Coming up today and every Monday at 7:00 pm Pacific – 10:00 pm Eastern – 02:00 GMT

GUNS AND BUTTER with Bonnie Faulkner
NATO’s Assault On Syria — Webster Tarpley
Foreign journalists trip to Syria; religions and ethnicities; cities of Damascus, Qara, Homs and its Zahra Neighborhood and Hospital, Baniyas, Tartus, and Beirut, Lebanon; Russian Naval Base; death squads/snipers/ambushes and kidnapping; Syrian Army; foreign intervention.

Coming up Tuesday at 9am Pacific – 12 Noon Eastern – 16:00 GMT
Will be archived here after the broadcast by Tuesday evening.

“THE KEVIN BARRETT SHOW”
EXCLUSIVE –Tuesday on KB Show:
James Petras: The empire is USING “moderate Islam”

Guest: Leading leftist sociologist and political analyst James Petras, who says the Empire is USING “moderate Islam.” He writes:

The Kevin Barrett Show is independently produced and hosted by Kevin Barrett and these shows are externally produced content. All externally produced content broadcast on No Lies Radio is the sole responsibility of the program-content producer and is not the responsibility of NoLiesRadio.org. Any questions or concerns should be directed to the content producer.

Michael Moore
Oscar and Emmy-winning director

Posted: 12/18/11 11:28 AM ET The Huffington Post

It’s Saturday night and I didn’t want the day to end before I posted this note to you.

One year ago today (December 17th), Mohamed Bouazizi, a man who had a simple produce stand in Tunisia, set himself on fire to protest his government’s repression. His singular sacrifice ignited a revolution that toppled Tunisia’s dictator and launched revolts in regimes across the Middle East.

Three months ago today, Occupy Wall Street began with a takeover of New York’s Zuccotti Park. This movement against the greed of corporate America and its banks — and the money that now controls most of our democratic institutions — has quickly spread to hundreds of towns and cities across America. The majority of Americans now agree that a nation where 400 billionaires have more wealth than 160 million Americans combined is not the country they want America to be. The 99% are rising up against the 1% — and now there is no turning back.

Twenty-four years ago today, U.S. Army Spc. Bradley Manning was born. He has now spent 570 days in a military prison without a trial — simply because he allegedly blew the whistle on the illegal and immoral war in Iraq. He exposed what the Pentagon and the Bush administration did in creating this evil and he did so by allegedly leaking documents and footage to WikiLeaks. Many of these documents dealt not only with Iraq but with how we prop up dictators around the world and how our corporations exploit the poor on this planet. (There were even cables with crazy stuff on them, like one detailing Bush’s State Department trying to stop a government minister in another country from holding a screening of Fahrenheit 9/11.)

The WikiLeaks trove was a fascinating look into how the United States conducts its business — and clearly those who don’t want the world to know how we do things in places like, say, Tunisia, were not happy with Bradley Manning.

Mohamed Bouazizi was being treated poorly by government officials because all he wanted to do was set up a cart and sell fruit and vegetables on the street. But local police kept harassing him and trying to stop him. He, like most Tunisians, knew how corrupt their government was. But when WikiLeaks published cables from the U.S. ambassador in Tunis confirming the corruption — cables that were published just a week or so before Mohamed set himself on fire — well, that was it for the Tunisian people, and all hell broke loose.

People across the world devoured the information Bradley Manning revealed, and it was used by movements in Egypt, Spain, and eventually Occupy Wall Street to bolster what we already thought was true. Except here were the goods — the evidence that was needed to prove it all true. And then a democracy movement spread around the globe so fast and so deep — and in just a year’s time! When anyone asks me, “Who started Occupy Wall Street?” sometimes I say “Goldman Sachs” or “Chase” but mostly I just say, “Bradley Manning.” It was his courageous action that was the tipping point — and it was not surprising when the dictator of Tunisia censored all news of the WikiLeaks documents Manning had allegedly supplied. But the Internet took Manning’s gift and spread it throughout Tunisia, a young man set himself on fire and the Arab Spring that led eventually to Zuccotti Park has a young, gay soldier in the United States Army to thank.

And that is why I want to honor Bradley Manning on this, his 24th birthday, and ask the millions of you reading this to join with me in demanding his immediate release. He does not deserve the un-American treatment, including cruel solitary confinement, he’s received in over 18 months of imprisonment. If anything, this young man deserves a friggin’ medal. He did what great Americans have always done — he took a bold stand against injustice and he did it without stopping for a minute to consider the consequences for himself.

The Pentagon and the national security apparatus are hell-bent on setting an example with Bradley Manning. But we as Americans have a right to know what is being done in our name and with our tax dollars. If the government tries to cover up its malfeasance, then it is the duty of each and every one of us, should the situation arise, to drag the truth, kicking and screaming if necessary, into the light of day.

The American flag was lowered in Iraq this past Thursday as our war on them officially came to an end. If anyone should be on trial or in the brig right now, it should be those men who lied to the nation in order to start this war — and in doing so sent nearly 4,500 Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis to their deaths.

But it is not Bush or Rumsfeld or Cheney or Wolfowitz who sit in prison tonight. It is the hero who exposed them. It is Bradley Manning who has lost his freedom and that, in turn, becomes just one more crime being committed in our name.

Read entire article here

Coming up today and every Monday at 7:00 pm Pacific – 10:00 pm Eastern – 02:00 GMT

GUNS AND BUTTER with Bonnie Faulkner
The 46 Exercises and Drills of 9/11 — Webster Tarpley
Military exercises and drills in the decade before September 11th, and on the day of; drills that then go live; MIHOP v. LIHOP; the goal of 9/11; the stand down order; lack of air defense; the Pentagon; Angel Is Next; Amalgam Virgo; Able Danger; Able Warrior; P2OG; Vigilant Guardian; Global Guardian; Amalgam Warrior; Doomsday Aircraft equipped with the Looking Glass Communication System, etc.

by Jacques R. Pauwels globalresearch.ca  12-11-2011

Myth: The US was forced to declare war on Japan after a totally unexpected Japanese attack on the American naval base in Hawaii on December 7, 1941. On account of Japan’s alliance with Nazi Germany, this aggression automatically brought the US into the war against Germany.

Reality: The Roosevelt administration had been eager for some time to wage war against Japan and sought to unleash such a war by means of the institution of an oil embargo and other provocations. Having deciphered Japanese codes, Washington knew a Japanese fleet was on its way to Pearl Harbor, but welcomed the attack since a Japanese aggression would make it possible to “sell” the war to the overwhelmingly anti-war American public.

An attack by Japan, as opposed to an American attack on Japan, was also supposed to avoid a declaration of war by Japan’s ally, Germany, which was treaty-bound to help only if Japan was attacked. However, for reasons which have nothing to do with Japan or the US but everything with the failure of Germany’s “lightning war” against the Soviet Union, Hitler himself declared war on the US a few days after Pearl Harbor, on December 11, 1941.

Fall 1941. The US, then as now, was ruled by a “Power Elite” of industrialists, owners and managers of the country’s leading corporations and banks, constituting only a tiny fraction of its population. Then as now, these industrialists and financiers – “Corporate America” – had close connections with the highest ranks of the army, “the warlords,” as Columbia University sociologist C. Wright Mills, who coined the term “power elite,”[1] has called them, and for whom a few years later a big HQ, known as the Pentagon, would be erected on the banks of the Potomac River.

Indeed, the “military-industrial complex” had already existed for many decades when, at the end of his career as President, and having served it most assiduously, Eisenhower gave it that name. Talking about presidents: in the 1930s and 1940s, again then as now, the Power Elite kindly allowed the American people every four years to choose between two of the elite’s own members – one labelled “Republican,” the other “Democrat,” but few people know the difference – to reside in the White House in order to formulate and administer national and international policies. These policies invariably served – and still serve – the Power Elite’s interests, in other words, they consistently aimed to promote “business” – a code word for the maximization of profits by the big corporations and banks that are members of the Power Elite.

As President Calvin Coolidge candidly put it on one occasion during the 1920s, “the business of America [meaning of the American government] is business.” In 1941, then, the tenant of the White House was a bona fide member of the Power Elite, a scion of a rich, privileged, and powerful family: Franklin D. Roosevelt, often referred to as “FDR”. (Incidentally, the Roosevelt family’s wealth had been built at least partly in the opium trade with China; as Balzac once wrote, “behind every great fortune there lurks a crime.”)

Roosevelt appears to have served the Power Elite rather well, for he already managed to be nominated (difficult!) and elected (relatively easy!) in 1932, 1936, and again in 1940. That was a remarkable achievement, since the “dirty thirties” were hard times, marked by the “Great Depression” as well as great international tensions, leading to the eruption of war in Europe in 1939. Roosevelt’s job – serving the interests of the Power Elite – was far from easy, because within the ranks of that elite opinions differed about how corporate interests could best be served by the President. With respect to the economic crisis, some industrialists and bankers were pretty happy with the President’s Keynesian approach, known as the “New Deal” and involving much state intervention in the economy, while others were vehemently opposed to it and loudly demanded a return to laissez-faire orthodoxy. The Power Elite was also divided with respect to the handling of foreign affairs.

The owners and top managers of many American corporations – including Ford, General Motors, IBM, ITT, and Rockefeller’s Standard Oil of New Jersey, now known as Exxon – liked Hitler a lot; one of them – William Knudsen of General Motors – even glorified the German Führer as “the miracle of the 20th century.”[2] The reason: in preparation for war, the Führer had been arming Germany to the teeth, and the numerous German branch plants of US corporations had profited handsomely from that country’s “armament boom” by producing trucks, tanks and planes in sites such as GM’s Opel factory in Rüsselsheim and Ford’s big plant in Cologne, the Ford-Werke; and the likes of Exxon and Texaco had been making plenty of money by supplying the fuel Hitler’s panzers would need to roll all the way to Warsaw in 1939, to Paris in 1940, and (almost) to Moscow in 1941. No wonder the managers and owners of these corporations helped to celebrate Germany’s victories against Poland and France at a big party in the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York on June 26, 1940!

American “captains of industry” like Henry Ford also liked the way Hitler had shut down the German unions, outlawed all labour parties, and thrown the communists and many socialists into concentration camps; they wished Roosevelt would mete out the same kind of treatment to America’s own pesky union leaders and “reds,” the latter still numerous in the 1930s and early 1940s. The last thing those men wanted, was for Roosevelt to involve the US in the war on the side of Germany’s enemies, they were “isolationists” (or “non-interventionists”) and so, in the summer of 1940, was the majority of the American public: a Gallup Poll, taken in September 1940, showed that 88 percent of Americans wanted to stay out of the war that was raging in Europe.[3] Not surprisingly, then, there was no sign whatsoever that Roosevelt might want to restrict trade with Germany, let alone embark on an anti-Hitler crusade. In fact, during the presidential election campaign in the fall 1940, he solemnly promised that “[our] boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars.”[4]

That Hitler has crushed France and other democratic countries, was of no concern to the US corporate types who did business with Hitler, in fact, they felt that Europe’s future belonged to fascism, especially Germany’s variety of fascism, Nazism, rather than to democracy. (Typically, the chairman of General Motors, Alfred P. Sloan, declared at that time that it was a good thing that in Europe the democracies were giving way “to an alternative [i.e. fascist] system with strong, intelligent, and aggressive leaders who made the people work longer and harder and who had the instinct of gangsters – all of them good qualities”!)[5] And, since they certainly did not want Europe’s future to belong to socialism in its evolutionary, let alone revolutionary (i.e. communist) variety, the US industrialists would be particularly happy when, about one year later, Hitler would finally do what they have long hoped he would do, namely, to attack the Soviet Union in order to destroy the homeland of communism and source of inspiration and support of “reds” all over the world, also in the US.

While many big corporations were engaged in profitable business with Nazi Germany, others now happened to be making plenty of money by doing business with Great Britain. That country – in addition to Canada and other member countries of the British Empire, of course – was Germany’s only remaining enemy from the fall of 1940 until June 1941, when Hitler’s attack on the Soviet Union caused Britain and the Soviet Union to become allies. Britain was desperately in need of all sorts of equipment to continue its struggle against Nazi Germany, wanted to purchase much of it in the US, but was unable to make the cash payments required by America’s existing “Cash-and-Carry” legislation. However, Roosevelt made it possible for US corporations to take advantage of this enormous “window of opportunity” when, on March 11, 1941, he introduced his famous Lend-Lease program, providing Britain with virtually unlimited credit to purchase trucks, planes, and other martial hardware in the US. The Lend-Lease exports to Britain were to generate windfall profits, not only on account of the huge volume of business involved but also because these exports featured inflated prices and fraudulent practices such as double billing.

A segment of Corporate America thus began to sympathize with Great Britain, a less “natural” phenomenon than we would now tend to believe. (Indeed, after American independence the ex-motherland had long remained Uncle Sam’s archenemy; and as late the 1930s, the US military still had plans for war against Britain and an invasion of the Canadian Dominion, the latter including plans for the bombing of cities and the use of poison gas.)[6] Some mouthpieces of this corporate constituency, though not very many, even started to favour a US entry into the war on the side of the British; they became known as the “interventionists.” Of course, many if not most big American corporations made money through business with both Nazi Germany and Britain and, as the Roosevelt administration itself was henceforth preparing for possible war, multiplying military expenditures and ordering all sorts of equipment, they also started to make more and more money by supplying America’s own armed forces with all sorts of martial material.[7]

If there was one thing that all the leaders of Corporate America could agree on, regardless of their individual sympathies towards either Hitler or Churchill, it was this: the war in Europe in 1939 was good, even wonderful, for business. They also agreed that the longer this war lasted, the better it would be for all of them. With the exception of the most fervent pro-British interventionists, they further agreed that there was no pressing need for the US to become actively involved in this war, and certainly not to go to war against Germany. Most advantageous to Corporate America was a scenario whereby the war in Europe dragged on as long as possible, so that the big corporations could continue to profit from supplying equipment to the Germans, the British, to their respective allies, and to America herself. Henry Ford thus “expressed the hope that neither the Allies nor the Axis would win [the war],” and suggested that the United States should supply both sides with “the tools to keep on fighting until they both collapse.” Ford practised what he preached, and arranged for his factories in the US, in Britain, in Germany, and in occupied France to crank out equipment for all belligerents.[8] The war may have been hell for most people, but for American “captains of industry” such as Ford it was heaven.

Roosevelt himself is generally believed to have been an interventionist, but in Congress the isolationists certainly prevailed, and it did not look as if the US would soon, if ever, enter the war. However, on account of Lend-Lease exports to Britain, relations between Washington and Berlin were definitely deteriorating, and in the fall of 1941 a series of incidents between German submarines and US Navy destroyers escorting freighters bound for Britain lead to a crisis that has become known as the “undeclared naval war.” But even that episode did not lead to active American involvement in the war in Europe. Corporate America was profiting handsomely from the status quo, and was simply not interested in a crusade against Nazi Germany. Conversely, Nazi Germany was deeply involved in the great project of Hitler’s life, his mission to destroy the Soviet Union. In this war, things had not been going according to plan. The Blitzkrieg in the East, launched on June 1941, was supposed to have “crushed the Soviet Union like an egg” within 4 to 6 weeks, or so it was believed by the military experts not only in Berlin but also in Washington. However, in early December Hitler was still waiting for the Soviets to wave the white flag. To the contrary, on December 5, the Red Army suddenly launched a counter-offensive in front of Moscow, and suddenly the Germans found themselves deeply in trouble. The last thing Hitler needed at this point was a war against the US.[9]

In the 1930s, the US military had no plans, and did not prepare plans, to fight a war against Nazi Germany. On the other hand, they did have plans war against Great Britain, Canada, Mexico – and Japan.[10] Why against Japan? In the 1930s, the US was one of the world’s leading industrial powers and, like all industrial powers, was constantly looking out for sources of inexpensive raw materials such as rubber and oil, as well as for markets for its finished products. Already at the end of the nineteenth century, America had consistently pursued its interests in this respect by extending its economic and sometimes even direct political influence across oceans and continents. This aggressive, “imperialist” policy – pursued ruthlessly by presidents such as Theodore Roosevelt, a cousin of FDR – had led to American control over former Spanish colonies such as Puerto Rico, Cuba, and the Philippines, and also over the hitherto independent island nation of Hawaii. America had thus also developed into a major power in the Pacific Ocean and even in the Far East.[11]

The lands on the far shores of the Pacific Ocean played an increasingly important role as markets for American export products and as sources of cheap raw materials. But in the Depression-ridden 1930s, when the competition for markets and resources was heating up, the US faced the competition there of an aggressive rival industrial power, one that was even more needy for oil and similar raw materials, and also for markets for its finished products. That competitor was Japan, the land of the rising sun. Japan sought to realize its own imperialist ambitions in China and in resource-rich Southeast Asia and, like the US, did not hesitate to use violence in the process, for example waging ruthless war on China and carving a client state out of the northern part of that great but weak country. What bothered the United States was not that the Japanese treated their Chinese and Korean neighbours as Untermenschen, but that they turned that part of the world into what they called the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, i.e., an economic bailiwick of their very own, a “closed economy” in with there was no room for the American competition. In doing so, the Japanese actually followed the example of the US, which had earlier transformed Latin America and much of the Caribbean into Uncle Sam’s exclusive economic playground.[12]

