Comparing Nazi & Neoliberal Reality
Book excerpts from Nazi Era to Enlighten today's Neoliberalism
The People As Enemy: The Leaders' Hidden Agenda in World War II, 2013, J Spritzler:
"There is the official view of World War II—the one we have all been taught—then, there is the one presented here: very different, and very disturbing. This alternative view argues that the aims of the national leaders were not democracy and self-determination, but were, as wars generally are, opportunities to suppress class rebellion. Furthermore, Spritzler maintains, the myths of World War II are the same myths that are being used today in the "war against terrorism" by government and corporate leaders to control people and pursue ends that have nothing to do with protecting us from terrorism."
They Thought They Were Free: The Germans, 1933-45, M. Mayer [excerpt]
“What happened here [Germany then] was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to being governed by surprise; to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if the people could not understand it, it could not be released because of national security. And their sense of identification with Hitler, their trust in him, made it easier to widen this gap and reassured those who would otherwise have worried about it.”--from Chapter 13, “But Then It Was Too Late”. Amazon
Behemoth: Structure and Practice of National Socialism, 1933-1944
"Neumann was one of the only early Frankfurt School thinkers to examine seriously the problem of political institutions.() the Nazi organization of society involved the collapse of traditional ideas of the state, of ideology, of law, and even of any underlying rationality."
War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to Create a Master Race, 2012, E Black:
"War Against the Weak is the gripping chronicle documenting how American corporate philanthropies launched a national campaign of ethnic cleansing in the United States, helped found and fund the Nazi eugenics of Hitler and Mengele — and then created the modern movement of "human genetics." Some 60,000 Americans were sterilized under laws in 27 states."
A One-And-A-Half-Truth for Pinter and Pilger
"...across the world the extinction and suffering of countless human beings could be attributed to rampant American power. "But," said Pinter, "You wouldn't know it. It never happened. Nothing ever happened. Even while it was happening it wasn't happening. It didn't matter. It was of no interest." Pinter's words were more than surreal. The BBC ignored the speech of Britain's most famous dramatist." - John Pilger
“BBC, in short, ensured that the British and other peoples did not know about the most crucially important speech about the Western states' war crimes since 1945 (see the list on left bottom). In Pinter's own words: "You wouldn't know it. It never happened. Nothing ever happened. Even while it was happening it wasn't happening. It didn't matter. It was of no interest." - Homo Sociologicus
The Sociological Question: which sociological mechanisms may explain Pinter's observation on the Western states' neglience of its consecutive state war crimes on a Nuremberg scale. From Korea & Vietnam to Yugoslavia, Libya & Syria etc.?
The Answer: corporate power relations control the Western political systems to a still larger extent. Not least on ‘foreign policy’. The states' intel agencies are generally corporate tools. They control the most important media, while hired academics at the universities and especially 'think tanks' write the demanded 'non-fiction' & 'analysis reports' to tell the media and the academic world, what to think. Basically, all (the rest) Western academics take the propaganda 'non-fiction' literature and 'analyses' seriously as if it had any resemblance to truth, while the media simply use and peddle the ‘well-established’ information as if it was sincerely researched information. You will probably only have to watch this one minute video expose of the US 17 'intel agencies' to see a vital glimpse of the the truth and have your trust in the official sourced changed radically. But you wouldn't know, it never happened etc., if you trust the BBC and other (state or corporate) Establishment media.
It is important to realize the incredible size of the US' so-called 'security complex': "In 2010 (..) Washington Post reported that the national security state had swelled into a “fourth branch” of the federal government ― with 854,000 vetted officials, 263 security organizations, and over 3,000 intelligence units, issuing 50,000 special reports every year." Exploring the Shadows of the US Security State: How I Learned Not to Love Big Brother, August 24, 2017, By Alfred McCoy
Bill Clinton de-regulated the US media laws in the 1990ties thereby opening up for almost total corporate media control. Today six companies owe the right to tell 90% of all American media employees, what to tell the people and how. The European politicians, academics and journalists simply have to accept the information given to submise and enlargen the US (deep) state's control to Europe. This, they do. The added corporate control of the media also helped change the political development even further to the right. This has also made it easy for both national state and corporate media to more systematically employ right wing sympathetic journalists, who will not pose critical questions but will applaud the corporate sources and its neoliberal scripts for ideological reasons. In Denmark, for instance, we often see former right wing spin doctors portray as political analysts on national tv. And the once most trusted program is today also regularly hosted by a former right wing spindoctor.
The late German editor of the Frankfurter Allegemeiner Zeitung, Udo Ulfkotte, published a book a few years ago, where he confessed to twenty five years of working for the CIA telling stories they wanted or gave him. Again, this should come as no surprise if you know even a bit about the CIA's history of infiltration in Western states. But of course, you wouldn't know it... The CIA and MI6 and other 'intel agencies' influence all over the media to have their (corporate masters') agendas represented as they want. The former US war hero and Pentagon employee Richard Ford has stated that the 'Syrian Laboratory for Human Rights', you know, the man in Coventry Link, who has supplied Western media with information on Syria the past years - is simply a MI6 front.
