|
|||||||
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|||||||
government ministers and etc.. to committed crime against other nations and has showing
USA grime is Zionism puppet !
This is a sample of one of thousand Zionists among USA regime who has been committed
crime and has been charged with crime against humanity ,this person is not someone ales
than Henry Kissinger!
who is Henry Kissinger? he was USA ambassador, Foreign minister and etc. ...
If we call USA regime is Zionist puppet do not be surprise do not think that
we as anti-zionist peoplee are extremist,fanatic anti-Semitic and etc..
http://www.eclipse.net/~tgardnet/kiss/kisskill.html
Henry Kissinger: War Criminal or Old-Fashioned
Murderer?
Incredibly, Henry Kissinger—the man who rivals Pol Pot for the dubious honor of being the person responsible for the death of
the largest number of innocent people in South East Asia (and far surpasses Pol Pot in criminality when one factors in
Kissinger's various levels of responsibility for wholesale slaughter and repression in other parts of the world)—still wields
significant power in the United States; but his role as eager facilitator of mass murder, totalitarian repression and other atrocities
is never discussed in polite society. Although Kissinger is a frequent guest on Nightline, where he is treated as a harmless and
venerable elder statesman, his friend Ted Koppel has never brought up the topic of Kissinger's responsibility for the horrifying
deaths of so many in Asia, Latin America and other areas of the world. It is safe to assume that Koppel has no intention of
doing so in the future.In fact, Kissinger's continuing influence over what the US government does, and what is reported about what the government
does, can clearly be seen is a relatively recent media event: Kissinger's significant behind-the-scene role in effecting CNN's
retraction of the "Tailwind" story.CNN's ostensible justification for the retraction is laid out in the compromise-ridden Abrams/Kohler Report. Although the
Tailwind story's producers, April Oliver and Jack Smith, had ample evidence to draw the conclusions that they did (see the
Oliver/Smith Rebuttal to the A/K Report), CNN quickly caved when the Pentagon and Kissinger, whose role in the
indiscriminate mass killings in South East Asia is a well-known but never-mentioned (by the mainstream media) fact, both
objected to the story. "Tailwind" alleged further U.S. atrocities in SE Asia during Kissinger's reign, specifically the use of poison
gas during an illegal U.S. black operation in Laos. (Imagine the U.S. media retracting a story about an atrocity committed by
Saddam Huessein because Saddam claimed it never happened.)When the usual right wing flacks, predictably, went ballistic over the story, CNN quickly decided on a strategy of appeasement
and hired Floyd Abrams to work along with David Kohler—who, as CNN's legal advisor, had already given Smith and Oliver
his advice that the Tailwind story was, as prepared for broadcast, legally defensible—to produce a report that would absolve
CNN's upper-management of any wrong-doing. That is precisely what their report did. The A/K report systematically ignored
the best, strongest, and most direct evidence that Oliver and Smith had amassed during the course of their investigation and
condemned the Tailwind story by adhering to a simple strategy: it examined only the weaker, subsidiary evidence and
disingenuously implied that this weaker evidence was in fact the most significant evidence the producers had found. In short,
Abrams and Kohler set up a straw man, then knocked it down.But neither Kohler nor CNN ever explained what had changed, what new evidence had come to light, to effect Kohler's
180-degree turn-around. How, in two short weeks, did the evidence that Smith and Oliver had compiled go, in Kohler's mind,
from justifiable and responsible to insufficient and insupportable? This is a question that the A/K report does not even pose,
much less answer.CNN has, however, said what allegedly was not a factor: CNN adamantly denies that the unprecedentedly quick retraction
had anything to do with the pressure applied by Kissinger, Colin Powell and other powerful government people —thus leaving
a vacuum at the center of the rationale for this whole embarrassing and unnecessary reversal. CNN would much rather leave
this incident hanging with no explanation than admit it left two producers to twist in the wind because of management's
cowardice in the face of pressure from powerful government-connected people. And CNN would evidently much rather be in
the good graces of the government than defend it's dubious claims to any kind of journalistic integrity.The A/K report does not claim that new evidence had come to light to contradict what Smith and Oliver reported; rather, the
report, and it's co-author David Kohler, claim that the very evidence Kohler had found compelling and legally defensible was
now somehow neither, even though that evidence had not changed. CNN's way of dealing with this seeming paradox was to
imply Abram's sole authorship of the report: the CNN webpage where the full text of the A/K Report resides makes no mention
of Kohler's name or of his role in the writing and preparing of the report. There was no reversal, CNN implies, because the
evidence was being looked at by a different person who reached a different conclusion about the worthiness of that evidence.
