- They appear daily like weeds on all topics. As a result,
Times reports aren't fit to read, let alone print. August 18 was no exception,
publishing lies about Libyan insurgent victories.
- On August 18, headlining, "Libyan Rebels Gain Control
of Oil Refinery as Qaddafi Forces Flee," Kareem Fahim's article was
pure Pentagon propaganda, duplicitously lying to readers.
- Yet he said "(r)ebel fighters claimed complete control
of a sprawling (Zawiyah) oil refinery, seizing one of (Gaddafi's) most
important assets after just three days of fighting and delivering the latest
in a string of small victories that have suddenly put the rebels at Tripoli's
- Reporting from Tripoli, independent Middle East/Central
Asian analyst, Mahdi Nazemroaya refuted him, telling Progressive Radio
News Hour listeners that:
- -- Gaddafi forces are winning;
- -- rebels are in disarray;
- -- the so-called National Transitional Council (NTC)
is falling apart;
- -- Misrata was liberated from rebels;
- -- Tripoli is peaceful and calm, despite daily NATO bombing,
willfully targeting civilians and nonmilitary sites;
- -- scattered fighting continues along routes to Tunisia
- -- arteries between the two countries remain open;
- -- Intense Western propaganda wants to intimidate Gaddafi
supporters to give up hope of prevailing;
- -- it's had the opposite effect, in fact, galvanizing
Libyans overwhelmingly behind Gaddafi, making him by far the most popular
African/Middle East leader; and
- -- his forces control Gheryan, Sorman, Sabratha, and
Zawiyah, its oil refinery and others; reports saying otherwise are lies;
rebels are south of the city, not in it.
- In an August 18 morning email, he added:
- "Nothing has changed thus far. There is fighting
in the area, but (rebels) do not have control. Bombings over Tripoli are
very bad though."
- As part of NATO's intimidation campaign, they continue
daily, inflicting pain and suffering on Libyans unrelated to military necessity.
As a result, they're war crimes, what Times and other major media sources
- Moreover, in times of war, the first casualty is duplicitous
reporting, journalists lying for a living, prostituting themselves for
- Daily The New York Times lies. So do other Western broadsheets,
magazines, US television, the BBC, National Public Radio, Public Broadcasting,
and other mainsteam sources, showing their managed news lacks credibility.
- For example, Fahim falsely claimed:
- -- Gaddafi forces "mounted (no) forceful counterattack;"
- -- signs indicate that the conflict "reached a critical
moment, if not its final stage;"
- -- "the vital highway from Tunisia to Tripoli has
remained closed, controlled by rebels;"
- -- thousands of refugees flee Tripoli daily to escape
"mounting hardships" and "be safer in rebel-held areas;"
- -- rebels show increasing confidence;
- -- morale among Gaddafi forces is near collapse;
- -- daily defectors joins rebels; and
- -- rebels now control former Gaddafi held cities.
- In fact, his article reads more like bad fiction than
news. Independent reports refute him and others, including about other
Gaddafi held cities claimed in rebel hands.
- On August 17, writers Susan Lindauer and Joanne Moriarty
headlined, "Libya: Gadhaffi Retakes Key Towns," saying:
- "Is Gadhaffi losing? Au contraire. In total contradiction
to the propaganda push on CNN (and other Pentagon mouthpieces, independent)
sources inside Libya say" Gaddafi, not rebels, is prevailing.
- In fact, pockets of insurgents are in all these areas,
but they're "isolated and surrounded by the Libyan army." In
addition, most tribes, including major ones "are fighting with Gaddafi"
- His forces are motivated, not demoralized, as falsified
- On August 17, Scott Taylor's Chronicle Herald article
headlined, "Gadhafi Support Soars Amid NATO Bombing," saying:
- Libya's insurgency "has been more of a media war
than a full-scale armed clash." In fact, despite an embargo, sea blockade,
theft of Gaddafi's assets, and ferocious daily bombing, "the ragtag
collection of fractious" rebels haven't managed "to make any
serious headway against Gadhafi loyalists," let alone topple him.
- His overwhelming popularity is key, polls showing it
about 85%. Moreover, over 2,000 of Libya's 2,335 tribes support him, including
the largest ones.
- At the same time, Libyans revile NATO and cutthroat rebels
with good reason. They're destroying, not liberating Libya for well understood
imperial reasons. As a result, popular sentiment is determined to resist.
- On August 16, the Mossad connected DEBKAfile headlined,
"Libyan rebel 'gains' smokescreen for talks in Tunisia to end war,"
- Claims about rebel advances and Gaddafi forces near collapse
are pure propaganda, not facts because government and TNC representatives
"have been meeting in semi-secrecy on the Tunisian island of Djerba...."
- Fighting on the ground has been "tailing off and
morphing into direct talks between the two" sides.
- DEBKA sources explained "a step-by-step" process,
involving Gaddafi yielding power in stages to a new government to include
top positions for his sons, key loyalists, supportive tribes, and TNC turncoats.
In addition, Gaddafi will remain in Libya, his personal safety guaranteed.
- DEBKA also confirmed independent reports that TNC "leadership
is being torn apart by infighting," especially after its field commander,
Gen. Abdel Fatah Younis was assassinated.
