaved unethically.

“Foreign journalists should abide by Chinese laws and regulations and abide by professional ethics,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said, in answer to a question as to why the correspondent, Melissa Chan, had been expelled from the country.

“I think the relevant journalists are very clear about what kind of regulations they have broken,” Mr. Hong added…

…In his comments to reporters Tuesday, Hong suggested that the Chinese government reserved the right to deny journalist visas to reporters whose coverage it deemed unfair. “We welcome foreign journalists to report objectively in China,” he said. “We have dealt with foreign journalists in accordance with rules and regulations as well as the actual performance of the journalists…”

Editor’s note: Peter Ford is the Vice President of the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of China, whose statement is quoted in the above article.

Excerpted / edited by Zuo Shou

Article link:

Al Jazeera exodus: Channel losing staff over ‘bias’ [RT]

Posted in Al Jazeera bias, distortion and lies, Bahrain, Libya, Qatar, Syria on March 18, 2012 by Zuo Shou / 左手

People are belatedly becoming aware, post-Libya and Syria, that Al Jazeera is just another propaganda arm of imperialism. “The fox shows its tail”… Those who were paying attention to the channel over time know that Al Jazeera was basically an Arab-marketed branch of the BBC — as it was stocked with former employees of that pseudo-venerable institution and its ilk. Ergo, it becomes an extension mouthpiece of NATO via its symbiotes, like Qatar. Al Jazeera English was running some of the most vicious yellow journalism articles of all against China in the run-up to the 2008 Beijing Summer Olympics – Zuo Shou

March 13, 2012

Key staff from Al Jazeera’s Beirut Bureau have resigned citing “bias” in the channel’s stance on the conflict in Syria.

Bureau Managing Director Hassan Shaaban reportedly quit last week, after his correspondent and producer had walked out in protest.

A source told the Lebanese paper Al Akhbar that Al Jazeera’s Beirut correspondent Ali Hashem had quit over the channel’s stance on covering events in Syria. “… his position [which] changed after the station refused to show photos he had taken of armed fighters clashing with the Syrian Army in Wadi Khaled. Instead [Al Jazeera] lambasted him as a shabeeh [implying a regime loyalist],” a source told Lebanese press.

Ali Hashem was also infuriated by Al Jazeera’s refusal to cover a crackdown by the King of Bahrain while twisting its Syria angle. “[In Bahrain], we were seeing pictures of a people being butchered by the ‘Gulf’s oppression machine’, and for Al Jazeera, silence was the name of the game,” he said.

The Beirut bureau’s producer also quit claiming Al Jazeera had totally ignored Syria’s constitutional reform referendum, which saw a 57% turnout with 90% voting for change.

Ghassan Ben Jeddo, who had been the head of the Beirut Bureau before resigning almost a year ago, said that Al Jazeera was biased in covering the Arab Spring, especially in Syria and Bahrain.

“I do believe that Al Jazeera and other channels were not balanced in dealing with the events,” he said. “For instance, with respect to the events in Syria and Bahrain, we started to invite guests from America who only criticize the regime in Syria and support the regime in Bahrain and persons who justify NATO intervention. This is unacceptable.”

Journalist and author Afshin Rattansi, who worked for Al Jazeera, told RT that, “sadly”, the channel had become one-sided voice for the Qatari government’s stance against Bashar al-Assad, having begun as the region’s revolutionary broadcaster.

“It is very disturbing to hear how Al Jazeera is now becoming this regional player for foreign policy in a way that some would arguably say the BBC and others have been for decades,” he said. “If Al Jazeera Arabic is going to take a war-like stance after [the] Qatari government, this would be very ill.”

“There is the courage of these journalists, however, in saying ‘Look, this is not the way we should be covering this. There are elements of Al-Qaeda in there,’” Rattansi concluded. “The way Al Jazeera Arabic has covered the story of Syria is completely one-sided.”

Journalists and anti-war activist Don Debar, who has also had Al Jazeera experience, confirmed that the station has been heavily guided by the Qatari government in its policies.

