TOKYO MASTER BANNER

MINISTRY OF TOKYO
US-ANGLO CAPITALISMEU-NATO IMPERIALISM
Illegitimate Transfer of Inalienable European Rights via Convention(s) & Supranational Bodies
Establishment of Sovereignty-Usurping Supranational Body Dictatorships
Enduring Program of DEMOGRAPHICS WAR on Europeans
Enduring Program of PSYCHOLOGICAL WAR on Europeans
Enduring Program of European Displacement, Dismemberment, Dispossession, & Dissolution
No wars or conditions abroad (& no domestic or global economic pretexts) justify government policy facilitating the invasion of ancestral European homelands, the rape of European women, the destruction of European societies, & the genocide of Europeans.
U.S. RULING OLIGARCHY WAGES HYBRID WAR TO SALVAGE HEGEMONY
[LINK | Article]

*U.S. OLIGARCHY WAGES HYBRID WAR* | U.S. Empire's Casino Unsustainable | Destabilised U.S. Monetary & Financial System | U.S. Defaults Twice A Year | Causes for Global Financial Crisis of 2008 Remain | Financial Pyramids Composed of Derivatives & National Debt Are Growing | *U.S. OLIGARCHY WAGES HYBRID WAR* | U.S. Empire's Casino Unsustainable | Destabilised U.S. Monetary & Financial System | U.S. Defaults Twice A Year | Causes for Global Financial Crisis of 2008 Remain | Financial Pyramids Composed of Derivatives & National Debt Are Growing | *U.S. OLIGARCHY WAGES HYBRID WAR*

Who's preaching world democracy, democracy, democracy? —Who wants to make free people free?
[info from Craig Murray video appearance, follows]  US-Anglo Alliance DELIBERATELY STOKING ANTI-RUSSIAN FEELING & RAMPING UP TENSION BETWEEN EASTERN EUROPE & RUSSIA.  British military/government feeding media PROPAGANDA.  Media choosing to PUBLISH government PROPAGANDA.  US naval aggression against Russia:  Baltic Sea — US naval aggression against China:  South China Sea.  Continued NATO pressure on Russia:  US missile systems moving into Eastern Europe.     [info from John Pilger interview follows]  War Hawk:  Hillary Clinton — embodiment of seamless aggressive American imperialist post-WWII system.  USA in frenzy of preparation for a conflict.  Greatest US-led build-up of forces since WWII gathered in Eastern Europe and in Baltic states.  US expansion & military preparation HAS NOT BEEN REPORTED IN THE WEST.  Since US paid for & controlled US coup, UKRAINE has become an American preserve and CIA Theme Park, on Russia's borderland, through which Germans invaded in the 1940s, costing 27 million Russian lives.  Imagine equivalent occurring on US borders in Canada or Mexico.  US military preparations against RUSSIA and against CHINA have NOT been reported by MEDIA.  US has sent guided missile ships to diputed zone in South China Sea.  DANGER OF US PRE-EMPTIVE NUCLEAR STRIKES.  China is on HIGH NUCLEAR ALERT.  US spy plane intercepted by Chinese fighter jets.  Public is primed to accept so-called 'aggressive' moves by China, when these are in fact defensive moves:  US 400 major bases encircling China; Okinawa has 32 American military installations; Japan has 130 American military bases in all.  WARNING PENTAGON MILITARY THINKING DOMINATES WASHINGTON. ⟴  

December 25, 2015

2012 - 'Afghanistan: The First Feminist War?'

Article
SOURCE






Afghanistan: The First Feminist War?

Dan Ehrlich
Posted: 16/03/2012 22:37 GMT Updated: 16/05/2012 10:12 BST

The tragedy in Afghanistan of a US soldier murdering 16 civilians has given President Obama a greater urgency in getting American troops out of that country. Yet, he finds himself in a similar situation as President Nixon during the latter days of the Vietnam War...Securing Peace (leaving) with honour.

With America's "puppet" Afghan ruler Hamid Karzai now asking NATO troops to stay in their camps, abandoning one of their main goals of winning the hearts and minds of the people...one question resonates: Why are we sill there?

Leaving Afghanistan was a main topic Obama discussed with British Prime Minister David Cameron this past week. And it's a cinch one of the talking points was that question: Why are we still there? What are our goals?

Now that Osama Bin Laden is dead and Al Qaida is opening up chapters all over the Islamic world, the only concrete answer to that question is the protection of women.

The feminist victory may be complete in America, but on the international stage it's not doing so well with three quarters of the world's women still under often-severe male domination. Afghanistan is an extreme case in point in what might be termed the first feminist war...a war that now may not be won even if Hillary Clinton dons a flack jacket and shoulders an M16 on the front lines. Still, since the Bush Administration to the present America's top foreign policy office has been held by women...women who have promised not to desert their Afghan sisters.

I say that since there has yet to be a credible explanation as to why we, and other NATO nations, are sill there, except to keep the extreme male chauvinist and misogynist Muslim Taliban from power. Our main goal of defeating Osama bin Laden's Al Qaida group and international terrorism is over...at least there.

Remember, America originally helped arm the Taliban in its fight against the Soviets. As far as anyone can tell the reason for our conflict with them, as with Iraq, is regime change. We have also accomplished that. How long Karzai remains in power after NATO leaves is questionable.

Yet, unlike Iraq, which had a strong central autocratic government, the Taliban is a theocracy made up of hill tribesmen who simply abandoned Kabul when we arrived and took the mountains and friendly villages for a protracted war against NATO.

Of course it doesn't have to be that way. If we had the money and popular support we could stay there as long as we wanted. We have maintained forces in South Korea since the end of WW2, most of that time under a cease-fire agreement with North Korea.

But, this is the main weakness with progressive democracies when pitted against stagnant theocracies. Like sharks, we have to keep moving or we eventually will perish. Many Islamic states simply exist as shellfish, going where the tide takes them, in a non-evolutionary permanent state shielded by their faith.

But, for us, as usual there's more at stake in Afghanistan than our war on terror, women being forced to wear burkas and our international reputation. There are big, big bucks in the form of natural gas and minerals. And there's one more thing...narcotics. The country's biggest cash crop is opium poppies, another battle that hasn't been going well. Because as with our similar efforts to eradicate South American cocaine, we're fighting an indigenous people's traditional work.

President Obama's original contention during the GW Bush years that we should be concentrating on Afghanistan rather than invading Iraq was good politics in the aftermath of 9/11. Our invasion of Iraq wasn't based so much on Saddam Hussein's brutality as it was on reports of his so-called weapons of mass destruction aimed at the West...a claim that has since been proven false.

So, it was left to the media to ramp the US population up for our Afghan adventure. Photos and videos of women being tortured and executed for trying to have jobs or enjoy some western music, inflamed many of us against the brutal Taliban religious fanaticism. As it should have. Develop a war on terrorism and couple this with the Taliban and nine years later we are still there with more NATO troops dying every week.

But wait! There's one more weakness progressive democracies
have: We won't do what some of our enemies would do to win. We are limited by our civility, rules of warfare, the Geneva Convention, etc. That's partly why those 16 senseless civilian deaths is so difficult to stomach.

During the Korean War General Douglas MacArthur, one of the most brilliant military tacticians we have ever had was fired by President Truman because he wanted to bomb the railroads in Manchuria. That was from where China's Red Army supplies were being funneled into Korea. He felt if we broke the supply line, the Chinese offensive would collapse. Truman, however, felt such as action might bring Russia into the conflict and trigger WW3. We didn't win in Korea...but eventually bargained for a truce.

In Vietnam we tried everything except invading North Vietnam and nuclear weapons. But, those options were nixed for fear of bringing the Chinese into the war.

We are not about to nuke Afghanistan, killing everyone that isn't waiving Old Glory or even try to fight a war of attrition, which we would lose. That's possibly because we are still too nice to win. We will eventually just leave...but probably without that infamous Mission Accomplished banner.

And, hopefully we may at long last learn that our nation is best defended by guarding our own borders and fighting a never-ending battle at home for truth, justice and the American way, if anyone can recall what that way is. 



Decades-old CIA crack-cocaine scandal gains new momentum

Published time: 11 Oct, 2014 01:47
Edited time: 13 Oct, 2014 14:52


Nearly two decades after a US reporter was humiliated for connecting the CIA to a drug-trafficking trade that funded the Nicaraguan Contras, important players in the scandal – which led to the journalist’s suicide – are coming forward to back his claims.
 

Back in 1996, Gary Webb of the San Jose Mercury News broke a story stating not only that the Nicaraguan Contras – supported by the United States in a rebellion against their left-leaning government – were involved in the US crack cocaine epidemic of the 1980s, but also that the CIA knew and turned a blind eye to the operation.

As a result, Webb concluded, the CIA was complicit in a drug trade that was wreaking havoc on African American communities in Los Angeles.

The bombshell report sparked outrage across the country, but when national newspapers like the Los Angeles Times, New York Times, and Washington Post weighed in on the matter, they dismissed Webb and attacked his story to the point that it was disowned by the Mercury News. Webb was forced out of journalism and ultimately committed suicide in 2004.

Now, however, the whole ordeal is being looked at with fresh eyes in the form of two new films: “Kill the Messenger” and a documentary called, “Freeway: Crack in the System.” Additionally, several figures involved in the operation have recently spoken out, lending further credibility to Webb’s original reporting. 




---------------------- ꕤ ----------------------

COMMENT

I'm not really good with subtlety.  I don't get it.  I find it annoying.

What exactly is this, a piss-take?  We know it wasn't a 'feminist war' and the writer himself goes on to discuss the big draw-cards of Afghanistan:

1.  "big, big bucks in the form of natural gas and minerals."

2.  "country's biggest cash crop is opium poppies" (narcotics).

So that probably explains what the Americans are doing there.  That and the regime change the Americans sought.
And regime change was accomplished, according to the author.  By installing  Hamid Karza.

So what else is there?

Seeing a military base in Korea was discussed (a base that is like an occupation since WWII), I'm going to guess that the Americans also want a military base in Afghanistan, so they can permanently occupy the country.


There's a large number of military bases in Afghanistan.  Wow, who knew? 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ISAF_installations_in_Afghanistan

The writer comes across as rather unpleasant, the way he keeps referring to the American invaders and aggressors as 'too nice' to win the invasion, yet he admits that the Americans will not win a war of attrition.  So short of dropping nukes on Afghanistan, what is there?  Whatever it is, it's not a case of being 'too nice' to win.

This is a nation of invaders and destroyers that have killed for decades on a worldwide scale.