- "By broadcasting false reports of victories, such
as the conquest of....Brega (Zawiyah, and other Gaddifi held cities), the
rebels hope to cover up their internal disputes and inability to win the
war, while at the same time (hoping falsified victories will be) bargaining
chips for the negotiations."
- The only so-called rebel gains, in fact, were made by
"Berger tribes (that) reject any ties whatsoever with" insurgent
- Clearly, the scripted media victory claims are pure Pentagon
propaganda - ball-faced lies with no credibility whatsoever. Reporters,
commentators, and editorial writers regurgitating them function solely
as imperial tools, disgracing their profession in the process.
- A Final Comment
- Misreporting on Syria matches Libya propaganda. On August
18, New York Times writer Steven Lee Myers headlined, "US and Allies
Say Syria Leader Must Step Down," saying:
- Obama and other Western leaders "called on Syria's
Bashar al-Assad to give up power." Obama also froze "all Syrian
assets within American jurisdiction, banned imports of Syrian oil and barred
American citizens from having any business dealings with the Syrian government...."
- In addition, he called on other countries to impose similar
- An August 18 White House Office of the Press Secretary
statement was propaganda rubbish, saying:
- "The United States has been inspired by the Syrian
peoples' pursuit of a peaceful transition to democracy. They have braved
ferocious brutality at the hands of their government. They have spoken
with their 'peaceful' marches, their 'silent' shaming of the Syrian regime,
and their courageous persistence....For the sake of the Syrian people,
the time has come for President Assad to step down."
- Aside from the audacity of demanding regime change anywhere,
as well as imposing sanctions harming civilians, not government officials,
the entire statement falsified what's been ongoing in Syria for months.
- A previous article explained, accessed through the following
- More on it below.
- An August 18 Times editorial headlined, "Truth About
- "It took too long, but (Obama) finally - and unequivocally
- called for (Assad) to step down and end his murderous war against the
Syrian people....Any fantasies that Mr. Assad is a guarantor of Syrian
stability or could lead a peaceful transition have been rightly jettisoned."
- Even Saudi and Bahrain despots can't "stomach (h)is
- Expecting truth on New York Times pages is like imagining
a progressive awakening in Washington, Republicans and Democrats renouncing
imperial wars, holding past and current culpable officials accountable,
nationalizing the Federal Reserve, breaking up too-big-to fail banks, and
prosecuting Wall Street and other corporate kleptocrats, confiscating their
stolen assets for starters.
- The above linked article compared events ongoing in Syria
to what began in Libya, pitting imperial powers against ruling governments
for destabilization and control. In Libya, it's by war for regime change,
colonization and plunder. In Syria, it's to establish another client state,
no matter who heads it.
- Clear evidence shows armed non-Syrian insurgents responsible
for much violence, killing civilians and security forces. Western media,
European leaders, and complicit regional ones falsely blame Assad, despite
legitimate nonviolent opposition to his regime. They, in fact, are caught
between hostile sides.
- On August 6, Lebanon's Al-Akhbar newspaper said government
security forces foiled an attempt to ship large quantities of arms to Syrian
insurgents, including high-quality Kalashnikov and M-16 rifles. Suppliers
were arrested after delivering them to a Beirut neighborhood.
- On August 8, Lebanon's As-Safir newspaper quoted a security
- "The recently foiled operation is still under investigation,
and there has been highly significant information gleaned from those involved
who are affiliated with a prominent tendency in the March 14 alliance.
This is not the only operation that they have carried out."
- March 14 is the anti-Hezbollah/anti-Syrian Saad al-Hariri-led
alliance, son of assassinated Rafik Hariri in February 2005, a Mossad operation
falsely blamed on Hezbollah.
- Washington, Israel, and Saudi Arabia back March 14. Seizing
arms for Syrian insurgents provide more evidence of imperial efforts to
destabilize Assad's government, replacing it with a pro-Western one, controlled
- According to DEBKAfile and Israeli intelligence, internal
anti-Assad elements also have or will get heavier weapons, including machine
guns, mortars, anti-tank and air rockets. Syria's army also said hundreds
of Islamist Salafi fighters were detained, including Afghans.
- On August 16, Michel Chossudovsky's Global Research.ca
article headlined, "The Pentagon's 'Salvador Option:' The Deployment
of Death Squads in Iraq and Syria," saying:
- Turkish troops may intervene in Syria. A broader military
confrontation may result, and "(i)n recent developments, Islamist
death squads have penetrated the port city of Latakia's Ramleh district,
(including) rooftop snipers (who) are terrorizing the local population."
- Imperial Washington orchestrated and escalated North
African/Middle East/Central Asian conflicts. Involving Syria risks expanding
them to general war, perhaps involving Russia and China for their own interests,
- Washington's imperial arrogance suggests a possible global
conflict, especially to divert public attention from deepening economic
- The strategy is tried and true, scaring people enough
to put safety above pocket book issues, besides enlisting public support
for greater geopolitical aims.
- Attacking weaker countries is one thing, involving China
and Russia potentially quite another. As a result, understanding the risk
and stopping it is crucial. The alternative is too grim to imagine.
- Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at
- Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and
listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive
Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central
time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy