Date: Monday, 26 December 2022
The false ideology that warps U.S.-&-allied ‘news’-reports
So much in U.S.-&-allied ‘news’-reports about foreign affairs (such as regarding its coups and invasions and sanctions against ‘authoritarian’ Governments in order to “regime-change” them) is false or misleading, so that it took years for their deceived readers and viewers to recognize that there were no “WMD in Iraq,” and decades to recognize that the invasion/occupation of Vietnam had actually been based upon lies and cover-ups by the Government and by its stenographic ’news’(-propaganda)-media. As a result, the question as to whether the real (or the worse) “authoritarian” Government has been actually the U.S. regime itself — the regime that has committed after 1945 far more international war-crimes than all other Governments in the world combined have done. This is a question that no U.S.-&-allied ‘news’-media investigate, because none of them will hire any journalist who does.
Consequently, in order for any of them to keep their jobs, they are required to buy into the U.S.-and-allied ideology, which is neoliberalism/neoconservatism, which says:
“However bad our side is, the other side — that of any Government that mine is seeking to overthrow and replace — is even worse; and, so, it’s okay to derive one’s income from a corrupt and evil Governing system, because that is necessary in order to fight against and (hopefully) replace ones that are even worse.”
An excellent example of this mentality (actually ideology) is Jonathan Guyer’s December 16th “This DC party invite shows all the money to be made off the Ukraine war: A Ukrainian Embassy reception, sponsored by America’s biggest weapons makers”, which threw in a key sentence of that obligatory type: “As Ukraine fights a defensive war against Russia’s brutal invasion, Ukrainians in Washington have been pushing for the US to send Ukraine more weapons,” in order to make this armament-controlled Government seem to be obligatory in order for the lesser-evil U.S. Government to be able to win its wars and overthrow and replace such greater-evil leaders as Vladimir Putin (formerly this had been: Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi, Bashar al-Assad, Viktor Yanukovych, etc.).
What about that sentence, though? Is it “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth” about what it is purporting? Not by a country mile, it isn’t. (If it were a missile, it would be blowing up more than a mile away from its target; and is that good for anybody but the makers of the missile and of its warhead? Not at all! Not in any way.)
It is, in fact, one lie after another, starting with its phrase “defensive war,” which started actually against Russia in Washington DC, when the Obama regime in June 2011 began planning its coup in Ukraine and started it in operation on 1 March 2013 inside the U.S. Embassy in Kiev, and then carried it out to conquer Ukraine and even take over Russia’s largest naval base, so as to checkmate and grab Russia. It wasn’t/isn’t Ukraine’s “defensive war against Russia” (such as Guyer alleges) but, instead, America’s aggressive war against Russia, that’s being proxy-waged by Ukrainians (and increasingly NATO forces) against Russians, in the battlefields of Ukraine. And THIS is how Guyer represents this profit-maximizing war-operation by the owners of Lockheed Martin, Northrup Grumman, Pratt & Whitney, and Raytheon Technologies, seeking for America’s taxpayers to be voted by these taxpayers’ enemies in Congress to pay EVEN MORE than the current $112 billion per year for the U.S. regime’s war in Ukraine to conquer Russia.
EVERY war is “brutal” — on BOTH sides. Guyer’s usage of that term “brutal,” in that context, is an insult either to his intelligence or to the intelligence of his readers, or both at once. It contradicts the reality of ANY war. But an American journalist has to be like this. (It’s got to be done, to sell product.) The question that any intelligent reader is asking is instead: Which side in this war is defending itself, and which side is instead the aggressor — endangering the national security (the sovereign independence) of its opponent? WHEN did the war start? Who STARTED the war? WHAT are its two sides? America started this war in February 2014, against Russia, by coup-grabbing Ukraine next door to Russia.
Perhaps Guyer has fooled himself to actually believe that when Putin on 17 December 2021 demanded of both the U.S. Government and its anti-Russian military alliance NATO to NEVER allow the 2014 Obama-coup-installed Ukrainian rabidly anti-Russian government into NATO and so allowed that coup-installed U.S. regime to post only 300 miles away from Russia’s central command in Moscow U.S. missiles, just five minutes of missile-flying-time from blitz-nuking Russia’s central command and thereby preventing Russia from launching its retaliatory weapons, the U.S. and its NATO were right instead of wrong to reply on 17 January 2022, “No!” (Not even to DISCUSS it with Russia.)
At that point in time, what option did Putin actually have (other than to allow the U.S. regime to place its missiles far closer to Moscow than JFK in 1962 had prohibited the Soviet Union to place, into Cuba, its missiles away from Washington DC)? Russia invaded Ukraine on 24 February 2022 because of that “No!” If the U.S. regime would be that 100% opposed to Russia’s national security (which it then clearly was), then Russia would have to do this itself — and is trying to do it, to force Ukraine NOT to be in NATO.
M.K. Badrakumar was the first commentator to point out (on December 25th) that U.S. President Biden had inadvertently admitted (on Dec. 21) that the only reason why Biden was holding back from bringing on a nuclear WW III against Russia is that despite his urgings of Europe’s leaders to do that, they unfortunately are “not looking to go to war with Russia. They’re not looking for a third World War.” He wants it; they don’t; and if the U.S. regime were to go it alone, that “would have a prospect of breaking up NATO and breaking up the European Union,” but otherwise he’d want it. That is the very extremity of neoconservatism; and, for America’s European vassals, they’d sooner ditch the U.S. than to go that far and commit global suicide in order to remain as America’s vassal-states (or colonies). They are trusting that he (Biden — NOT Putin — Biden and the U.S. regime’s owners are the evil one here, the insatiable global aggressor) won’t force them to make that choice (because it “would have a prospect of breaking up NATO and breaking up the European Union”).
Neoliberal ideology says wealth should rule a nation, people shouldn’t; richness indicates one’s goodness (poor people are bad and must be ruled; rich people are good and must do the ruling); neoliberalism is called “libertarianism” by Americans, but it is the same thing and is the U.S. Government’s dominant domestic ideology: one-dollar-one-vote instead of one-person-one-vote — the wealth (not the people) should rule a nation. Its international extension is called neoconservatism, which is U.S. hegemonic (universal) imperialism (the lie that everything is a zero-sum game; ONLY winners should count).
The admission-ticket to a mainstream-media (or even at any U.S. billionaires non-mainstream medium’s) ‘journalism’-job in the U.S. is that ideology: neoliberalism/neoconservatism. It gets constantly pumped to the American masses.
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s new book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.