The CIA and other Western intel agencies hire and pay thousands of analysts and journalists to write the 'news'. No less problematic, from a democratic and anti-war perspective, is the apparatus' ability to pay big money to PR companies and hire thousands of people to smear and work against critical academics and journalists both under cover in the public and on the social media. A single PR company was paid $500 million dollars to do propaganda for the war on Iraq: "A former contractor for a UK-based public relations firm says that the Pentagon paid more than half a billion dollars for the production and dissemination of fake Al-Qaeda videos that portrayed the insurgent group in a negative light." 2016, The Independent LINK
This article can be considered critical important information. But such critical information always come too late, with the goal of backing up the media's own credibility so as to able to be function as effective tools for the next big lie and propaganda project. The only thing we can know for sure about the establishment media is that they will never tell the most important truths about their way of doing journalism for the corporate agenda. Just as they will never tell the truth that NATO has employed jihadist mercenaries for the past forty years, where media such as the BBC and the Independent still systematically suppress the truth and help lie for more of the corporate empire's wars. Link
The corporate powers even get useful idiots volunteering to support the apparatus, when for instance sincere 'critical' academics, lacking the skills to understand it all, voluntarily suppress themselves and everybody else, when they go out to defend the established media and write ridiculing texts about 'conspiracy theorists’.
This chaotic 'behemoth' public sphere, where nobody knows who and what to trust, is a great achivement. The politicians are never put to account. Everybody in the public sphere 'work together', from covert and overt hired hands to cunning intel agents, sincere and insincere politicians, academics and journalists, indistinguishable from each other, they simply present the peoples with a more or less uniform but mostly completely false information. This way, critical thinking and the truth on all subjects is systematically suppressed. This way, the Western peoples are presented with a most biased and often completely false corporate ordered information about reality. This way, we have gained a still more ‘totalitarian’ Western public sphere. This way, we can now more than ever appreciate the warning by the French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu, who said that the concerted assault on critical thought in the eighties and nineties is a great danger for our democracies.
The Evidence: the apparatus is as extremely powerful as it is dangerous. The information is so clearly false, when compared to the information available on the alternative media. But It is easy to understand if most people cannot imagine the description above to be the truth and prefer to think that the Western academics are trustworty, and that the media produce journalism.
But... there is an insurmountable logical problem, for the apparatus and all its implicated cunning-intel-hired-hands-and-non-critical-minded-useful-idiots-academics-journalists-and-neoliberal-politicians. That is, if one thinks about it. For the apparatus’ very success and still greater success in mobilizing the Western peoples to applaud consecutive state war crimes on a Nuremberg scale (destroying nation after nation with still less noteworthy academic, political and journalistic opposition and critique) is simply the greatest possible evidence of its totalitarian nature. When we apply critical historical knowledge on the former wars, what we know today, and confront it with the uniformly presented information given to us up to and under the wars, it is obvious that the Western public spheres have functioned as one big totalitarian apparatus.
To mention just one example. Today we know, and the British Parliament has acknowledged it as a fact, that basically all information leading up to and under the NATO war on Libya was false. We also remember - or can go back and check the given information - that there was No oppositional information back then. This lays bare the naked truth. Because, when we know today that basically all information was false and nobody contradicted the information then, it must be logically true that everbody talking about Libya then, all politicians, all academics and all media must have been telling the same lies. There is simply no way of denying this. It is what Karl Kraus and Ludwig Wittgenstein would call a one-and-a-half-truth.
This way, everybody can know for a fact that every period's information has shown up to be evidence that our states and public spheres are rotten to the core. This applies both to domestic and foreign policy.
To bear witness and enlighten people about the kind of totalitarian world we actually inhabit, I research to collect the best critical (= true) academic knowledge and journalistic information on different topics. Not least the former wars. People may find the most trustworthy information about the former wars and the totalitarian lies that accompanid them on my pages on Korea, Vietnam, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria etc.
The Big Picture: it's all about powerful conspiracies!
"Those who tell the stories rule society." - Plato
The Big Business People that were convicted at Nuremberg as being the real culprits running Hitler's 'Foreign Policy' for thirteen years only got a few years jail. While some of their ground men soldiers were hanged they were free i a couple of years. One of the Nazi generals even was appointed to head of NATO later...
It is the same Big Business that have run the world ever since. They had the US/CIA make the Great German Europe that they had Hitler 'working' on. The same Big business Power Relations destroyed Yugoslavia (together with MI6, CIA, British SAS special forces etc) on complete lies, fabrications and NATO's illegal bombs on Serbian civilian infrastructure etc.
It is the same Big Business that run the EU today - and more than ever. They destroyed Greece - also on complete lies (95% of the loans given to Greece went directly back to German, French, British etc. big shareholders that had given very risky loans to private banks in Greece - only the 95% loans were now 'nationalized' and thereby put on the Greek people as an even much bigger burden. So, the 'loans' were not loans but burden).
And the same scheme is going to be applied to other EU nations in the South that don't have their own currency. NB. Own currency = Own state = Own policies. Most economists don't protest the EU. Because either they don't know this (many of them) or they simply still want an EU with one currency. Why? Because that so would fit their 'pure' economic models on their minds. Please notice that everything important going on in the EU is happening behind closed doors. And that the Western media completely and lie, suppress and make propaganda on the EU issues, too.
