SF Bay Area Indymedia indymedia
About Contact Subscribe Calendar Publish Print Donate

International | Anti-War

Colonizing Nations 101
by Stephen Lendmanl
Wednesday Aug 15th, 2012 12:24 AM
Colonizing Nations 101

by Stephen Lendman

Last December, Truth 11.com offered a model for destroying and colonizing nations. In Orwellian newspeak, it said:

(1) Global "Mafia" scoundrels target nations "ripe for 'Regime Change.' " Calling them rogue states enlists support.

(2) CIA/Mossad/MI6 and collaborators "arm, train, (and) finance local and foreign mercenaries/terrorists." Freedom fighters they're called for the same reason.

(3) With or without Security Council authorization, mass killing and destruction follow. At the same time, sanctions suffocate nations economically. Political isolation harms them further. Civilians always suffer most.

(4) Media propaganda glorifies war in the name of peace. Managed news enlists public support. Mind manipulation convinces people to back what they should condemn.

(5) Invasions and occupations are called liberation. Plunder is called economic development. Exploitation and imperial control are called democracy.

Might justifies right. Nations are destroyed to free them. Code language conceals real motives. Policy involves ravaging the world one country at a time or in multiples. Nations are destroyed for their own good. Monied interests alone benefit.

Truth 11.com quoted a 19th century proverb saying:


Political speech masks policies. News is carefully filtered. Fiction substitutes for fact. Free and open societies aren't tolerated. Dissent is marginalized and suppressed. Imperial wars are called liberating ones. Human rights are violated for our own good. Patriotism means going along with what harms us.

Terrorism is what they do, not us. Reasons why imperial wars are waged are suppressed. Wealth and power alone matter. Sacrificing human lives and freedoms are small prices to pay. Humanity is at risk but who cares.

Media scoundrels aid and abet state crimes. Where it ends, who knows. Money power won't sustain a ravaged planet. Militarism and perpetual wars assure it. Peace is spurned to wage them. Big Lies conceal it. Truth is the most dangerous disinfectant. Suppressing it is policy.

Syria was largely peaceful before US proxies invaded. So was Libya last year. Iran's moment of truth awaits. It's on America's hit list. Propaganda wars precede hot ones. Washington vilified the Islamic Republic for decades. Saber rattling threatens war.

On August 12, The New York Times headlined "Israeli Minister Asks Nations to Say Iran Talks Have Failed," saying:

Netanyahu threatens war. Minister Danny Ayalon called for "an international declaration that the diplomatic effort to halt Tehran's enrichment of uranium is dead."

Unmentioned was doing it complies with Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty provisions. Dozens of nations with peaceful programs do it. Iran alone is challenged. Ayalon wants "all options" on the table to confront Tehran.

Asked how much time remains before Israel acts, he said "weeks, and not more than that." Netanyahu repeats the canard of an Iranian nuclear weapons program. "Iran cannot be allowed to have" one, he says.

Times articles never say they have no nuclear weapons or intention to develop and produce them. Doing so would contradict imperial Washington.

On August 13, Mossad-connected DEBKAfile (DF) headlined "Iran can build an N-bomb by Oct. 1. Cairo coup hampers Israeli action," saying:

In about six weeks, Iran will have enough 20% enriched uranium "to build its first nuclear bomb….and two-to-four bombs by early 2013, DEBKAfile's military and intelligence sources report."

According to the Federation of American Scientists, highly enriched uranium is considered weapons grade after enrichment to around 90% U-235. Iranian enrichment doesn't exceed 20%. Most important is no evidence suggests an Iranian program or intention to have one.

DF's source is "an unnamed Israeli security" official. He calls 20% enrichment "a short jump to weapons grade fuel." DF quoted Netanyahu saying:


DF claimed the urgency of addressing an alleged Iranian threat is "many times more necessary" than bombing what's now known not to have been a Syrian nuclear site in 2007. It added that Netanyahu and Barak "put themselves in a straightjacket" by:

(1) Delaying two years. It let Iran's nuclear program progress. It also bought time to "enlist ex-politicians and retired generals at home" to publicly oppose military action.

(2) Both men "behaved as though" Iranian policy is "their exclusive province."

DF said Netanyahu must decide whether or not to confront Iran given fast moving events in Egypt and an alleged Syrian chemical weapons threat.

In fact, relations with Egypt remain stable. Syria poses no threat unless Western generated violence spills over cross-border. Israel partnered with Washington's war. It may end up reaping what it helped sow.

In June, RAND Corporation analyst Gregory Jones said Iran can build a nuclear bomb in eight weeks. His analysis relied on dubious IAEA information. Director Yukiya Amano serves Western interests.


Nothing Amano reports is credible. Evidence supporting his claims is lacking.

The window on effective air strikes closed, Jones said. Ground forces alone can work. Western Iranian policy failed, he added. Iran can develop a nuclear warhead "whenever it wants," he claimed. Saying it doesn't make it so.

It doesn't address Iranian intentions. If Tehran wanted nuclear weapons, it could have developed them long ago. Instead it denounces them and urges a nuclear free Middle East.

On August 12, Haaretz contributor Amir Oren headlined "Obama must speak out against war with Iran," saying:

Netanyahu and Barak are on a messianic mission. They "embarked last week on a feverish and wide-ranging propaganda campaign to market the attack to the press by means of public opinion - to satisfy the doubters and pursuade the persuaded."

"These are distress signals." Most Israelis oppose war. So do past and present military and political officials. Opponents "must organize a protest that is loud and clear, sober and not defeatist, whose reasons are rooted in concern over damage to Israel's security."

Moderates and centrists should lead it. It's now or perhaps never, he added, to act "instead of regretting their silence afterward."

On August 12, Haaretz contributor Yoram Kaniuk echoed a similar sentiment. He headlined "The Israeli Right must stop Netanyahu's messianism."

"No one is getting up and shouting: That's enough. I'm resigning, a dybbuk (a malevolent spirit) possessed the man leading us. He is a messianist and is taking us to Masada."

"The man is suffering from megalomania. Iran for him is like a demon that has to be attacked so he can die and conquer the mountain."

Thankfully, Haaretz published articles opposing its resident hawk. Ari Shavit endorses war. Existential threats he claims don't exist. Yet he's featured and has editorial policy influence. Perhaps he should read Bradley Burston's August 13 "Special Place in Hell" column.

He headlined "Mr. Netanyahu, before you bomb Iran, say goodbye to everyone you know." Once war begins, it won't matter why he attacked. He, Israelis and others regionally will reap the whirlwind.

It's time others explained the folly and destructiveness of war. Attacking Syria and Iran assures losers, not winners. Embroiling the region in what can be prevented is key.

Potential consequences are too dire to tolerate. Global headlines should read better safe than sorry. Now's the time to act, not later.



