by Stephen Lendman
WaPo editors long ago fell from grace. Credibility is entirely gone. Watergate-type exposes are verboten.
Editorial policy fronts for power. Extreme hawkishness defines it. New owner Jeff Bezos has CIA ties. He's in bed with the devil.
He was bought. He was paid off. He got a $600 million CIA contract.
It's double what he paid to buy WaPo. Late last year he said: "We look forward to a successful relationship with the CIA."
Perhaps it involves much more than meets the eye. He expects lots more business. For sure CIA officials want plenty back besides Amazon Web Services (AWS).
Bezos' disturbing history curries favor with national security officials. After WikiLeaks published State Department cables, AWS removed them.
WaPo should explain Bezos' CIA connection. Readers should know its editorial policy is biased.
It's propaganda. It turns truth on its head. It's corrupted. It's illegitimate. It's bought and paid for. WaPo is a CIA house organ.
Communications Professor/journalism scholar/media critic Robert McChesney commented, saying:
"When the main shareholder in one of the very largest corporations in the world benefits from a massive contract with the CIA on the one hand, and that same billionaire owns the Washington Post on the other hand, there are serious problems."
"The Post is unquestionably the political paper of record in the United States, and how it covers governance sets the agenda for the balance of the news media."
"Citizens need to know about this conflict of interest in the columns of the Post itself."
"If some official enemy of the United States had a comparable situation - say the owner of the dominant newspaper in Caracas was getting $600 million in secretive contracts from the Maduro government - the Post itself would lead the howling chorus impaling that newspaper and that government for making a mockery of a free press."
"It is time for the Post to take a dose of its own medicine."
It's time for full disclosure. It bears repeating. WaPo editors front for power. They're extremely hawkish.
They urge war on invented US enemies. They're militantly anti-Syrian. Last February, they headlined "The president has options on Syria. He should use them."
Obama "has adopted the position that any US intervention in Syria would be ineffective, 'short of us being willing to undertake an effort in size and scope similar to what we did in Iraq.' "
"In reality, the United States has a number of (robust) options for action in Syria…"
"They might not bring the Syrian civil war to a quick end, but they could address several major challenges, including the horrific war crimes being committed by the regime of Bashar al-Assad, the dire humanitarian crisis affecting several parts of the country and the growing power of Islamic extremist forces."
Fact: Syria is Obama's war.
Fact: He planned it.
Fact: He initiated it.
Fact: He's responsible for recruiting, funding, arming, training and directing death squad foreign proxies.
Fact: He wants pro-Western puppet governance replacing independent Syrian sovereignty.
Fact: So does Israel.
Fact: Both countries partnered.
Fact: They're ravaging and destroying Syria.
Fact: So are complicit EU, Arab states and Turkey.
Fact: Assad is wrongfully blamed for Western-sponsored crimes.
Fact: Nothing civil about Obama's war on Syria exists.
Fact: Insurgents are US proxies.
Fact: They're foreign invaders.
Fact: Assad battles them responsibly.
Fact: He deserves universal support.
Nuremberg Charter, Judgment and Principles apply. Crimes of war and against humanity are called crimes against peace. They include:
(1) "Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;" and
(2) "Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned" above.
War crimes are defined as:
"Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave-labor or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war, of persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity."
Crimes against humanity include:
"Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhuman acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime."
"Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity...is a crime under international law."
All of the above apply to Syria. The 1907 Hague Convention on the Opening of Hostilities includes similar laws of war.
The US Army Field Manuel 27-10 covers "The Law of Land Warfare." Section II explains Crimes Under International Law. Paragraph 498 states:
"Any person, whether a member of the armed forces or a civilian, who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefor and liable to punishment.
Such offenses in connection with war comprise:
Crimes against peace.
Crimes against humanity.
Paragraph 499 defines War Crimes, saying:
"The term 'war crime' is the technical expression for a violation of the law of war by any person or persons, military or civilian. Every violation of the law of war is a war crime."
Paragraph 500 covers Conspiracy, Incitement, Attempts, and Complicity, saying:
"Conspiracy, direct incitement, and attempts to commit, as well as complicity in the commission of crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, and war crimes are punishable."
These provisions apply to all US military and civilian personnel. They include top commanders, the Secretary of Defense, his subordinates, and the President and Vice President of the United States.
Under the Constitution's Supremacy Clause (Article VI, paragraph 2), all international laws and treaties are the "supreme Law of the Land."
The UN Charter's Article 2 states:
"The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its members..."
"All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered."
"All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations."
Article 33 states:
"The parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall, first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice."
Nations are prohibited from settling disputes by planning, instigating or waging direct or proxy wars. Security Council authorization alone permits it.
Only in self-defense. Only when one nation attacks another. Or if attack is too imminent to ignore.
America, rogue EU partners, complicit Arab states, Israel and Turkey wage proxy war on Syria. It's illegal. It's not civil.
Belligerent states bear full responsibility. So do complicit media scoundrels. They support what demands denunciation.
On May 23, WaPo editors headlined "US inaction on Syria helped make it a hell on earth."
They outrageously accused Assad of waging "war against Syrian civilians…"
"The only thing that could deter him is credible military opposition from the rebels, who continue to receive far too little help from the United States, which realistically is the only country in a position to change the calculus of this terrible war."
WaPo editors quoted Obama's neocon UN envoy Samantha Power. She mocks legitimacy. She shames the office she holds.
"Years from now our grandkids will ask how we could've failed to bring justice to people living in hell on earth," she said.
She stopped short of explaining Washington's full responsibility. Syrians and Assad are victims. Don't expect WaPo editors to explain.
"For more than three years," they said, Obama "resisted advice from inside and outside his administration to abandon his passivity." They want him responding more robustly.
Without more "US involvement, the worst-case predictions are coming true, " they said.
Assad is "stronger than ever. (He) g(ave) up much of his chemical weapons arsenal."
"(H)e continues to launch chemical attacks…(He targets) schools, bakeries and apartment buildings…"
WaPo editors lied. They consistently turn truth on its head. They urge more robust US action. They want Syria entirely ravaged and destroyed.
They want Assad blamed for Obama's crimes. They want all US-invented enemies eliminated.
They deplore peace. War is their option of choice. They urge it when other methods fail. Neocons operate this way.
WaPo ones are some of the worst. Propaganda substitutes for legitimate journalism.
Defending the indefensible is official editorial policy. It supports unchallenged US dominance. It urges war on humanity to achieve it.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.
His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III."
Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.
Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.
It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.