That is because it is the same Big Business that run all the Western 'Foreign Policy' today and control the media. Where they are not in control they have had right wing 'globalist' enthusiastic politicians and journalists hired so that they will do and say, what Big Business want out of ideological reasons. It is enough, actually a qualification, if you are not too bright either as a journalist or as a politicians to fall their globalist propaganda, just look at the academic world that have promoted the 'globalist agenda' still more for the past thirty years. If you try to explain that the civil liberties, workers' rights and welfare state rights are all hung up on the national states, they still won't listen and says that the 'future' is globalism...
Here we come to the best part of it. The same Big Business had their CIA hitmen make even the very question of asking what is going on 'illegal'. That is, they fabricated the 'conspiracy meme' in the sixties and had it circulated all over the US media (later it is also over all the European media - as everybody knows). So, you cannot tell - in fact not even ask questions - about the Big Business, politics, media and 'intel agencies' connectedness of things as I lay out here.
The only differences between me and Colin Powell stating such a (hidden) conspiracy theory, are, that I am not working for Big Business that I care about people and that I mean what I say, when I say: 'These statements are not assertations, these statements are based on facts, solid facts'. Only the British Parliament have acknowledged that all the info on the war on Libya was false. But that is of course something. Important. So, why do the UK continue the exact same false, illegal and insane war on Syria. NATO systematically back, fund, arm, train, lead and bomb for al Nusra and ISIS in Syria. BBC just covered it up as a 'mistake'. They are corrupt. Completely.
I have made pages with relevant if not crucial information on all these subjects and many more. Not least on the factual knowledge we have today that the US/NATO wars killing millions of people on lies and propaganda for Big Business were all illegal - and actually as a matter of fact insanely more cruel than the nazis's 'wars'. NATO do not so much go into war, they more accurately destroy nations. So:
"You wouldn't know it. It never happened. Nothing ever happened. Even while it was happening it wasn't happening. It didn't matter. It was of no interest." Harold Pinter
That is all for now! I must run (boy to football ;) ) - sorry about misspellings etc.
Is Alternet's Ben Norton on CIA's Payroll? #NATOLibya
"In 2010, almost a decade into this secret war with its voracious appetite for information, the Washington Post reported that the national security state had swelled into a “fourth branch” of the federal government - with 854,000 vetted officials, 263 security organizations, and over 3,000 intelligence units, issuing 50,000 special reports every year." Alfred W. McCoy
You'd probably have to know about CIA's unimaginable history of infiltration in the world, not least in the Western world in the twentieth century, to even consider that the esteemed Alternet could be involved with the CIA. So let me begin by referring a bit history from another time, where people also had no idea of the extent of the CIA infiltration and dirty influence in the Western states.
It is well documented how CIA had an incredibly big and dirty anti-democratic influence all over the world. But that was also true, perhaps more surprisingly, when it comes to CIA's role in the Western states. Everybody should know that throughout the twentieth century the CIA systematically sponsored and played, if not everybody and everything in the Western world, then at least so much that it begs belief. CIA's (corporate) agendas were about destroying left wing politics and political views and about protecting and covering up US imperialism as if it was a rational policy. CIA needed people and writing that would cover up for the Western mass murders and destructions of democracies and nations worldwide and the very real robbing of the peoples' resources. CIA was also working systematically to destroy all understanding and sympathy for communist, socialist, and even social democratic political ideas and philosophies. Here is an excerpt from Edward Said's review of Who Paid the Piper? The CIA and the Cultural Cold War, 1999
Frances Stonor Saunders (Book link
"E.P. Thompson called it the ‘Natopolitan’ world: that is, not just Nato plus all the Cold War military and political institutions that were integral to it, but also a mentality whose web extended over a lot more activity and thought, even in the minds of individuals, than anyone at the time had suspected. Of course there were the revelations in the mid-Sixties about Encounter and the CIA, and later in the US and Britain a stream of disclosures about covert counter-insurgency in every form, from secretly underwritten academic research to assassinations and mass killings.
Yet it still gives me an eerie feeling to read about people like George Orwell, Stephen Spender and Raymond Aron, to say nothing of less admirable characters of the Melvin Lasky stripe, taking part in surreptitiously subsidised anti-Communist ventures – magazines, symphony orchestras, art exhibitions – or in the setting up of foundations in the name of ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’. One of the rare dissenters, Charles Burton Marshall, is quoted here as saying that this bizarre operation to ‘counter Communism’ by trying ‘to break down ... doctrinaire thought patterns’ and anti-American attitudes throughout the world was ‘just about as totalitarian as one can get’." 'Hey, Mister, you want dirty book?' Edward Said, LRB,1999 Link
Western Media function like in a Totalitarian State
"Dr. Ulfkotte says the corruption of journalists and major news outlets by the CIA is routine, accepted, and widespread in the western media, and that journalists who do not comply either cannot get jobs at any news organization, or find their careers cut short. (..) I ended up publishing articles under my own name written by agents of the CIA and other intelligen-ce services, especially the German secret service." Editor of major German newspaper [Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung] Says He Planted Stories for the CIA, Link 2015
There is no doubt that the CIA today, more than ever, has an enormous power over the Western media. Yet, most Western people do not have the faintest idea about CIA's involvement in the media. This is as it should be, seen from CIA's desks, for to be able to exert the most effective influence it is crucial that it is done in the dark. It must be done in a manner, so that the CIA's planted stories and controlled narratives are seen as the natural outcome of actual journalism. And this is clearly done so perfectly that even the mentioning of CIA with regard to influence in our media would be disregarded as laughable 'conspiracy theorizing' by most people. In short, CIA has managed to make it a taboo to talk about them in relation to the Western media. Just as it is a taboo to talk about CIA's dirty role in current foreign policy. And of course, unless people are officially employed by the CIA, we never see anyone, journalists or academics admitting in the public that they work for the CIA. So, as everybody knows, we never see any Western politician, journalist or academic criticize CIA's role in the world.