Kohler's role in the A/K report went down the memory hole.CNN's quick retraction and summary firing of producers Oliver and Smith sent an unmistakeable message to anyone who might
want to follow up on this story: approaching this issue, even if in good faith (and even the compromised Abrams/Kohler Report
concludes that Oliver and Smith acted responsibly and in good faith), will cost you your job and your good name. When the
rest of the mainstream media gleefully jumped on the bandwagon to condemn CNN and Oliver and Smith, it became clear that
nobody in the mainstream media was going to follow up on this story despite the convincing preliminary case made in the
Tailwind report, and despite the many promising leads that have yet to be pursued. Needless to say, CNN's summary firing of
Smith and Oliver pulled the rug out from under them: they had been working on a follow-up to the original Tailwind story when
CNN gave them the shiv. CNN has ensured that that story will probably never be told.The media, once again, fell all over itself to become apologists for the Pentagon and the National Security state—some going so
far as to claim that CNN admitted the story was "false", when in fact, CNN's retraction, while pusillanimous and abject, went
no further than to say that story "could not be supported".It should be noted that Smith and Oliver repeatedly asked to interview Kissinger for the story; Kissinger repeatedly refused.
Clearly, Kissinger would rather work his magic behind the scenes and not be forced to answer questions about his role in the
affair. Amazingly, many in the mainstream media viewed Kissinger's outrage at the Tailwind story as evidence that the Tailwind
story was not true.See also Alexander Cockburn's article on Kissinger's role in the affair: The Press Devours Its Own
A footnote: Peter Arnett, the reporter on the Tailwind story, attempted to distance himself from it as the right wing's attack on
the story turned the heat was up. As the rest of the mainstream media jumped on the attack bandwagon, Arnett made the
rounds of news sources claiming he was only the talking head for the story, and had little, if anything, to do with its content. He
apologized for the story, as required by the higher-ups at CNN, and publicly agreed with CNN management's position that the
story was fundementally flawed and deserved to be retracted.A year later, Arnett, a veteran war correspondent and the only US-based reporter to attempt to report on the effect the
American bombing during the Gulf war was having on the Iraqi populace (for which he was villified by the right, including many
right-leaning CNN employees—many of whom had been gunning for him ever since) was unceremoniously fired by CNN.
