Should we trust police officers? Are police officers allowed to lie to you? Yes the Supreme Court has ruled that police officers can lie to the American people. Police officers are trained at lying, twisting words and being manipulative. Police officers and other law enforcement agents are very skilled at getting information from people. So don’t try to “out smart” a police officer and don’t try being a “smooth talker” because you will lose! If you can keep your mouth shut, you just might come out ahead more than you expected.

Sunday, August 14, 2016

Language and Politics

By Noam Chomsky 


There are powerful forces in the U.S., as elsewhere, that will labor to secure their wealth and power, whatever the human cost. They will succeed, if they are not opposed by an informed and committed public. The anarchist thinker Rudolf Rocker once wrote that "Political rights do not originate in parliaments; they are rather forced upon them from without... They do not exist because they have been legally set down on a piece of paper, but only when they have become the ingrown habit of a people, and when any attempt to impair them will meet with the violent resistance of the populace". You don't win your rights because somebody rights it down in a law, and you don't lose your rights because somebody writes it down in a law. you win your  rights by struggle & you maintain your rights by struggle.

Information is certainly available publicly through various publications and government officials.

It's true there may be even more horrifying things that we don't know about. but what we do know about is sufficient for an informed reaction and to be able to discern that new systems are being introduced that are a tremendous threat to our existence.

One of the reasons its always a military choice, is that that's one of the few things you can get the population to pay for willingly; after all, somebody's got to pay for all of this, and people will pay if they feel threatened. So these moves are invariably accompanied with a lot of hysterical rhetoric about weapons of mass destruction, mobile biological weapons, dirty bombs, all fabricated but necessary in order to beat the population into submission.

There are people... who feel the U.S. should maintain control of the Middle East and violently suppress all nationalist movements by force. They naturally support an Isreali Sparta to do that kind of work for them. As the events of the war on terrorism show clearly, this system permits the U.S. to mobilize its own population and its allies for brutal and costly actions, under the guise of defense. 

Throughout history, the primary means for accomplishing this end has been the appeal to the threat of a "Great Satan". As for the U.S., it has been clearly recognized by government and business leaders that the state must intervene in the economy to stimulate production, and for a variety of reasons, the Pentagon system developed as the optimal means to achieve this result. This system funnels public subsidies to advanced sectors of industry. It is a system of public subsidy private profit. The militarization of the domestic society, a technique for compelling the public to invest in advanced sectors of the economy without sharing in the profits or interfering with management. Again, in this system the poor must be willing to subsidize the wealthy. A  state guaranteed market for high technology waste production. That's our industrial policy planning, which has been in existence since W.W.II. 

Fear and consumption 

There invariably is a war scare to create a climate in which military build up is possible. At the same tine it has to seek confrontation internationally so that you can justify it to the one who has to pay for it . The public has to pay for it. The way they do it is through fear.


War Crimes
By Shenali D Waduge LankaWeb

In 1920 Iraq was punished for asking for their own country back – British had formed the nation of Iraq and installed puppet leaders. The Iraqi people were fed up and began revolting. The Royal Air Force conducted night bombing on civilian targets, used chemical weapons, gassed groups and after victory the British used collective punishment against the tribes. Any tribe not following the line would have its entire village annihilated. The British were ordered to exterminate every living thing within its walls, animals to rebels to children. British conducted random searches, if a single weapon was found it meant the entire area would be burnt to the ground, crops destroyed, wells poisoned and livestock killed.  

The 1920s British air bombing campaign in Iraq
BBC News


British planes are involved in a third air campaign over Iraq in 23 years. But the RAF has bombed Iraq before - more than 90 years ago - and that controversial strategy has had a huge impact on modern warfare and the Middle East.

An armed rebellion in Iraq. Debate at Westminster on how to counter the insurgency. The deployment of RAF bombers to defeat the uprising.

With British planes once again in the skies over Iraq, it sounds like a story from the last few days. But Britain first tried to exercise control over Iraq from the air in the 1920s.

The end of World War One left Britain and France in command of the Middle East - as the defeated Ottoman Empire fell apart. The allies then carved up the region with a series of "mandates".

It gave them control of new countries, with the notion of independence postponed until the peoples of the region were considered ready to rule themselves.