Corporate America was extremely frustrated at being squeezed out of the lucrative Far Eastern market by the “Japs,” a “yellow race” Americans in general had already started to despise during the 19th century.[13] Japan was viewed as an arrogant but essentially weak upstart country, that mighty America could easily “wipe off the map in three months,” as Navy Secretary Frank Knox put it on one occasion.[14] And so it happened that, during the 1930s and early 1940s, the US Power Elite, while mostly opposed to war against Germany, was virtually unanimously in favour of a war against Japan – unless, of course, Japan was prepared to make major concessions, such as “sharing” China with the US. President Roosevelt – like Woodrow Wilson not at all the pacifist he has been made out to be by all too many historians – was keen to provide such a “splendid little war.” (This expression had been coined by US Secretary of State John Hay in reference to the Spanish-American War of 1898; it was “splendid” in that it allowed the US to pocket the Philippines, Puerto Rico, etc.) By the summer of 1941, after Tokyo had further increased its zone of influence in the Far East, e.g. by occupying the rubber-rich French colony of Indochina and, desperate above all for oil, had obviously started to lust after the oil-rich Dutch colony of Indonesia, FDR appears to have decided that the time was ripe for war against Japan, but he faced two problems. First, public opinion was strongly against American involvement in any foreign war. Second, the isolationist majority in Congress might not consent to such a war, fearing that it would automatically bring the US into war against Germany.

Roosevelt’s solution to this twin problem, according to the author of a detailed and extremely well documented recent study, Robert B. Stinnett, was to “provoke Japan into an overt act of war against the United States.”[15] Indeed, in case of a Japanese attack the American public would have no choice but to rally behind the flag. (The public had similarly been made to rally behind the Stars and Stripes before, namely at the start of the Spanish-American War, when the visiting US battleship Maine had mysteriously sunk in Havana harbour, an act that was immediately blamed on the Spanish; after World War II, Americans would again be conditioned to approve of wars, wanted and planned by their government, by means of contrived provocations such as the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin Incident.) Furthermore, under the terms of the Tripartite Treaty concluded by Japan, Germany, and Italy in Berlin on September 27, 1940, the three countries undertook to assist each other when one of the three contracting powers was attacked by another country, but not when one of them attacked another country. Consequently, in case of a Japanese attack on the US, the isolationists, who were non-interventionists with respect to Germany but not with respect to Japan, did not have to fear that a conflict with Japan would also mean war against Germany.

And so, President Roosevelt, having decided that “Japan must be seen to make the first overt move,” made “provoking Japan into an overt act of war the principal policy that guided [his] actions toward Japan throughout 1941,” as Stinnett has written. The stratagems used included the deployment of warships close to, and even into, Japanese territorial waters, apparently in the hope of sparking a Gulf of Tonkin-style incident that could be construed to be a casus belli.  More effective, however, was the relentless economic pressure that was brought to bear on Japan, a country desperately in need of raw materials such as oil and rubber and therefore likely to consider such methods to be singularly provocative. In the summer of 1941, the Roosevelt administration froze all Japanese assets in the United States and embarked on a “strategy for frustrating Japanese acquisition of petroleum products.” In collaboration with the British and the Dutch, anti-Japanese for reasons of their own, the US imposed severe economic sanctions on Japan, including an embargo on vital oil products. The situation deteriorated further in the fall of 1941. On November 7, Tokyo, hoping to avoid war with the mighty US, offered to apply in China the principle of non-discriminatory trade relations on the condition that the Americans did the same in their own sphere of influence in Latin America. However, Washington wanted reciprocity only in the sphere of influence of other imperialist powers, and not in its own backyard; the Japanese offer was rejected.

The continuing US provocations of Japan were intended to cause Japan to go to war, and were indeed increasingly likely to do so. “This continuing putting pins in rattlesnakes,” FDR was to confide to friends later, “finally got this country bit.” On November 26, when Washington a demanded Japan’s withdrawal from China, the “rattlesnakes” in Tokyo decided they had enough and prepared to “bite.” A Japanese fleet was ordered to set sail for Hawaii in order to attack the US warships that FDR had decided to station there, rather provocatively as well as invitingly as far as the Japanese were concerned, in 1940. Having deciphered the Japanese codes, the American government and top army brass knew exactly what the Japanese armada was up to, but did not warn the commanders in Hawaii, thus allowing the “surprise attack” on Pearl Harbor to happen on Sunday, December 7, 1941.[16]

The following day FDR found it easy to convince Congress to declare war on Japan, and the American people, shocked by a seemingly cowardly attack that they could not know to have been provoked, and expected, by their own government, predictably rallied behind the flag. The US was ready to wage war against Japan, and the prospects for a relatively easy victory were hardly diminished by the losses suffered at Pearl Harbour which, while ostensibly grievous, were far from catastrophic. The ships that had been sunk were older, “mostly 27-year old relics of World War I,” and far from indispensible for warfare against Japan. The modern warships, on the other hand, including the aircraft carriers, whose role in the war would turn out to be crucial, were unscathed, as per chance (?) they had been sent elsewhere by orders from Washington and were safely out at sea during the attack.[17] However, things did not quite work out as expected, because a few days later, on December 11, Nazi Germany unexpectedly declared war, thus forcing the US to confront two enemies and to fight a much bigger war than expected, a war on two fronts, a world war.

In the White House, the news of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor had not arrived as a surprise, but the German declaration of war exploded there as a bombshell. Germany had nothing to do with the attack in Hawaii and had not even been aware of the Japanese plans, so FDR did not consider asking Congress to declare war on Nazi Germany at the same time as Japan. Admittedly, US relations with Germany had been deteriorating for some time because of America’s active support for Great Britain, escalating to the undeclared naval war of the fall of 1941. However, as we have already seen, the US Power Elite did not feel the need to intervene in the war in Europe. It was Hitler himself who declared war on the United States on December 11, 1941, much to the surprise of Roosevelt. Why? Only a few days earlier, on December 5, 1941, the Red Army had launched a counteroffensive in front of Moscow, and this entailed the failure of the Blitzkrieg in the Soviet Union. On that same day, Hitler and his generals realized that they could no longer win the war. But when, only a few days later, the German dictator learned of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, he appears to have speculated that a German declaration of war on the American enemy of his Japanese friends, though not required under the terms of the Tripartite Treaty, would induce Tokyo to reciprocate with a declaration of war on the Soviet enemy of Germany.

With the bulk of the Japanese army stationed in northern China and therefore able to immediately attack the Soviet Union in the Vladivostok area, a conflict with Japan would have forced the Soviets into the extremely perilous predicament of a two-front war, opening up the possibility that Germany might yet win its anti-Soviet “crusade.” Hitler, then, believed that he could exorcize the spectre of defeat by summoning a sort of Japanese deus ex machina to the Soviet Union’s vulnerable Siberian frontier. But Japan did not take Hitler’s bait. Tokyo, too, despised the Soviet state but, already at war against the US, could not afford the luxury of a two-front war and preferred to put all of its money on a “southern” strategy, hoping to win the big prize of resource-rich Southeast Asia, rather than embark on a venture in the inhospitable reaches of Siberia. Only at the very end of the war, after the surrender of Nazi Germany, would it come to hostilities between the Soviet Union and Japan. In any event, because of Hitler’s needless declaration of war, the United States was henceforth also an active participant in the war in Europe, with Great Britain and the Soviet Union as allies.[18]

In recent years, Uncle Sam has been going to war rather frequently, but we are invariably asked to believe that this is done for purely humanitarian reasons, i.e. to prevent holocausts, to stop terrorists from committing all sorts of evil, to get rid of nasty dictators, to promote democracy, etc.[19]

Never, it seems, are economic interests of the US or, more accurately, of America’s big corporations, involved. Quite often, these wars are compared to America’s archetypal “good war,” World War II, in which Uncle Sam supposedly went to war for no other reason than to defend freedom and democracy and to fight dictatorship and injustice. (In an attempt to justify his “war against terrorism,” for example, and “sell” it to the American public, George W. Bush was quick to compare the 9/11 attacks to Pearl Harbor.) This short examination of the circumstances of the US entry into the war in December 1941, however, reveals a very different picture. The American Power Elite wanted war against Japan, plans for such a war had been ready for some time, and in 1941 Roosevelt obligingly arranged for such a war, not because of Tokyo’s unprovoked aggression and horrible war crimes in China, but because American corporations wanted a share of the luscious big “pie” of Far Eastern resources and markets. On the other hand, because the major US corporations were doing wonderful business in and with Nazi Germany, profiting handsomely from the war Hitler had unleashed and, incidentally, providing him with the equipment and fuel required for his Blitzkrieg, war against Nazi Germany was definitely not wanted by the US Power Elite, even though there were plenty of compelling humanitarian reasons for crusading against the truly evil “Third Reich.” Prior to 1941, no plans for a war against Germany had been developed, and in December 1941 the US did not voluntarily go to war against Germany, but “backed into” that war because of Hitler’s own fault.

Humanitarian considerations played no role whatsoever in the calculus that led to America’s participation in World War II, the country’s original “good war.” And there is no reason to believe that they did so in the calculus that, more recently, led to America’s marching off to fight allegedly “good wars” in unhappy lands such as Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya – or will do so in the looming war against Iran.

A war against Iran is very much wanted by Corporate America, since it holds the promise of a large market and of plentiful raw materials, especially oil. As in the case of the war against Japan, plans for such a war are ready, and the present tenant in the White House seems just as eager as FDR was to make it happen. Furthermore, again as in the case of the war against Japan, provocations are being orchestrated, this time in the form of sabotage and intrusions by drones, as well as by the old-fashioned deployment of warships just outside Iranian territorial waters. Washington is again “putting pins in rattlesnakes,” apparently hoping that the Iranian “rattlesnake” will bite back, thus justifying a “splendid little war.” However, as in the case of Pearl Harbor, the resulting war may well again turn out to be much bigger, longer, and nastier than expected.

Jacques R. Pauwels is the author of The Myth of the Good War: America in the Second World War, James Lorimer, Toronto, 2002

Notes

[1] C. Wright Mills, The Power Elite, New York, 1956.
[2] Cited in Charles Higham, Trading with the Enemy: An Exposé of The Nazi-American Money Plot 1933-1949, New York, 1983, p. 163.
[3] Robert B. Stinnett, Day of Deceit: The Truth about FDR and Pearl Harbor, New York, 2001, p. 17.
[4] Cited in Sean Dennis Cashman, America, Roosevelt, and World War II, New York and London, 1989, p. 56; .
[5] Edwin Black, Nazi Nexus: America’s Corporate Connections to Hitler’s Holocaust, Washington/DC, 2009, p. 115.
[6] Floyd Rudmin, “Secret War Plans and the Malady of American Militarism,” Counterpunch, 13:1, February 17-19, 2006. pp. 4-6, http://www.counterpunch.org/2006/02/17/secret-war-plans-and-the-malady-of-american-militarism
[7] Jacques R. Pauwels, The Myth of the Good War : America in the Second World War, Toronto, 2002, pp. 50-56. The fraudulent practices of Lend-Lease are described in Kim Gold, “The mother of all frauds: How the United States swindled Britain as it faced Nazi Invasion,” Morning Star, April 10, 2003.
[8] Cited in David Lanier Lewis, The public image of Henry Ford: an American folk hero and his company, Detroit, 1976, pp. 222, 270.
[9] Jacques R. Pauwels, “70 Years Ago, December 1941: Turning Point of World War II,” Global Research, December 6, 2011, http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=28059.
[10] Rudmin, op. cit.
[11] See e.g. Howard Zinn, A People’s History of the United States, s.l., 1980, p. 305 ff.
[12] Patrick J. Hearden, Roosevelt confronts Hitler: America’s Entry into World War II, Dekalb/IL, 1987, p. 105.
[13] “Anti-Japanese sentiment,” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Japanese_sentiment
[14] Patrick J. Buchanan, “Did FDR Provoke Pearl Harbor?,” Global Research, December 7, 2011,http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=28088 . Buchanan refers to a new book by George H. Nash, Freedom Betrayed: Herbert Hoover’s Secret History of the Second World War and its Aftermath, Stanford/CA, 2011.
[15] Stinnett, op. cit., p. 6.
[16] Stinnett, op. cit., pp. 5, 9-10, 17-19, 39-43; Buchanan, op. cit.; Pauwels, The Myth…, pp. 67-68. On American intercepts of coded Japanese messages, see Stinnett, op. cit., pp. 60-82. “Rattlesnakes”-quotation from Buchanan, op. cit.
[17] Stinnett, op. cit., pp. 152-154.
[18] Pauwels, “70 Years Ago…”
[19] See Jean Bricmont, Humanitarian imperialism: Using Human Rights to Sell War, New York, 2006. Jacques R. Pauwels is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Jacques R. Pauwels

READ FULL STORY HERE

Coming up every Saturday at 1:00 pm Pacific – 04:00 pm Eastern – 20:00 GMT

Gadfly on the wall — Susan Lindauer
Cindy presents her guest Susan Lindauer, author of Extreme Prejudice: The Terrifying Story of the Patriot Act and the Cover Ups of 9/11 and Iraq. Ms. Lindauer was a US “asset” covering the Libyan and Iraqi embassies in Washington D.C. and served as a “back channel” during the Lockerbie negotiations. Thus she was situated in an ideal “fly on the wall” position there. She and Cindy discuss Susan’s perceptions, the Lockerbie, incident, and the unraveling of the “whole cloth” manufactured to “prove” Libya’s ‘guilt’ in the matter. Ms. Lindauer maintains the Libya was known actually innocent of blowing up Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland on December 21, 1988. She also agues that . . . . No; . . No; It’s just too good. You gotta listen in to this for yourself! Susan was also interviewed by Kevin Barrett on his show on No Lies Radio..Click here to listen to the archive.
This interview is from May 22, 2011.
Cindy’s website is here.

Dec 7, 2011 15:45 Moscow Time

Prince of Saudi Arabia Turki bin Faisal Al Saud warned his country may start its own nuclear program as a response to Iran’s effort to develop a nuclear warhead.

Iran and Saudi Arabia are the main rivals in the region. And Turki al-Faisal, a former intelligence chief and a nephew to King Abdullah – has always been critical towards Shiite-ruled Iran. Earlier, however, he stopped short of saying his country was eager to join “a nuclear arms race”.

This may lead to a runway arms race in the Middle East, Vladimir Evseev, an analyst from the Center for social and political studies, believes:

“Saudi Arabia has not got any infrastructure for building a nuclear warhead. Instead, it will be looking for a state that could manufacture a bomb for it. Egypt, which has the necessary infrastructure, would be one of the options. All this is extremely dangerous, especially taking into account that Turkey is closely monitoring the developments in Saudi Arabia and will certainly join the race.”

Petr Topychkanov, an expert at the Centre for International Security of the Institute of World Economy and International Relations falls in with his colleague. At the same time, he says, the aggressive rhetoric voiced by Saudi Arabia might help find new approaches to resolving the stand-off over Iran’s nuclear program:

“If Iran gets hold of nuclear weapons, it may have a domino effect across the whole region. Iran’s efforts can not be stopped by sanctions. There should be other measures, in fact, a whole set of measures to halt its efforts. The US will make Iran give up its nuclear program only by normalizing relations with Tehran. This is not the case right now, as Iran regards sanctions as politically motivated and not related to its nuclear program.”

Saudi Arabia’s threat to join a nuclear arms race can also be a bargaining tool in the US talks with Russia and China, as neither of them supports sanctions against Iran. Yet, analyst Vladimir Evseev does not believe that it will help the US achieve its goals:

“The US is using various tools to put pressure on Russia and China. One of these tools, for instance, is the claims that, if sanctions are not toughened, Israel will launch an air strike against Iran’s nuclear sites. This is pure blackmail. The US has to find stronger arguments for convincing Russia to cooperate.”

Read entire article here

Coming up Tuesday at 9am Pacific – 12 Noon Eastern – 16:00 GMT
Will be archived here after the broadcast by Tuesday evening.

“THE KEVIN BARRETT SHOW”
EXCLUSIVE –Tuesday on KB Show:
“Indefinite Military Detention”?! Ask Susan Lindauer!

Guest: Ex-CIA asset & imprisoned 9/11 whistleblower Susan Lindauer, author of Extreme Prejudice.

The Kevin Barrett Show is independently produced and hosted by Kevin Barrett and these shows are externally produced content. All externally produced content broadcast on No Lies Radio is the sole responsibility of the program-content producer and is not the responsibility of NoLiesRadio.org. Any questions or concerns should be directed to the content producer.

It is amazing just how big and influential the 9/11 truth and justice movement has become. The New York Times, ABC, CNN, Time magazine, and other dinosaur media outlets cannot push back the political tsunami of truth and accountability that is heading towards Washington.

The official media organs of the totalitarian state are collapsing left and right. Newspaper circulation is declining across the West which is a highly positive development for freedom and democracy because that means less government propaganda is entering the minds of the people. And TV viewership is declining, too, as more people turn to the Internet for their news and entertainment.