(CNN's coverage of the Gulf War, it should be noted, was saved from being as rah-rah jingoistic as all the other networks'
almost exclusively by Arnett's reporting from Baghdad. Otherwise, CNN unquestioningly submitted to the military's censoring
of the war, unfailingly relayed the military's absurdly inflated claims regarding the woefully underperforming "smart bombs"
(which rarely, if ever, hit the intended target), and hewed to the government's party line. CNN's Pentagon employees hated
Arnett for reporting the truth about the indiscriminate carnage happening in Iraq as a result of "smart bombs" missing their
supposedly military targets.)Like a victim of the Stalinist show trials of the 1930s, Arnett's public admission of his "guilt" ultimately did not save him from
being purged. Of course, in the US, "purging" may mean loss of job, loss of "credibility", loss of career prospects...but
obviously not death, as it did to the victims of Stalin's terror. And while risking the loss of one's job and one's career prospects
ought not to be taken lightly, still it is a sad commentary on the state of mainstream journalism that so few American journalists
are willing to take that risk. One does not need to look back to Stalinist Russia to find examples of countries where crossing the
establishment could and often does mean a death sentence—there are a multitide of examples of such countries today (many of
them U.S. client states). But, again, it need not be pointed out that the U.S. itself is not one of them. One may be ostrasized,
marginalized, and effectively silenced, but obviously not murdered. The personal risk is real for any journalist who steps out of
line, but it is comparatively small.Still, the courage of journalists such as April Oliver, Jack Smith, Robert Parry and Gary Webb deserves recognition. Gary
Webb has been vindicated, and Oliver and Smith, I have no doubt, will be too, in time. Arnett's willingness to accomodate
CNN's management did not save him: he was just as surely purged as Smith and Oliver, who courageously—and with good
reason—stood by their excellent reporting on Tailwind.Admitting that he loved Big Brother did Arnett no good; it merely delayed the whisper of the axe. Ultimately, nothing less than
his complete purging was deemed acceptible as expiation for the "sins", both past and present, he had committed; and his
attempts to stave off the inevitable look, in retrospect, sad and pathetic. Arnett's frantic damage-control was unable to re-gain
for him the tenuous mainstream favor he lost simply for being involved with the Tailwind story; and his willingness to say
whatever he was required to say to attempt to save his position at CNN has, understandably, not won him any friends among
those who believe—and, I would say, believe rightly—that the Tailwind story deserved to be told and, when attacked,
defended. It certainly lost him the sympathy of those who feel that journalistic integrity ought not to be so easily given up.It has now been years since the Tailwind story was broadcast and, to my knowledge, it has not been followed up by anyone in
the mainstream. With CNN's help, Kissinger, Powell, Reed Irvine and their ilk have effectively killed it off.
For further insight into what CNN thinks qualifies as "objectivity" when covering our government, see Alexander Cockburn's
article on CNN's use of US PSYOPS operatives as interns at CNN's Atlanta news headquarters. (See FAIR's Action Alert
here.) CNN's rah-rah stance on US troops during the Gulf war; CNN's sponsoring of the Clinton administration's propaganda
seminar that attempted to set forth the reasons for (and only for, not against) initiating another bombing campaign against the
people of Iraq; CNN's quick retraction of the well-researched and justifiable Tailwind story to accomodate the hurt feelings of
the likes of Henry Kissinger, Colin Powell, and right-wing flak-hack Reed Irvine (whose "Accuracy in Media" flak-tank came
about as a result of the right's desperate attempt to deny the My Lai massacre and justify the US's illegal invasion of, and
continued presence in, Vietnam)—you decide...is CNN a prime (though certainly not lone) example of an adjunct to
government?Further crimes and atrocities for which Henry Kissinger is responsible:
Kissinger as merchant of Death: BULLETS, GAS, AND THE BOMB: THE SPREAD OF CONVENTIONAL AND
UNCONVENTIONAL WEAPONS
Edward S. Herman, Pol Pot And Kissinger: On war criminality and impunity
War Criminals
Kissinger the War Criminal
Kissinger and Illegal Bombing of Cambodia...
Third World Traveler's Kissinger Page
Kissinger Encourages Murder of East Timorese
Kissinger halting the Spread of Democracy in Chile
Kissinger Encouraging Assassination in Chile
Chomsky on America's responsibility for the Mass Killings in South East Asia and Elsewhere
Friends of Pol Pot
Kissinger's Example Determines Much of US's Future Behavior
NEW! Christoher Hitchens' Indictment of Kissinger the War Criminal
NEW! Kissinger the Walking, Talking Conflict of Interest
NEW! Kissinger and the Obstinate Memory of his Many Crimes
NEW! Show Us the Papers!Kissinger as merchant of Death: BULLETS, GAS, AND THE BOMB: THE SPREAD OF CONVENTIONAL AND
UNCONVENTIONAL WEAPONS
Edward S. Herman, Pol Pot And Kissinger: On war criminality and impunity