“That has been ongoing since last April of 2011,” Debar told RT. “The head of the bureau in Beirut quit, many other people quit because of the biased coverage and outright hand of the government in dictating editorial policy over Libya, and now Syria.”

­* ‘There’s a chill, they’re controlling things more at Al Jazeera’ *

­Former Al Jazeera English-language blogger Ted Rall recounted his own story of quitting the job. He said his blogs and columns were being rejected on a regular basis.

“For a long time I ascribed it to incompetence on their part because they weren’t very good at getting back very quickly, but over time I came to learn through various people there that the politics of the channel were changing,” he told RT. What he found out was that leftist and progressive voices such as his were not welcome anymore and that he no longer needed to submit anything.

Rall noted that this change in policy only took place recently.

“After September 11, Al Jazeera became a channel that could be counted upon for openness and transparency, certainly compared to most corporate broadcast media in the West, particularly related to the Middle East and Central Asia and South Asia but that has really changed in the last year or so,” he said. “There’s a chill, they’re controlling things more.”

When Rall first went to work at Al Jazeera, he says he was surprised that it was actually owned by the Qatari government. He compared their past hands-off policy to that of Rupert Murdoch when he owned the Village Voice of New York City. But now, the “Qataris have decided to shape the picture of the news a little more than they used to.”

While he rejected the notion of objectivity, Rall did note that the media could try to present a more balanced view.

“What you really want to see is a broad marketplace of ideas, where lots of different ideas and stories are being told,” he summed up.

­When it was first set up, Al Jazeera English was intended to be a softer version of its Arabic counterpart. Since then, the situation has changed drastically, Middle East analyst Tariq Ali told RT. “The channel I think, was largely set up to please the west and its coverage showed that very clearly. There were few critical programs, compared to Arabic Al Jazeera, but it seems now both are working in tandem.”

“The Brutal Murder of Gaddafi and the Implications for All Who Stand in the Way of the War Criminals” by Matthias Chiang [Future FastForward]

Posted in Afghanistan, Africa, Al Jazeera bias, distortion and lies, Cameron, China, Corporate Media Critique, Fascism, France, Iran, Israel, Lebanon, Libya, NATO, Obama, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Syria, Tony Blair, Turkey, U.K., U.K. War Crimes, UNSC, USA, War crimes, Zionism on November 3, 2011 by Zuo Shou / 左手

22nd October 2011

* Toe the line or be the next victim of the colonial plunder and rape! *

Gaddafi died a martyr, murdered by the war criminals of US, France, Britain and NATO led by President Obama, President Sarkozy and Prime Minister Cameron. Although NATO spearheaded the military campaign against Libya, the strategic planning was prepared by US Africa Command (AFRICOM).

AFRICOM was set up to further the US interest in Africa, more precisely the Global Military-Industrial-Financial Complex’s interests in securing and plundering the resources of Africa. Behind AFRICOM’s curtain are the hidden hands of Zionist Israel.

The first victim of this agenda is Libya.

When the UN Security Council sanctioned the attack on Libya under the guise of imposing a No-Fly zone to protect the alleged killing of civilians by Gaddafi who was fighting an armed rebellion supported and financed by the abovementioned war criminals, Russia and China could have vetoed the resolution and thwart the destruction and plunder of Libya.

But these two permanent members of the Security Council caved in and abstained.

China has a major presence in Libya and her intelligence services would have known whether Gaddafi enjoyed wide popular support from his people. The Libyan government was stable and successful in implementing development projects for the benefit of the people. It was the most developed country in the entire African continent and Gaddafi’s efforts were duly recognised by the UN weeks before the barbaric aerial bombardment of Libya.

China invested billions of dollars in Libya.

Yet, without a whimper of resistance at the highest diplomatic level, she evacuated 30,000 Chinese workers from Libya and left in a hurry. China and Russia knew in advance that there would be an undeclared war against Libya. Everything was up for grabs!

