Max Writes...

Aldous Huxley

There is much truth in the observation that charity eases the conscience of the rich more often than it eases the condition of the poor. But charity is a form of human kindness. It is charity which helps to make the man.

Recently I watched the documentary film Dirty Wars, which depicted the work of investigative journalist Jeremy Scahill as he travelled to Afghanistan, Yemen and Somalia; three countries where the US has undertaken covert military operations. Scahill's journalism was extremely important and courageous, and for an aspiring journalist like myself it was immensely inspiring. Afghanistan Firstly, Scahill ventured to Afghanistan to investigate regular night raids that were committed by the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), a branch of the United States Special Operations Command. Given the uniquely dangerous environment that he was surrounded by, highlighted by the fact that he witnessed an attack from the Taliban, Scahill's accurate reporting has become important research for anyone trying to fully understand the war in Afghanistan. It was during this chapter of the film that sparked me to consider the frequent use of the word "terrorist", considering the extremities of its implications, in today's political discourse. It was almost as if anyone who challenged US hegemony was immediately labelled a "terrorist"; probably through general laziness or ignorance. Scahill turned his attention to the case of British journalist Jerome Starkey, who's work on civilian casualties in Afghanistan was denounced by NATO's International Security Assistance Force, who even tried to censor his reporting. Despite this quite appalling behaviour on behalf of NATO (I suppose we're used to worse from them!) Starkey continued his research and he managed to expose a JSOC night raid in Eastern Afghanistan which, finally, forced an apology from JSOC's Vice Admiral William McRaven. As Scahill succinctly concluded; the war in Afghanistan had become JSOC's war. "I didn't want to admit it. But life back home was dull after being in a war zone." This was Scahill's reaction to arriving back in the US. This may seem quite an odd reaction, however from my little experience of reporting from a war zone I totally understood his feelings. Despite the profound information that Scahill provides in the film, it also enables the viewer to empathise deeply with his array of emotions; of curiosity, anger and misery. Yemen Scahill then focused on events in al-Majalah, in Yemen, which in December 2009 was the victim of 5 missile strikes. These strikes killed up to 50 people, including 14 women and 21 children. After the attack, Yemeni journalist Abdulelah Haider Shaye reported that the site of the bombing was littered with remnants of US Tomahawk missiles and cluster munitions, which contradicted the claims of the Yemeni government, who declared that in fact they were responsible for the attack. These reports were dismissed by US Pentagon officials but later confirmed by Amnesty International and other reputable news sources. It was later proven that JSOC was responsible for the attack, further evident from the fact that a photograph of Yemen's president meeting with the Head of JSOC (at the time), Admiral William McRaven, was published on the President of Yemen's personal website. This brings us onto the case of Anwar al-Awlaki, a US citizen sentenced to death without being charged with a crime. He was accused of inciting terrorism, through lectures and speeches and in September 2011 was killed by a Predator drone carried out by JSOC. Anwar al-Awlaki loved America, but became more vocal against the US after 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq. He was deeply affected by the events that followed 9/11 and praised some of the attacks against the US. For many Americans this was enough for them to call him a terrorist. He later turned to more militaristic approaches and jihad; an identity he had once opposed. It was quite a simple transition to comprehend - the US had helped create the man that it later killed. "I want [a] decent American lawyer to tell me that it is right for the United States government to kill an American citizen on the basis that he said something against the United States or against American soldiers." - Anwar al-Awlaki's father. To make matters worse, two weeks later, a US drone strike killed Anwar al-Awlaki's 16 year-old son Abdulrahman. Why would he be on the kill list? The Americans said he was collateral damage, but gave no explanation for the death and didn't even apologise. All of these incidents are somewhat staggering considering the US had never declared war on Yemen, but in modern day warfare this is known as a covert war. Those that defend the operations of JSOC, based on notions of national security, must be unaware of the fact that their actions only deteriorate the security situation both inside and outside of the US. Drones have become the new - and most cowardly - weapon of war. Conclusion Scahill ended his treacherous journey in Somalia and the capital Mogadishu, where there are now no foreign journalists left. He was embedded with US-backed Somali warlords, which seemed like his most dangerous journalistic experience in the film. Somalia is a country in ruins and after falling victim to a decade of covert war, half of the country is now ruled by the local al-Qaeda affiliate and the other half by the US-backed warlords. All three of these countries have suffered from US covert operations. Operations that if perpetrated the other way around would almost certainly be deemed acts of terrorism. But somehow, in front of our eyes, undeclared acts of state terrorism have been launched across the globe. Foreign and US citizens alike have been assassinated by US Presidential decree. The War on Terror is an endless, counterproductive war that will only lead to more civilian deaths around the world. Dirty Wars is a thought-provoking production that sheds light on the appalling acts of US covert wars and helps viewers to understand the repercussions of the Global War on Terror. Consciousness is the beginning, but real action needs to be taken to halt US policies of brutality being inflicted on civilians across the globe.

Chris Hedges.