The reference to progressive democracies being limited to rules of war, the Geneva Convention and so on, are total crap.

The US has refused to ratify protocols of the Geneva Convention, the US has denied detainees basic human rights and denied detainees rights as combatants, and the US has engaged in torture of detainees, rendition (kidnap & transfer abroad), and was/is running black sites.  Plus the US has bailed out of the Rome Statute, so that it is not subject to provisions of the International Criminal Court (thus to avoid conviction for:   genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression).
The illegal invasion of Iraq would, I believe, be considered a 'war of aggression' and therefore a war crime.

Chauvinism & burqas, and exporting 'feminism' (democracy or anything else), have absolutely nothing to do with American (or Western) NATO motivations.

And as the CIA was involved in trafficking drugs in South America to fund the Nicaraguan Contras, even the mention of eradicating cocaine in South America is suspect.

What's the bet that the CIA is just repeating the same patterns in the Middle East?

P.S.

Following is link to USA Rome Statute (ICC) unsigning:



USA - Rome Statute - ICC
-- USA 'unsigns' Rome Statute
-- USA threatens military force
-- USA hypocrisy re ICC & regime change Targets
(Libya & Syria)
Link | Post




GIF - Christmas Card



2015

---------------------- ꕤ ----------------------



Some guy tweeted me that he'd been assaulted by Santa:

... so I made him a card.  lol


Expected his account to be as hilarious as his Santa message.  Not so.





December 24, 2015

US-NATO War Machine - Humanitarian NGOs Shilling for US-NATO Wars

Summary
SOURCE
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/coleen-rowley/amnestys-shilling-for-usn_b_1607361.html


SUMMARY
[as article understood by me]

US-NATO War Machine

Humanitarian NGOs
Shilling for US-NATO Wars
Entwined with US-NATO
War Machine

Title:

"Amnesty's Shilling for US-NATO Wars"

By:

Coleen Rowley
Former FBI Special Agent
Wrote Whistleblower Memo 2002
Testified re FBI pre-9/11 Failures

Ann Wright
29-year U.S. Army/Army Reserve Colonel
16-year US diplomat
Resigned 2003 in Opposition to Iraq War
Summary of Article
[As understood by me]


Cornerstone Obama foreign policy:

  • "Right to Protect (R2P)"
  • "humanitarian intervention"
  • "Atrocity Prevention Board" newly created

served mainly to rationalize the launching of war on Libya

& now for U.S.-NATO military intervention in Syria

Suzanne Nossel (former Amnesty International USA chief)
coined 'Smart Power':

USA use of:

1. military power
2. 'soft power'

approach announced by Hillary Clinton
on confirmation as US Secretary of State

Suzanne Nossel paper on "Smart Power" (2004)
published in the Council on Foreign Relations
-- much like theories of:
  • - Samantha Power
  • - Madeline Albright

Suzanne Nossel article:

urges policy-makers to:
return to "great mainstay" of 20th Century
"US foreign policy:
LIBERAL
INTERNATIONALISM

Suzanne Nossel paper posits: global system of 'stable' in liberal democracies less prone to war

USA should offer leadership (diplomatic & economic), together with military might & "quarantine and elimination of dictators and weapons of mass destruction (WMD"

Amnesty International USA
hiring of a State Department shill
as executive director of its US affiliate

NATO Shadow Summit
closely mimicked CIA's latest suggested propaganda device [see post, here]

'CIA Red Cell' - new CIA think-tank
-- group of analysts
-- assigned to
- think 'outside the box'
- anticipate emerging challenges
-- & right to worry in 2010 re:
State Department
Bureau of Intelligence & Research (INR) found:
"80 percent of French and German citizens were opposed to continued deployment of their countries' militaries in the U.S.-NATO war in Afghanistan."

PUBLIC APATHY
-- allowed politicians (Germany & France)
-- to ignore voters
-- to increase troop contributions
-- to International Security Assistance Force (ISAF)
Afghanistan
-- CIA think-tank concern re anticipated NATO casualties
-- turning to calls for withdrawal (by Europeans)
-- worried re active & politically potent hostility
-- thus conversion of PASSIVE OPPOSITION into ACTIVE CALLS FOR IMMEDIATE WITHDRAWAL

CIA "Special Memorandum"
-- CIA propaganda expert
-- suggests USA-CIA European propaganda campaign 
[see post, here]
"Red Cell" memo was leaked
-- window into US govt propaganda
-- to work on NATO citizenry
-- to maintain public support for waging war on Afghans
-- via 'euphemistically titled
"International Security Assistance Force" (ISAF)'

CIA propaganda aims to:
-- tap into concerns of secular French public
-- provoke French indignation re 'girls' education' / women's issues
-- create rallying point
-- give voters reason to support war & ignore casualties
-- promote outreach initiatives
-- exploit Afghan women in media
-- esp. French, German & other European
-- feature emotive testimonials
-- on programs targeting disproportionately female audience
-- to overcome scepticism of women re war

Amnesty International - [NATO-CIA Echo]:
  • - strikes similar themes via:
  • - online announcements
  • - billboard advertisements, Chigaco bus stops

meanwhile, thousands of activists march in Chicago
to protest NATO wars

Bill board exploits feminism.

Huffington Post echoes same feminist propaganda with article:

HuffPo:
"Afghanistan:
The First Feminist War?"

