NATO and US military forces yesterday reportedly killed a son and innocent relatives — three young grandchildren – of the leader of Libya, because the leader of Libya refused to accept NATO/US demands that he step down. They deliberately targeted a residential compound, knowing (though they deny it) that innocent members of the leader’s family would be present and likely killed. But Washington’s elite can’t admit what everyone knows just happened. [Al Arabiya News reports the claims three grandchildren were killed are not true.]
Murder is a criminal act, possibly a war crime here, and if the reports are true, every one of the commanders and national leaders, including those of the United States, should be forced to resign or impeached, and be prosecuted. Except they won’t be, because America’s leaders are above the rule of law.
This obvious conclusion, however, is beyond the intellectual or moral capabilities of CNN’s Candy Crowley, who apologetically, and oh so diplomatically asked the clueless Jane Harmon and the evasive Steven Hadley whether this didn’t mean we are “targetting Qaddafi.” It was a cowardly, stupid question, because the answer is obviously yes. US and NATO forced tried to assassinate the leader and murdered innocent members of his family instead. But neither guest came close to an honest or straightforward answer.
Jane Harmon changed the subject. She said she worried we hadn’t thought through the implications at the “front end,” and lacked a strategic narrative for what we were trying to accomplish in the region. Regarding the actual bombings, all she could muster was, “We’re trying to soften it up.” Yes, Jane, “soften up” is what happens to human flesh when you drop massive bombs on people.
Steven Hadley was as morally bankrupt today as he was as Bush’s National Security adviser. He at least argued that if you’re engaged in a war, it is legitimate to attack the entire “command structure,” and Qaddafi was the head of the “command structure,” so fair game. Crowley must have thought that was a Very Serious Answer, because she did not bother to ask where the leader’s children and their wives and children fit in the command structure. We might ask the same about our own leaders’ families, now that Mr. Hadley has laid out the morally permissble rules of engagement.
Apparently none of these people can explain how we got from an effort to rescue others for humanitarian reasons to a deliberate, unlimited “war” in which one objective is the assassination of a foreign leader. And since this media-elite trio is, regretfully, representative of the moral cesspool that pervades Washington Beltway thinking, there was no reason to expect different answers.
But it is still astonishing the entire American defense and foreign policy establishment, from the President on down through our national security advisers and Congressional oversight, can be complicit in despicable murders and war crimes, and not one member of the Beltway elite can honestly describe what just happened.



44 Comments

For a while, I’ve thought that Candy (strange name for someone who looks like her — and I mean her attitude) was difficult to watch or listen to. I remember that she didn’t do much for John Kerry’s campaign. I don’t get it. She’s not an air head blonde on Fox, but I think she’s just as dangerous, or maybe worse.
End of my Sunday morning rant.
Beautiful day in Southern California. Hope you all have Spring coming, if not here already.
The official language of the United States: Doublespeak
They all work for the same masters, were is Helen when we need her?
Not to me. They are all in bed together as evidenced by the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. Would you write a piece calling your good friend and/or colleague an accomplice to murder? Well, you might but intellectual honesty is not a very common thing, particularly in modern “journalism”. These people are doing the same thing Goebbels did. They buddy up to whomever is willing and intimidate or silence the rest.
Agree..totally.
Let her take a break. She deserves it. There are plenty here to “question”. Like you. :)
It’s the Obama style. Hide the bottom sludge like the 4 inches of oil over 2600 square miles of the Gulf If you don’t see it, it ain’t there.
And when some does float to attention in the daylight keep the accountability under the sludge. The murder of innocent children was a NATO decision, nothing to do with the US or Obama. This will be the way of our future intrusions into the affairs of oil producing nations. Why else have an Army General as head of the CIA.
Ooooo…you said the “G” word…hahaha. Of course, you are correct.
She’s disgusting. And I’m not referring to her looks.
He [Hadley] at least argued that if you’re engaged in a war, it is legitimate to attack the entire ‘command structure,’ and Qaddafi was the head of the ‘command structure,’ so fair game.”
But, but, this is a limited kinetic military action, Stevo.
Morning, demi.
(At least the wind isn’t blowing. That was so much fun. Not.)
The murder of innocent children was a NATO decision, nothing to do with the US or Obama.
Forgot your snark tags? Because NATO pretty much does what the Pentagon (or the President) wants.
Yes I intended it to be taken as a snark.
1. The US military has been “murdering” people in other countries for years. It’s nothing new, it is currently happening in several other countries, and is completely accepted and even cheered by the establishment.
2. Gaddafi was reportedly in the house that was targeted and so that was the probable reason that it was targeted. He is a US and NATO enemy in a war.