Shaker Aamer is the last British citizen to be held at Guantanamo Bay, much of it in solitary confinement. He has been detained without charge since November 2001. He arrived at the prison camp on Valentine's Day in 2002, the day his youngest son, Faris, was born. He has never seen him; nor has he seen his other three children or his wife, in many years. Guantanamo Bay is a symbol of the lawless brutality of the counter-productive War on Terror. It was established in 2002 and was set up on US-occupied Cuban territory in order to cage enemy combatants captured during the War on Terror. The vast majority of whom have been held without charge or trial and subsequently tortured. What makes it all the more scandalous is the fact that Obama directed an immediate halt to the Bush administration's military commission of Guantanamo; a pledge he has shamefully unfulfilled. It is unconditionally unacceptable for the US to hold a British citizen in Guantanamo Bay, without charge or trial, for more than a decade. So it leads one to pose the question, why hasn't our government been applying pressure to release Aamer? The answer to this question may be found in the allegations of Aamer that both MI5 and MI6 were complicit in his torture. So it appears that the UK and the US are seeking to curb Aamer's freedom of speech. Therefore it does not seem coincidental that he has been cleared for release to only one country, Saudi Arabia, where his lawyers say he would be forbidden from speaking in public - and would end up in another jail. It is difficult to comprehend the hypocritical claims of many Western nations that they are the champions of human rights, when situations like this still exist; albeit they don't exist in the foremost mind frames of the majority of the public - partly due to the domination of corporate media.

Hedley Bull

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vNCpGaxWno&list=FLY3Fwegp5_wnqkWKRimAJSA&index=1 "Every revolutionary idea seems to invoke three stages of reaction. They may be summed up by the phrases: 1 - It's completely impossible. 2 - It's possible. But it's not worth doing. 3 - I said it was a good idea all along." - Arthur C. Clarke. 

In both cases President Clinton and President Obama went to war against Serbia and Libya, respectively, with absolutely no authorization from the United States Congress to do so, as required by the Article I, Section 8 War Powers Clause of the United States Constitution as well as by Congress's own War Powers Resolution of 1973. In other words, President Obama's war against Libya was unconstitutional and illegal. It was also an impeachable offense under Article II, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution: "The President, Vice President, and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

The Russians are well-known around the world as passionate and consummate chess-players. In this case, Russia decided to sacrifice the Libyan Pawn in the international chess-board in the geopolitical game of power politics in order to protect the Syrian Rook and the Persian Queen as well as its own King. Russia figured that it could divert U.S./NATO to the West and away from its own borders and those of its allies and friends in Syria and Iran.

On March 15, 2011, the Arab Spring reached Syria. A revolution for freedom and justice was sparked to end 40 long years of oppression and dictatorship.  For six months, it was a peaceful revolt, where people took to the streets and protested. The government responded with gunfire, wide arrests, and torture. People's will only grew more intense. So did the regime crackdown. Tanks, artillery, missiles, snipers, air force, and all sorts of weaponry were used against protesting civilians. After six months, the Free Syrian Army (FSA) was formed. It consisted of defectors from the army who refused to fire at civilians and who wanted to defend the people and their rightful revolution. They were successful in liberating areas of the country from regime rule.  However, Syrians still have a long way to go. Today, the war has become more intense than ever. Massacres killing 100s at a time are being committed by a regime wanting to stay in power at any cost. Please support the Syrian people in their struggle for freedom. Share their story. Post, blog, and tweet for #Syria.  Consider donating to numerous relief campaigns.

A great documentary about the encounters of a team of young Syrian-American human rights activists in a homeland torn with genocide. The children, in particular, are very inspiring. 

The United States, France, Britain and NATO immediately hijacked a legitimate but very brief "Arab Spring" in Benghazi in order to promote their own imperialist agenda of (1) stealing Libya's oil and gas; (2) reversing the anti-imperial and anti-colonial Qaddafi Revolution; (3) re-establishing a neo-colonial outpost on the north coast of Africa and a beach-head on the southern rim of the Mediterranean - right next door to the strategically pivotal Egypt - in order to better control and dominate the Maghreb, the southern Med, and the Sahel; and (4) from Libya they felt they could even better project their imperial power southwards onto the rest of the African continent.

Henry Kissinger, 1973.

Zionism's "final solution" to Israel's much touted and racist "demographic threat" allegedly posed by the very existence of the Palestinians has always been genocide, whether slow motion or in bloodthirsty spurts of violence.

The only way the Palestinians will achieve anything, is the way that any other group in the world, any nation, people, country has achieved anything and that’s by organising its population to resist. You’re not going to get anything from the Israelis or the Americans unless you force them to extract concessions and the Palestinians, and the so-called Palestinian negotiators, won’t get anything from the negotiating table that they haven’t won through mass action, mass resistance and a mobilisation in galvanisation of international public opinion to force to extract concessions from Israel.

From the perspective of international law, the “responsibility to protect” (R2P) doctrine is nothing more than imperialist propaganda for wars of aggression in the name of human rights.