HuffPo propaganda:
-- 'male domination' of three-quarters of worlds women
-- "Afghanistan is an extreme case in point"
-- "in what might be termed the first feminist war "
-- "women who have promised not to desert their Afghan sisters."

Amnesty International
'Shadow Summit'
-- featuring: former Sec. State, Madeline Albright
-- & other female foreign relations
-- Melanne Verveer, US Ambassador-at-Large, Global Women's Issues
-- US Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Illinois
-- Afifa Azim, Gen Dir. & Co-founder, Afghan Women's network
-- Gayle Tzemach Lemmon, Dep. Dir. CFR Women & Foreign Policy Program

Verveer
-- would not answer Ann Wright questions
-- hotel security guards tried to turn away anti-war protesters
-- registration desk reminded that Summit advertised as
-- 'Free Admissions' & some anti-war were members of Amnesty International
-- were then permitted to attend (on condition)

THE BIG SELL
UNDERPINNED BY EXPLOITING WOMEN'S ISSUES (just as CIA propagandist suggested  - [see post, here]):

"All generally linked the protection and participation of Afghan women in government as well as the progress made in educating Afghan women to the eventual peace and security of the country as envisioned by the new strategic "partnership" agreement that Obama had just signed with Afghan President Hamid Karzai."

US government officials
-- EASILY use "good & necessary cause" of women's rights
-- to get audience into the palm of their collective hand
-- just as CIA propaganda expert predicted

Albright a PR blunder
-- given her involvement & defence of Iraqi sanctions 1990s
-- when 500,000 Iraqi children deaths deemed by Albright as:

"we think the price is worth it."
----

(article) reference source human rights blogger:

Amnesty International USA 
advertising posters described as:

-- pro-NATO posters
-- playing into prevailing tropes
-- re so-called "humanitarian intervention"
-- via "think of the women & children" imagery

Posters & the forum that includes Albright
= neither slight slips nor without context

Amnesty International USA
"used pro Nato imagery & slogans ahead of & during a controversial summit that has thousands protesting in the streets"

On Albright, humanitarian blogger comments:
Amnesty International USA asked:


"notorious apologist for mass murder of children to speak on the right of women and children"
Humanitarian Blogger (article reference source)
-- refers to Amnesty international USA's:
- "critical SERIES of errors"
- asks how such a series of 'errors' could be made.
Article authors contend:

Amnesty International USA
had chosen Madeleine Albright as main speaker
-- because Albright has paved the way for feminist war-hawks
-- to become Secretary of State (or candidates for same)
-- & became they take the lead of 'ruthless Grand Dame' Albright

Highest ranks of feminist wing of interventionism:
  • Madeline Albright
  • Condi Rice
  • Hillary Clinton
  • Susan Riche
  • Samantha Power

Passion & enthusiasm re:
  • -- 'nobility' of own goals
  • -- & American exceptionalism
that it sways others, like religious blind faith.

Nossel & Albright theories are flawed

NOTE
  1. as demonstrated by lady war-hawks lobbying
  2. & long list of democracies disproving assertion, incl:
  • Nazi Germany
  • Roman Empire
  • United Kingdom
  • France
  • USA
DEMOCRACIES ARE NOT LESS PRONE TO WAR

USA 'support' for democracies
involves much hypocrisy (& exploitation)
as the USA has a long record of
toppling (or attempting to topple) 
democracies in foreign countries

Examples:
  • Iran (Mossadequh)
  • Guatemala (Arbenz)
  • Chile (Allende)
USA history of bringing down democracies to:
-- to gain easier control of a foreign country
-- through an allied dictatorship

Goals of humanitarianism
-- preventing atrocities
-- furthering women's rights
are truly noble goals

*and, yes, women lack rights in Afghanistan

HOWEVER

this is convenient truth and:

best lies are always based on a certain amount of truth

devil lies in the details
re promoting equality & accomplishing humanitarianism

Article authors argue:

ends, even noble ends, never justify wrongful means

⟴ when people such as Samantha Power decide to bomb village (Libya) to save it

⟴ it will backfire on a pragmatic level

CIA PROPAGANDA - EXPLOITATION OF PUBLIC
(ESP. WOMEN)

VIA ADVERTISED & PR SPUN 'NOBILITY' OF US-NATO MOTIVATION

nobility of the U.S.-NATO's motivation that
-- as CIA propaganda department advised
-- should be relied upon to convince public (esp. women)
-- to support (or at least tolerate) war & military occupation

War & military occupation, now known to encompass

  • worst of war crimes
  • massacres of women and children
  • torture
  • cutting off body parts of those killed
US soldiers:
  • increasing mental illness
  • self-destructive behavior
  • suicides

corresponding cover-ups

Military scholars identify:

-- declining American public support for Vietnam war
-- as main factor responsible for USA Vietnam war loss

US GOVT. BY-PASS PUBLIC OPPOSITION

1. get rid of the military draft;
2. put the wars on a credit card ;
so fewer citizens pay attention
3. control over the type of free media

SERIES OF WAR PROPAGANDA SYSTEMS

-- planting retired generals as "talking heads" on TV
-- assistant to Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld
-- deciding to "embed the media"

⟴ work well to maintain
⟴ necessary level of war momentum
⟴ in mainstream media & amongst public opinion