On the other hand, we have a reality where the Western media more than ever sing in concert and never come up with reports and view points that contradict NATO's agenda and constructed narratives. This is obviously not to say that all the different media say precisely the same thing on each (fabricated) narrative. Already Goebbels was acutely
aware of the necessity of a big orchester playing tunes from an apparently plethora of independent source.
Alternet is one of the more respected American media sites with often important critical journalism. Ben Norton has a reputation as a particularly critical minded journalist, when it comes to US foreign policy. Given that Norton exists in a very large choir of Western media completely non-critical and subservient to the US offical line, it is easy to understand Norton's reputation. And it is easy to understand the sympathy his writings get from like-minded readers critical about US foreign policy.
My case-study critique here of Ben Norton's recent report on Western media, NATO and Libya's alleged slave trade can best be understood as a symptom of how much our media generally work for NATO's agendas and provides legitimacy for illegal wars. My hope is that by showing how problematic one of the most critical journalist is on an important issue, people can begin to appreciate that we need much, much more critical reporting if we shall be able to counter NATO's narratives - and 'interventions'.
The problem is that NATO's and CIA's narratives to legitimize 'interventions' [read: wars] are so completely false and deceitful that unless one contradicts them completely, one supports them. Only the most cynical analytical approach to NATO's motives, lies and fabricated 'evidence' can do justice to what the Western nations actually do around the world. It is here that we need to scrutinize and criticize the most apparently critical journalism, for if it do not do the job, it is most likely helping the very agendas and narratives that it purports to go against.
If we shall have any hope of putting a stop to NATO's nation destructions, people must understand the very deadly consequences of Western media, when they legitimize NATO 'interventions'. It is a sociological fact that all the late NATO interventions would be impossible without our journalists' willingness to support the lies. The Western media's support of the lies is a necessity for Western imperialism and NATO interventions. If the journalists began reporting the critical information available they would stop the wars. But the journalists cannot do it by themselves. They need academic support to be able to gain the necessary social power. A more concerted intellectual dismantling of the lies provided by corrupt journalism can therefore, in principle, save hundreds of thousands of innocent lives. It is no accident that journalists were also convicted at the Nuremberg Tribunal.
The totalitarian Character of the Western Media
People finally need to realize that Western journalists work so completely together to legitimize the rationality if not necessity of NATO interventions - as if they were controlled to do so. Now, such a complete conspiracy behind Western media is exactly what the former German editor of Frankfurter Allgeimene Zeitung said is the reality. And after having followed the Western media close the past couple of years, everything suggest that the German editor told us the truth.
how can we realize this .. will write tomorrow..
Media Lens, Fair and Sputnik are tricked by the overt semantics
Ben Norton has written an article on NATO's responsibility for the alleged 'slave trade' in Libya today. In the article he criticizes the Western mainstream media for not telling about the slave trade and for not reporting on NATO's responsibility creating the situation in Libya today. It is certainly true that NATO bears the responsibility for the situation in Libya today (but there is more to the story than meets the eye). And Media Lens, Fair and Sputnik enthusiastically shares his story and explanations. Here is what Media Lens wrote on their Facebook wall (November 29, 2017):
"This is a superb piece by Ben Norton about the shocking slave trade in Libya: a consequence of Nato's bombing campaign in 2011 and Nato's support for extremist racist 'rebels'. And how the corporate media has essentially buried these uncomfortable facts.===Media Erase NATO Role in Bringing Slave Markets to Libya
'Twenty-first century slave markets. Human beings sold for a few hundred dollars. Massive protests throughout the world.
'The American and British media have awakened to the grim reality in Libya, where African refugees are for sale in open-air slave markets. Yet a crucial detail in this scandal has been downplayed or even ignored in many corporate media reports: the role of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in bringing slavery to the North African nation.
'...to acknowledge NATO’s complicity in empowering these racist extremist militants, corporate media would have to acknowledge NATO’s role in the 2011 regime change war in Libya in the first place'."
Norton leaves out the most critical points for a true explanation of NATO's agenda and dirty involvement i Libya. While he in effect come to support the CNN narrative and opens up for yet another NATO 'intervention'.
I have great respect for Media Lens, so this is just what it is: a critique of Norton's explanations. To help Media Lens, Fair and Sputnik spreading truth instead of lies. Below is my sociological reasoning for accusing Ben Norton and - consequently - Alternet.
