Sunday, October 2, 2011
by Paul Craig Roberts
LewRockwell.com
In the past decade, Washington has killed, maimed, dislocated, and made widows and orphans millions of Muslims in six countries, all in the name of the "war on terror." Washington's attacks on the countries constitute naked aggression and impact primarily civilian populations and infrastructure and, thereby, constitute war crimes under law. Nazis were executed precisely for what Washington is doing today.
Moreover the wars and military attacks have cost American taxpayers in out-of-pocket and already-incurred future costs at least $4,000 billion dollars – one third of the accumulated public debt – resulting in a US deficit crisis that threatens the social safety net, the value of the US dollar and its reserve currency role, while enriching beyond all previous history the military/security complex and its apologists.
Perhaps the highest cost of Washington's "war on terror" has been paid by the US Constitution and civil liberties. Any US citizen that Washington accuses is deprived of all legal and constitutional rights. The Bush-Cheney-Obama regimes have overturned humanity's greatest achievement – the accountability of government to law.
If we look around for the terror that the police state and a decade of war has allegedly protected us from, the terror is hard to find. Except for 9/11 itself, assuming we accept the government's improbable conspiracy theory explanation, there have been no terror attacks on the US. Indeed, as RT pointed out on August 23, 2011, an investigative program at the University of California discovered that the domestic "terror plots" hyped in the media were plotted by FBI agents.
FBI undercover agents now number 15,000, ten times their number during the protests against the Vietnam war when protesters were suspected of communist sympathies. As there apparently are no real terror plots for this huge workforce to uncover, the FBI justifies its budget, terror alerts, and invasive searches of American citizens by thinking up "terror plots" and finding some deranged individuals to ensnare. For example, the Washington DC Metro bombing plot, the New York city subway plot, the plot to blow up the Sears Tower in Chicago were all FBI brainchilds organized and managed by FBI agents...[Full Article]
Labels: Lew Rockwell, Paul Craig Roberts
Friday, August 12, 2011
Lew Rockwell
by Silver Shield
Don't Tread On Me
I wrote an article called 5 Places NOT To Be When The Dollar Collapses. In it I wrote that societies that benefited the most from the dollar would be the worst places to be when it fell apart. While the dollar has not even collapsed yet, the strain in these areas is becoming more apparent. England is number 3 on the list has had 4 days of violent riots as people start to lose it. Israel is number 1 on that list has had massive protests. There is revolution in the air all over the world except in the US.
America is still in deep denial which is still the first stage of the Awakening. This denial will be wiped away when the dollar collapses. For now the economy is still functioning with food and fuel available. Americans still have the illusion of wealth and normalcy. They still are stuck in the false left right paradigm and think some other sock puppet will turn things around.
When the dollar collapses, all American illusions will collapse with it. Deep denial will turn into deep anger. The violence I expect in the other 3 areas on the list and all urban areas in the US, will make all other global riots pale in comparison. America is deeply infused with arrogance, denial, narcissism, drugs and violence. There is no other society that I know of that has the degree of intensity and combination of these factors...[Full Article]
Labels: Lew Rockwell, rioting, riots
Monday, April 25, 2011
Why They Died in Vain
Since the beginning of the war in Iraq, I have unequivocally maintained several things about the deaths of U.S. troops. Every one of the 4,450 U.S. soldiers who has died so far in Iraq has died unnecessarily, senselessly, for a lie, and in vain.
This latter point struck a nerve with a reader of a recent article of mine on the Iraq war, "What If Iraq Had Weapons of Mass Destruction?," that was reprinted by LibertarianChristians.com. Although my critic didn’t "necessarily disagree" with some of my conclusions, he did "disagree on one major point":
The soldiers did not die in vain. There is now a chance for freedom in a country that did not have it, if that is in vain then we all must question our purpose here on earth. I would not insult their families or their honor by reprinting such an inflammatory statement.
Does this mean there was no "chance for freedom" in Iraq before the United States invaded? A look at what has happened to oppressive regimes in the Middle East this year should answer that question. One bullet put by an Iraqi into the head of Saddam Hussein could have given Iraq a "chance for freedom." There was always a "chance for freedom" in Iraq. And even if there wasn’t, who is to say that the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and thousands of U.S. troops is a price that should have been paid to give Iraq a "chance for freedom"? Is my critic willing to sacrifice one of his children so Iraq can have a "chance for freedom"? I don’t think so.
Look at what has happened to our freedoms in this country since 9/11 and since the troops started defending our freedoms by fighting in Iraq. Our freedoms have gone down the drain. Is it worth giving up our freedoms – like the freedom to travel without being sexually molested – so that Iraqis can have a "chance for freedom"?
Although I don’t discount the brutality of Saddam Hussein’s regime, some Iraqis who used to have legs, jobs, fathers, mothers, children, freedom to worship, and freedom to not be blown up by a suicide bomber don’t think much of Iraq’s newfound "chance for freedom."
| |
And why is it that no totalitarian country has a "chance for freedom" unless the United States intervenes militarily or otherwise?
As much as I don’t like to write it and as much as Americans don’t want to read it, U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq died in vain. This means that their deaths were ineffectual, unsuccessful, and futile. Their deaths were without real significance, value, or importance. Their deaths were without effect, to no avail, and to no purpose.
I realize that this truth might be especially painful to the thousands of Americans who have lost loved ones in Iraq. I am not insensitive to the fact that every American soldier killed in Iraq was someone’s father, husband, son, brother, uncle, nephew, grandson, and, in about a hundred cases, someone’s mother, wife, daughter, sister, aunt, niece, or granddaughter. This painful truth should embolden those who have lost loved ones to never support or encourage any relative, friend, acquaintance, neighbor, coworker, business associate, or fellow church member ever joining the military.
I would like to mention three reasons why I believe U.S. soldiers killed while fighting in Iraq died in vain.
U.S. soldiers killed while fighting in Iraq died in vain because their mission in that conflict was undefined and unfinished.
When the number of U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq hit the 1,000 milestone in September of 2004, President Bush said of the families of those killed: "My promise to them is that we will complete the mission so that their child or their husband or wife has not died in vain." Yet, back in October of 2003, in front of a "Mission Accomplished" banner, Bush had already announced: "Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the Battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed." But if the United States prevailed and ceased major combat operations, then what was Bush doing talking about completing the mission?
Just what was our mission in Iraq? To remove Saddam Hussein? To defend our freedoms? To dismantle Al-Queda? To remove a threat to the United States? To liberate Iraq? To respond to an attack on the United States? To bring stability to the Middle East? To force Iraq to comply with UN resolutions? To free Muslim women from oppression? To impose democracy on Iraq? To retaliate for 9/11? To maintain the free flow of oil? To protect Israel? To destroy weapons of mass destruction?
A study back in 2004 documented 27 rationales given for the war by the Bush administration, war hawks in Congress, and the media between 9/11 and the October 2002 congressional resolution to use force in Iraq and concluded that it was "the Bush administration, and the President himself" that "established the majority of the rationales for the war and all of those rationales that make up the most prominent reasons for war." Another 2004 study – this one prepared for Representative Henry Waxman (D-CA) by the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Government Reform – concluded that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, and Rice
repeatedly made misleading statements about the threat posed by Iraq. In 125 separate appearances, they made 11 misleading statements about the urgency of Iraq’s threat, 81 misleading statements about Iraq’s nuclear activities, 84 misleading statements about Iraq’s chemical and biological capabilities, and 61 misleading statements about Iraq’s relationship with al Qaeda.
| |
U.S. soldiers killed while fighting in Iraq died in vain because the military they were in was engaged in an unjust war and immoral war.
Labeling the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq a just war does not make it one. A just war must be defensive, be in proportion to the gravity of the situation, have obtainable objectives, be preceded by a public declaration, be declared only by legitimate authority, and only be undertaken as a last resort. By no stretch of the imagination can the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq be called a just war. In fact, the war violates every "just war principle" ever invoked to justify a war.
What is the purpose of the U.S. military? I think it is beyond dispute that the U.S. military should be engaged exclusively in defending the United States, not defending other countries, not attacking other countries, not invading other countries, and not occupying other countries. Using the military for other purposes perverts the role of the military. Any other purposes, including not only enforcing UN resolutions, nation building, establishing democracy, changing regimes, training foreign armies, opening markets, and maintaining no-fly zones, but even providing disaster relief and dispensing humanitarian aid, perverts the purpose of the military.
Even if the United States went into Iraq with the best of intentions and most purest of motives (which of course it didn’t), is it the job of the U.S. military to free the oppressed peoples of the world from their autocratic rulers and totalitarian states? Absolutely not. Not only can’t it be done, it would be a never-ending mission that would perpetually shed U.S. blood and spend U.S. treasure.
U.S. soldiers killed while fighting in Iraq died in vain because of the Islamic state they inadvertently helped set up.
Yes, an Islamic state. A socialistic Islamic state under Sharia law in place of the secular government that existed.. Did any advocate for more war and bloodshed in the Middle East ever read article 2 of the new Iraqi constitution? This article stands the beloved American principle of separation of church and state on its head:
Islam is the official religion of the State and it is a foundation source of legislation.
No law may be enacted that contradicts the established provisions of Islam.
And what about articles 30, 31, and 34? These articles establish an Iraqi Great Society that would make LBJ proud:
The State shall guarantee to the individual and the family – especially children and women – social and health security, the basic requirements for living a free and decent life, and shall secure for them suitable income and appropriate housing.
The State shall guarantee social and health security to Iraqis in cases of old age, sickness, employment disability, homelessness, orphanhood, or unemployment, shall work to protect them from ignorance, fear and poverty, and shall provide them housing and special programs of care and rehabilitation, and this shall be regulated by law.
Every citizen has the right to health care. The State shall maintain public health and provide the means of prevention and treatment by building different types of hospitals and health institutions.
Free education in all its stages is a right for all Iraqis.
This is the constitution created by the United States-created and funded Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), not Al-Qaeda, Islamic extremists, militants, terrorists, insurgents, the Muslim Brotherhood, or Islamofascists. The administrator of the CPA reported directly to the U.S. secretary of defense – not to Osama bin Laden, a Muslim cleric or imam, or the Supreme Leader of Iran.
Why doesn’t Congressman Peter King investigate this?
U.S. soldiers killed while fighting in Iraq died in vain. They didn’t die defending anyone’s freedoms. They didn’t die protecting the United States. They didn’t die fighting "over there" so we wouldn’t have to fight "over here." They didn’t die to keep American safe from terrorists. They didn’t die to avenge 9/11.
They may have been sincere, patriotic, and altruistic. They may have fought bravely, heroically, and passionately. They may have died sacrificially, willingly, and eagerly. But they died for the imperial presidency (Bush or Obama), the U.S. empire, the U.S. military, the U.S. military-industrial complex, the national-security state, and a belligerent, reckless, and meddling U.S. foreign policy.
It is not honorable for a U.S. soldier to die fighting some unnecessary foreign war. It is in fact a shameful thing. All Americans ought to be ashamed of their government, its foreign policy, and the way it uses its military.
Why is it that those who opposed this monstrous war from the beginning are not considered the true patriots? Is it anti-American to think that it wasn’t worth one drop of blood from one American soldier to give Iraq a "chance for freedom"? How much more pro-American could one get? Real patriots don’t want to see any more U.S. soldiers die in vain.
April 25, 2011
Laurence M. Vance [send him mail] writes from central Florida. He is the author of Christianity and War and Other Essays Against the Warfare State, The Revolution that Wasn't, and Rethinking the Good War. His latest book is The Quatercentenary of the King James Bible. Visit his website.
Copyright © 2011 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.
Labels: Lew Rockwell
Monday, April 11, 2011
Lew Rockwell
Jesse Ventura tells Lew Rockwell about The 63 Documents the Government Doesn’t Want You to Read.
Naked-body "microwave" machines target travelers in violation of the 4th Amendment, the Republican and Democratic parties make everything worse, the CIA is embedded in state governments to control the governors, and the USA is already a police state, censoring Jesse’s show about the building of FEMA camps. Big corporations in control, military kangaroo courts, sixteen million documents stamped "Top Secret," authoritarian borders – all are a part of the foolish, dangerous, and evil actions of our overlords, exposed in 63 Documents the Government Doesn’t Want You to Read.
Jesse’s 63 Documents: facebook page
Jesse’s new website: http://weaintgottimetobleed.com/
[Full Article]Labels: Jesse Ventura, Lew Rockwell
Friday, April 1, 2011
Lew Rockwell
by Ron Paul
Statement on Libya – Defining U.S. National Security Interests, Before the Foreign Affairs Committee, US House of Representatives, 31 March 2011
The American people have once again been suckered into an unconstitutional, undeclared, illegal, and unwise war. This is not a war in response to an attack on the United States. This is not a war against a regime that has threatened the United States. This is a preventative war. The president never claimed that any large-scale slaughter of civilians was taking place in Libya. Rather, the president has spent close to a billion dollars – so far – bombing a country because its government might at some point harm its civilians.
| |
The president consulted NATO, the United Nations, and the Arab League for permission and authorization to use US military force against Libya. He ignored the one body that has the legal authority to grant that permission, the US Congress.
While we have not seen credible proof – nor has it been claimed – that the Gaddafi regime has engaged in any large-scale slaughter of Libyan civilians, we see increasing reports of civilians who have been killed in airstrikes by the forces that are supposed to protect them! It seems we may be causing the very problem our intervention was supposed to prevent.
| |
After days of the administration’s public speculation about whether or not to arm the Libyan rebels, we hear from the media that the president already instructed the CIA to arm and assist the rebels several weeks ago. So we have gone from the phony pretext of stopping a massacre of civilians to engaging the US military and covert operatives directly to fight on one side of a civil war.
Who are the rebels we are fighting for in Libya? We don’t fully know. Press reports suggest that there are some 1,000 jihadists fighting on their behalf. Are we arming al Qaeda in Libya? It certainly appears possible.
This is not really a new war. It is in fact a continuation of the neoconservatives' 22-year war to remake the Middle East. Unfortunately the president has ignored the US constitution and decided instead to continue this misguided policy. This is a deeply flawed foreign policy that will only lead to escalation, blowback, and unintended consequences. Ultimately it is leading us to financial catastrophe. We must abandon the fantasy that we can police the world before it’s too late. Congress must stand up and say “no” to this illegal war.
Labels: Lew Rockwell, Ron Paul
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Lew Rockwell
Bicarbonate of soda or baking soda has many different uses in the household. Although much more expensive products have been developed over the years to do the same jobs, baking soda can work for you just as well, if not better. Use it in the following ways:... [Full Article]
Labels: baking soda, Lew Rockwell
Monday, February 14, 2011
Lew Rockwell
Seems John "The Perv" Pistole, chief deviant at the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), "wants to hear our [ideas]" on "transportation security."
Indeed.
Haven’t outraged passengers shrieked ideas a-plenty at airports as The Perv’s underlings sexually abuse them? Yet this sociopath not only ignores the clamor, he refuses to change "screening procedures" however heartrending those shrieks become.
So his "remarks to the American Bar Association in January" broke all records for hypocrisy and deceit: The Perv "expressed a need to formulate a vision for transportation security," – oh, good grief – "mentioning a trusted traveler program as an option under consideration and expressing an openness to other suggestions. ‘If people have ideas, he wants to hear them because he’s looking at ways to make changes,’ a T.S.A. spokesman" lied.
Well, Perv, since you asked …
[Full Article]Labels: Lew Rockwell, Transportation Security Administration, TSA
Monday, January 24, 2011
Lew Rockwell
Keep knockin’ and you can’t come in,
Keep knockin’ and you can’t come in,
I guess you better let me be.
~ Perry Bradford
Riding the commuter trains of my area is a study in how people react to being mildly uncomfortable for any length of time. Being designed to seat people of a body type far slimmer than what my line usually encounters makes riding to work with a seatmate’s bulging oversized body squeezing you into the wall, arm rest or the bulging girth seated on your other side almost a given. Lucky for me, I learned how to properly fold and read The New York Times even when hemmed into a packed subway car so handling the task while immobilized between two people who could stand to lose a few stone each is not beyond my ability.
So that’s how I was able to read Justices Look Again At How Police May Search Homes on a recent ride home. Apparently, the brave warriors who fight our War on Drugs have found getting search warrants too much of a hassle, and lawyers for the Obama administration and the state of Kentucky are before the Supreme Court arguing they must be able to forcibly enter any home should they simply "smell something funny" and "hear strange noises" from the other side of a door. I’d gasp in horror at their brazenness, but I can barely breathe due to the 300 pounds of American on each side of me. Every time the mountain to my left turns a page of the magazine she’s reading I feel a rib crack...
[Full Article]Labels: Lew Rockwell
Sunday, September 12, 2010
"America’s strategic and economic interests in the Mideast and Muslim world are being threatened by the agony in Palestine, which inevitably invites terrorist attacks against US citizens and property."
Ever since 9/11, readers keep asking me my views on these attacks. I have been barraged with emails until my head spins with engineering studies about melting steel, controlled explosions, claims about nefarious plots, and wreckage analysis...
[Full Article]
Labels: 9/11, Lew Rockwell
Saturday, September 4, 2010
| |||||||||||||
| Weekend Edition, September 4-5, 2010 | |||||||||||||
|
Labels: Lew Rockwell
Saturday, August 28, 2010
| |||||||||||||
| Weekend Edition, August 28-29, 2010 | |||||||||||||
|
Labels: Lew Rockwell
Saturday, August 21, 2010
| |||||||||||||
| Weekend Edition, August 21-22, 2010 | |||||||||||||
|
Labels: Lew Rockwell
Sunday, August 15, 2010
| |||||||||||||
| Weekend Edition, August 14-15, 2010 | |||||||||||||
|
Labels: Lew Rockwell
Sunday, August 8, 2010
| |||||||||||||
| Weekend Edition, August 7-8, 2010 | |||||||||||||
|
Labels: Lew Rockwell
Sunday, August 1, 2010
| ||||||||||||||
| Weekend Edition, July 31-August 1, 2010 | ||||||||||||||
|
Labels: Lew Rockwell
Sunday, July 18, 2010
| |||||||||||||
| Weekend Edition, July 17-18, 2010 | |||||||||||||
|
Labels: Lew Rockwell
Sunday, July 4, 2010
| |||||||||||||
| Weekend Edition, July 3-4, 2010 | |||||||||||||
|
Labels: Lew Rockwell
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]

