When Western media discusses terrorism against the West, such as 9/11, the motive is almost always left out, even when the terrorists state they are avenging longstanding Western violence in the Muslim world, reports Joe Lauria.
Approaching the terrorist attacks as a memorializing event on the anniversary generally avoids deeper inquiry into the historic U.S. role in the Middle East and Afghanistan, write Jeremy Stoddard and Diana Hess.
The ruling classes always work to keep the powerless from understanding how power functions. This assault has been aided by a cultural left determined to banish “dead white male” philosophers.
The road to possible nuclear Armageddon has been littered with lost opportunities for peaceful co-existence with Russia and signposted by repeated U.S. provocations, but Ukraine’s neutrality remains key to everyone’s security, writes Edward Lozansky.
Considering the common U.S. reaction to 9/11, we must ask: Can the U.S. do without its exceptionalist consciousness? Or is this consciousness indispensable to America?
Chile under Pinochet was the experimenting ground for an economic project, neoliberalism, that inspired both Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. It was also a laboratory for torture and enforced disappearance of human beings, writes Brad Evans.
A pattern of regret — distinct from remorse — for the venture militarism that failed in Afghanistan and Iraq does exist, writes Norman Solomon. But the disorder persists in U.S. foreign policy.
Fifty years after the murderous coup in Chile, the U.K.’s most important political artist, Peter Kennard, recounts how the Barbican censored his work to placate high-ranking Chilean finance officials and British bankers.
It’s the damnedest thing how you’re called a Kremlin agent for saying the war was provoked by NATO expansionism and it serves U.S. interests, even when NATO and U.S. officials openly admit the same thing, writes Caitlin Johnstone.