Below his words Norton asks for new NATO Intervention in Libya
“Omission is the most powerful form of lie.” – George Orwell
Let me begin by telling you what Ben Norton actually did tell us of importance. The then move on the focusing on what he did not but should have told us. I will use his article in Fair and his interview on Sputnik: 'All things Middle East on today's episode of By Any Means Necessary. Show favorite Ben Norton joins Eugene and Sean for the hour." Nov 29, 2017
Enough for today. More tomorrow.
What George Monbiot Covers Up on Yugoslavia
I really don't care what Monbiot says. He is covering up and legitimizing the Guardian's systematic suppression of the Western people. I regard him as a betrayer of journalism helping to kill people at home and abroad. But recently I have come to learn that he systematically covers up for NATO's lies and attacks journalists, who actually fight to tell people the truth about, what is going on in the world. How NATO lies, fabricates and deliberately destroys nations - inclusive committing mass murder in the hundred thousands. Just as Monbiot is a complete liar, attacking the best people to cover up NATO's lies on Syria today, I have come to learn that he was also a complete liar on Yugoslavia, covering up for NATO and attacking one of the very finest and most important academics in the twentieth century, Edward Herman. Thanks, but no thanks, I am disgusted Mr. Monbiot. So, I take this as a welcome opportunity to put my ressource page on Yugoslavia into some practical use.
The most important lesson from Yugoslavia is not only that all NATO nations lied in the most totalitarian manner, used false flags, fabrications and extremist Mujahideen mercenaries there. The most important lesson is that the War in Yugoslavia made NATO and the Western nations into a single completely cynical totalitarian info- and war machine. It is in this perspective that Monbiot's attacks show their true colour in all its horror. He is trying to shut up the last remaining people, who are working to inform people about the truth of our nations.
Lies? Nah, rather fabrications on an unheard scale, false flags and NATO soldiers killing civilians to blame the Serbs and legitimize bombing the Serbian people on a false pretext
So it begins. It is almost false to simply say that all information in the Western media, by the politicians, NATO etc. was false. It is worse than that. It is more accurate to say that all information on Yugoslavia, used to conduct and legitimize the war on Yugoslavia relied on fabrications.
To destroy Yugoslavia, NATO and its corporate masters succeeded in recruiting the Western left politicians. Joschka Fischer and the German social democratic government with Gerhard Schröeder as Prime Minister deliberately misinformed the German people and everybody else of course. This was a necessity to bring Germany into war for NATO and most helpfulp in mobilizing the European peoples. Evidence can be found in an important German documentary from 2001. A NATO spoke person praises the German politicians for their lies that were instrumental in dragging Germany back in to war. A very experienced Swedish peace researcher with connections in NATO, Tunander later informed the world at a peace conference, that high-ranking NATO people had admitted to him that they knew the truth and had lied deliberately.
Then we come to the even more criminal aspect of the war on Yugoslavia. British SAS special forces made false flags and deliberately killed civilians. Together with Mujahideen extremist mercenaries they attacked civilians and blamed the Serbs. A French colonel from the French Foreign Legion later wrote a book, where he explained that his men had fought NATO’s forces at Pristina, with the title Europe died at Pristina (in French). Another French officer, Bunel gave the Serbs information about coming NATO bombs. There were Western journalists at the time trying to inform people that NATO deliberately bombed the Chinese embassy and important media station, to kill the Yugoslavian journalists, who were informing the Yugoslavia people about what was happening. Bunel was imprisoned. He also wrote a book on it. It should also be mentioned that some of the Spanish pilots refused to fly and bomb in Yugoslavia.
To mention only thing about the after-play. NATO later denied Milosevic Russian medical help in prison, so he died. One of his lawyers, Christopher C. Black is rather sure he was killed deliberately this way, by NATO making sure that he was not getting the proper treatment. But even though Milosevic was set up in a completely NATO controlled false trial, he was still evicted posthumously in 2016. I guess there are still some judges with decency.
The Western media never reported how false, they had all been on Yugoslavia. Nor did the UN, the politicians or NATO. Of course they did not. If they did the wars that followed would not have been possible and all the implicated Western politicians would have been forced out of politics, completely dishonored if not trialed, jailed and perhaps even hanged.
Former advisor to JFK and most knowledgeable on economics, US intelligence and history, Sean Gervasi, husbond to Heather Cottin, predicted it years before it happened. He talked about it and warned about the coming war on Yugoslavia. Gervasi held a lecture in 1996, ..., where he among other things explained this:
Text excerpt from Gervasi's Warning on the real situation - 1996
"The Struggle for Mastery in the Balkans
We have been witnessing, since 1990, a long and agonizing crisis in Yugoslavia. It has brought the deaths of tens of thousands, driven perhaps two million people from their homes and caused turmoil in the Balkan region. And in the West it is generally believed that this crisis, including the civil wars in Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, was the result of internal Yugoslav conflicts, and specifically of conflicts between Croats, Serbs and Bosnian Muslims. This is far from the essence of the matter.
The main problem in Yugoslavia, from the first, was foreign intervention in the country's internal affairs. Two Western powers, the United States and Germany, deliberately contrived to destabilize and then dismantle the country. The process was in full swing in the 1 980s and accelerated as the present decade began. These powers carefully planned, prepared and assisted the secessions which broke Yugoslavia apart. And they did almost everything in their power to expand and prolong the civil wars which began in Croatia and then continued in Bosnia-Herzegovina. They were involved behind the scenes at every stage of the crisis.
Foreign intervention was designed to create precisely the conflicts which the Western powers decried. For they also conveniently served as an excuse for overt intervention once civil wars were under way.
Such ideas are, of course, anathema in Western countries. That is only because the public in the West has been systematically misinformed by war propaganda. It accepted almost from the beginning the version of events promuligated by governments and disseminated through the mass media. It is nonetheless true that Germany and the US were the principal agents in dismantling Yugoslavia and sowing chaos there.
This is an ugly fact in the new age of realpolitik and geo-political struggles which has succeeded the Cold War order. Intelligence sources have begun recently to allude to this reality in a surprisingly open manner. In the summer of 1995, for instance, INTELLIGENCE DIGEST, a respected newsletter published in Great Britain, reported that:
The original US-German design for the former Yugoslavia [included] an independent Muslim-Croat dominated BosniaHerzegovina in alliance with an independent Croatian and alongside a greatly weakened Serbia. 
Every senior official in most Western governments knows this description to be absolutely accurate. And this means, of course, that the standard descriptions of "Serbian aggression" as the root cause of the problem, the descriptions of Croatia as a "new democracy", etc. are not just untrue but actually designed to deceive." LINK TEXT
A note on the NATO controlled after-play
Gervasi died later that year from from stomach cancer in Belgrade, LINK
. His talk was later honored on the launching of the important media site Global Research
. A site all Western journalists and academics to this day have suppressed and stigmatized, thereby doing the greatest service to Western media propaganda and political lies, and to NATO, CIA, MI6 etc. hindering the Western people - and themselves - from taking the most crucial critical information seriously.
I also used to be rather sceptical about Global Research, but after reading critical information on NATO's wars and destructions for a couple of years now, every day and from hundreds of sources, my mind and vision have gotten accustomed to knowing that Global Research generally, we all make mistakes, provides some of the most crucial important information out there. And of course, nobody has an immaculate perception seeing reality with the bare eyes, an illusion Nietzsche warned about, so it does take time to get out of the false Western world view created attending Western propaganda and lies for years if not decades. Just as it takes a couple of years for chemists working in a lab to be able to see correctly and clearly in a microscope.
Read the text excerpts in the middle of my home page on Yugoslavia. And know that the truth is completely different from what we have heard for decades. I must also mention Luciana Bohne here. Her heartbreaking informative articles, writing from her own childhood experience with German bombs in her village and the horror of German soldiers killing village men to today's bombings in Yugoslavia, Libya, Syria etc. Luciana's knowledgeable mind put me into begin knowing all of this only a couple of years ago, where I went into her and other knowledgeable people's Facebook University. If I had not come to know her via Facebook, I would probably never have come to completely changing my mind away from everything, that I thought I knwe about NATO, our politicians and the wars from Yugoslavia. This was the beginning of me finding out the truth about, what the EU did to Greece (a corporate/Goldman Sachs' economic war on the nation) and that everything we hear on Syria is completely false.
Perhaps it is possible for readers now,
given the sketchy critical perspective above, to appreciate Edward Herman's text 'The Srebrenica Massacre was a Gigantic Political Fraud', 2016, Global Research LINK.
Herman died a short while ago. RIP Herman. To paraphrase Erwing Goffman, I wish that I had been even close to almost meeting both Herman and Gervasi.
Dear reader, you can go to my page on Yugoslavia to read a longer summation on NATO's war on Yugoslavia made by excerpts from important literature on the subject. Link below together with other links related to NATO's 'foreign policy'.
Merci bien 😉
Lars Jørgensen, sociologist, Denmark
My first interview on the Herland Report, on Syria:
The weather in Sweden - let's talk about that
CRITICAL QUESTIONS on Ex-CIA Giraldi [A Case Study]
We know that the US/NATO have bombed for ISIS and today clearly protect ISIS in Syria (links below). And we have John Kerry's leak from 2016, that the Obama Administration had a clear policy of wanting ISIS to grow in Syria to remove Pres. Assad from power.
So, why does the alleged well informed Ex-CIA Giraldi in an interview on Russia Today [in 2015] say that ISIS is the enemy in Syria, which the US should go after? Why, when that is exactly, what the US propaganda wants the world to believe? In the interview, Giraldi also explicitly echoes Obama's words on the need to 'contain' ISIS. And he - as is a great habit from US analysts - excuses US policy as a matter of 'poor planning'. Yes sure ... Not.
If Giraldi wanted to tell the most important truth, so that people should be able to get the correct picture of US 'foreign policy', he would say that the Mujahedins, Al Qeada and now Al Nusra, ISIS etc. were always very well planned and funded US foreign policy tools. He doesn't.
He is also completely silent about the fact that the US interference and presence in Syria is illegal under international law. Actually on a Nuremberg level. Finally, Giraldi explains the situation in Syria as being 'very complex' thereby effectively discouraging people from thinking that they can (easy) understand, what is happening.
The General Point
The simple truth is that the US (UK etc.) deliberately use terror groups by design, that they support, fund, train, arm, protect and even bomb for Al Nusra and ISIS etc. And that they spend hundreds of millions of dollars on CIA paid and controlled journalists and PR companies to cover up reality with lies, propaganda and fabrications. Such as the White Helmets etc.
The fact is that his commentary supports the propaganda frame instead of explaining reality. He does not provide the most necessary cognitive tools to break and escape the official 'foreign policy' propaganda. In short, Giraldi leaves people with the understanding that the US makes mistakes but is fighting terrorism. Just like the US officals always do.
It is not of much practical importance, whether Giraldi is being polite or diplomatic or if he deliberately provides a kind of controlled 'critical information' as an advanced form of CIA propaganda, a so-called 'controlled opposition'. This analysis is not an ad hominum critique of the person Philip Giraldi. His person is not interesting from a sociological point of view.
The analysis is a case study of a general tendency of critical commentators not really telling the critical truth and therefore silently supporting the Big lie of US as a law-abiding legitimate player in world politics.
All such 'critical' commentators might as well talk about the weather in Sweden, if they are not going to explain the elephant in the room anyway: that the US 'foreign policy' is using terrorism by design - on a big scale.
A few links to back up the critique
Prof. F. Boyle: 'A Baseless Justification for War in Syria', June 2017_LINK
NB. This began as a fb post that I saw did not do so well on Facebook. So, I thought I would try to disguise it a bit. Below is a little edited copy of the post. (Lars Jørgensen har delt HomoSociologicus' opslag — sammen med Luciana Bohne og 48 andre. 19 min. - I have shared this post several times, now. Tagging fifty people in it. But it not on my wall.. So I try again.).
Making virtues of states of denial 
- on the sociology of intellectuals, state crime and propaganda
‘On the importance of the matter we have testimony from ancient times. Everybody knows that conceptual clarity was essential for Socrates. But let us here take an even older example. When Confucius one time was asked, what he considered to be of the greatest importance in the art of government, he answered: To put words and concepts correctly. Because if the concepts don't fit, the works won't be made. If the works aren't made then morality and art cannot thrive. And if morality and art do not thrive then the punishment do not hit the targets. And if the punishments don't hit, the people don't know where to put the hand and the foot. - That is why the scholar make sure that he can transform his words into action. The scholar cannot endure anyting in his words that do not fit. This is what everything depends on.’ Knud Grue-Sørensen
We need to talk about our insane wars and why we allow them to go on
If we only think of the illegal and destructive wars committed by the US and other Western nations in the last couple of decades in Yugoslavia, Iraq and Libya, we must pose this sociological problem: how is it possible for so-called democratic societies to continue with state crimes and not confront our governments’ illegal action?
Why do every critical analysis and critical piece of information on the subject seem so inconsequential? Indeed, why is there so little opposition and public resistance to the continuation of our illegal wars? It is not as if the populations want the wars. So why do we not oppose them on a grand scale? Why do we as peoples accept the wars? We need to face the harsh reality, and it is much, much harsher than people would like to think. However, we must because we must stop making virtues of our states of denial – both our mental and our national states of denial. The following text was to become an article but as the situation in Syria is getting still more dangerous by the minute – I will throw out some of my text on my blog. I have no doubt that the US and Western alliance consider if not simply plan to attack Syria directly. My text is a mess. I will improve it in the coming days.
My analysis of this problem has led me back to some heavy sociological lessons from the Germans’ Nazi experience that we, unfortunately, have forgotten or perhaps never properly understood. The great Canadian sociologist Everett C. Hughes found out, that the Germans really believed that they did not know the truth about their reality. How could that be possible? Well for similar reasons most people today do not know the truth about our reality. How is this possible?
It is the academics and the intellectuals, who betray their responsibility
I will point the causal finger in a completely different direction from where critical thinking on such issues usually point. I will focus on the role and responsibility of the academia and the intellectuals. Because history, not least twentieth century German history teaches us, that it is pointless to expect change of behavior from the obvious bad perpetrators. We will have to confront and expect change from somewhere else, that is, perhaps paradoxically, from the perceived good, prestigious academics and intellectuals. The greater the (symbolic) power the greater the responsibility, you know. We have to understand the role and responsibility of the Western academics and intellectuals, who, silently, somehow unconsciously and ignorantly but effectively, support and legitimize our governments’ dirty work and state crimes.
The intellectuals play a powerful role in the larger propagandized machinery if only by generally accepting the political lies and the media-based state propaganda. Just by accepting the general framework of our governments’ lies, they enhance the denial of our states’ ‘dirty work’ with all their symbolic power. In addition, at the same time as they make virtues of their ‘pure’ knowledge, morality and mental states, not wanting to go into the Western secret intelligence agencies like the CIA and the MI6, etc., they tend to stigmatize the very only sources of information, which actually work to inform the public about our states’ crimes and dirty work. This way, they make the people trust our governments and the mainstream media’s lies and propaganda while hindering them from taking the most important non-mainstream critical information seriously.
Then the intellectuals pretend to themselves and everybody else that they somehow deserve a finer status for being above taking dirty information – information on our states’ dirty work - seriously. Not to talk about researching and informing about it. Their more or less sincere ignorance is a perfect assistance to our governments’ unspoken wishes. In fact, their suppressing of our states’ dirty work could not have been so effective, if our governments had paid them full time to do it. Their collective sort of virtuous suppression of the subject and their naïve sincerity and sincere ignorance of the subject inclusive their own role and part in the entire logic make them perfect accomplices in our states’ game of making virtues of states of denial.
However, the intellectuals have the logic of things completely backwards as they betray their responsibility for informing and enlightening the world. Instead of being preoccupied with our governments’ crimes against other nations and doing their best to make people understand the world destructive consequences of the problem, they do the opposite. The intellectuals fulfill a most important function of legitimizing the state propaganda and preventing whole populations from knowing the crucial critical facts of our governments’ dirty work and state crimes.
Hence, when people ask, why the Western peoples allow their governments to continue the incredible destructive policies around the world, not least in the Middle East, the truth is, that the people cannot imagine how false their information on their governments’ action are nor how treacherous and worthless their media, academia and intellectuals are. It is unreasonable and bad judgment to point the finger at the people. We need to understand how the authorities in the media, intellectuals and the academic field prevent the people from knowing the most crucial information.
Intellectuals, journalists, and others might reproach me that the problem of misinformation about governments’ dirty actions is nothing new. They are right, of course, and it is gruesome to acknowledge, that we perhaps could and definitely should have done things in a completely different way decades ago. Ridicule and ignorance of the analysis only underline its importance and confirm it.
The few intellectuals that actually work to inform on these critical matter logically classify as the most important people today. Given the state of affairs, it is also logical, that the academic and intellectual community generally neglect if not stigmatize them. Many important whistleblowers on these issues are, as everybody knows, in jail.
Radical Doubt: everything our governments tell us on Syria is false
Many people believe or at least cling to the illusions spread by Western governments about the humanitarian and democratic intentions if not necessity of our interventions and wars in foreign nations. Many people take the propaganda that accompanies our states’ interventions for information. As everybody can testify, who has tried to point out that much of media’s information is propaganda and that there is usually a more cynical agenda behind our governments’ actions; it is only normal, that one meets fierce resistance from people, who are more than willing to teach one lessons with the received propaganda, as if it was information.
Is it possible to know something but pretend, to oneself and others that one does not know it? It clearly is, I think, especially when one’s society as a whole support the pretension and treat direct confrontational critique as a taboo or, which is the same, with ridicule. Nevertheless, defending our Western governments ‘foreign policy’ and the accompanying mainstream media propaganda is not only false and pathetic; it is an important contribution, and I tell you, it may very well be the most important factor that help our states’ crimes against nations and humanity seem reasonable and just.
There are of course all kinds of partial critiques and moderations of the propaganda, but the problem is, that Western people generally accept the US and Western narratives as if they are sound and true in its basic postulates. This, we need to problematize. We need to make people realize, that our governments and the media are lying and that their powerful narratives on the Western ‘foreign policies’ backed by almost all politicians and the mainstream media are false to the core. We need to make the unthinkable thinkable.
In sociology, it is a basic epistemological postulate that the most powerful things in society happen silently and unnoticed. This is also, what I will argue happens in this case. Now I am not talking about the narratives, which our governments and the media manufacture on an industrial scale. I am talking about the way, we as people accept for this to happen rather silently and unnoticed. Yes, there are a few protests here and there, but in general, the narratives pass as true.
This is key; I am sure, to understand the fact that we are living in states of denial. We have the power of the masses clinging to our governments’ and the media’s version of reality. It is not difficult to understand how this can happen, when one realizes the grand scale of propaganda, we are accustomed to. One has to do a lot of research on a lot of less known, less official if not somewhat stigmatized sites and rely on what can easily be regarded as rather untrustworthy sources, if one is to go against the common narrative. It is not popular, it is not career promoting and above all, it takes a lot of time, what most working people do not have. Then one has to think one is right against one’s politicians, one’s media and one’s society if not most Western nations.
In other words, if you are not working most diligently and hard and over a long time, you will not be able to confront and go against our governments’, indeed our societies’ narratives. In this perspective, it is not difficult to understand why most people accept the same narratives. How could it be otherwise? Now, the problem is that it is enough, as Vaclav Havel once noted, to accept a system for one to be part of it. This way, as you may already sense, we may not be far away from qualifying as totalitarian states.
However, what about the critical minds in society? The same elementary logic, I am afraid, no matter one’s illusions about Western intellectuals, easily apply to the journalists and the intellectuals; and not only that. As I shall show, even the otherwise most trustworthy intellectuals known for their critical thinking in other areas are not only accepting these narratives, they even support and defend them and criticize and stigmatize information, that go against them.
This way our intellectuals not only play a powerful role, using their symbolic power to stigmatize the only sources that can provide the crucial counter-information. Their seemingly noble actions that seem to skillfully help select the trustworthy from the non-trustworthy information in fact only work to suppress critical counter information, thereby fulfilling a crucial role of stigmatizing critical thinking people, information and sources, at the same time making virtues of their own states of denial. Hence helping to make virtues of our nations as states of denial.
I must go now. But I will come back tomorrow with some concrete empirical evidence on how this happens. And people are of course welcome to mail me experience on the subject. Not least experience from critical academics and journalists are most welcome.
Information here: http://homosociologicus.com/syria
Till tomorrow then.