3. There is currently no proof of the deaths. As Gaddafi has said about the reports that his forces are killing people, show me the bodies.
After the UN approved it (though not Congress) I thought the United States reluctantly agreed to help enforce a ‘no-fly’ zone? Jeepers.
Speaking of Congress, isn’t that part of the federal government supposed to review war-making abroad? Doesn’t have to approve military action after so many days? Or can they just ignore this?
So by Hadley’s logic, the White House is now a legitimate military target. I’m sure Michelle will be delighted.
If Crowley had a functioning brain cell, she might have been astonished enough by Hadley’s assertion to follow up on its obvious logical conclusion. Alas, no.
Still, in a world where every citizen is a criminal suspect (hence the intrusion into every aspect of our private communications, travel, and now nudey pictures at airports), is it any wonder that our “elites” consider every square inch of the planet a battlefield and every living creature upon it a “legitimate target”?
We desperately need to wrest control of our country and our world back from these people, but it remains to be seen how that may be accomplished.
Can we all please stop and consider how Israel will be effected by this policy? What about Israel? How much more money can we give to Israel? Again, WHAT … ABOUT … ISRAEL?????
;-)
This just sets up the continuation of perpetual war. Now Ghadafi will be forced to retaliate. He must have some scary things hidden away in the desert, probably made in the good old USA. Then the bloodlust will rise to amore fevered pitch. Our cycle of violence will grow. The Pentagons job-security program continues on unchecked by a formerly democratic republic. May flowers into NATO bombs and missiles.
Happy MayDay!
“Mayday!” indeed..
All hail Petraeus!
Might as well condemn FDR, General George C. Marshall, & Sir Winston.
George Scialabba’s review of “Cultures of War Pearl Harbor/ Hiroshima/ 9-11/ Iraq” by John Dower:
http://www.georgescialabba.net/mtgs/2011/04/cultures-of-war-pearl-harborhi.html
(also published in The Nation April 11, 2011)
(P.S. Last week Obama was condemned for stating that Pfc. Manning “broke the law” b/c we trust in innocence until guilt is proved. Right?)
It’s true that FDR was a right wing lunatic on foreign policy. Remember Dresden? Truman was a terrorist no different than the 9/11 hijackers. He killed innocent non-combatants for political purposes at Nagasaki and Hiroshima. It was Japan’s “9/11.” I’m convinced a U.S. city will be nuked by a terrorist within my lifetime. We cannot go to war with the world (as America is doing) and expect peace at home. Thousands more American civilians will be killed. It’s going to be horrific.
“So by Hadley’s logic, the White House is now a legitimate military target. I’m sure Michelle will be delighted.”
I’m pretty sure that the White House is the official office and headquarters of the commander-in-chief so in an actual war against the United States it would probably be a legitimate military target.
Torture / Murder/ Treason, o had great lines last night as his assassinations attempts were carried out. The guy has great bush timing yuck, yuck, yuck.
Magnificent Mindless ‘Merican Murder Machine delivers again.
Semi related, Juan Cole is a twat.
I am not sure why anyone is surprised considering how many AF/PAKs we have been killing with no comment from the MSM. If you listen closely you can see how much they are like a mouthpiece for the government instead of a check and balance of government.
Astonishing??? That “the entire American defense and foreign policy establishment, from the President on down through our national security advisers and Congressional oversight, can be complicit in despicable murders and war crimes, and not one member of the Beltway elite can honestly describe what just happened.”
Astonishing??? Have you been paying attention? This is a high probability event! It is to be expected, unfortunately.
Excellent point that is completely absent from mainstream news regarding the attack. Why is it unthinkable for reporters to question and examine these attacks in a way that is critical of the US?
The British attack on the White House in 1814.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burning_of_Washington
Yea, and Jeb Stuart and his boys took a couple of runs at it themselves.
The drone attacks are CIA but its all US so splitting hairs except to note that the CIA is widely implicated in the assassination of John Kennedy and he was a white man. The point in the Kennedy murder is how effective it is to decapitate a nation to force your will upon it.
The President has claimed the power to arrest and hold without charge anyone he decides to, and to hold them forever in whatever abusive conditions he wants. He can pick and choose people to be murdered by air attack or in person in any country, friend or enemy, around the world.
This has all been reported without commentary or challenge for years. What other powers does he need to be considered a King or Absolute Dictator? He can pull money to start a war out of his back pocket and continue it without a word from the congress.
Didn’t they lock up Jerad Lee Loughner for killing six innocent people?
Murdering six innocent people is a light day for Obama.
