April 17, 2016
"Information
Clearing House"
- I have been filming in the Marshall Islands, which
lie north of Australia, in the middle of the Pacific
Ocean. Whenever I tell people where I have been,
they ask, "Where is that?" If I offer a clue by
referring to "Bikini", they say, "You mean the
swimsuit."
Few seem
aware that the bikini swimsuit was named to
celebrate the nuclear explosions that destroyed
Bikini island. Sixty-six nuclear devices were
exploded by the United States in the Marshall
Islands between 1946 and 1958 -- the equivalent of
1.6 Hiroshima bombs every day for twelve years.
Bikini is
silent today, mutated and contaminated. Palm trees
grow in a strange grid formation. Nothing moves.
There are no birds. The headstones in the old
cemetery are alive with radiation. My shoes
registered "unsafe" on a Geiger counter.
Standing on
the beach, I watched the emerald green of the
Pacific fall away into a vast black hole. This was
the crater left by the hydrogen bomb they called
"Bravo". The explosion poisoned people and their
environment for hundreds of miles, perhaps forever.
On my
return journey, I stopped at Honolulu airport and
noticed an American magazine called Women's Health.
On the cover was a smiling woman in a bikini
swimsuit, and the headline: "You, too, can have a
bikini body." A few days earlier, in the Marshall
Islands, I had interviewed women who had very
different "bikini bodies"; each had suffered thyroid
cancer and other life-threatening cancers.
Unlike the
smiling woman in the magazine, all of them were
impoverished: the victims and guinea pigs of a
rapacious superpower that is today more dangerous
than ever.
I relate
this experience as a warning and to interrupt a
distraction that has consumed so many of us. The
founder of modern propaganda,
Edward Bernays,
described this phenomenon as "the conscious and
intelligent manipulation of the habits and opinions"
of democratic societies. He called it an "invisible
government".
How many
people are aware that a world war has begun? At
present, it is a war of propaganda, of lies and
distraction, but this can change instantaneously
with the first mistaken order, the first missile.
In 2009,
President Obama stood before an adoring crowd in the
centre of Prague, in the heart of Europe. He pledged
himself to make "the world free from nuclear
weapons". People cheered and some cried. A torrent
of platitudes flowed from the media. Obama was
subsequently awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
It was all
fake. He was lying.
The Obama
administration has built more nuclear weapons, more
nuclear warheads, more nuclear delivery systems,
more nuclear factories. Nuclear warhead spending
alone rose higher under Obama than under any
American president. The cost over thirty years is
more than $1 trillion.
A mini
nuclear bomb is planned. It is known as the B61
Model 12. There has never been anything like it.
General James Cartwright, a former Vice Chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has said, "Going smaller
[makes using this nuclear] weapon more thinkable."
In the last
eighteen months, the greatest build-up of military
forces since World War Two -- led by the United
States -- is taking place along Russia's western
frontier. Not since Hitler invaded the Soviet Union
have foreign troops presented such a demonstrable
threat to Russia.
Ukraine -
once part of the Soviet Union - has become a CIA
theme park. Having orchestrated a coup in Kiev,
Washington effectively controls a regime that is
next door and hostile to Russia: a regime rotten
with Nazis, literally. Prominent parliamentary
figures in Ukraine are the political descendants of
the notorious OUN and UPA fascists. They openly
praise Hitler and call for the persecution and
expulsion of the Russian speaking minority.
This is
seldom news in the West, or it is inverted to
suppress the truth.
In Latvia,
Lithuania and Estonia -- next door to Russia - the
US military is deploying combat troops, tanks, heavy
weapons. This extreme provocation of the world's
second nuclear power is met with silence in the
West.
What makes
the prospect of nuclear war even more dangerous is a
parallel campaign against China.
Seldom a
day passes when China is not elevated to the status
of a "threat". According to Admiral Harry Harris,
the US Pacific commander, China is "building a great
wall of sand in the South China Sea".
What he is
referring to is China building airstrips in the
Spratly Islands, which are the subject of a dispute
with the Philippines - a dispute without priority
until Washington pressured and bribed the government
in Manila and the Pentagon launched a propaganda
campaign called "freedom of navigation".
What does
this really mean? It means freedom for American
warships to patrol and dominate the coastal waters
of China. Try to imagine the American reaction if
Chinese warships did the same off the coast of
California.
I made a
film called
The War You
Don't See,
in which I interviewed distinguished journalists in
America and Britain: reporters such as Dan Rather of
CBS, Rageh Omar of the BBC, David Rose of the
Observer.
All of them
said that had journalists and broadcasters done
their job and questioned the propaganda that Saddam
Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction; had
the lies of George W. Bush and Tony Blair not been
amplified and echoed by journalists, the 2003
invasion of Iraq might not have happened, and
hundreds of thousands of men, women and children
would be alive today.
The
propaganda laying the ground for a war against
Russia and/or China is no different in principle.
To my knowledge, no journalist in the Western
"mainstream" -- a Dan Rather equivalent, say --asks
why China is building airstrips in the South China
Sea.
The answer
ought to be glaringly obvious. The United States is
encircling China with a network of bases, with
ballistic missiles, battle groups, nuclear -armed
bombers.
This lethal
arc extends from Australia to the islands of the
Pacific, the Marianas and the Marshalls and Guam, to
the Philippines, Thailand, Okinawa, Korea and
across Eurasia to Afghanistan and India. America
has hung a noose around the neck of China. This is
not news. Silence by media; war by media.