SLEIGHT OF HAND
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL USA
 & OTHER
BACK UP USA FOREIGN POLICY

JUST AS PUBLIC SOURS ON WAR

-- American polls approaching same as Europe
-- cited by the "CIA Red Cell" (that called for propaganda campaign) [see post, here]
-- & suddenly major human rights orgs
-- eg Amnesty International (& others)
-- applauding Obama's (and the feminist war-hawks')
-- "Atrocity Prevention Board"

Congress may allow
Pentagon propagandists
to target American citizens
through: National Defense Authorization Act of 2013

TWISTING & EXPLOITING HUMAN RIGHTS

"laudable need to further human rights should not be twisted into justifying harsh economic sanctions that kill hundreds of thousands of children or, even worse, "shock and awe" aerial bombing that takes the lives of the women and children the "humanitarian" propagandists say they want to help."
HUMAN RIGHTS EXPLOITED

FALSITY OF UTILITARIANISM
CONCOCTING FICTIONAL 'HAPPY' OUTCOMES
TO JUSTIFY WRONGFUL MEANS

Madeleine Albright
-- response re deaths HALF MILLION CHILDREN IN IRAQ
-- on 60 Minutes
-- that "the price was worth it"
-- illustrates falsity of what ethicists call
-- "act utilitarianism"
-- concocting fictional happy outcomes
-- to justify wrongful means

CORRUPTED
BY ALIGNMENT
WITH USA & NATO

  1. human rights NGOs - incl. Amnesty International
  2. Nobel Peace Prize

Nobel laureate
-- Mairead Maguire withdrew from the Nobel Peace Forum
-- held in CHICAGO during NATO
-- for that reason

"Good NGOS and non-profits that want to maintain the trust in their humanitarian work tend to be very careful to maintain their independence from any government"

SOURCE
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/coleen-rowley/amnestys-shilling-for-usn_b_1607361.html



RECOMMENDED FURTHER READING (POSTS)

CIA Propaganda - Selling War in Afghanistan
LINK | here

'CIA’s Hidden Hand in ‘Democracy’ Groups' | Robert Parry
LINK | here

Mainstream Media - Concentrated - Big-6 Corporate Control - Lies & Indoctrination
LINK | here

Modern Art As CIA Weapon
LINK | here

Other Interesting:

British Broadcasting Corporation
Syria: British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) - Fraud
LINK | here


---------------------- ꕤ ----------------------

COMMENT

As I've said before, this was a great article.

I've just banged out the summary.

Might have to come back to check for typos etc.



2012 - Afghanistan - "Amnesty's Shilling for US-NATO Wars" - And NATO-CIA Propaganda

Article
SOURCE
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/coleen-rowley/amnestys-shilling-for-usn_b_1607361.html



2012 Article

Relates to Amnesty International USA.

Former USA Executive Director 2012-2013:
Suzanne Nossel
Suzanne Nossel:
currently executive director of PEN American Centre
largest of the 144 centres that form a loose federation that comprise PEN International


Current USA Executive Director appointment:
Steven W. Hawkins
Steven W. Hawkins:
American social justice leader & litigator


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/coleen-rowley/amnestys-shilling-for-usn_b_1607361.html

Huffington Post - 2012

Coleen Rowley
Former FBI Special Agent

Amnesty's Shilling for US-NATO Wars

Posted: 20/06/2012 00:50 AEST Updated: 18/08/2012 19:12 AEST

By Ann Wright and Coleen Rowley



The new Executive Director of Amnesty International USA -- Suzanne Nossel -- is a recent U.S. government insider. So it's a safe bet that AI's decision to seize upon a topic that dovetailed with American foreign policy interests, "women's rights in Afghanistan," at the NATO Conference last month in Chicago came directly from her.

Nossel was hired by AI in January 2012. In her early career, Nossel worked for Ambassador Richard Holbrooke under the Clinton Administration at the United Nations. Most recently, she served as Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Organizations at the U.S. Department of State, where she was responsible for multilateral human rights, humanitarian affairs, women's issues, public diplomacy, press and congressional relations.

She also played a leading role in U.S. engagement at the U.N. Human Rights Council (where her views about the original Goldstone Report on behalf of Palestinian women did not quite rise to the same level of concerns for the women in countries that U.S.-NATO has attacked militarily).

Nossel would have worked for and with Hillary Clinton, Madeleine Albright, Samantha Power and Susan Rice, and undoubtedly helped them successfully implement their "Right to Protect (R2P)" -- otherwise known as "humanitarian intervention" -- as well as the newly created "Atrocity Prevention Board."

This cornerstone of President Barack Obama's foreign policy (which has served mainly to rationalize the launching of war on Libya) is now being hauled out to call for U.S.-NATO military intervention in Syria.

"Smart Power" = smart wars?

In fact, Nossel is herself credited as having coined the term "Smart Power," which embraces the United States' use of military power as well as other forms of "soft power," an approach which Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced at her confirmation as the new basis of State Department policy.

An excerpt from Nossel's 2004 paper on "Smart Power," published in the Council on Foreign Relations' Foreign Affairs magazine, sounds a lot like Samantha Power's (and also traces back to Madeleine Albright's) theories:



To advance from a nuanced dissent to a compelling vision, progressive policymakers should turn to the great mainstay of twentieth-century U.S. foreign policy: liberal internationalism, which posits that a global system of stable liberal democracies would be less prone to war.