Even after the full invasion and wanton destruction of Libya, China and Russia made perfunctory and lame criticisms of NATO’s criminal actions. Surely, it cannot be said that Russia and China were misled by the war criminals that they had no intentions to destroy Libya and oust Gaddafi and to seize the oil resources. They must have known that war preparations were in place long before the matter came before the UN Security Council. That was their excuse in not vetoing the UN Security Council resolution authorising NATO’s military action. A load of rubbish.

So why did China and Russia cave in? This is the US$ trillion question.

It reminds me of the story of a man who owed a debt of gratitude to two rival gangs. The man was asked by the more notorious gang to assassinate the leader of the other gang but the attempt failed. When confronted by the victim as to the reasons to be the hired killer, the man replied that he owed a greater debt of gratitude to the other gang leader.

Libya under Gaddafi welcomed China with open arms, but China turned a blind eye to the destruction of Libya because she owed a greater debt of gratitude to Zionist Israel and the global financial elites for past favours, as well as narrow selfinterests [sic]. China had too much toilet paper money (US Federal Reserve notes) and the sale of Libyan oil in the intended gold dinar by Gaddafi would literally destroy the US dollar. This cannot be allowed! Period!

The same can be said of Sarkozy and Tony Blair and his copycat Cameron. They all turned their backs on Gaddafi for the same reasons.

It must be said that the leading members of the African Union were courageous enough to make a stand against the invasion and wanton destruction and did not extend “recognition” to NATO’s quisling regime until forced by circumstances to do so. Members of the Arab League and the OIC were cowards and opportunists and they pride themselves as righteous Muslims. But Qatar must be singled out for special condemnation. Can anyone still believe that Al-Jazeera is the voice of the Arab / Muslim communities? Until exposed as the barking dog of NATO, Al-Jazeera was the major “Arab” propaganda tool to demonise Gaddafi and to misrepresent the actual situation in Libya – an armed rebellion financed by war criminals. Al-Qaeda played a leading role in the armed rebellion.

Iran, Syria and Lebanon should learn from this experience and the mistakes of Gaddafi. They are the next targets of the Zionists / Neo-Conservatives global agenda. If they entertain any thoughts of making compromises with these war criminals, by abandoning their right of self-defence and to be armed with every conceivable weapon, including nuclear weapons, they will end up like Saddam Hussein and Gaddafi. In defending their country, all options should be on the table in like manner as the war criminals have declared in their war agenda against them. They will collapse one by one like dominoes if they strategise [sic] otherwise!

To the leaders of countries under immediate threat as well as those on the fringes, your previous strategy of inviting China and Russia to invest on preferential basis and to purchase massive amount of arms to counter-balance the threat of the Zionist Anglo-American Axis will no longer be effective because US$ billions worth of investments and military purchase count for nothing when US$ trillions worth of foreign reserves are at stake.

The investing countries will run for cover for short-term preservation and will not be willing to commit their resources for a military conflict unless and until they themselves are under a direct threat. This is a given. To the leaders of China and Russia – this is your wake up call. Stop strutting like a peacock just because you have abundant dollar reserves. The Federal Reserve Notes are all toilet papers and will not be bargaining chips when the deal placed on the table is – surrender or war.

There is still time yet to mount a Global Counter-Alliance against this fascist triad of Israel / US / UK war criminals.

As for Iran and Turkey, stop aspiring to be regional powers, as you cannot hope to achieve this grand vision so long as Zionist Israel continues to wag the US dog. Be realistic. Without nuclear weapons as a deterrent, and revolutionary social forces on your side, global public opinion cannot be mobilised to first isolate and then annihilate your enemies. Turkey cannot take comfort that as a member of NATO it will be immune to the machinations of the war criminals.

The countdown has started.

The new normal and preferred mode of regime change is to use the pretext of Humanitarian Intervention as a cover for outright military intervention.

In the African continent, it will be U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) as the Planner and NATO as the military Bully.