In 2015, in
high secrecy, the US and Australia staged the
biggest single air-sea military exercise in recent
history, known as Talisman Sabre. Its aim was to
rehearse an Air-Sea Battle Plan, blocking sea lanes,
such as the Straits of Malacca and the Lombok
Straits, that cut off China's access to oil, gas and
other vital raw materials from the Middle East and
Africa.
In the
circus known as the American presidential campaign,
Donald Trump is being presented as a lunatic, a
fascist. He is certainly odious; but he is also a
media hate figure. That alone should arouse our
scepticism.
Trump's
views on migration are grotesque, but no more
grotesque than those of David Cameron. It is not
Trump who is the Great Deporter from the United
States, but the Nobel Peace Prize winner, Barack
Obama.
According
to one prodigious liberal commentator, Trump is
"unleashing the dark forces of violence" in the
United States. Unleashing them?
This is the
country where toddlers shoot their mothers and the
police wage a murderous war against black Americans.
This is the country that has attacked and sought to
overthrow more than 50 governments, many of them
democracies, and bombed from Asia to the Middle
East, causing the deaths and dispossession of
millions of people.
No country
can equal this systemic record of violence. Most of
America's wars (almost all of them against
defenceless countries) have been launched not by
Republican presidents but by liberal Democrats:
Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, Clinton, Obama.
In 1947, a
series of National Security Council directives
described the paramount aim of American foreign
policy as "a world substantially made over in
[America's] own image". The ideology was messianic
Americanism. We were all Americans. Or else.
Heretics would be converted, subverted, bribed,
smeared or crushed.
Donald
Trump is a symptom of this, but he is also a
maverick. He says the invasion of Iraq was a crime;
he doesn't want to go to war with Russia and China.
The danger to the rest of us is not Trump, but
Hillary Clinton. She is no maverick. She embodies
the resilience and violence of a system whose
vaunted "exceptionalism" is totalitarian with an
occasional liberal face.
As
presidential election day draws near, Clinton will
be hailed as the first female president, regardless
of her crimes and lies - just as Barack Obama was
lauded as the first black president and liberals
swallowed his nonsense about "hope". And the drool
goes on.
Described
by the Guardian columnist Owen Jones as "funny,
charming, with a coolness that eludes practically
every other politician", Obama the other day sent
drones to slaughter 150 people in Somalia. He kills
people usually on Tuesdays, according to the New
York Times, when he is handed a list of candidates
for death by drone. So cool.
In the 2008
presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton threatened to
"totally obliterate" Iran with nuclear weapons. As
Secretary of State under Obama, she participated in
the overthrow of the democratic government of
Honduras. Her contribution to the destruction of
Libya in 2011 was almost gleeful. When the Libyan
leader, Colonel Gaddafi, was publicly sodomised with
a knife - a murder made possible by American
logistics - Clinton gloated over his death: "We
came, we saw, he died."
One of
Clinton's closest allies is Madeleine Albright, the
former secretary of State, who has attacked young
women for not supporting "Hillary". This is the same
Madeleine Albright who infamously celebrated on TV
the death of half a million Iraqi children as "worth
it".
Among
Clinton's biggest backers are the Israel lobby and
the arms companies that fuel the violence in the
Middle East. She and her husband have received a
fortune from Wall Street. And yet, she is about to
be ordained the women's candidate, to see off the
evil Trump, the official demon. Her supporters
include distinguished feminists: the likes of Gloria
Steinem in the US and Anne Summers in Australia.
A
generation ago, a post-modern cult now known as
"identity politics" stopped many intelligent,
liberal-minded people examining the causes and
individuals they supported -- such as the fakery of
Obama and Clinton; such as bogus progressive
movements like Syriza in Greece, which betrayed the
people of that country and allied with their
enemies.
Self
absorption, a kind of "me-ism", became the new
zeitgeist in privileged western societies and
signaled the demise of great collective movements
against war, social injustice, inequality, racism
and sexism.
Today, the
long sleep may be over. The young are stirring
again. Gradually. The thousands in Britain who
supported Jeremy Corbyn as Labour leader are part of
this awakening - as are those who rallied to support
Senator Bernie Sanders.
In Britain
last week, Jeremy Corbyn's closest ally, his shadow
treasurer John McDonnell, committed a Labour
government to pay off the debts of piratical banks
and, in effect, to continue so-called austerity.
In the US,
Bernie Sanders has promised to support Clinton if or
when she's nominated. He, too, has voted for
America's use of violence against countries when he
thinks it's "right". He says Obama has done "a great
job".
In
Australia, there is a kind of mortuary politics, in
which tedious parliamentary games are played out in
the media while refugees and Indigenous people are
persecuted and inequality grows, along with the
danger of war. The government of Malcolm Turnbull
has just announced a so-called defence budget of
$195 billion that is a drive to war. There was no
debate. Silence.
What has
happened to the great tradition of popular direct
action, unfettered to parties? Where is the courage,
imagination and commitment required to begin the
long journey to a better, just and peaceful world?
Where are the dissidents in art, film, the theatre,
literature?
Where are
those who will shatter the silence? Or do we wait
until the first nuclear missile is fired?
This is
an edited version of an address by John Pilger at
the University of Sydney, entitled A World War Has
Begun. Follow John Pilger on Twitter @johnpilger
It is unacceptable to slander, smear or engage in personal attacks on authors of articles posted on ICH.
Those engaging in that behavior will be banned from the comment section.
In accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational
purposes. Information Clearing House has no
affiliation whatsoever with the originator of
this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)