Washington, the theory goes, should thus offer assertive leadership -- diplomatic, economic, and not least, military [our emphasis] -- to advance a broad array of goals: self-determination, human rights, free trade, the rule of law, economic development, and the quarantine and elimination of dictators and weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

Following the CIA Red Cell

Perhaps the AI's hiring of a State Department shill as executive director of its U.S. affiliate was merely coincidental to how/why its "NATO Shadow Summit" so closely mimicked the CIA's latest suggested propaganda device, but....

The "CIA Red Cell," a group of analysts assigned to think "outside the box" to anticipate emerging challenges, was right to worry in March 2010 when the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) found that 80 percent of French and German citizens were opposed to continued deployment of their countries' militaries in the U.S.-NATO war in Afghanistan.

Even though public apathy had, up to that point, enabled French and German politicians to "ignore their voters" and steadily increase their governments' troop contributions to Afghanistan, the CIA's newly-created think tank was concerned that a forecasted increase in NATO casualties in the upcoming "bloody summer ... could become a tipping point in converting passive opposition into active calls for immediate withdrawal."


In a confidential memo, the "Red Cell" wrote:


The Afghanistan mission's low public salience has allowed French and German leaders to disregard popular opposition and steadily increase their troop contributions to the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). Berlin and Paris currently maintain the third and fourth highest ISAF troop levels, despite the opposition of 80 percent of German and French respondents to increased ISAF deployments, according to INR polling in fall 2009.

Public Apathy Enables Leaders To Ignore Voters ...

Only a fraction (0.1-1.3 percent) of French and German respondents identified 'Afghanistan' as the most urgent issue facing their nation in an open-ended question, according to the same polling. These publics ranked 'stabilizing Afghanistan' as among the lowest priorities for US and European leaders, according to polls by the German Marshall Fund (GMF) over the past two years.

According to INR polling in the fall of 2009, the view that the Afghanistan mission is a waste of resources and 'not our problem' was cited as the most common reason for opposing ISAF by German respondents and was the second most common reason by French respondents. But the 'not our problem' sentiment also suggests that, so for, sending troops to Afghanistan is not yet on most voters' radar.

But Casualties Could Precipitate Backlash

If some forecasts of a bloody summer in Afghanistan come to pass, passive French and German dislike of their troop presence could turn into active and politically potent hostility. The tone of previous debate suggests that a spike in French or German casualties or in Afghan civilian casualties could become a tipping point in converting passive opposition into active calls for immediate withdrawal.

The CIA "Special Memorandum" went a step further, inviting "a CIA expert on strategic communication and analysts following public opinion" to suggest "information campaigns" that State Department polls showed likely to sway Western Europeans.

The "Red Cell" memo was quickly leaked, however, furnishing a remarkable window into how U.S. government propaganda is designed to work upon NATO citizenry to maintain public support for the euphemistically titled "International Security Assistance Force" (ISAF) waging war on Afghans. Here are some of the CIA propaganda expert's suggestions:


...messaging that dramatizes the potential adverse consequences of an ISAF defeat for Afghan civilians could leverage French (and other European) guilt for abandoning them. The prospect of the Taliban rolling back hard-won progress on girls' education could provoke French indignation, become a rallying point for France 's largely secular public, and give voters a reason to support a good and necessary cause despite casualties... Outreach initiatives that create media opportunities for Afghan women to share their stories with French, German, and other European women could help to overcome pervasive skepticism among women in Western Europe toward the ISAF mission...Media events that feature testimonials by Afghan women would probably be most effective if broadcast on programs that have large and disproportionately female audiences.

Amnesty International struck similar themes in announcements posted online as well as billboard advertisements on Chicago bus stops (like the one above). Telling "NATO: Keep the Progress Going!", the ads beckoned us to find out more on Sunday, May 20, 2012, the day thousands of activists marched in Chicago in protest of NATO's wars.

The billboard seemed to answer a recent Huffington Post blog post, "Afghanistan: The First Feminist War?"

The feminist victory may be complete in America, but on the international stage it's not doing so well with three quarters of the world's women still under often-severe male domination. Afghanistan is an extreme case in point in what might be termed the first feminist war ... a war that now may not be won even if Hillary Clinton dons a flack jacket and shoulders an M16 on the front lines. Still, since the Bush Administration to the present America 's top foreign policy office has been held by women ... women who have promised not to desert their Afghan sisters.

Our curiosity was further piqued because we consider ourselves to be women's rights and human rights proponents and also due to our own prior federal careers in intelligence and military. (Colonel Wright is retired from the State Department/US military and Rowley is from the FBI.)

So along with a few other anti-war activists, we packed into a taxi to head to the Chicago hotel where Amnesty International's "Shadow Summit" featuring former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and other female foreign relations officials was being held. We happened to carry our "NATO bombs are not humanitarian"; "NATO Kills Girls" and anti-drone bombing posters that we had with us for the march later that day.

As we arrived, an official-looking black car dropped off Melanne Verveer, U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women's Issues, who was to be a main speaker (on the first panel, along with former Secretary Albright; U.S. Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Illinois; and Afifa Azim, General Director and Co-Founder, Afghan Women's Network; along with Moderator Gayle Tzemach Lemmon, Deputy Director of the Council on Foreign Relations' Women and Foreign Policy Program).

Verveer cast a cold glance at us and would not answer Ann Wright's questions as she scurried into the hotel with her aides surrounding her and us following behind. At first the hotel security guards tried to turn us away but we reminded the registration desk the Summit was advertised as "Free Admissions" and that some of us were members of Amnesty International.

So they let us register and attend as long as we promised to leave our signs outside and not disrupt the speakers. The hotel conference room was about half full. We stayed long enough to hear the opening remarks and the moderator's first questions of Albright and the other speakers on the first panel.

All generally linked the protection and participation of Afghan women in government as well as the progress made in educating Afghan women to the eventual peace and security of the country as envisioned by the new strategic "partnership" agreement that Obama had just signed with Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

Ms. Verveer said Afghan women do not want to be seen as "victims" but are now rightfully nervous about their future. When we saw that audience participation was going to be limited to questions selected from the small note cards being collected, we departed, missing the second panel as well as kite-flying for women's rights.

We noted, even in that short time, however, how easy it was for these U.S. government officials to use the "good and necessary cause" of women's rights to get the audience into the palm of their collective hand -- just as the CIA's "strategic communication" expert predicted!

But Why Ms. Albright?

Not everyone was hoodwinked however. Even before the "Summit" was held, Amnesty realized it had a PR problem as a result of its billboard advertisement touting progress in Afghanistan. An Amnesty official tried to put forth a rather lame defense blaming an accidental poor choice of wording.

But many readers (and AI members) posted critical comments and questions, including concerns about Albright's involvement given her infamous defense of Iraqi sanctions in the 1990s, which were estimated to have caused the deaths of a half million Iraqi children, with the comment "we think the price is worth it."

Under the blogger's explanation: "We Get It / Human Rights Now," there were comments like these:


...Could someone from AI please explain why Madeleine Albright was invited to participate in this event? We (and especially those of us who are familiar with AI) should all be able to understand that the wording on the poster was a genuine, albeit damaging, mistake. But why Ms. Albright?

The posters are pro-NATO and play into prevailing tropes about so called "humanitarian intervention" via "think of the women & children" imagery. The posters & the forum that includes Albright are neither slight slips nor without context. AI is coping heat because they have miss-stepped dramatically. There is NOTHING subtle about either the imagery nor the message! It is not a case of "oh sorry we didn't realize it it could be interpreted that way! They used pro Nato imagery & slogans ahead of & during a controversial summit that has thousands protesting in the streets. Tell me again how that is not taking sides? They asked a notorious apologist for mass murder of children to speak on the right of women and children...tell me again: how is that not taking sides. So it is absolutely reasonable for past supporters (and board members like myself) to be asking how it is that Amnesty USA so lost its bearings they could make a critical SERIES of errors like this?

Of course the defensive AI blog author never answered the numerous questions asking why Amnesty had chosen Madeleine Albright as their main speaker. So we will venture an answer that probably lies in the fact that all of the powerful feminist-war hawks who have risen to become Secretary of State (or are waiting in the wings) are now taking their lead from the ruthless Grand Dame who paved the way for them, Madeleine Albright -- (see Coleen Rowley's recent blogs: "Obama's New 'Atrocity Prevention Board': Reasons for Skepticism" and "Militarization of the Mothers: You've Come a Long Way, Baby, from Mother's Day for Peace").

It's also possible the highest ranks of the feminist wing of military interventionism (i.e. Madeleine Albright, Condi Rice, Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice, Samantha Power, et al.) are so passionate and hubristic about the nobility of their goal and "Amercan exceptionalism" that some have simply succumbed to a kind of almost religious (blind faith) type fervor.

The Road to Hell Is Paved With Good Intentions

Nossel's and Albright's theories are flawed in many ways but suffice it to say that democracies are actually not less prone to war. A long list of "democracies" -- including Nazi Germany, the Roman Empire, the United Kingdom, France and the United States itself -- disprove this assertion.

In any event, the U.S. has been terribly hypocritical in its support of "democracies" in foreign countries, often toppling or attempting to topple them (i.e. Iran's Mossadeqh, Guatemala's Arbenz, Chile's Allende) in order to gain easier control of a foreign country through an allied dictatorship.

No one is going to argue that the goals of humanitarianism, preventing atrocities and furthering women's rights around the world are not "good and necessary" (in the words of the CIA strategic communications expert). We would go so far as to say these ARE truly noble causes!

Testimonials about human rights' abuse are often true and fundamentalist regimes' treatment of women seems to vary only in degrees of horrible. But while it's true that many women lack rights in Afghanistan, some would argue that it's
conveniently true. And that the best lies are always based on a certain amount of truth.

The devil, however, lies in the details of promoting equality and accomplishing humanitarianism. Most importantly the ends, even noble ends, never justify wrongful means. In fact, when people such as Samantha Power decide to bomb the village (Libya) to save it, it will backfire on a pragmatic level.

It must be realized that it is the nobility of the U.S.-NATO's motivation that -- as CIA propaganda department has advised -- should be relied upon to convince otherwise good-hearted people (especially women) to support (or at least tolerate) war and military occupation (now known to encompass the worst of war crimes, massacres of women and children, torture, cutting off body parts of those killed, as well as increasing mental illness, self-destructive behavior and suicides among U.S. soldiers and the corresponding cover-ups of all such horrible means).

In the decades after Vietnam, a number of military scholars identified declining American public support for that war as the main factor responsible for the U.S. "losing" Vietnam. One lesson learned and quickly implemented was to get rid of the military draft and put the wars on a credit card so fewer citizens would pay attention.