Aaron Barnhart writes in The Kansas City Star that “For first time in 20 years, TV ownership declines.” Does that mean TV is dying? No. There are many great television shows and programs that teach, inspire, and entertain. As the former Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission Newton Minow said in his 1961 “vast wasteland” speech:

“When television is good, nothing — not the theater, not the magazines, or newspapers — nothing is better. But when television is bad, nothing is worse.”
Fifty years later, the cross-generational crusade to destroy TV as a mind control and cultural brainwashing tool continues. Reformers are aided with a more conscious and accountable tool – the Internet.

In September 2011, Minow and others participated in an event called “News and Entertainment in the Digital Age: A Vast Wasteland Revisited,” to discus the failure of the official media to serve the public interest and “to reflect upon the changed landscape of television and dramatic shifts in the broader media ecosystem, and identify lessons learned that may help to offer insight into the next 50 years of media and public discourse.” Watch the talk here. The event was covered by Katie Koch of the Harvard Gazette, who wrote:

Now, Minow acknowledged, his grandchildren don’t even own TV sets. The public has nearly limitless access to news and entertainment between cable television and the Internet. But the debate over what’s in the public’s best interest rages on, and reform is still needed, he said.

“Today’s politics are dominated by money,” Minow said. Candidates spend most of their time raising money “so they can buy radio and television ads. They’re raising money from the public to get access to something the public owns, the airwaves. That’s a crazy system.”

Compounding the problem today, said panelist Jonathan Alter, a historian and columnist for Bloomberg View, is the fact that struggling news outlets increasingly do not want to foot the costs of investigative reporting.

“Talk is cheap, and reporting is expensive,” Alter said. “The ‘vast wasteland’ now has this big ‘Tower of Babble’ on top of it.”

Other panelists were more optimistic about the new bottom-up model of news. Ethan Zuckerman, founder of the international blog network Global Voices, pointed out a recent hypothesis in the Columbia Journalism Review that says that cheaply produced, easy-to-distribute video is fast becoming “a universal human language.”

It is a great and beautiful thing that TV news is no longer trusted and watched by the vast majority of the public in North America. The cover up of 9/11 truth by television parrots and pundits has led to the unjust deaths of one million people, four trillions dollars wasted, the breakdown of the rule of law in the world, the transformation of America and other Western nations into a police state, and a world on the brink of world war III. As I wrote in the article, “The Misuse of The Power of Television In Wartime Is Itself A War Crime”:

Television has created a second dark age in Western civilization and undermined the freedom of thought, which is the basis for a free and open society.
Whereas traditional, arrogant, and obnoxious journalists have failed to challenge power-seeking traitors and psychopaths, new media journalists are serving the global public interest by telling the truth about 9/11 and raising the reality of state terrorism in the United States, Israel and the West to public consciousness.

The editors of the website the Daily Bell have popularized the idea of an “Internet Reformation,” and how it is changing power dynamics across the planet. Here is an excerpt from their larger article called “Internet Reformation”:

“The Internet Reformation is the culmination of the power and glory of Western civil society and free-market thinking. It is the apogee of all that is best in a sweep of history that began with the ancient Greeks and has culminated in the hearts and minds of millions of young men and women who industriously add to its impact every day via additional code, non-mainstream news or fundamental scientific commentary.

It is NOT an “Internet Revolution.” The Internet Revolution is a standard “pat” phrase of the powers-that-be about the so-called empowering effects of technology. The Internet Reformation is a much more deeply disruptive concept. It is truly a revolutionary one, affecting every aspect of human society and human relationships with modern elites. It is focused around the insights generated by the Internet itself.

This concept is based on what happened during the era of the Gutenberg press. Almost from the beginning, the Gutenberg press was a revolutionary technology. As soon as people used the press to print Bibles, readers began to discover that the Holy Word differed considerably from what they’d been taught by the Catholic Church.

Until then, Bibles had been fairly rare. They were printed in Latin or Greek, and copied down by hand with elaborate engravings. The Catholic Church and its important functionaries and bureaucrats possessed Bibles. Priests performed Mass with their back to the congregation. The ceremony was a highly Romanized one, as the West had come to conceive of Rome within its most corrupt and centralizing phase, and highly controlled.

But printing Bibles in moveable type changed the power relationship entirely. Now, anyone could own a Bible and they were easily reproduced and increasingly inexpensive. Almost immediately, then Bibles began to be translated into “vulgate” and eventually the King James Version (English) would become a dominant variant. But in the meantime, the damage was done. First came the Renaissance and then the Reformation and finally the Age of Enlightenment, three powerful rolling waves of free-thinking that transformed the face of human society, first in the West and then around the world.

The changes ushered in by the Gutenberg press were fundamental. The Renaissance began the reconfiguration by allowing for the rediscovery of the scientific orientation of Greece and Rome. This set in motion a series of events that has not yet ceased to reverberate.”

What the Internet has done for modern scholarship and learning cannot be fully grasped yet, as the editors of the Daily Bell point out. But we can already foresee major new works of history that will turn the conventional history of the 20th century on its head and change how we understand the political and economic developments of the last hundred years.

The positive consequences of truth-telling on the Internet for human society and global political affairs are limitless. An entire world of government psyops and corporate treason has been kept hidden from the global public. Matter of fact, entire advanced civilizations that exist beyond our planet have been shielded from public light by the U.S. shadow state, world governments and the world press.

Historian Richard Dolan, author of the widely acclaimed books, “UFOs and the National Security State: Chronology of a Coverup, 1941-1973,” and, “The Cover-Up Exposed, 1973-1991 (UFOs and the National Security State, Vol. 2)” has uncovered the secret history of the last sixty five years in American history and world history without sounding either paranoid or conspiratorial, which tends to happen to a lot of people because of the nature of the dark era in which we live.

In an article written on January 20, 2011, called, “JFK, Secrecy, and UFOs,” Dolan acknowledged the murder of President John F. Kennedy by the shadow terrorists in the CIA as a critical step towards the construction and consolidation of totalitarian power inside Washington. Dolan wrote:
“Like many people who have reviewed the life and Presidency of JFK, it’s my feeling that we lost something very important on that dark day of his assassination. What we lost was the implicit bond of trust that existed between the American people and their government.
The system that had been evolved for a century and a half, which despite all imperfections had moved in fits and starts toward greater power to the people, had made a great transformation during the Second World War. That was when the American republican system government became increasingly swallowed up by a “national security state.” It did not take new boss very long before it decided to remove the President in what became for all intents and purposes a silent coup d’etat.

Thus for good reason are we unable to look back at JFK, at the era of Camelot, and avoid that feeling in the pit of our stomachs. That feeling of loss, and the conviction that his assassination was a criminal action yet to be punished, or even acknowledged.”

In his classic speech to the American Newspaper Publishers Association on April 27, 1961, President Kennedy appealed to the better natures of journalists, and pleaded them to defend the public interest even at the cost of their careers. He called the press the keeper of mankind’s conscience, saying:

“It was early in the Seventeenth Century that Francis Bacon remarked on three recent inventions already transforming the world: the compass, gunpowder and the printing press. Now the links between the nations first forged by the compass have made us all citizens of the world, the hopes and threats of one becoming the hopes and threats of us all. In that one world’s efforts to live together, the evolution of gunpowder to its ultimate limit has warned mankind of the terrible consequences of failure.

And so it is to the printing press–to the recorder of man’s deeds, the keeper of his conscience, the courier of his news–that we look for strength and assistance, confident that with your help man will be what he was born to be: free and independent.”
After Kennedy’s assassination, American journalists turned mute. They not only let down their President, but their country and their readers. And this is understandable. Journalists in the United States who tell the truth about U.S. government policies like Gary Webb are killed.

A dark cloud of fear and death hangs over the journalism profession in the West. But that’s not the whole story. Most journalists just flat out don’t care about the common good, freedom, truth, or justice.

And so it is to the Internet – “to the recorder of man’s deeds, the keeper of his conscience, the courier of his news–that we look for strength and assistance, confident that with” the help of conspiracy theorists, truthers, birthers, and deathers, “man will be what he was born to be: free and independent.”

The corrupt gatekeepers who bought all the printing presses and used their god-like power over the media to cover up state crimes against the American people, Iraq, Afghanistan, and the world by secret intelligence agencies cannot repress the big truths of modern history forever.

A global political reformation of shadow governments and criminal media institutions is inevitable.

“It is decentralization that the modern power elite fears most,” write the editors of the Daily Bell, “because decentralized spheres of influence are impossible to control. Unfortunately the Renaissance and Reformation were all about the decentralization of control built on the availability of real knowledge and a return to primary sources that undermined the “experts” of church and state.” They add: “The darkness is lifting as it lifted long ago during the Renaissance. An Internet Reformation is coming. It will have numerous unpredictable ramifications. In fact, its dawn is already here.”
POSTED BY SAMAN MOHAMMADI AT 10:26 PM

READ FULL STORY HERE

Every Saturday – Anti-War – Progressive Truth Teach-in
Coming up at 9:00am Pacific * 12 noon Eastern * 16:00 GMT
Will be archived here after the broadcast by Monday.