So killing an single innocent civilian as part of a campaign of suppression of dissent is not murder and not a prosecutable crime against humanity–consider of all the trials at the Hague, who has been brought up for killing only a single civilian. But killing the head-of-state who ordered the killing of civilians is an international crime of the highest order.
So it’s a horrendous crime if the US does it and just business as usual if a dictatorial head of state does it. The UN Security Council has referred the killing of civilians under Gaddafi’s orders to the International Criminal Court. That’s called due process. If Gaddafi wants to hole up hollering “Come get me copper”, the international community should just give up and go home? And that’s rule of law?
What exactly is the progressive vision of how the international system should operate with respect to peace and human rights?
You want to prosecute the President and the US military under US criminal law for an alleged crime in another country for which there is scant evidence? The only laws that potentially apply are US laws. International law is not that developed yet. And do you think anyone will extradite an American to serve a warrant issued by the Gaddafi regime, which the international community now considers illegitimate rulers merely holding Libya by force. Hell, they can’t even grab Robert Mugabe in Italy because he’s “on his way to the Vatican for the beatification of Pope John Paul II.”
A tweet the other day made the point that when the Bolsheviks killed the family of Czar Nicolas, they were branded as monsters in the West for doing so.
When Obama and NATO do it, it’s… business as usual.
Thanks for the great report and analysis, Scarecrow.
Obama set the bar four days into his presidency when he authorized the first drone strike of his watch on Afghani territory. These strikes routinely kill innocent Afghanis, many of them children.
The war crime in Libya is of the same terrible weight, just a front and center atrocity. This is not ‘collateral damage.’
These are all war crimes.
I don’t see how anyone can vote for this man in future. How can one vote for a war criminal? Even had he done all the good things we were promised, how is this even a remote possibility?
“Speaking of Congress, isn’t that part of the federal government supposed to review war-making abroad?”
Not “to review” – to authorize, in advance. Without Congressional authorization, no Constitutional authority exists, in the absence of the need to repel sudden attack, for the President of the United States to change our relations with another nation from a state of peace to a state of war.
The Constitution, The War Powers Resolution, & Libya: Rand Paul Defends Congressional Authority, Carl Levin Cedes It
On April 18, Louis Fisher – while disabusing readers of the presidentially-peddled, profoundly-undemocratic myth that an international body (the U.N. Security Council) can take the place of Congress – succinctly explains why we, the people, seem to have lost control of the Executive Branch of our government, and identifies the culprits, hiding in the crowd of their respective fundraising-machine Parties (when they’re not on the public airwaves openly advocating cold-blooded murder by the state, like South Carolina’s Lindsey “We can’t have 535 commander-in-chiefs” Graham):
And what a sloppy thinker>/a> he is.
Until we figure out how to make bombs loaded with freedom and democracy instead of high explosives, we have this problem. “Regime change” via military force is very messy and fraught with unintended consequences. You might think we learned something in Iraq, but guess not!
It is not the international community that considers Qaddafi illegitimate, it is the western allies. Most notably, US, UK. France, Italy, Spain, Dutch, Canada and their middleman Qatar. I know that now you are going to say that the African Union and the Arab league sanctioned this action. I think you will be hard pressed to find anyone in the African Union or Arab league who expected this action from the so-called international community and I bet they won’t agree to it again. This thing went from preventing a supposedly humanitarian disaster in Benghazi, to a no fly zone, to no ground troop zone, to attacking stationary command and control facilities (ie civilian buildings), to arming and training the rebels under the guise of humanitarian aid. It’s all Bulls@#t.
You are correct. There is a lot of surprised and disappointed people, myself included.
Exactly how should this situation been handled if the UN Security Council were not involved? What exactly would the African Union and Arab League have done? After all it’s in their neighborhood.
This is not an idle question. Because the US, UN, and NATO are not likely to duplicate this action in Syria if only because they won’t get UN Security Council resolution like 1970 and 1973. The US is going to be leaving Iraq (yes, really it will). It is not about to destabilize Iraq, Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan by intervening even if the UN Security Council to authorize it.
I do think that Libya is a unique event in the region and happened because (1) Gaddafi’s regime loss enough legitimacy internally to be weak diplomatically, (2) Gaddafi had made enough enemies in the region that they were willing to carry the recommendation forward to the UN. (3) Russia and China (and India and Germany) were willing to not obstruct UN Security Council action — most likely because of persuasion by the Libyan diplomats at the UN who broke with the Gaddafi regime (I would be very curious as to why Russia and China departed from their default position on issue like this). In my view, the abstentions by Russia and China are more significant than than the actions of the Arab League and the African Union. The Arab League did more than sanction the no-fly zone; they referred the recommendation to the UN through Lebanon. To its credit, the African Union has made some efforts to get diplomatic initiative going between the regime and the rebels.