One of Britain's mandates was Iraq - Mesopotamia as it was then. But welding together a new country and subjugating disparate ethnic and religious groups who felt that they had simply swapped one imperial Turkish master for another British one proved costly.

An uprising in Iraq in May 1920 united Sunni and Shia briefly against the British. It was put down, but required the deployment of more than 100,000 British and Indian troops. Thousands of Arabs were killed. Hundreds of British and Indian soldiers died. The military campaign cost Britain tens of millions of pounds - money it could not afford after the Great War.

A new way of controlling Iraq was needed, and the man who needed it most was Winston Churchill. As war secretary in Lloyd George's coalition government, Churchill had to square huge military budget cuts with British determination to maintain a grip on its mandate in Iraq.


Winston Churchill and the Mesopotamia Commission

The result became known as "aerial policing". It was a policy Churchill had first mused on in the House of Commons in March 1920, before the Iraqi uprising had even begun.

"It may be possible to effect economies during the course of the present year by holding Mesopotamia through the agency of the Air Force rather than by a military force. It has been pointed out that by your Air Force you have not to hold long lines of communications because the distance would only be one or one-and-a-half hours' flight by aeroplane. It is essential in dealing with Mesopotamia to get the military expenditure down as soon as the present critical state of affairs passes away."

The defeat of the Iraqi uprising was credited in part to the deployment of RAF bombers. The embryonic RAF - attempting to carve out a permanent role for itself and avoid being consumed by the other armed services - took on command of all future military operations in Iraq.

When trouble flared again, villages held by rebellious tribes were attacked from the air.

The Air Minister, Lord Thomson, detailed how one district of "recalcitrant chiefs" was subdued in the Liwa region on the Euphrates in November 1923.

He wrote: "As they refused to come in, bombing was then authorised and took place over a period of two days. The surrender of many of the headmen of the offending tribes followed."

As far as the British government was concerned, the strategy was a pragmatic success. Iraq was subdued by a handful of RAF squadrons and a small force of troops. The RAF maintained its military control over Iraq until World War Two, even after Iraqi independence in 1932.

There was apparently little debate about the morality of bombing.

Lord Thomson went on to spell out why air power was essential in Iraq. The language may have changed over the last 90 years, but some of the argument sounds familiar.

"The alternatives to the employment of the air arm in backward countries of poor communications and with a wide scattered population are, first, an occupation by ground forces so complete as to put out of the mind of disaffected elements any hope or temptation to resist government authority. Occupation on this scale would involve large numbers of troops and heavy expenditure."

For the RAF though, the lessons of Iraq were doctrinal, not budgetary. They came to believe that bombing was enough to win a war. As the historian AJP Taylor put it: "Here was an independent strategy of the air. From this moment, it was accepted that bombs could not only quell tribal revolts, but could win a great war."

The "great war" the RAF became convinced it could win by strategic bombing duly arrived in 1939. The lessons of Iraq were to be applied to Germany.

One of the RAF squadron leaders in Iraq was Arthur Harris - who in 1942 assumed the leadership of RAF Bomber Command. Several of his senior officers in Bomber Command had served in the same squadron.

For Harris, what was true of Iraq was true of Germany. As AJP Taylor said of him: "He genuinely believed that the German people could be cowed from the air as he had once cowed the tribesmen of Irak (sic)."

The destruction of Hamburg, Dresden and scores of other German cities and towns followed. Around 600,000 Germans, mostly civilians, perished. But although the crews of Bomber Command fought with great gallantry - more than 55,000 crewmen were killed and 19 Victoria Crosses won - the RAF's strategic bombing campaign alone could not force Germany's surrender. The Allied armies were required to destroy Hitler's war machine.

The US strategy in the Middle East, Afghanistan and Pakistan are the direct descendant of that original British campaign.

Prof Priya Satia, associate professor of Modern British History at Stanford University in California, has written extensively about the history of aerial campaigns in the region.

"This reflexive recourse to an aerial strategy still in the Middle East is not a coincidence. It comes out of this long history that this part of the world can take it."

Related articles:

How does racism work? Part I


Fuck America and fuck the American way Part II

Officer of the Year Arrested for Domestic Violence


(Due to Censorship) Blog has been shifted to:
http://www.copsrcorrupt.com/ 

Articles and videos from now on will be posted at:
Underground America Inc.

Follow on YouTube
and Twitter