Al Qaeda and the Global War on Terrorism
– Michel Chossudovsky
The broad consequences of 9/11 with regard to US military doctrine, and more broadly the pretext and justification which the lies surrounding 9/11 have given to waging a war of conquest under the banner of what we call the Global War on Terrorism; Libya, Syria; Q and A. From a Guns & Butter Presentation. Recorded September 9, 2011 in Toronto, Canada.

The Anti-war Progressive Teach-in broaches upon some of the most highly charged subjects of our day—War & Peace, national healthcare, women’s rights, human rights, civil rights, torture, vets against the war, freedom, democracy, protest, demonstrations, etc. We scour the world to find and gather debates and presentations that are extremely informative and educational. Related subjects are also discussed. It provides key information for the uninitiated and the initiated alike.

Uploaded by RussiaToday on Nov 29, 2011

Several dozen Iranian students have stormed the UK embassy in Tehran, chanting “death to England” and bringing down the British flag. Students clashed with riot police as they climbed over the embassy’s gate, rushed into the building and started throwing documents from the windows. The protesters chanted “Down with Britain”, “Down with America”, “Down with Israel” and “Students are Awake and Hate Britain,” according to Fars news agency.

Source www.youtube.com

November 29, 2011

Illuminati or New World Order in Syria!

Source www.youtube.com

NATO strike revenge for Pakistan crackdown on CIA assets Nov. 26, 2011

Source www.youtube.com

Sen. Rand Paul Defends American Citizens Against Indefinite Detainment

Uploaded by SenatorRandPaul on Nov 29, 2011

Coming up Tuesday at 9am Pacific – 12 Noon Eastern – 16:00 GMT
Will be archived here after the broadcast by Tuesday evening.

“THE KEVIN BARRETT SHOW”
EXCLUSIVE –Tuesday on KB Show:
Senator Mike Gravel: Israel lies; US is a war-hungry drunk

Senator Mike Gravel of the 9/11 Citizens’ Commission campaign has always been one of the few truth-tellers in American politics. But recently he’s been ratcheting it up a couple of notches. See: US Senator Condemns Israel’s Lies about Iran

Uploaded by RussiaToday on Nov 23, 2011
The US is like a drunkard who charges to war with anyone who might pose a threat, ex-Senator and former US presidential candidate Mike Gravel says.

The Kevin Barrett Show is independently produced and hosted by Kevin Barrett and these shows are externally produced content. All externally produced content broadcast on No Lies Radio is the sole responsibility of the program-content producer and is not the responsibility of NoLiesRadio.org. Any questions or concerns should be directed to the content producer.

Coming up today and every Monday at 7:00 pm Pacific – 10:00 pm Eastern – 02:00 GMT

GUNS AND BUTTER with Bonnie Faulkner

Al Qaeda and the Global War on Terrorism
– Michel Chossudovsky

The broad consequences of 9/11 with regard to US military doctrine, and more broadly the pretext and justification which the lies surrounding 9/11 have given to waging a war of conquest under the banner of what we call the Global War on Terrorism; Libya, Syria; Q and A.

Every Saturday 7:00 pm Pacific – 10:00 pm Eastern – 02:00 GMT (Sunday)
Will be archived here after the broadcast by Monday.

PSI SATURDAY — explorations in Paranormal research
Coming up Saturday: UFOs and the National Security State — Richard Dolan
Gene Steinberg and David Biedny of TheParacast.Com spend the evening with researcher Richard M. Dolan, author of “UFOs and the National Security State,” who explores government secrecy and its potential impact on disclosure. This week’s show was broadcast courtesty of the TheParacast.Com and it is archived there. (See 11-25-07)

And please Listen to the latest show from TheParacast.com broadcast every Sunday at 6:00 PM Pacific, 8:00 PM Central, 9:00 PM Eastern, and Monday at 0100 GMT. Go to TheParacast.com to listen.

Coming up Tuesday at 9am Pacific – 12 Noon Eastern – 16:00 GMT
Will be archived here after the broadcast by Tuesday evening.

“THE KEVIN BARRETT SHOW”
EXCLUSIVE –Tuesday on KB Show:
Adrian Salbuchi: Zionist banksters on the verge of unleashing World War

Guest: Adrian Salbuchi, international consultant and author, anti-New World Order activist-pundit, founder of Argentina’s Second Republic Movement, 9/11 truth supporter and critic of Zionism. Adrian recently appeared on Russia Today, arguing that Netanyahu’s current push for war with Iran may not be a bluff, and that it could set off World War III.

The Kevin Barrett Show is independently produced and hosted by Kevin Barrett and these shows are externally produced content. All externally produced content broadcast on No Lies Radio is the sole responsibility of the program-content producer and is not the responsibility of NoLiesRadio.org. Any questions or concerns should be directed to the content producer.

Coming up Tuesday at 9am Pacific – 12 Noon Eastern – 16:00 GMT
Will be archived here after the broadcast by Tuesday evening.

“THE KEVIN BARRETT SHOW”
EXCLUSIVE –Tuesday on KB Show:
Eric Sayward–We Are Change? What is its role in the Occupy protests?

Guest: Eric Sayward, We Are Change – Wisconsin.

The Kevin Barrett Show is independently produced and hosted by Kevin Barrett and these shows are externally produced content. All externally produced content broadcast on No Lies Radio is the sole responsibility of the program-content producer and is not the responsibility of NoLiesRadio.org. Any questions or concerns should be directed to the content producer.

Coming up Tuesday at 9am Pacific – 12 Noon Eastern – 16:00 GMT
Will be archived here after the broadcast by Tuesday evening.

“THE KEVIN BARRETT SHOW”
EXCLUSIVE –Tuesday on KB Show:
Richard Moore: Is Occupy Wall Street Occupied?

Richard Moore, author of Escaping the Matrix, says the banksters’ grip on the planet’s power pyramid is such that if Occupy Wall Street isn’t already occupied, it soon will be. He believes the Rothschild-centered New World Order secret government will offer Occupy Wall Street “reforms” – just like they engineered earlier crises, then offered earlier “reforms” including the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913. The big “reform” they’re working toward: A bankster-controlled world government.

The Kevin Barrett Show is independently produced and hosted by Kevin Barrett and these shows are externally produced content. All externally produced content broadcast on No Lies Radio is the sole responsibility of the program-content producer and is not the responsibility of NoLiesRadio.org. Any questions or concerns should be directed to the content producer.

Coming up Tuesday at 9am Pacific – 12 Noon Eastern – 16:00 GMT
Will be archived here after the broadcast by Tuesday evening.

“THE KEVIN BARRETT SHOW”
EXCLUSIVE –Tuesday on KB Show:
Christopher Bollyn returns to the KB Show

Guest: Christopher Bollyn, author of the important book Solving 9/11. He has a great new article out entitled Chicago’s Elders of Zion and Obama’s War for Profit. Highly recommended!

The Kevin Barrett Show is independently produced and hosted by Kevin Barrett and these shows are externally produced content. All externally produced content broadcast on No Lies Radio is the sole responsibility of the program-content producer and is not the responsibility of NoLiesRadio.org. Any questions or concerns should be directed to the content producer.

Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch demanded the arrest and prosecution of former president George W. Bush before his appearance at an economic summit in Surrey, British Columbia on October 20th.

The advocacy organizations have called on Canadian federal authorities to arrest Bush due to the “overwhelming evidence that Bush and other senior administration officials authorized and implemented a regime of torture and ill-treatment of hundreds of detainees in US custody.”

Though both advocacy groups called for Bush’s extradition, The Vancouver Sun reports that the Canadian government has no intention to comply with the demand, saying the organizations were “engaging in cheap stunts.”

The ultimatum has also been dismissed in the US. Eliott Abrams, Senior Fellow for Middle Eastern Studies at the Counsel for Foreign Relations, published a piece highlighting the arbitrary demands for prosecution by HRW and Amnesty.

Though the groups have been outspoken in their campaigns against Bush’s involvement with torture, they choose their targets selectively, Abrams argues, saying that neither organization demanded the arrests of other heads of state with histories of human rights violations:

Read entire story here

Coming up Tuesday at 9am Pacific – 12 Noon Eastern – 16:00 GMT
Will be archived here after the broadcast by Tuesday evening.

“THE KEVIN BARRETT SHOW”
EXCLUSIVE –Tuesday on KB Show:
Ken O’Keefe on the limits of nonviolence, being a world citizen, and more!