Some control also had to be gained over the type of free media (that led to trusted TV anchor Walter Cronkite broadcasting his public souring on the Vietnam War). A whole series of war propaganda systems, from planting retired generals as "talking heads" on TV to the assistant to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld deciding to "embed the media," have worked pretty well to maintain the necessary level of war momentum in mainstream media and amongst public opinion.

But now, with American polls approaching the same problematic levels as those in Europe cited by the "CIA Red Cell," we suddenly see major human rights organizations like Amnesty International (as well as others) applauding Obama's (and the feminist war-hawks') "Atrocity Prevention Board."

Such sleight of hand seems to work even better amongst political partisans. By the way, it should be noted that Congress may allow these Pentagon propagandists to target American citizens through the National Defense Authorization Act of 2013. Should we connect the dots?

There are some clear lines where the laudable need to further human rights should not be twisted into justifying harsh economic sanctions that kill hundreds of thousands of children or, even worse, "shock and awe" aerial bombing that takes the lives of the women and children the "humanitarian" propagandists say they want to help.

Madeleine Albright's response about the deaths of a half million children on 60 Minutes, that "the price was worth it," illustrates the quintessential falsity of what ethicists call "act utilitarianism" or concocting fictional happy outcomes to justify the terrible wrongful means.

It also seems that a human rights NGO, in this case Amnesty International, which had gained a solid reputation and hence the trust of those it has helped through the years, will be jeopardized in aligning itself with the U.S. Secretary of State and NATO.

This is exactly how the Nobel Peace Prize got corrupted, aligning itself with the U.S. Secretary of State and NATO, which is why Nobel laureate Mairead Maguire withdrew from the Nobel Peace forum held in Chicago during NATO.

Good NGOS and non-profits that want to maintain the trust in their humanitarian work tend to be very careful to maintain their independence from any government, let alone any war-making government. When NGOs, even good ones, become entwined with the U.S./NATO war machine, don't they risk losing their independent credibility?

Ann Wright is a 29-year U.S. Army/Army Reserve Colonel and a 16-year U.S. diplomat who served in Nicaragua, Grenada, Somalia, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Sierra Leone, Micronesia, Afghanistan and Mongolia. She resigned in 2003 in opposition to the Iraq war. She returned to Afghanistan in 2007 and 2010 on fact-finding missions.

Coleen Rowley, a FBI special agent for almost 24 years, was legal counsel to the FBI Field Office in Minneapolis from 1990 to 2003. She wrote a "whistleblower" memo in May 2002 and testified to the Senate Judiciary on some of the FBI's pre-9/11 failures. She retired at the end of 2004, and now writes and speaks on ethical decision-making and balancing civil liberties with the need for effective investigation.



(Originally posted on Consortiumnews.com)




RECOMMENDED FURTHER READING (POSTS)

CIA Propaganda - Selling War in Afghanistan
LINK | here

'CIA’s Hidden Hand in ‘Democracy’ Groups' | Robert Parry
LINK | here

Mainstream Media - Concentrated - Big-6 Corporate Control - Lies & Indoctrination
LINK | here

Modern Art As CIA Weapon
LINK | here

Other Interesting:

British Broadcasting Corporation
Syria: British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) - Fraud
LINK | here




Summary
US-NATO War Machine

Humanitarian NGOs Shilling for US-NATO Wars
Entwined with US/NATO War Machine


Title: "Amnesty's Shilling for US-NATO Wars"



US-NATO / CIA PROPAGANDA
SELLING AFGHANISTAN WAR

USA UNSIGNING ROME STATUTE

USA THREATENING MILITARY ACTION RE BRINGING USA BEFORE ICC

CIA PROPAGANDA & MEDIA CONTROL - GENERAL



---------------------- ꕤ ----------------------

COMMENT


Feel like I've maybe read and posted this before.

It's a pain tracking anything on this blog, so I've not looked to see if I've covered this.

Memory's shocking, so it's all like new to me.   lol

Anyway, I really enjoyed this article. 

Even though it dates back to 2012, everything is applicable today in terms of how government, military, foreign policy, NGOs, humanitarian organisations etc operate.


December 23, 2015

GIF Torah






---------------------- ꕤ ----------------------





The script is Ashkenazi styled Hebrew, I believe.

It began with a flower that looked like an angel or a priest, so I gave him a Torah.

Wish I knew what it says.








GIF - Australian Journalist Julian Assange - Over 5 Years Political Persecution

AUSTRALIAN JOURNALIST
JULIAN ASSANGE
  POLITICAL PERSECUTION

AUSTRALIAN JOURNALIST
 JULIAN ASSANGE
Over 5 Years

Political Persecution

Know Your Rights
The Clash


"This is a public service announcement
With guitar
Know your rights all three of them

Number one
You have the right not to be killed
Murder is a crime!
Unless it was done by a
Policeman or aristocrat
Know your rights"



LYRICS | Link


BRIEF EDIT




US-NATO / CIA PROPAGANDA
SELLING AFGHANISTAN WAR

USA UNSIGNING ROME STATUTE

USA THREATENING MILITARY ACTION RE BRINGING USA BEFORE ICC

CIA PROPAGANDA & MEDIA CONTROL - GENERAL



---------------------- ꕤ ----------------------


PLEASE SUPPORT

Julian Assange
Editor, WikiLeaks


BOOK:  The WikiLeaks Files (2015)
Link | here