Comment on this article |
Email this article |
McCain/Kerry Support Imperial War on Libya
by Stephen Lendman
Email: lendmanstephen (nospam) sbcglobal.net
23 Jun 2011
McCain/Kerry Support Imperial War on Libya - by Stephen Lendman
On November 6, 1971, a remorseful John Kerry told Washington, DC's WRC-TV that "I gave back, I can't remember, six, seven, eight, nine medals," protesting against America's Vietnam War involvement.
On April 22, 1971, Kerry testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee as a member of Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW), saying in part:
He came to discuss an investigation involving "over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly decorated veterans," who admitted committing Southeast Asian war crimes, explaining:
"stories at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, bl(ew) up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages (like) Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravages of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country."
Calling it a "Winter Soldier Investigation," he said "there is nothing in South Vietnam, nothing which could happen that realistically threatens the United States of America." Linking America's involvement "to the preservation of freedom....is to us the height of criminal hypocrisy...."
"We saw firsthand how money from American taxes was used for a corrupt dictatorial regime....We rationalized destroying villages....to save them. We saw America lose her sense of morality as she accepted very cooly a My Lai," and many others like it. "We learned the meaning of free fire zones, shooting anything that moves, and we watched while America placed a cheapness on the lives of orientals."
"We have come here....because we believe this body can be responsive to the will of the people (saying) we should be out of Vietnam now...."
Adding much more, he condemned America's illegal, immoral war, wanting no further part in it. That was then. This is now. Since 1985, Kerry represented Massachusetts in America's Senate, chairing the Foreign Relations Committee he testified before in 1971.
In fact, one of many congressional millionaires, he's the Senate's richest approaching $300 million in net worth as heir, through his wife, to the HJ Heinz fortune.
Now hawkish, he and five other senators co-sponsored John McCain's May 23 "S. 194: A Resolution expressing the sense of the Senate of the United States military operations in Libya," saying:
It "(s)upports the aspirations of the Libyan people for political reform based on democratic and human rights. Commends the service of the men and women of the US Armed Forces and our coalition partners who are engaged in military operations to protect the Libyan people....to achieve the departure from power of (Gaddafi) and his family so that a peaceful transition can begin to a government that ensures freedom, opportunity, and justice for the people of Libya."
In fact, America abhors these rights and freedoms, pursuing imperial wars of conquest, plunder and exploitation for wealth, power, and unchallenged dominance.
In 2001 and 2003, Kerry supported wars against Afghanistan and Iraq for those purposes, not liberation, human rights or democratic values. He now backs terror bombing Libya for the same reasons, spurning Libyans who want no part of America's involvement.
In fact, Western media ignored a June 20 one million strong pro-Gaddafi Tripoli rally, raging against NATO terror bombings, killing civilians, targeting schools, hospitals, residential areas, and other non-military sites, what few in the West know about or understand.
On Press TV, independent journalist Lizzie Phelan said "from my sources, I have information that 90% of the tribes in Libya are supportive of the government, including the largest."
In fact, Libyans are known for being "non-confrontational people (who'll) go to the ends of the earth to resolve in a non-confrontational way."
Washington's led NATO war changed that, pursuing America's undefined "national security policy interests," that include mass slaughter, pillaging, colonization, destruction, and exploitation, common themes of Pentagon terror wars.
On June 22, AP reported that Kerry and John McCain with other Senate Democrats and Republicans introduced a resolution giving "Obama limited authority" in Libya retroactively from March 19 when terror bombing began.
Majority Leader Harry Reid calls it a "clear statement to our allies, to the world, to the Libyan people and to Gaddafi that we support the administration's actions," no matter how lawless, immoral, and defiant of democratic values.
Kerry said ending funding will be a "moment of infamy." Supportive media reports concur, including a June 16 New York Times editorial headlined, "Libya and the War Powers Act," saying:
"It would be hugely cost - for (America's) credibility, for the future of NATO and for the people of Libya - if Congress were to force (Obama) to abandon military operations over Libya....(It) needs to authorize continued American support for NATO's air campaign," no matter how ignoble the cause, mass slaughter, destruction, and human misery inflicted, issues ignored by Times editors, endorsing the rape and plunder of another US imperial target.
The Republican controlled House will likely accede, despite duplicitous posturing for maximum advantage, perhaps concessions for other hard right legislation, harming working Americans most.
As a result, Speaker John Boehner responded to the Senate measure, saying:
"They're pushing for an authorization in Libya and I don't think that is where the House is. The fact is the president has not made his case to the members of Congress. He's not made his case to the American people. We've been in this conflict for 90 days and the president hasn't talked to the American people for four or five weeks about why we're there, what our national interest is and why we should continue."
Omitted from his comments were international and constitutional law references, standards all US wars violate, including against Libya, considerations never raised in either House.
House Republicans may vote this week on one of two resolutions - either to continue Libyan operations for one year, bar US ground forces, require Obama to report regularly to Congress, or end involvement entirely. AP says a Thursday vote is likely.
Supportive congressional members from both parties use duplicitous rhetoric for it, including Reid saying it's "to stop mass murder and chaos" that didn't begin until America and NATO intervened, and that Gaddafi's "repressive dictatorship is a threat to the region and to the United States national security," when, in fact, he threatens no one, especially America, the very notion laughable on its face.
Nonetheless, terror bombing Libya will continue, perhaps ending after turning targeted areas to rubble and inflicting mass casualties in the process, what America means by liberation.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen (at) sbcglobal.net.
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 listening.
This work is in the public domain