Ken O’Keefe, my colleague at Veterans Today, is an ex-Marine who is now fighting the good fight – the fight to save humanity, and the planet, from the psychopaths in power. Whether he is disarming murderous Israeli soldiers on the Mavi Marmara, or helping Irish travelers at Dale Farm stave off eviction, Ken has a way of putting his body between the aggressor and the victim. He is also a supremely articulate and passionate speaker.

The Kevin Barrett Show is independently produced and hosted by Kevin Barrett and these shows are externally produced content. All externally produced content broadcast on No Lies Radio is the sole responsibility of the program-content producer and is not the responsibility of NoLiesRadio.org. Any questions or concerns should be directed to the content producer.

Over the past 21 months, I have come into contact with many people that fail to even consider the possibility that U.S. intelligence agents could have been involved in the underwear bomber plot. It is with these people in mind that I decided to write the following article. I have noticed that recent terrorist attacks within the United States have many similar characteristics. If you look at these plots together as a series of attacks, the modus operandi of U.S. intelligence agencies begins to develop. For this article, I have decided to look at only “terrorist attacks” from January 1, 2002, to the present.

1. Mohamed Mohamud (The Portland Christmas Tree Bomber)
Date Of Incident: November 26, 2010.

The 2010 Portland car bomb plot involved an incident in which Mohamud, a Somali-American student, was arrested in an FBI sting operation, after attempting to set off what he thought was a car bomb at a Christmas tree lighting in Portland, Oregon.
Mohamud had been monitored by the FBI for months. Prior to Mohamud’s arrest, an undercover FBI agent, posing as a terrorist, had been in contact with him since June 2010 (A 5 month period). In preparation for the planned bombing of a public gathering, Mohamud and undercover FBI operatives drove to a remote area of Lincoln County, Oregon, where they conducted a test run on November 4, 2010 by detonating a real bomb Mohamud believed to have been hidden inside a backpack. The fake bomb was in a white van that carried six 55-gallon drums with what appeared to be real detonation cords and plastic caps. Mohamud tried to detonate the bomb by dialing a cell phone that was attached to it. When the device failed to explode, the undercover agent suggested he get out of the car to obtain better reception. When he did so, arresting agents moved in. According to the FBI, the device it provided to Mohamud had no explosive components (even the detonating caps were inert) and the public was never in any danger.

2. Sami Samir Hassoun (Wrigley Field Bomber)
Date of Incident: September 19, 2010

Hassoun placed a backpack authorities say he thought contained a bomb near Chicago’s Wrigley Field. The fake but ominous looking device (a paint can fitted with blasting caps and a timer)was given to him by an FBI undercover agent. According to Hassoun’s attorney, Hassoun didn’t bring anything of his own making to the incident. All materials were given to him by an under cover FBI agent. Hassoun also had no apparent affiliation with extremists. The complaint alleges he raised the specter of terrorist groups only by suggesting it would be helpful to blame them for any attacks he staged. At least two FBI undercover agents got in touch with Hassoun, posing as co-plotters and eventually helped to deliver the bogus bomb.

3. Bronx Terrorism Plot
Date of Incident: May 20, 2009

On May 20, 2009, US law enforcement arrested four black Muslim men in connection with a plot to shoot down military airplanes flying out of an Air National Guard base in Newburgh, New York and blow up two synagogues in the Riverdale community of the Bronx. The events leading up to the attempted attack began in June 2008. Shahed Hussain, an Albany hotel owner and FBI informant, showed up at the Masjid al-Ikhlas mosque under the name “Maqsood”, talking of jihad and violence. Hussain, a Pakistani immigrant, agreed to serve as an FBI informant after being arrested in 2002 over a scam involving driver’s licenses. Four men expressed interest to Hussain. They planned to both bomb the Riverdale Temple and nearby Riverdale Jewish Center in the Bronx, and, using Stinger surface-to-air guided missiles, shoot down military planes flying out of a nearby air base. On May 6, 2009, the men traveled to Stamford, Connecticut, to pick up what they believed to be a surface-to-air guided-missile system and three improvised explosive devices, all of which were incapable of actually being used. The men placed fake bombs wired to cell phones in three separate cars outside the Riverdale Temple and nearby Riverdale Jewish Center, both in the Riverdale community of Bronx. The FBI informer also served as the driver of the suspects’ vehicle. Both the car bombs and the missiles were actually fakes given to the plotters with the help of an informant for the FBI. Each of the two homemade bombs was equipped with about 37 pounds of inert material designed to look like C-4 plastic explosive, and “there was no danger to anyone,” according to the FBI. The men were returning to their vehicle and heading to attack aircraft at the Stewart Air National Guard Base in Newburgh, New York, with the fake Stinger missiles when law enforcement stopped them.

4. Antonio Martinez
Date of Incident: December 8, 2010

Martinez was arrested in an FBI sting after agents said he tried to detonate a phony bomb outside a Maryland military recruitment center. The FBI began investigating Martinez in early October 2010 after an informant pointed out postings on Martinez’s Facebook page. Martinez’s attorney said the lack of a recording of the informant’s initial three conversations with Martinez is a sign the government was trying to obscure its role in developing the plot. It was in those conversations that Martinez first mentioned attacking the recruiting center, according to a criminal complaint. Also according to his attorney, the government “induced him to be involved in an act which was clearly the design of the government and provided Martinez with the fake bomb”.

5. Rezwan Ferdaus
Date of Incident: September 28, 2011

Federal prosecutors allege in court documents that Rezwan Ferdaus outlined an elaborate plan to undercover FBI agents posing as al-Qaeda operatives that involved the use of three drone aircraft carrying deadly payloads to attack and destroy federal government landmarks. Ferdaus was arrested after allegedly accepting delivery of materials, including three grenades, six Ak-47 assault rifles and a quantity of what he believed to be powerful C-4 explosives. U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz said all of the weaponry was in the control of undercover agents who were closely monitoring the plot’s developments. She said the public was never in danger.
However, some legal organizations and Muslim groups have questioned whether Ferdaus, whose activities were carried out with two undercover FBI agents posing as terrorists, would have been able to carry out such a sophisticated plot if left to his own devices. In numerous previous cases in the US, the FBI has been accused of over-zealousness in its investigations and of entrapping people into terror plots who might otherwise not have carried out an attack. On April 19, 2011, undercover agents met with Ferdaus and questioned the “feasibility” of his plan. That raises the prospect that the FBI agents were somehow goading Ferdaus into more action.
At the same meeting the undercover agents also gave financial assistance for Ferdaus to travel to Washington on a scouting trip: a fact that raises the question of whether he would have made the trip without that financial help. The undercover agents also supplied thousands of dollars in cash for Ferdaus to buy the F-86 Sabre miniature plane to be used in an attack.

Analysis Of These 5 Attacks:

When looking at these plots, the most obvious connection between them (Other than the Muslim male connection) is that the FBI provided each of these “terrorists” with fake weapons, including fake explosives, to carry out the plots. Also, each of the terrorists attempted to carry out the plots with the aid of undercover FBI agents. It is unclear to what extent the FBI agents came up with the initial idea. However, it certainly is questionable whether any of these attacks would have occurred without the aid of the undercover FBI agents. Before meeting up with the undercover FBI agents, most of these men had little to no criminal record and were guilty of no more than random terroristic thoughts. It is also very apparent that the undercover FBI agents allowed the “terrorists” to conclude a significant portion of the plots including attempting to detonate fake bombs. While researching these and other “terrorist” attacks, I could not help but notice the lack of “terrorist” attacks from 2002-2008. I can’t help but question whether the increase in these attacks is related to the term of office of President Obama, which began in January 2009. As I chose to not make this article poilitical, I won’t delve into such aspect any further. During this same time period, on December 25, 2009, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab,the “Underwear Bomber” attempted to detonate an explosive in his underwear as he sat 8 rows in front of me.

Analysis of the Underwear Bomber Incident:

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab(Umar)allegedly received his bomb from Al Qaeda in Yemen and due to U.S. Intelligence Agencies “failing to connect the dots”, was able to board flight 253 with a bomb. The U.S. Intelligence Agencies “failed to connect” the dots despite the fact that they had been warned by Umar’s own father several months earlier that Umar was a threat. Further, we are told that it was this “failing to connect the dots” that led to Umar boarding, despite the Congressional testimony of Patrick Kennedy (see his testimony here:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jN_33ojupTc).
This testimony from Kennedy, the Under Secretary of State, indicated that a yet to be disclosed intelligence agency was tracking Umar, and wanted to track him into the U.S. to catch “bigger fish”. Now how would such agency do that if it didn’t allow Umar to board a plane heading to the U.S.? What’s also troubling is that nearly all of the mainstream U.S. media failed to even report on this Congressional testimony. The one newspaper that did, the Detroit News, has now erased the story from its archives. Of course, I witnessed Umar near the boarding gate of flight 253. He was escorted by a sharp dressed man, that spoke perfect American English without an accent and told the gate agent that Umar didn’t have a passport, that he needed to board the plane, that he was from “Sudan, and we do this all the time”. My next question is who is the “we” that he was referring to. Obviously, I have to ask what sort of U.S. authority figure in Amsterdam could say that “we” let refugees on planes all of the time without passports and apparently, has the authority to make it happen. It seems that an undercover FBI agent would fit the bill. Although Schiphol Airport has the most security cameras in the world, the airport audio and video remain unreleased under a court protective order. In December 2010, Umar’s stand-by attorney, Anthony Chambers reported to the Detroit Free Press that “The Government’s own experts have indicated that the bomb was impossibly defective as it lacked a blasting cap”. That story has now been erased from the Free Press archives. Although pieces of the bomb laid all over the airline cabin near row 19, law enforcement officers made no effort to remove passengers from such area and passengers trampled through pieces of the bomb as they exited the plane. The NPR interview of Jay Howard, the man who sat next to Umar, is very telling (see below)(http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=123821351. In this interview, Howard relates that the FBI told him not to talk about what happened and took all of his clothes that were covered with pieces of the bomb. Although the FBI had samples of the bomb all over the airline, it seized all of his clothes to “test the bomb materials”. I have to wonder if the FBI actually seized Mr. Howard’s clothes in order to not let others test the bomb materials. In his NPR interview, Mr. Howard makes the following curious comment “I don’t want to call him a terrorist because he hasn’t been treated as a terrorist and it wasn’t a national threat”. Really Mr. Howard? Why wasn’t it a National threat? Is this why the FBI told you not to talk about this too much? Note that I am not saying that Jay Howard was involved in this lot, but only that he knows more than he is letting on. Remember, after we exited the plane, we were taken to a baggage claim area where we stood with our carry on bags for an hour, not knowing if other bombs were located in the carry on bags. Law enforcement was not concerned, however. At this time, Umar had already exited the plane and told officers that “there is another bomb on board”. Another man was taken into custody during this time, after a bomb sniffing dog found explosives in his carry on bag. The U.S. Government changed its story on who this man was 5 times before finally deciding to ignore the existence of the man entirely. It’s most likely that this man was an FBI undercover agent that provided Umar with his “bomb” and the bomb resideue in his bag alerted the dog. In late 2010, Umar was charged with conspiring with “persons known and unknown” yet none of these persons have ever been named. Their involvement with the plot has never been explained. Shouldn’t such persons be on the FBI’s 10 Most Wanted List? Shouldn’t the FBI solicit the public to help identify such individuals, who should be some of the most wanted men in the world? Not if they are FBI agents. There are very few differences between the Underwear Bomber incident and the 5 incidents I listed above. One difference being that this attack occurred on a plane which caused a fire that did indeed threaten lives. The other plots seemingly didn’t risk injury to others. We must remember that the U.S. needs legitimate “terrorist attacks” to keep making money for those that benefit from the fraudulent war on terror. Also, a legitimate airline attack was needed to usher in the body scanning machines. Without a failed bomb in a terrorist’s clothes, the American public would never stand for the body scanning machines. Lastly, the flight proceeded over Detroit before the “bomb” was lit, on Christmas Day, in order to make the biggest splash in the media. The U.S. Government’s modus operandi of setting up these attacks with fake bombs and without risking injury to others was seemingly achieved. This led to Janet Napolitano’s explicit comment that “the system worked” when referring to this attack. Janet knows what happened here, and so do I. Hopefully, I have convinced other that read this post that the U.S. Government, via its intelligence agencies, gave Umar a fake bomb and escorted him through security in order to assure a fake “terrorist attack”. This “terrorist” attack occurred in order to continue padding the wallets of those that benefit from the war on terror and its repulsive body scanners. Would this plot have happened without the aid of the unnamed U.S. Intelligence Agency that allowed Umar to board, provided Umar with his fake bomb and God knows whatever else? Not a chance. I sit here writing this article a mere 30 minutes from Dearborn, Michigan, which has the largest segment of Muslims in the U.S. I realize that if the U.S. were truly in danger of terrorist attacks from Muslims, this area should be in jeopardy of suicide and car bombings that frequently occur in the middle east. These attacks do not occur here. I know why, and I ask that you also ask yourself why. Those that are hopeful that the upcoming trial will reveal anything of this sort should think again. Umar is representing himself and thereby refusing to let standy-by attorney Chambers use the entrapment defense (that he told me he would) if he was allowed to. This action by Umar is inexplicable, unless of course he is involved in the plot, has been threatened or promised a lenient sentence. I don’t know which, but there seemingly is no other explanation. Obviously, there is more to this story than the FBI is telling us.
Composed By: Lori H at Sunday, October 02, 2011

READ FULL STORY HERE

A “Pull No Punches” Interview with Dr. Shyam Sunder, the lead WTC investigator for NIST.
This Interview was last broadcast on October 10, 2011.
It is now archived — Use Player

Building 7 Collapse Interview with Dr. Shyam Sunder of N.I.S.T.
No Lies Radio News brought you live coverage of the N.I.S.T news conference on their final report on the collapse of World Trade Tower Building 7 and we followed immediately with a live broadcast of the AE911Truth.org news conference with their response showing the flaws in the N.I.S.T report. That day, Allan Rees, of No Lies Radio News, was granted an interview with Dr. Shyam Sunder, who presented the report at their news conference and who is the lead WTC investigator for NIST. This is a PULL NO PUNCHES interview you do not wish to miss!!

Every Saturday – Anti-War – Progressive Truth Teach-in
Coming up at 9:00am Pacific * 12 noon Eastern * 16:00 GMT
Will be archived here after the broadcast by Monday.


9/11 Reclaiming our Future
With Kevin Danaher, Ed Asner, Richard Gage and others. This program begins with an excerpt from the trailer, followed by a talk by Kevin Danaher about reclaiming our future. He is the co-founder of Global Exchange and executive producer of the annual San Francisco Green Festival. Reclaiming our Future was the motto of the 10 year anniversary of 9/11 held in 2011 at San Francisco’s Herbst Theater. The event signaled a break through on 9/11 in two important areas. A trailer for an upcoming movie by Engineers and Architects for 9/11 Truth about the destruction of World Trade Center Building #7 has already gone viral on the internet. Narrated by Ed Asner, it shows the latest research that rebuts the government explanation that office furniture fire caused the free fall collapse of the 47 story building, that was not hit by an airplane. Of all the 9/11 issues the case of building #7 is the most compelling to-date to initiate a new investigation. Architects and engineers are joined by 9/11 family members and first responders who are supporting that demand. From a TUC Radio Presentation.

The Anti-war Progressive Teach-in broaches upon some of the most highly charged subjects of our day—War & Peace, national healthcare, women’s rights, human rights, civil rights, torture, vets against the war, freedom, democracy, protest, demonstrations, etc. We scour the world to find and gather debates and presentations that are extremely informative and educational. Related subjects are also discussed. It provides key information for the uninitiated and the initiated alike.

Coming up every Thursday at 7:00 pm Pacific * 10:00 pm Eastern * 02:00 GMT
Will be archived here after the broadcast.

Release of Censored 2012: Sourcebook for the Media Revolution

Mickey Huff: “Good morning. Welcome to the Morning Mix, the Project Censored Show on Pacifica Radio. I’m Mickey Huff in studio with Peter Phillips and Abby Martin. Today’s show: for the entire hour we take a look at the top censored stories and media analysis for 2010-11, as we celebrate the release of Censored 2012: Sourcebook for the Media Revolution out this week on Seven Stories Press. We’ll hear from professors, from students, from community contributors across the U.S. So, please stay with us for the hour as we have, again, action-packed news that you can use that the corporate media didn’t want you to hear.” Also, on today’s programme, “Steve Zeltzer will join us at the bottom of the hour for Work Week Radio.” Show hosts are Mickey Huff, Peter Philips and Abby Martin.

Coming up Tuesday at 9am Pacific – 12 Noon Eastern – 16:00 GMT
Will be archived here after the broadcast by Tuesday evening.

“THE KEVIN BARRETT SHOW”
EXCLUSIVE LIVE–Tuesday on KB Show:
UK activist Ian Fantom: 10th anniversary breakthrough for 9/11 truth!

Email your questions or comments now.

Guest: Ian Fantom of Berkshire 9/11 Truth, who says the 10th anniversary brought a breakthrough for 9/11 truth. Below is Ian’s newsletter: Berkshire 9/11 Truth Movement Newsletter