In the next escalation in the Middle East and South Asia wars (i.e. the overspill from Afghanistan to Pakistan), U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) will be the Planner and the combined might of NATO, Israel and Arab Lackeys will provide the military manpower.

In South-East Asia and the Pacific, U.S Pacific Command (USPACOM) will lead and coordinate all military campaigns.

In South America, the U.S. Southern Command (USSOUTHCOM) will plan and lead, with narco states providing the ground troops.

In all of the above war scenarios, mercenaries and special forces will be in the forefront in fomenting sectarian wars and religious armed conflicts.

2012 will usher in The World War of the 21st Century – the perverse solution of the war criminals in their futile attempt to overcome the final phase of the Global Financial Tsunami!

* Matthias Chang is a distinguished Malaysian lawyer, author and adviser to former Prime Minister Dr. Tun Mahathir Mohamad *

Article link:

“Decline of the West: Blood-lust in the streets of Libya suffices for justice” by Patrick Henningsen [21st Century Wire]

Posted in Afghanistan, Africa, Al Jazeera bias, distortion and lies, Assassination, BBC bias, distortions and lies, CIA, Corporate Media Critique, France, Hillary Clinton, Iraq, Israel, Italy, Media smear campaign, MI6, NATO, Obama, Palestine, Qatar, State Department, Syria, Torture, U.K., US "War on Terror", US imperialism, USA on October 22, 2011 by Zuo Shou / 左手

October 21, 2011

It appears that Libya’s former leader Muammar Gaddafi may have been handed down his final verdict by NATO rebels, but it’s perhaps an even more bloody awful fate already suffered by a morally detached western civilization.

The man who liberated his country from the tyrannical monarchy of King Idris back in 1969… was tried and sentenced by bullet today.

Gaddafi modeled himself after Omar Mukhtar, The Lion of the Desert, the only other man who has led a genuine, independent Libyan resistance, fighting against a brutal Italian colonization in 1927. Yet, our media tell us he’s just another dead tyrant.

Unable to conceal her philistine nature, pathetic US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton took the opportunity to crack a predictably disingenuous joke. When hearing the news of Gaddafi’s death she cackled as she told reporters, “We came, we saw, he died!”

This has become the new narrative in the US and western Europe now, where foreign leaders and other non-state actors with brown skin are given lengthy trials through press briefings by suited politicians in places like Washington, London and Paris, echoed by the corporate media until an antagonist is born for public consumption.

Following the White House’s comical staged hoax of SEAL Team 6′s gallant raid on long-dead Osama bin Laden, and with no evidence to show it actually happened other than President Obama’s TV speeches- we get the next public assassination. After all, Obama’s far-fetched tale of the bin-Laden mission somehow vindicated all those innocent lives ruined by US incarceration and outright torture of thousands of young men since the War on Terror officially began in 2001.

Al Jazeera will no doubt play the shaky cell phone video of the man being stripped and dragged through the streets of Sirte by the NATO rebel mob. Somehow they believe, Gaddafi’s brutal post-mortem will vindicate their careless efforts and somehow make right the thousands of innocents who have perished- so that Libya can finally become part of the globalist, debt-based, neoliberal economic IMF system.

The west and its banking elite have nothing left to plunder other than middle class pension funds and incomes at home, so they are relying on plundering countries in the east and south in order to refill its sadly diminishing coffers. This is the only way to get their hands on any real liquidity or assets.

The same treatment was given to Iraq’s Saddam Hussein. Like Gaddafi and Osama bin Laden, he worked hand in hand with America’s CIA and Britain’s MI6 in order to help western intelligence agencies achieve their operational goals, and thus the foreign policy objectives of the US, Great Britain and Israel. Grainy cell phone videos of Saddam’s circus execution somehow vindicated those in the west who liquidated so many innocent Iraqi lives since 1991, and arguably before.

This is the new trend in dispensing due process, in a declining western civilization where blood-lust suffices for justice.

After the protracted media trials of both Slobodan Milosevic and Saddam Hussein, globalist power-brokers will never allow their war criminals to stand trial and spill the beans on all their dirty little secrets.