My comments about the weakness of international institutions for dealing with these sort of issues without intervention by some country or groups of countries stands. It has been unclear from the beginning how widespread the rebellion against the Gaddafi regime is. If the rebels ever control Sirte, we will see (1) how democratic they are and (2) how widespread opposition to Gadaffi is.
The US started off on the wrong foot by bigfooting the PR about the beginning of the no-fly zone and putting it in the same PR frame as every war of the past two decades (the Colin Powell style briefing). If the US indeed was surreptitiously arming and training the rebels using CIA staff (as the NYT reported without much detail) that was fundamentally stupid because it started pushing the “mission creep” framing.
As for the legitimacy of the Gaddafi regime, more countries consider Gaddafi’s actions against his population a sign of an illegitimate government that those that consider the rebels the legitimate government. Most countries (and the UN Security Council resolutions give a indication of this) would like the Libyan people to be able to select their regime without the repression of any point of view. It’s coalition countries (NATO+) that go farther and assert that the doubt about legitimacy justifies a violation of sovereignty of the Gaddafi regime (in the name of the sovereignty of the Libyan people); that point is what is debatable.
I know not many regulars here would vote for him, but I believe Ron Paul would be quite willing to require Congressional votes on just about everything, including war. I’m not expecting him (or Kucinich) to be elected POTUS, but it would be fun to see him reject their abdication of power and demand they put their John Hancock on everything they do.
Are you referring to the dictatorial leader of Libya there? If so, where did Scarecrow claim, if that’s your assertion, that what the leader of Libya has done to his own people, if proven as alleged, isn’t murder under Libyan law? If we disapprove of the lack of legally-enforceable remedies for clear crimes committed by high government officials in undemocratic nations, we have a little housekeeping of our own to do, before we begin to preach our Reform religion to the weak nations of the world that, in classic bully fashion, we feel safe kicking when they’re down.
For our purposes, being Americans, it’s enough that it’s an American domestic crime of the highest order for our president to order our military to kill the leader of a foreign nation, posing no threat to us, with which we are formally at peace (because Congress has declined to authorize the use of force against that nation). Again: Without Congressional authorization, no Constitutional authority exists, in the absence of the need to repel sudden attack, for the President of the United States to change our relations with another nation from a state of peace to a state of war: The Constitution, The War Powers Resolution, & Libya: Rand Paul Defends Congressional Authority, Carl Levin Cedes It
Yes, I’m afraid that those are basically the facts of life in this world – a world in which we can directly control the actions of only one nation. Yet we, through our federal representatives, have, manifestly, utterly failed to uphold our own fundamental responsibility to constrain within the law – both domestic and international – the behavior of the President (and Congress) of that one nation. (And we were originally dealt a much stronger hand, for that purpose, than the people of Libya, whose undemocratic government has long been enabled and armed by the United States government, without a peep from the media or public.) Our powerful nation is thus now an active sponsor of the very unfortunate “business as usual” you describe, in one unhappy semi-dictatorship after another around the world (see Iraq, see Afghanistan, see Saudi Arabia, see, until very recently, Libya), whose oppressive, but U.S.-compliant, leaders are often dependent on American weaponry that has been generously underwritten by our government.
So before we throw our weight around the world and pretend to tell other nations (with rich oil deposits) how to abide by democratic, life-respecting principles, we first ought to get our own damn house in order, and violently engage – if our Congress so chooses – in the affairs of other nations only in accordance with the procedures laid down by our own democratic, life-respecting Constitution.
Good for the UN Security Council.
There’s rock-solid evidence that the U.S. President and military violated, and continue to violate, basic American Constitutional law with their unauthorized armed attacks on Libya. Again, being Americans, that ought to be the first of our concerns, and be resolved – through impeachment, if not through criminal self-prosecution by the sinning branch of government or some other check on the abuse of power – before we start parsing whether the U.N. Security Council did or did not purport to lawfully authorize the nations of the world to do what they will to the national infrastructure and government (that is, to the people) of Libya, under color of international law.
Bernhard at Moon of Alabama looks at the legal implications of what NATO did in trying to assassinate Ghadaffi by missile (bunker buster bombs?).
Notes that we also took out a Down’s Syndrome parent-funded school and orphanage in Tripoli.
Wonder who ordered that attack on that clearly civilian center? Sickening.
Oh, for an edit feature! Sorry, missed the end tag on my link….
MODNOTE: refresh and its fixed