Over the last few decades, both Americans and western Europeans have become well-trained media consumers, and absorb their talking points much in the same way that grade school children dutifully repeat after their teachers and walk in single file. As adults, their teachers are CNN, FOX, the BBC, and the newest addition to the state information corps, US CENTCOM’s own Al Jazeera. None of them have any genuine moral or ethical perspective left in their editorial vision. The corporate networks will reserve any real humanitarian compassion for a handful of trapped miners, baby seals, missing Caucasian children and Amanda Knox.

Our new teachers have taught the dutifully minded among us that when the mob labels a head of state or non-state actor as a tyrant, then regime change must take place, and that this man deserves to die. They have taught us that one dead US soldier is worth more in headlines than 100 dead brown-skinned Iraqis, Afghanis, Palestinians, or Libyans- women and children included. That is the overwhelming power of the 21st century media.

Will Libya have anything near the stability it enjoyed over the last 30 years? Will its people enjoy the mountain of state benefits available to them under the Gaddafi rein [sic]? Will Libyans be able to retain ownership of their country’s bounty of natural resources, and see the state reinvesting its profits back into their country for the benefit of future generations?

History has taught us that the answer to each and every one of these questions is of course…no.

History has written all over the sands of the Maghreb of North Africa, and Libya in particular. It has always been under the thumb of one empire or another- from the Romans, the Spanish, the Vatican’s Knights of Malta, the Ottomans, and Mussolini’s Italy.

Libya’s first brush with America came in the early 19th century, when war broke out between the United States and what was then referred to as Tripolitania, in what came to be known as the Barbary Wars. Only this time around the Barbary pirates are on the other side of the fighting, and they are known the world over by the name of ‘NATO’.

It’s only fitting that this latest chapter of history should be written as follows…

It was clear from day one that the Anglo-American empire, along with its clients like Qatar, were actively supporting and planning to bring destabilization to the country. From the very first days of the civil war in January 2011, before the shell casings had even hit the ground, western envoys and consultants worked with known al-Qaida fighters and criminals in Libya to form a new NTC government, a new central bank and a new state oil holding company. NATO were deployed to give brutal air support to these new gangs of rebel paramilitaries, and for nearly 10 months, both those groups killed, tortured, raped and looted everything in their path.

Meanwhile, offshore transnational corporations from the US, Europe and Qatar carved up the country’s assets. Months followed years of instability, infighting and acts of internal retribution followed. The poor became poorer, the rich became richer, organized crime blossomed and thousands of middle class Libyans were allowed to immigrate to the UK, France and Italy.

This would come to be known as Libya’s liberation.

* What it means *

The UN issued the citation, and NATO came in with the tow truck. Make no mistake, in the real world, NATO is the USA and the USA is NATO. It’s a politically correct way of using military force without being seen to be acting alone as an imperial aggressor. But what about the NTC’s death squads, the theft, the rape, the torture and destruction of citizens’ property, business, and whole lives?

To pass the buck a little further, NATO’s goals and end-game is handed over to Libya’s NTC, this way everyone’s asses are covered.

Politicians in Washington, London and Paris should be proud. They got everything they wanted, and with no dirt under their nails [sic].

If no one in the US, UK, France, the UN or NATO’s technicians of death are held accountable for the sacking and looting of Libya- the crime of the 21st century, then expect that they will simply move forward, and do it again, and again. So who’s next? Syria?

There is no more moral high ground, no more western values, no beliefs to use as a back-stop for western civilization.

Was Gaddafi guilty? Is that it then, a bullet?

He will never be afforded the same trial that anyone reading this article would expect as their god-given right. So what makes any among us believe that we deserve any of these so-called rights we think we enjoy in the west?

Meanwhile, the US and UK corporate media can’t stop parading those barbaric pictures on the front page in exactly the same manner as Libya’s NATO rebels where parading corpses around town. And this is what 2000 years of civilization brought?

Who are we kidding?

Article link: