Nuclear power is a uniquely hazardous technology that can destroy entire nations, Japan’s prime minister Naoto Kan at the time of the Fukushima nuclear disaster has warned British MPs. The lessons of from such catastrophes must be heeded in other countries that believe that nuclear fission can be harnessed safely, writes Linda Pentz Gunter – or they, and the world, will reap the whirlwind.

One quarter of the country’s population would have had to flee if all the fuel had escaped at Fukushima. We came that close. If 50 million people had had to evacuate Japan, as a state our very survival would have been questioned.

It’s widely agreed here in the rapidly Disuniting States of America that the most notorious of the Republican presidential candidates have not only abandoned, but torn up the rulebook of acceptable behavior. Lies, taunts, profanities all have become the norm.

Kaoto Kan, as prime minister of Japan, responding to the Fukushima nuclear catastrophe on live television, 14th August 2013. Image: NNK World TC via Youtube.

Naoto Kan, as prime minister of Japan, responding to the Fukushima nuclear catastrophe on live television, 14th August 2013. Image: NNK World TC via Youtube.

But what if one of those candidates promised, if elected, to risk the death or permanent exile of a quarter of the country’s population? That would surely evoke the well-used slur of the Right: ‘unpatriotic!’

And insane, you say. Except that being certifiably unhinged doesn’t seem to be a disqualifying factor in US presidential campaigns these days. Still: purposely putting your electorate at risk when other choices are open to you certainly smacks of treachery.

In the normal scheme of things, leaders of nations don’t set out to deliberately wreck their countries, although arguably some have made political choices that have done precisely that.

It’s therefore no coincidence that the leaders at the time of the two countries that have experienced the world’s most catastrophic nuclear disasters, are fervent campaigners against any further use of nuclear energy.

They see the choice to continue with nuclear power, knowing the risk to the nation they swear an oath to protect, as tantamount to declaring war on your own country.

Former leaders during nuclear meltdowns, now oppose nuclear power

Former Soviet Premier, Mikhail Gorbachev, who led the then USSR during the April 1986 Chernobyl nuclear reactor explosion in Ukraine; and Naoto Kan who was prime minister of Japan when the March 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster began, both now travel the speakers’ circuit extolling the need to abolish nuclear power.

Kan, now 69, who resigned the premiership in August 2011, has become a ubiquitous and compelling voice for the global anti-nuclear movement. Gorbachev is equally on board but, due to age and infirmity (he turns 85 on March 2nd) is less often in evidence.

Kan made his case in January during a presentation at the UK’s House of Commons co-organized by Nuclear Free Local Authorities, Green Cross International (the group Gorbachev founded) and Nuclear Consulting Group. Gorbachev was scheduled but had to cancel.

Kan compared the potential worst-case devastation that could be caused by a nuclear power plant meltdown as tantamount only to “a great world war. Nothing else has the same impact.”

Japan escaped such a dire fate during the Fukushima disaster, said Kan only “due to luck”. But he is clearly haunted by the map his advisors showed him in the early days of the still unfolding triple meltdowns, one he screened for his London audience:

I was shown this map with a 250km radius around Fukushima. An area home to 50 million people. One quarter of the country’s population would have had to flee if all the fuel had escaped at Fukushima. We came that close. If 50 million people had had to evacuate Japan, as a state our very survival would have been questioned.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few

Even so, Kan had to make some steely-nerved decisions that necessitated putting all emotion aside. In a now famous phone call from Tepco, when the company asked to pull all their personnel from the out-of-control Fukushima site for their own safety, Kan told them no. The workforce must stay. The few would need to make the sacrifice to save the many.

Kan knew that abandoning the Fukushima Daiichi site would cause radiation levels in the surrounding environment to soar, in turn forcing the evacuation of the neighbouring, and still functioning, Fukushima-Daiini nuclear site.

With all 10 Fukushima reactors and 11 spent fuel pools untended, there would be multiple meltdowns and the likely ignition of nuclear waste in onsite storage ponds, cascading into an unending radiological disaster. Kan would be ordering that most dreaded 250km evacuation, including the city of Tokyo.

His insistence that the Tepco workforce remain at Fukushima was perhaps one of the most unsung moments of heroism in the whole sorry saga.

It was then, said Kan, who trained as a physicist, that his whole energy perspective was forever altered. “It was a moment when my view on nuclear power changed 180 degrees.” Sticking with the nuclear energy path meant that “the country would go down in ruin.” He could no longer in all conscience “make the decision to go with nuclear power and risk the survival of a nation.”

Looking then at the sprinkling of MPs who had bothered to attend the presentation in person, Kan reminded them that their current refugee problem would pale compared to the kind of nuclear evacuation they could confront in the UK. Where, he asked them, would all those millions of people go?

87 US Senators blithely voted for more spending on nuclear energy

Renouncing nuclear, then, is the ultimate act of patriotism. Love of country (or “cournty”as the typo-loving Ted Cruz campaign would say) should mean making decisions that protect it, not letting it turn into a radioactive wasteland.

Which makes it so hard to understand why any US political leader on the Left or Right  – but especially those Freedom Fries-loving, jingoistic wall-building, Make-America-Great-Again saber rattlers – would continue to support, promote and secure funds for an industry that could kill tens of thousands of people and exile even more.

The argument that it can’t or won’t happen in the US was undermined by Chernobyl, then obliterated by Fukushima.

Senator Bernie Sanders, a true independent currently running for president on the Democratic ticket, was on top of that reality early.  In a March 2012 Senate hearing on Fukushima he reminded us that, “with nuclear power, 99.9% safe is not good enough.”Sanders had reason to be alarmed as the then still functioning but now closed Vermont Yankee reactor in his state is the same design as those at Fukushima.

Nevertheless, the Republican Party, and a shamefully large swath of Democrats as well, voted lockstep in the Senate on January 28 for the Nuclear Innovation Capabilities Act, an amendment shoe-horned into the massive Senate Energy Policy Modernization Act still under discussion.

With very little fanfare, 87 senators were happy to endorse the squandering of likely billions more taxpayer dollars on yet another nuclear snipe hunt, dreaming of fusion and fast reactors, when solar and wind would do very nicely instead.

So much money, so much risk

As Sanders noted in the 2012 hearing, “the future of nuclear power will one hundred percent be determined by whether or not the taxpayers of this country continue to provide huge, huge financial support to the nuclear power industry for the indefinite future.”

Ditto the current regime in Japan, led by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, who is intent on restarting the country’s still operable reactors (three down 40 to go) including the latest at Takahama which uses plutonium fuel.  He is also an ardent exporter of nuclear reactor technology, apparently as eager to destroy other countries as his own.

One willing client is the UK which is looking to build a Japanese Hitachi reactor at its Wylfa site in Wales. Never mind that the country’s flagship two-reactor EDF project at Hinkley Chas turned into the worst kind of French farce with costs currently estimated at $36 billion and rising.

As Dr. Paul Dorfman of the Nuclear Consulting Group told the House of Commons audience in January: “It’s deeply difficult to see why one could wish to spend so much money to take so many risks.”

Linda Pentz Gunter is the international specialist at Beyond Nuclear, a Takoma Park, MD environmental advocacy group.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Fukushima Disaster and Nuclear Power in Japan: ‘If You Love Your Country, Let Nuclear Go!’

Bill Clinton said he “would grab a rifle” and fight for Israel during paid speech.

Bill and Hillary Clinton are under increasing scrutiny from the mainstream press over paid speeches they have given to big banks in exchange for millions of dollars. According to CNN, the couple has earned a total of $153 million in lecture fees from companies and organizations affiliated with the financial industry.

But the media has been conspicuously silent about the large sums the Clintons have raked in from paid addresses to pro-Israel organizations, including the Jewish National Fund (JNF), which directly participates in the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians and Bedouin citizens of Israel. An evaluation of Hillary Clinton’spublic disclosures from 2001 to 2015 shows that she and Bill, and their daughter, Chelsea, have earned roughly $4 million in speaking fees from pro-Israel organizations, including JNF and organizations allied with the right-wing government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The vast majority of these documented payments—$3,599,999—have gone toward the Clintons’ personal income, and up to $450,000 has been funneled into the Clinton Foundation.

Ramah Kudaimi, membership outreach coordinator for the U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, told AlterNet, “It is the right of voters to know what every single candidate earns in speaking fees, whether from banks or pro-Israel groups that engage in oppressive policies against Palestinians. It is the voters’ right to know if we have candidates running to be president who plan to continue horrific U.S. policies that make us all complicit in Israel’s denial of Palestinian rights.”

The Wages of Blaming Palestinians

Bill Clinton’s presidency ended with the collapse of the U.S.-led peace process at Camp David in 2000. After leaving office, Clinton publicly blamed Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat for the failure of negotiations, explicitly violating a promise he made to Arafat at the start of the Camp David process. The former president thus reinforced then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak’s infamous talking point that there was “no Palestinian partner” for peace.

Bill Clinton declared in the summer of 2002, at the Toronto chapter of the pro-Israel group Hadassah-WIZO, “If Iraq came across the Jordan River, I would grab a rifle and get in the trench and fight and die,” reportedly earning wild applause from attendees of the $1000-a-plate dinner. According to a New York Post reporter in attendance, Clinton again blamed Palestinians for his failure at Camp David, “accusing Arafat of making a ‘disastrous mistake’ by turning down past peace proposals that would have given the Palestinian leader control of 97 percent of the West Bank.” Clinton earned $125,000 for the speech.

Payments From Obama’s Opponents

Bill Clinton received $425,000 for two speeches to Friends of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, a right-wing group that generally supports the Likud-run government of Benjamin Netanyahu and is hostile to Democrats. Simon Wiesenthal Center president Marvin Hier, who addressed the 2000 Republican National Convention, has compared President Barack Obama to Neville Chamberlain and described the Iran nuclear deal as “another Munich.” In 2011, three years before Bill Clinton’s second paid speech before the organization, Hier accused then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of “a sell out” to anti-Semitism for opening diplomatic discussions with Egypt’s democratically elected Muslim Brotherhood.

While unmentioned in public disclosures, the Clinton Foundation website notesthat the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the main arm of America’s pro-Israel lobby, contributed between $10,001 and $25,000 to the organization for at least one speech delivered by Bill Clinton, with the exact date or amount paid unspecified. S. Daniel Abraham, the Slim Fast diet mogul who serves on the board of AIPAC, has given as much as $5 million to the Clinton Foundation. Through a series of front groups, ad campaigns and Israel propaganda tours for freshman members of Congress, AIPAC spent upward of $40 million last year in a failed attempt to derail the Obama administration’s Iran nuclear deal.

Among the Clintons’ pro-Israel speaking fees, only one was received from an organization that could be classified as part of Israel’s peace camp. The Abraham Fund, which says its aim is to “promote coexistence and equality among Israel’s Jewish and Arab-Palestinian citizens,” paid Bill Clinton $125,000 for a single speech in 2002.

Chelsea Clinton raked in as much as $325,000 in speaking fees from the United Jewish Appeal and its affiliate, the Jewish Federations, a pro-Israel umbrella group of Jewish American establishment organizations that actively combats the Palestinian-led BDS (boycott, bivestment and sanctions) movement. She remits 100 percent of her speaking fees to the Clinton Foundation, where she is a board member and helps decide how the foundation spends its $180 million annual budget.

Bill Clinton took in six-figure lecture fees from pro-Israel synagogues around thecountry. Our calculations include only Jewish instutions whose pro-Israel programming could be identified; we excluded hundreds of thousands of dollars in speaking fees paid to the Clintons by Jewish instutions whose online materials do not explicitly promote Israel.

In addition, Bill Clinton received $250,000 for a speech to Univision Management Company, the media corporation co-owned by pro-Israel billionaire Haim Saban. As AlterNet’s Grayzone Project recently reported, Saban and his wife Cheryl contributed $5 million to the pro-Hillary Clinton super PAC, Priorities USA Action, this February. Saban has also contributed between $5 and $10 million to the Clinton Foundation. “I’m a one-issue guy, and my issue is Israel,” Saban said in 2004.

Whopping Fees From Ethnic Cleansers

Public records show that Bill Clinton earned a total of $549,999 in four speeches to the JNF. The disclosures do not mention the JNF’s most generous fee. JNF provoked an outcry within pro-Israel circles when it transferred half a million dollars to the Clinton Foundation through the Peres Academic Center to pay for a single speech by Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton later said he donated his large fee back to the Peres Academic Center, but there are lingering questions about where all the money went, including funds from the JNF.

Formed in 1901, JNF has spent over a century driving Palestinians off their land, including through the creation of the paramilitary force euphemistically namedthe Green Patrol. Former JNF director Yosef Weitz outlined detailed plans for the mass ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in 1948, demanding that their villages be destroyed and they “be harassed continually” to prevent them from returning.

In recent years, JNF has teamed up with the Israeli military, police and Christian Zionist donors to violently expel the residents of unrecognized Bedouin villages in Israel’s Negev Desert. Among them is Al Arakib, which as of October 2015, has been razed to the ground a staggering 90 times.

Video below by Max Blumenthal, a co-author of this article, shows the destruction of Al Arakib by Israeli bulldozers in 2010 — the third time it was demolished — in order to make way for a JNF-funded “forest” and Jews-only town. The JNF is widely opposed in Palestinian civil society and controversial even within Israel, where it owns roughly 13 percent of state land and vows to lease it to exclusively Jewish tenants.

 

Will Hillary Honor Her Commitments?

Hillary Clinton has made her unflinching support for Israel a centerpiece of her foreign policy agenda. In November 2015, she promised to “reaffirm” the “unbreakable bond with Israel, and Benjamin Netanyahu,” suggesting she would adopt a friendlier posture to Israel’s right-wing leader than Obama had.

In a July 2015 letter to mega-donor Haim Saban, which her campaign distributed to the press, Clinton declared “we need to make countering BDS a priority.” It was the first time in American history that a presidential candidate mentioned by name the grassroots movement to boycott Israel.

As the challenge to her primary candidacy from Senator Bernie Sanders grows, Hillary Clinton is tacking left. During her concession speech in New Hampshire, Clinton insisted to local supporters, “I believe so strongly that we have to keep up with every fiber of our being the argument for, the campaign for human rights.”

Whether a Clinton presidency would alter the U.S.-Israeli special relationship remains to be seen. But as long as she honors the wishes of her family’s top contributors, as she has pledged to do, her argument for human rights must exclude Palestinians.

The following list shows Bill and Hillary Clinton’s personal income from speaking fees to pro-Israel groups between 2001 and 2015, based on public disclosures.

The following list shows the Clintons’ speaking events to pro-Israel groups, which were compensated by payments to the Clinton Foundation. The Foundation’s website does not provide information about the exact date of the engagements or the amount given.

Sarah Lazare is a staff writer for AlterNet. A former staff writer for Common Dreams, Sarah co-edited the book About Face: Military Resisters Turn Against War. Follow her on Twitter at @sarahlazare.

Max Blumenthal is a senior editor of the Grayzone Project at AlterNet, and the award-winning author of Goliath and Republican Gomorrah. His most recent book is The 51 Day War: Ruin and Resistance in Gaza. Follow him on Twitter at@MaxBlumenthal.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Clintons Earned Over $3.5 Million in Paid Addresses to Pro-Israel Organizations

Under the feudal mode of production, peasants were often allowed to cultivate plots of land for themselves on a rental basis. However, those tenant farmers rarely succeeded in becoming landowners in their own rights because a major share of what they harvested was taken away by landlords as rent, often leaving them with a bare subsistence amount of what they produced. When the harvest was poor, they incurred debt. If peasants were unable to pay off their debts, they could find themselves reduced to the condition of serfs or slaves.

Today, under conditions of market dominance by parasitic finance capital, a similar relationship can be detected between the powerful financial oligarchs (as feudal lords of our time), on the one hand, and the public at large (as peasant population of today), on the other. In the same manner as the landed aristocracy of times past extracted rent by virtue of monopolistic ownership of land, so today the financial oligarchy extracts interest and other financial charges by virtue of having concentrated the major bulk of national resources in their hands in the form of finance capital.

The Marxist term wage-slaves refers to those who, lacking capital or means of production, have only their labor power to sell to make a living. This describes the vast majority of people in today’s capitalist societies whose sole means of subsistence is the sale of their capacity to work. “Just as the feudal-era serf had no choice but to enslave himself and his family to the manor-house lord, the modern-day serf must indenture himself to banks to own a car or home or buy a college education” [1].

In the latest edition of her book, Occupy Money, Professor Margrit Kennedy shows that today between 35 percent and 40 percent of all consumer spending is appropriated by the financial sector: bankers, insurance companies, non-bank lenders/financiers, bondholders, and the like [2]. Obviously, this means that, as Ellen Brown points out: “By taking banking back . . . governments could regain control of that very large slice (up to 40 per cent) of every public budget that currently goes to interest charged to finance investment programs through the private sector” [3].

Distribution Effects: Escalation of Poverty and Inequality

Like the feudal rent, the hidden tribute to the financial sector, the nearly 40 percent of consumer spending that is appropriated by the financial sector, helps explain how wealth is systematically transferred from Main Street to Wall Street. The rich get increasingly richer at the expense of the poor—not just because of greed or the blind forces of the market mechanism but, more importantly, because of deliberate monetary/economic policies, which have steadily come under effective control of the financial oligarchy. Indeed, the very mechanism of money creation and/or monetary policy itself exacerbates inequality.

Although obfuscated and/or mystified, the planned or premeditated mechanism by which redistribution of economic resources from the bottom to the top takes place is fairly straightforward. The insidious mechanism of redistribution in favor of the financial oligarchy is expertly sanitized and benignly called monetary policy. Private central banks (such as the Federal Reserve Bank in the U.S.) are usually the main institutional vehicles that carry out the monetary policy of redistribution. Central banks’ polices of cheap or easy money benefits, first and foremost, the big banks and other major financial players that can outbid small borrowers who must borrow at much higher rates than the near-zero rates guaranteed to the big borrowers.

By thus gaining privileged access to nearly interest-free money, the financial elites can enrich themselves in a number of ways. For one thing, they can snap-up income-producing assets at the expense of small borrowers who lack access to cheap money. For another, they can boost the value of their wealth by creating an artificial demand (such as stock buybacks) for those ill-begotten assets with the cheaply borrowed money. In addition, they can skim vast wealth by loaning out the cheap they obtain from central banks to everyone below the top of the wealth/income pyramid—at near four percent (mortgages), at seven or eight percent (auto, student and other loans), and above 15 percent (credit cards). Obviously, this would funnel much of the national income stream to those who can borrow cheap and lend at much higher rate [4].

Instead of regulating or containing the disruptive speculative activities of the financial sector, economic policy makers, spearheaded by central banks, have in recent years been actively promoting asset-price bubbles—in effect, further exacerbating inequality.

Proxies of the financial oligarchy at the helm of monetary/economic policy making apparatus seem to believe that they have discovered an insurance policy for bubbles that burst by blowing new ones:

Both the Washington regulators and Wall Street evidently believed that together they could manage bursts. This meant that there was no need to prevent such bubbles from occurring: on the contrary, it is patently obvious that both regulators and operators actively generated them, no doubt believing that one of the ways of managing bursts was to blow another dynamic bubble in another sector: after dot-com, the housing bubble; after that, an energy-price or emerging market bubble, and so on [5].

It is obvious that this policy of effectively insuring financial bubbles would make financial speculation a win-win proposition, a proposition that is aptly called “moral hazard,” as it encourages risk-taking at the expense of others—in this case of the 99%, since the costs of bailing out the “too-big-to-fail” gamblers are paid through austerity cuts. Knowing that the central bank/monetary policy would bail them out after any bust, they go from one excess to another.

This shows how the proxies of the financial oligarchy, ensconced at the helm of central banks and their shareholders (commercial banks), serve as agents of subtlely funneling economic resources from the public to the financial oligarchy—just as did the rent/tax collectors and bailiffs of feudal lords collected and transferred economic surplus from the peasants/serfs to the landed aristocracy.

Contractionary or Anti-developmental Nature of Parasitic Finance Capital

As mentioned earlier, today between 35 percent and 40 percent of all consumer spending is appropriated by the financial sector. Not only does this redistribute resources in favor of the financial oligarchy, it also drains the real sector of the economy of the necessary resources for productive investment and economic development.

Experience shows that, contrary to the extractive or parasitic private banking, public banking has proven quite beneficial to the developmental objectives of their communities and/or nations. Nineteenth century neighborhood savings banks, Credit Unions, and Savings and Loan associations in the United States, Jusen companies in Japan, Trustee Savings banks in the UK, and the Commonwealth Bank of Australia all served the housing and other credit needs of their communities well.

Perhaps a most interesting and instructive example is the case of the Bank of North Dakota, which continues to be owned by the state for nearly a century, and which is widely credited for the state’s relatively healthy budget and its robust economy in the midst of budgetary problems and economic stagnation in many other states. The bank was established by the state legislature in 1919, specifically to free farmers and small business owners from the clutches of out-of-state bankers and railroad barons. The bank’s mission continues to be to deliver sensible financial services that promote agriculture, commerce and industry in North Dakota [6].

Explaining how the Bank of North Dakota utilizes people’s savings for productive credit and/or investment, Eric Hardmeyer, president of the bank, points out, “Really what separates us [from private banks] is that we plow those deposits back into the state of North Dakota in the form of loans. We invest back into the state in economic development type activities.” The bank president further indicates that in the course of the last dozen years or so “we’ve turned back a third of a billion dollars just to the general fund to offset taxes or to aid in funding public sector types of needs” [7].

Contrary to the case of North Dakota, most other states, burned by interest payments and other financial obligations to private banks, are forced to cut investment on public capital formation, to slash jobs and liquidate state-owned properties or state-sponsored services—often at fire-sale prices. Consider California, for example. At the end of 2010, it owed private banks and other bondholders $70 billion in interest only—44% of its total financial obligations of $158 billion. “If the state had incurred that debt to its own bank,” writes Ellen Brown, “California could be $70 billion richer today. Instead of slashing services, selling off public assets, and laying off employees, it could be adding services and repairing its decaying infrastructure” [8].

At the national level, the U.S. federal government paid in 2011 a sum of $454 billion in interest on its debt—the third highest budget item after the military and Social Security outlays. This figure amounted to nearly one-third of the total personal income taxes ($1, 100 billion) collected that year. This means that if the Federal Reserve Bank was publicly owned, and the government borrowed directly from it interest-free, personal income taxes could have been cut by a third [9]. Alternatively, the savings could be invested in social infrastructure, both human and physical, thereby drastically augmenting the productive capacity of the nation and elevating the standard of living for all.

It can reasonably be argued that the ravages wrought on today’s economies/societies by parasitic finance capital’s extraction of economic resources are even more destructive than was the extraction of feudal rent to the social fabric under feudalism. There are at least two major reasons for this judgment.

For one thing, the landed aristocracies’ appropriation of the major bulk of economic surplus, or rent, required production and, therefore, employment of the farming labor force. This meant that although the farming workforce was, of course, exploited, it nonetheless benefitted from production—albeit at poverty or subsistence levels of remuneration. In the age of finance capital, however, profit making or surplus extraction by the parasitic financial oligarchy is largely divorced from real production and employment, as it comes largely through parasitic appropriation from the rest of the economy. As such, it employs no or a very small percentage of labor force, which means that, today, the financial sector generates income/profits without sharing it with the overwhelming majority of the public.

For another, whereas periodic cancellation of unsustainable peasants’ debts by landed aristocracies were considered as restorative measures for maintaining the feudal mode of production and social structure, under today’s rule of finance capital such healing measures are ruled out as omens of economic catastrophe. Historical records show that debt cancellation in the Bronze Age Mesopotamia took place on a fairly regular basis from 2400 to 1400 BC. Ancient documents decoded from cuneiform inscriptions have led many historians to believe that the Bronze Age tradition of debt cancellation in the Near/Middle East may have served as the setting or model for the Biblical pronouncements of debt relief.

Careful studies of those records indicate that, contrary to today’s perceptions (shaped largely by the influential financial interests) that debt cancellation may lead to economic disorder, as epitomized by the too-big-to-fail refrain, those earlier practices of debt relief were carried out precisely for the opposite reasons: to restore economic revival and social harmony by undoing the ravages of debt wrought on the economy and the overwhelming majority of the population. Freedom in those days meant real, economic freedom—freedom from debt bondage—not the abstract or hollow concept of freedom promoted today.

The type of economic freedom being referred to was the royal act of cancelling back taxes and other personal debts, restoring traditional family landholding rights and freeing citizens who had been enslaved for debt. These royal interventions ensured rather than encroached on general economic freedom [10].

What is to be Done?

Many critics of parasitic finance capital have called for a robust regime of regulation of the financial sector. Experience shows, however, that as long as the dynamics and structures of the accumulation of capital are left intact, regulation cannot provide an effective long-term solution to the recurring crises of financial bubble and bursts.

For one thing, due to the political influence of powerful financial interests, financial regulations would not be implemented in a meaningful way, as evinced, for example, by policy responses to the 2008 financial implosion and the ensuing Great Recession.

For another, even if regulations are somehow implemented, they would provide only a temporary relief. For, as long as there is no community or real democratic control, regulations would be undermined by the influential financial interests that elect and control policy-makers. The dramatic reversal of the extensive regulations of the 1930s and 1940s that were put in place in response to the Great Depression and World War II to today’s equally dramatic deregulations serves as a robust validation of this judgment. This means that the need to end the recurring crises of the capitalist system requires more than financial regulation; it calls for changing the system itself.

Other critics of parasitic finance capital have called for public banking. The idea of bringing the banking industry, national savings and credit allocation under public control or supervision is neither complicated nor necessarily socialistic or ideological. In the same manner that many infrastructural facilities such as public roads, school systems and health facilities are provided and operated as essential public services, so can the supply of credit and financial services be provided on a basic public utility model for both day-to-day business transactions and long-term industrial projects.

As pointed out earlier, provision of financial services and/or credit facilities after the model of public utilities would lower financial costs to both consumers and producers by about 35 to 40 percent. By thus freeing consumers and producers from what can properly be called the financial overhead, or rent, similar to land rent under feudalism, the public option credit and/or banking system can revive many stagnant economies that are depressed under the crushing burden of never-ending debt-servicing obligations.

Even in the core capitalist countries public banking has occasionally been used to save capitalism from its own systemic crises. For example, in the face of the Great Depression of the 1930s, and following the Hoover administration’s unsuccessful policy of trying to bailout the insolvent banks, the F.D.R. administration was compelled to declare a “bank holiday” in 1933, pull the plug on the terminally-ill banks and take control of the entire financial system. The Emergency Banking Act of 1933, introduced by President Roosevelt (four days after he declared a nationwide bank holiday on March 5, 1933) and passed by Congress on March 9th, guaranteed full payment of depositors’ money, thereby effectively created 100 percent deposit insurance. Not surprisingly, when the banks reopened for business on March 13, 1933, “depositors stood in line to return their stashed cash to neighborhood banks” [11].

Similarly, in the face of the collapse of its banking system in the early 1992, the Swedish state assumed ownership and control of all the insolvent banks in an effort to revive its financial system and prevent it from bringing down its entire economy. While this wiped out the existing shareholders, it turned out to be a good deal for taxpayers: not only did it avoid costly redistributive bailouts in favor of the insolvent banks, it also brought taxpayers some benefits once banks returned to profitability.

Both in Sweden and the United States once profitability was returned to insolvent banks their ownership was returned to private hands! It is perhaps this kind of capitalist governments’ commitment to powerful financial–corporate interests that has prompted a number of critics to argue that one definition of capitalism is that it is a system of socializing losses and privatizing profits.

In the absence of incestuous business–political relationship between Wall Street and the government apparatus, nationalization of banks and other financial intermediaries is not as complicated or difficult as it may sound; since banking laws already empower regulators to impose extraordinary controls and close supervision over these institutions. It is certainly easier than public ownership and management of manufacturing enterprises that require much more than record keeping and following regulatory or legal guidelines.

Indeed, in the immediate aftermath of the 2008 financial implosion, the U.S. and British governments became de facto owners of the failed financial giants such as Citibank, A.I.G, the Royal Bank of Scotland, and Anglo-Irish Bank. Through the provision of enormous amounts of public funds, these governments effectively became the main investors in the collapsed institutions. Were it not because of political and/or ideological reasons, they could have easily made their de facto ownership legal ownership [12].

The fraudulent compensation of Wall Street’s gambling losses at the expense of everyone else is testament, once again, to the demagogical pretentions of the champions of austerity and neoliberalism that the government should stay out of the market’s affairs.

While public banking could certainly mitigate or do away with market turbulences that are due to financial bubbles and bursts, it will not preclude other systemic crises of capitalism. These include profitability crises that could result from very high levels of capitalization, from insufficient demand or under-consumption, from overcapacity or overproduction, or from disproportionality between various sectors of a market economy. To do away with the systemic crises of capitalism, therefore, requires more than nationalization of banks; it requires changing the capitalist system itself.

References

[1] Charles Hugh Smith, Central Banks Have Pushed the Middle Class Down into Neofeudal Serfdom.

[2]. Margrit Kennedy, Occupy Money: Creating an Economy Where Everybody Wins, Gabriola Island, BC (Canada): New Society Publishers 2012.

[3] Ellen Brown, Exploring the Public Bank Option.

[4] For a concise and clear exposition of this insidious redistribution from the bottom up see, for example, Charles Hugh Smith, If We Don’t Change the Way Money Is Created and Distributed, We Change Nothing.

[5] Peter Gowan, “The Crisis in the Heartland,” in M. Konings (ed.) The Great Credit Crash, London and New York, Verso 2010: 52.

[6] For more on the unique experience of the Bank of North Dakota see, for example, Ellen Brown, Cutting Wall Street Out.

[7] Interview, as quoted by Public Banking Institute, http://publicbankinginstitute.org/.

[8]. Ellen Brown, It’s the Interest, Stupid! Why Bankers Rule the World.

[9]. Ibid.

[10] Michael Hudson, The Lost Tradition of Biblical Debt Cancellations.

[11] William L. Silber, Why did FDR’s Bank Holiday Succeed?

[12] For a relatively thorough discussion of this issue see, for example, Michael Hudson, Scenarios for Recovery: How to Write Down the Debts and Restructure the Financial System.

Ismael Hossein-zadeh is Professor Emeritus of Economics (Drake University). He is the author of Beyond Mainstream Explanations of the Financial Crisis (Routledge 2014), The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism (Palgrave–Macmillan 2007), and the Soviet Non-capitalist Development: The Case of Nasser’s Egypt (Praeger Publishers 1989).

Anthony A. Gabb is Associate Professor of Economics at St. John’s University in New York City. 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Financial Oligarchy vs. Feudal Aristocracy. The Parasitic Nature of Finance Capital

The United States would have the world believe that it is in mortal danger should nations like Iran or North Korea obtain operationally effective nuclear weapons. We are told that there is a grave risk of these weapons being used against another nation and that the US (with the support of the “international community”) must confront these government, and if possible undermine and overthrow them. Why?

Since a nation has already used nuclear weapons against another state, ironically enough that nation being the United States itself, we already know the devastating effects of nuclear weapons. Besides the immense, indiscriminate initial blast, nuclear weapons also produce a persistent radioactive threat amid the fallout afterwards.

The fallout and the catastrophic effects it has on human health for years afterward make nuclear weapons particularly horrifying and abhorrent. The United States didn’t drop only one nuclear bomb on another nation, Japan, it dropped two. The data collected in the aftermath of these attacks have helped form our collective fear of these weapons.

Ironically the US is using the fear its own nuclear warfare has created as leverage to wage still more war.

Depleted Uranium – All the Fallout, None of the Bang 

But what if the catastrophic human health effects of fallout could be achieved without the immense, city-flattening initial explosion? What if you could use a weapon to induce long-term spikes in cancer and birth defects without the political ramifications of dropping a nuclear bomb on a population? Some readers may be tempted to cite “dirty bombs,” and they would be partially correct. But there is another correct answer. Depleted uranium or DU ammunition.

Depleted uranium is one of the densest materials munitions can be made out of. Because of their density, they are able to penetrate armor other rounds cannot. DU was initially conceived as an additional deterrence, a weapon of last resort in the event of a full-scale Soviet invasion of Western Europe during the Cold War.

Because of the overwhelming number of tanks the Soviet Union possessed, it was believed extraordinary measures would be needed to even the odds, even at the cost of radioactive contamination of the battlefield.

The catastrophic effects of littering the battlefield with contaminated ammunition possessing a half-life of several billion years was a risk NATO was willing to take to ensure the survival of Western Europe. How then, did this weapon of last resort become a weapon commonly used?

The first Gulf War in 1990, Operation Desert Storm, included the heavy use of this doomsday contingency. The International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons (ICBUW) in their recent piece titled, ““The most toxic war in history” – 25 years later,” would note:

This month marks the 25th anniversary of the start of Operation Desert Storm, the combat phase of the Gulf War. Precipitated by Iraq’s invasion and annexation of Kuwait in August 1990, the conflict was the first to see the widespread use of depleted uranium (DU) ammunition. US and UK forces subsequently acknowledged firing a combined 286,000kg of DU – the vast majority of which was fired by US Abrams and M60 tanks, and A10 and Harrier aircraft.

ICBUW would also note that the use of DU has impacted both soldiers who used the weapons as well as civilians trapped on or near battlefields they were used on.

Latinos Health included in one of their recent articles the following caption:

The Czech military is testing all of its soldiers that served in the Balkans for possible signs of Balkan Syndrome, an unexplained condition that is thought to be caused by depleted uranium used in NATO ammunition. Recent media reports claim that scientists have found evidence of Uranium 236 in blood samples from soldiers who served in the Gulf War, where depleted uranium ammunition was also used.

It should strike people as disturbing that the United States poses as the greatest advocate against weapons of mass destruction and a champion for preserving the lives and wellbeing of innocent people affected by war, all while using weapons of mass destruction, repeatedly, at the expense of innocent lives affected by their various wars.

DU has turned up in both Iraq wars, NATO’s intervention in the Balkans and in Afghanistan. Courts around the world have ruled in favor on several cases regarding the effects of DU, including a British Gulf War veteran who became ill because of the radioactive weapons.

The BBC would report in their story, “Gulf soldier wins pension fight,” that:

A former soldier is believed to be the first veteran to win a war pension appeal after suffering depleted uranium poisoning during the first Gulf War.

A tribunal in Edinburgh found in favour of Kenny Duncan from Clackmannanshire who became ill after his service in the Middle East.

He had helped move tanks destroyed by shells containing depleted uranium.

One can only wonder how many nameless, faceless and voiceless civilians living on or near former battlefields have also been affected like Mr. Duncan from Clackmannanshire, who will never receive the assistance needed to recover from what America’s indiscriminate and unnecessary use of radiological weapons has done to them and their communities.

While it is hopeful seeing mounting awareness and subsequent pressure being applied to the United States and other governments around the world who might also consider using this weapon and others like it, we are still faced with the problem that the US, essentially the worst violator when it comes to nuclear and radiological weapons, poses as the primary advocate policing the world against them.

Not only is the US guilty of immense hypocrisy, it has managed to hijack what are supposed to be “international institutions” to help perpetrate this hypocrisy. This is yet another example of just how important it is to establish a true balance of global power through a multipolar system of sovereign nations, in place of the “international order” that currently exists, which sidesteps nation sovereignty and empowers global criminality rather than stopping it.

Ulson Gunnar, a New York-based geopolitical analyst and writer especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on America’s “Love Affair” With Nuclear and Radioactive Weapons

Meeting in Munich on February 11 & 12, 2016, as the International Syria Support Group (ISSG), the Arab League, China, Egypt, the EU, France, Germany, Iran, Iraq, Italy, Jordan, Lebanon, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, Oman, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, the United Nations, and the United States decided that humanitarian access will commence this week to besieged areas, and an ISSG task force will within one week elaborate modalities for a nationwide cessation of hostilities.

The ISSG members unanimously committed to immediately facilitate the full implementation of the UN Security Council Resolution 2254, adopted unanimously December 18, 2015. The ISSG reaffirmed their readiness to carry out all commitments set forth in the resolution, including to: ensure a Syrian-led and Syrian-owned political transition based on the Geneva Communiqué in its entirety; press for the end of any indiscriminate use of weapons; support and accelerate the agreement and implementation of a nationwide ceasefire; facilitate immediate humanitarian access to besieged and hard-to-reach areas and the release of any arbitrarily detained persons; and fight terrorism.

Ensuring Humanitarian Access

In order to accelerate the urgent delivery of humanitarian aid, sustained delivery of assistance shall begin this week by air to Deir Ez Zour and simultaneously to Fouah, Kafrayah, the besieged areas of Rural Damascus, Madaya, Mouadhimiyeh, and Kafr Batna by land, and continue as long as humanitarian needs persist. Humanitarian access to these most urgent areas will be a first step toward full, sustained, and unimpeded access throughout the country.

The members of the ISSG will use their influence with all parties on the ground to work together, in coordination with the United Nations, to ensure that all parties allow immediate and sustained humanitarian access to reach all people in need, throughout Syria, particularly in all besieged and hard-to-reach areas, as called for in UNSCR 2254. To this end, the UN will submit a plan to an ISSG humanitarian task force, which shall convene on February 12 and next week. This group will comprise the ISSG co-chairs, relevant UN entities and members of the ISSG with influence on the parties in a position to ensure humanitarian access.

The ISSG reaffirmed that humanitarian access should not benefit any particular group over any other, but shall be granted by all sides to all people in need, in full compliance with UNSCR 2254 and international humanitarian law. The ISSG asks the UN to report weekly, on behalf of the task force, on progress on the implementation of the plan referenced above, so that in any cases where access lags or approvals are lacking, relevant ISSG members will use their influence to press the requested party/parties to provide that approval. There will be a process for resolving any problems so that relief can flow expeditiously. Any questions about access or delivery will be resolved through the task force.

All ISSG members commit to immediately work together with the Syrian parties to ensure no delay in the granting of approval and completion of all pending UN requests for access in accordance with UNSCR 2254, paragraph 12.

ISSG co-chairs and members will ensure that aid convoys are used solely for humanitarian purposes. International humanitarian organizations, in particular the United Nations, will play the central role, as they engage the Syrian government, the opposition and local populations, in arranging the monitoring and sustained and uninterrupted distribution of aid.

Achieving a Nationwide Cessation of Hostilities

The ISSG members agreed that a nationwide cessation of hostilities must be urgently implemented, and should apply to any party currently engaged in military or paramilitary hostilities against any other parties other than Daesh, Jabhat al-Nusra, or other groups designated as terrorist organizations by the United Nations Security Council. The ISSG members commit to exercise influence for an immediate and significant reduction in violence leading to the nationwide cessation of hostilities.

The ISSG members decided to take immediate steps to secure the full support of all parties to the conflict for a cessation of hostilities, and in furtherance of that have established an ISSG ceasefire task force, under the auspices of the UN, co-chaired by Russia and the United States, and including political and military officials, with the participation of ISSG members with influence on the armed opposition groups or forces fighting in support of the Syrian government. The UN shall serve as the secretariat of the ceasefire task force.

The cessation of hostilities will commence in one week, after confirmation by the Syrian government and opposition, following appropriate consultations in Syria.  During that week, the ISSG task force will develop modalities for the cessation of hostilities.

The ISSG task force will, among other responsibilities continue to: a) delineate the territory held by Daesh, ANF and other groups designated as terrorist organizations by the United Nations Security Council; b) ensure effective communications among all parties to promote compliance and rapidly de-escalate tensions; c) resolve allegations of non-compliance; and d) refer persistent non-compliant behavior by any of the parties to ISSG Ministers, or those designated by the Ministers, to determine appropriate action, including the exclusion of such parties from the arrangements for the cessation of hostilities and the protection it affords them.

Although a cessation of hostilities can facilitate humanitarian access, it cannot be a precondition for such access anywhere in Syria.

The ISSG decided that all members will undertake their best efforts, in good faith, to sustain the cessation of hostilities and delivery of humanitarian assistance, and take measures to stop any activities prohibited by United Nations Security Council Resolutions 2170, 2178, 2199, 2249, 2253, and 2254. The ISSG again expressed concern for the plight of refugees and internally displaced persons and the imperative of building conditions for their safe return in accordance with the norms of international humanitarian law and taking into account the interests of host countries.

Advancing a Political Transition

The members of the ISSG reaffirmed the imperative of all sides engaging in negotiations under the auspices of the United Nations as soon as possible, in strict compliance with United Nations Security Council 2254. They reaffirmed that it is for the Syrian people to decide the future of Syria. The members of the ISSG pledge to do all they can to facilitate rapid progress in these negotiations, including the reaching of agreement within six months on a political transition plan that establishes credible, inclusive and non-sectarian governance and sets a schedule and process for drafting a new constitution, free and fair elections, pursuant to the new constitution, to be held within 18 months and administered under supervision of the United Nations, to the satisfaction of the governance and to the highest international standards of transparency and accountability, with all Syrians, including members of the diaspora, eligible to participate.

Full implementation of these objectives will require the ISSG co-chairs and members, the UN and others, to work closely on political, humanitarian, and military dimensions.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on “Modalities for a Nationwide Cessation of Hostilities”: Official Statement of the International Syria Support Group (ISSG)

The Race To Raqqa Is On – To Keep Its Unity Syria Must Win

February 13th, 2016 by Moon of Alabama

The race to Raqqa is on. Syria and its allies are competing with the U.S. and its allies to snatch east Syria from the Islamic State.

Raqqa in eastern Syria is held by the Islamic State as are the other cities along the Euphrates towards Iraq. To defeat the Islamic State in Raqqa, Deir Ezzor and other eastern Syrian towns and to liberate them is the aim of all purported enemies of the Islamic State. But this question has to be seen in a larger context.

Could the U.S. and its allies capture Raqqa or Deir Ezzor and with it parts of eastern Syria it could use them as a bargaining chip to gain some negotiation power with Syria and its allies over the future of Syria. Alternatively it create a Sunni state in east-Syria and west-Iraq. Mosul would be part of such a Sunni state and it would probably be put under the tutelage of Turkey. There have been U.S. plans for such a “Sunnistan” and a revision of the Sykes-Picot borders for some time.

For Syria and its allies the upholding of the unity of Syria is a major objective. To leave Raqqa and the eastern oil fields to the U.S. would be a devastating loss. Syria and its allies have therefore to beat the U.S. and its allies in the race to Raqqa and the larger east Syria.

According to Southfront Syria just made the first major move. A brigade of the Syrian Arab Army attacked the positions of the Islamic State along the Ithriyah to Raqqa road. The town Tal Abu Zayhn has been taken on the way to the first objective, the Tabaqah military airport. Additional supporting forces from various allied groups are assembling in Ithriyah to later support the attack.


map via Southfront – bigger

The U.S. move towards east-Syria is still in preparation. The first U.S. plan was to use the Syrian-Kurdish YPG forces of north-east Syria. These were labeled Syrian Democratic Forces after attaching a few fighters from Arab tribes. These forces would have attacked Raqqa from the north. But the Kurds did not want to invade the Arab lands they would not be able to hold. Their aim is to connect to the Kurdish enclave in north-west Syria along the Turkish border.

The U.S. is coming up with a new plan. There are only sketches visible so far and the following is just somewhat informed speculation.

The U.S. has extended the runway of the agricultural Rumeilan/Abu Hajar airfield (map) in the Kurdish held area in north east Syria to be able to supply larger operations in the wider area:

This location has been chosen because it’s just 100 miles (160 kilometers) from ISIS frontline positions and some of its lucrative oil fields, but well within territory held by Kurdish fighters known as the YPG. The runway is being nearly doubled in length from about 2,300 feet to 4,330 feet (700 to 1,320 meters) — long enough, say, to receive C130 transport planes. A small apron is also being paved.

Some U.S. special operation forces are said to already operate from there. This is the vanguard on a reconnaissance mission.

It was publicly disclosed that one brigade if the U.S. 101st Airborne Division would go to Iraq to train, advise and assist the Iraqi forces for an attack on Mosul.

Some 1,800 soldiers from the 101st’s Headquarters and its 2nd Brigade Combat Team will deploy soon on regular rotations to Baghdad and Irbil to train and advise Iraqi army and Kurdish peshmerga forces who are expected in the coming months to move toward Mosul, the Islamic State group’s de facto headquarters in Iraq.

But Col. Pat Lang was told that two brigades of the 101st would deploy:

I was told today that two brigades of the 101st Airborne Division are going to Iraq, not just one. This probably is related to the Saudi Juggernaut. pl

The Saudi “juggernaut” was the recent announcement that the Saudis would be willing to send troops to Syria. Nobody was, at first, taking that serious but it now starts to make some sense. The Saudis today confirmed their intent:

Saudi’s decision to send troops to Syria in an attempt to bolster and toughen efforts against militants is “final” and “irreversible,” the Saudi military spokesman announced on Thursday.Brig. Gen. Ahmed Al-Assiri, said that Riyadh is “ready” and will fight with its U.S.-led coalition alliesto defeat ISIS militants in Syria, however, he said Washington is more suitable to answer questions on further details about any future ground operations.

The statement comes as Saudi Arabia’s Deputy Crown Prince and Defense Minister Mohammed bin Salman visited NATO headquarters in Brussels to discuss the Syrian civil war.

The Saudis would fight under the control of the one brigade of the 101st airborne that was not announced to go for Mosul. The Saudis would deploy from Saudi Arabia likely via a U.S. controlled airstrip in west Iraq towards Syria while the brigade from the 101st would probably deploy from the Kurdish area in north Iraq through the Kurdish areas in north-east Syria towards Raqqa. Raqqa would thereby be attacked from a north-eastern and a south-eastern. The airport of Rumeilan/Abu Hajar would be one of the major supply bases.

Such a move of forces would be quite large and over relative long distances. But most of the area is desert and modern motorized military equipment could easily cover those distances in a day or two. This would put Saudi troops into Syria. If they would take Raqqa or Deir Ezzor and the eastern Syrian oilfields they would NEVER let go of it unless Syria would bend to the Saudi demand of introducing an Islamist led government.

The plan is workable but it would also instigate a large mobilization of Shia forces and could lead to a bigger conflict. The Russian Prime Minister Medvedev warned today that new Arab forces entering the Syrian war could spark a much wider war.

The Saudi operation was said today to start within two months. The Syrian government forces and their allies will now have to rush to the east to protect the unity of the country. The U.S. for its part may want to hinder the Syrian advantage by whatever means it has, including – possibly – some “erroneous” bombing.

The race for Raqqa, and Syria’s future, is on.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Race To Raqqa Is On – To Keep Its Unity Syria Must Win

America’s Endless Wars

February 13th, 2016 by Margaret Kimberley

There is no “peace” wing in either the Democratic or Republican parties. “Not only has Obama declared unending war against the rest of the world, but so has the rest of the two party duopoly.” When the warmongers scream “Jump,” the only question leaders of either party ask is, “How high?” It’s a matter of tone, not substance. “The Republicans openly brag about aggressions while Democrats dissemble and use weasel words to pretend they won’t do the same thing.”

“How can Bernie Sanders bring social democracy to the United States if he won’t cut the military budget or foreswear interventions?”

America’s grand fantasy of a Project for a New American Century has experienced a serious setback. Yet this country still isn’t dissuaded from pursuing the imperial effort. For five years Syrian president Bashar al-Assad stood his ground and ignored Barack Obama’s refrain that he “must go.” Fortunately Assad didn’t leave or give up the fight. Russian president Vladimir Putin finally stood beside him in deed and not just in words. The alliance is a textbook case of how nations ought to behave within the parameters of international law.

Russian air strikes bolstered the Syrian army and in just four months ISIS and the rest of its jihadists allies are on the run. The Syrian peace conference in Geneva is now under a “temporary pause” (*link pause) for the simple reason that there is no longer any need for it. The issue is settled. Assad isn’t going anywhere.

For nearly five years the Syrian people have suffered as a direct result of American aggression. More than 250,000 people are dead and 9 million are refugees in their country and abroad. The humanitarian disaster is a direct result of America’s intervention and blame for the bloodshed should be placed at Barack Obama’s feet. Now that America’s jihadists allies are losing, there is suddenly concern expressed for the Syrian people who wouldn’t be suffering at all absent the regime change plot.

“Blame for the bloodshed should be placed at Barack Obama’s feet.”

While Republican and Democratic presidential candidates, including “socialist” Bernie Sanders, express unending support for imperialism and brutality in Syria, the project is falling apart. The failure is a good thing for humanity. The United States should not be allowed to act like the schoolyard bully who steals lunch money for fun.

The Russian success should have taught America a lesson but that doesn’t appear to be the case. The United States has pursued another brand of warfare against that country for the past two years. First by overthrowing the president of neighboring Ukraine and then by exacting sanctions which have damaged the Russian economy. The corporate media has played its part by fanning the flames with anti-Russian propaganda. One day they claim that Russia threatens European nations, then they claim Russian submarines will cut underwater cables. Any Russian who was ever murdered is now said to have died at Putin’s hands.

The United States is determined to try and snatch some victory from the jaws of defeat. While the Syria project is heading south, the cold war appears to be getting warm. The defense department announced that it will take the unprecedented action of  installing weapons and personnel in the Baltic states bordering Russia. (*link weapons) The most hawkish American presidents respected the old Soviet spheres of influence and didn’t dare provoke so openly. Now it is clear that there will be no respite from imperialism even as it fails.

“Any Russian who was ever murdered is now said to have died at Putin’s hands.”

Barack Obama will be president for less than one year but his successor won’t be any better for the rest of humanity. The Democratic and Republican candidates sound alike as they eagerly proclaim their loathing for Putin and their determination to continue war by other means. Not one of them has dared to call the Syria intervention the unlawful aggression that it obviously is and none has expressed an intention to change foreign policy. Even liberal darling Bernie Sanders spouts nonsense about “Saudi skin in the game” in Syria when the Saudis have been an integral part of the regime change effort. Not only has Obama declared unending war against the rest of the world, but so has the rest of the two party duopoly.

The lack of debate among the establishment and the slavish devotion of the corporate media make America a very dangerous country. If candidates like Barack Obama and Bernie Sanders are slick enough they can market themselves as peacemakers when in fact they will create as much chaos and suffering as any of the Republicans.

How can Bernie Sanders bring social democracy to the United States if he won’t cut the military budget or foreswear interventions? He learned a lot from Barack Obama’s 2008 comment that he was only opposed to “dumb wars.” The Republicans openly brag about aggressions while Democrats dissemble and use weasel words to pretend they won’t do the same thing.

Every global conflict from the small, like Haiti, to the largest, like Iraq and Syria, is the result of American interventions. But presidential candidates and major newspapers won’t acknowledge American responsibility for the suffering of millions of people. It is yet another reason to reject the Democrats and Republicans and their tag team politics of pretense. No one can say for certain who will be president of the United States one year from now. We do know that he or she will continue to bring disaster all over the world.

Margaret Kimberley’s Freedom Rider column appears weekly in BAR, and is widely reprinted elsewhere. She maintains a frequently updated blog as well as athttp://freedomrider.blogspot.com. Ms. Kimberley lives in New York City, and can be reached via e-Mail at Margaret.Kimberley(at)BlackAgendaReport.com.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on America’s Endless Wars

Emphasis added by Global Research

Damascus, SANA-President Bashar al-Assad gave the following interview to AFP News Agency on the developments in Syria and the region:

Journalist: Mr. President, we would like to thank you for taking the time to answer our questions in these crucial moments in the history of Syria and the region.

Question 1: How do you feel when you see tens of thousands of your citizens starving, running away from hunger, from their areas, which are being shelled by your Russian allies, and trying to cross the borders to Turkey? And how do you feel when you see the pictures of them drowning in their attempt to cross the seas?

President Assad: If we talk about emotions, I belong to this people; and it is self-evident that I have the same feelings my people have. Any scene of suffering is painful to all of us as Syrians. But as an official, the question for me is less about emotions than about what I, as an official, should do, being responsible before my people.

However, when the cause of this suffering is the terrorists, not the Russian shelling, as claimed by Western media, and when one cause for migration is the almost five-year-old embargo against the Syrian people, naturally my, and every Syrian official’s first task is to fight terrorism essentially using Syrian capabilities, but also using our friends’ support in the fight against terrorism. That’s why I say the problem of Syrian refugees abroad, as well as the problem of hunger inside Syria, as you referred to it, is a problem caused by terrorism, Western policies, and the embargo imposed on the Syrian people.

Question 2: Mr. President, since you are talking about actions rather than emotions, can we talk, or at least think, about the possibility of putting an end to shelling civilian populations in order to alleviate the suffering of these civilians, and also lifting the blockade imposed on certain areas?

President Assad: The conflict has been, since the beginning of the crisis in Syria, about who wins the support of the people in Syria. Consequently, it doesn’t make sense for us to shell civilians if we want to win them to our side. This is in theory. Practically, while moving around in Syria, you will find that in any area under the control of the state, all sections of Syrian society, including the families of the militants, are being cared for by the state. What is more is that in a city like Raqqa, which is under the full control of Daesh (ISIS), the state continues to pay the salaries of employees and send vaccines for children. So, it doesn’t make sense for the state to shell civilians while doing all the above, unless we are talking about mistakes which happen in every battle. The general rule is that there are innocent victims in every war. This is a rule of thumb in wars, but this is definitely not the Syrian state’s policy.

Question 3: Mr. President, what do you say to those emigrating to Europe? Do you ask them to come back?

President Assad: I would like to ask every person who left Syria to come back. That’s natural but not enough. Emotions are not enough. They would ask: “why should I come back? Has terrorism stopped? Have the basic requirements for life been restored?” Many of those who have emigrated are neither against the Syrian state or with the terrorists, but sometimes there are circumstances which force people to emigrate. So, my answer to this question is: when terrorism recedes, and things are better, they will return of their own volition without any invitation. So, instead of asking these people to return, I’ll call on the European governments, which have been a direct cause for the emigration of these people, by giving cover to terrorists in the beginning, and through the sanctions imposed on Syria, to help in making the Syrians return to their country.

President Assad_AFP_1

Question 4: Mr. President, will the Syrian state regain control over Aleppo in the next few days? If so, what is next? Is it extending full control to Lattakia, Aleppo, and Idleb?

President Assad: The battle in Aleppo now is not about regaining control over Aleppo, because the Syrian state is there; but the main battle is about cutting the road between Aleppo and Turkey; for Turkey is the main conduit of supplies for the terrorists. The battle is going on now on more than ten fronts at the same time, from north, to south, to the east, to the far east too, and to the west in Lattakia. It was going on in Homs, and now it’s over. So, all these stages are moving in parallel.

Question 5: Do you think, Mr. President, that you can regain control over all Syrian territory? And what is the timeframe you have for that now?

President Assad: Regardless of whether we can do that or not, this is a goal we are seeking to achieve without any hesitation. It makes no sense for us to say that we will give up any part. The timeframe is dependent on two scenarios. Suppose that the problem is purely Syrian, i.e. that Syria is isolated from its surroundings, we can put an end to this problem in less than a year by moving on two fronts: fighting terrorism and political action. The second scenario – which is the case now – taking the shape of continuing supplies to terrorists through Turkey, Jordan, and partly from Iraq – because Daesh (ISIS) exists in Iraq with Saudi, Turkish, and Qatari support – naturally means that the solution will take a long time and will incur a heavy price. So, it is difficult to give a precise answer about the timeframe.

Question 6: Can’t you say precisely how many years you need to restore peace to Syria?

President Assad: The question is: for how many years will Turkey and Saudi Arabia continue to support terrorism. That is the question. And when will the West put pressure on these countries to stop supporting terrorism.

Question 7: Mr. President, can we know who is your main enemy? Is it the so-called moderate opposition and the Islamists, or is it Daesh (ISIS)? I’m asking because everybody can see that you are targeting, with your shelling and blockade, the areas under the control of this opposition and these Islamists. Who are your real enemies?

President Assad: I don’t think that the term “opposition” can be used, in France or anywhere else in the world, to describe somebody carrying a weapon. Opposition is a political act. Suppose that you mean to say “moderate terrorists,” this is a different term. Saying that, you mean that they do not belong to Daesh (ISIS), al-Nusra, or to these extremist groups. Obama said that the moderate opposition is a fantasy. Biden said the same thing. But what’s more important is reality which says that such an opposition is non-existent. Most of the militants belong to extremist groups, such as Daesh (ISIS), al-Nusra, Ahrar al-Cham, and others. So, my answer is that every terrorist is an enemy. We respect every political opposition; and we do have political opposition inside Syria. They adopt tough positions against the state, and we are not attacking them.

Question 8: I would like to get this straight. As far as you are concerned, there’s no difference between these armed groups, on the one hand, and Daesh (ISIS), al-Nusra, and others, on the other?

President Assad: Legally speaking, there is no difference. The state will confront all those who carry weapons. It will not ask them about their ideology. But the difference is that the extremist groups refuse to have any dialogue with the state. They believe that they will fight, die, and go to heaven. This is their doctrine. The other groups are not ideological. Most of them have been misled. They got involved in dialogue with the state later. Some of them have laid down their weapons, and some are actually fighting with the Syrian Army today. We grant them amnesty in return for laying down their weapons.

الرئيس 2

Question 9: Mr. President, what do you think of Jaish al-Islam and Ahrar al-Cham? They did negotiate with you, and went to Geneva.

President Assad: They went as part of the opposition formed by Saudi Arabia, because it is Saudi Arabia which supports terrorism worldwide. So, it is only natural for the representatives of Saudi Arabia to be terrorists, not politicians.

Question 10: So, you will not negotiate with those.

President Assad: In principle, direct negotiations were not supposed to take place in Geneva 3. They were supposed to take place through de Mistura. And here we should be precise: we are not negotiating with Syrians, but with representatives of Saudi Arabia, France, the UK, and others. So, if you mean Syrian-Syrian dialogue, the answer is naturally no. Dialogue with these people is not a Syrian-Syrian dialogue at all. A Syrian dialogue is that conducted with Syrian groups which have grassroots in Syria, like the political opposition in Syria, for instance. Any persons calling themselves opposition but belong to foreign states or foreign intelligence services do not represent Syrians in the dialogue, and simply we do not consider them Syrian.

Question 11: You said that you were going to negotiate. All those who went to Geneva were based outside Syria. Can you explain?

President Assad: No, some of them are based inside Syria, and some live outside Syria but they are involved in politics and have supporters in Syria. I’m not talking only about terrorists, I’m talking about people who have been formed in a foreign state and act on behalf of a foreign state.

Question 12: Mr. President, you talked about a Syrian opposition inside Syria. My question is: don’t you think that had you been more tolerant in dealing with this opposition in the past, you would have avoided this conflict? Don’t you bear part of the responsibility?

President Assad: We do not claim that we did not make mistakes in Syria. This is natural in any state. And we do not claim that we, in the Middle East, have reached a stage of significant political openness. We were moving in that direction, not very quickly, and maybe slowly. Back to your question, the more radical segments of the opposition inside Syria, which attack the state, have not been imprisoned or prosecuted by the state, neither before or after the crisis. So, I don’t know what is meant by tolerance in this case.

Question 13: Maybe it was difficult for the opposition inside Syria to assemble and to organize itself, before the crisis, and to raise the voice as opposition. Maybe they did not have a margin for movement.

President Assad: You are talking about a general condition in the Middle East. This is partly true, particularly in the Arab world. But the question in this case is not that of tolerance. The question has to do with individuals rather than institutions. The question is: what is the institutional action that we should take in order to move forward. This has legal, social, or cultural aspects, because democracy is more of a culture than a law. You cannot proceed with laws while remaining culturally in your place.

Question 14: Mr. President, do you think that there might be a Turkish intervention in Syria now? And do you think the Saudi threats are serious?

President Assad: Logically, intervention is not possible, but sometimes reality is at odds with logic, particularly when there are irrational people leading a certain state. That’s why I don’t rule that out for a simple reason: Erdogan is a fanatical person with Muslim Brotherhood inclinations. He is living the Ottoman dream. For him, the collapse which took place in Tunisia, Libya, Egypt and Syria is something personal. This threatens his political future, on the one hand, and his fanatical Islamist ambitions, on the other. He believes that he has an Islamist mission in our region. The same applies to Saudi Arabia. The collapse of the terrorists in Syria is a collapse of their policies. I tell you that this process is surely not going to be easy for them, and we will certainly confront it.

Question 15: Mr. President, are you prepared to give northern Syria to the Kurds as a self-rule area after the crisis?

President Assad: This question is directly related to the Syrian constitution; and as you know, the constitution is not given by the government, all sections of Syrian society have a say in it, and it is put to public referendum. That’s why this should be a national question, not a question put to any Syrian official, whether it has to do with self-rule, federalism, decentralization, or any similar thing. All these things are part of the political dialogue in the future; but I would like to stress that the Kurds are a Syrian national group.

Question 16: Is it true, Mr. President, that the Russians persuaded, or tried to persuade you, to step down? Don’t you fear a Russian-American deal on this issue?

President Assad: If we look at Russian policies and Russian officials in the same way we look at unprincipled Western officials and policies, this is a possibility. But the fact is the exact opposite, for a simple reason: the Russians treat us with great respect. They do not treat us as a superpower dealing with a minor state, but as a sovereign state dealing with a sovereign state. That’s why this issue has not been raised at all in any shape or form.

Question 17: Mr. President, are you prepared to give Russia and Iran permanent bases on your territory? And in this case, do you fear that Syria will become a satellite to these powers?

President Assad: Having military bases for any country in Syria does not mean that Syria will become a satellite state to these countries. They do not interfere in issues related to the law, the constitution, nor to politics. In any case, the Russian base exists already, while the Iranians have not asked to have one. But in principle, we do not have a problem.

Question 18: So, if the Iranians raise this possibility, will you accept?

President Assad: The issue hasn’t been raised, and consequently this is hypothetical. But as I said, when we accept it in the case of Russia, it means the principle is acceptable. But this also depends on the capabilities of every state and their role on the regional and international arena.

Question 19: Has Russia asked your permission to build new bases on your territory?

President Assad: No.

President Assad_AFP_2

Question 20: Mr. President, the American elections are still at the primaries stage. Are you, personally, with candidate Trump or Clinton? Do you see a third person who might be useful and in the interest of the region?

President Assad: We have never placed our bets on any American president. We always bet on policies; and these policies are not controlled only by the president, but by the establishment in general, and by the lobbies operating in the United States. If you look at the competition between many candidates, now or in the past, you will find that it revolves around who is more inclined to start wars, and this doesn’t bode well.

Intervention: Who is more aggressive, or more inclined to war, Trump or Clinton?

President Assad: The problem with American politicians is that they say something and do the exact opposite, before and after the elections.

Intervention: So, the promises made by Trump do not frighten you?

President Assad: No. As I said, since I don’t build on what the American candidates say, I see no reason why I should comment on any of them, i.e. they are all alike to me.

Question 21: Mr. President, do you intend to be a president for life, as was your father? And if you don’t intend to do that, are you in the process of grooming a successor; and would this successor be one of your sons?

President Assad: First, the presidency is not a hobby that we enjoy. It is a responsibility, particularly in these circumstances. As to my selecting a successor, this country is neither a farm nor a company. If I want to remain president, that should be dependent on two factors: first, my desire to be president, and second, the desire of the people. When the next elections come and I feel that the people don’t want me, I shall not stand. That’s why it’s too early to talk about this. We still have years before the next elections.

Question 22: Mr. President, you know that there have been many accusations to your government and to you personally, most recently by the UN investigation committee, which accused you of genocide, which is a crime against humanity.

Last month, the UN Human Rights High Commissioner spoke about blockading a number of your cities, like the town of Madaya, and accused your government of committing war crimes, and also about crimes he says you commit by throwing barrel bombs on civilians. Aren’t you concerned that you will one day face an international court?

President Assad: First, you know that UN institutions express balance among the superpowers and the conflict among them.

And these organizations are now basically controlled by Western powers. That’s why most of their reports are politicized and serve a political agenda. The evidence is that these organizations haven’t said anything about clear massacres perpetrated by terrorist groups against innocent civilians in Syria. What refutes the reports of these organizations is that, first, they do not provide any evidence, and this is the case in general. Second, there is a logic for things: if Western states and rich Gulf states are against an individual; and this individual is killing his people, how would he withstand for five years in these circumstances? That’s why I’m not concerned about these threats or these allegations.

Question 23: You said that these reports and institutions do not provide any evidence. But don’t you believe that these reports are correct, particularly the latest report by the UN committee about the death of thousands of prisoners in your prisons? There are eyewitnesses in this case.

President Assad: No, there is a difference between individual crimes having been committed and having a state policy of systematic killing. I said that innocent people die in the war. That is true, but war crimes are committed when orders are given to follow a policy of committing massacres for certain purposes. Had this been true, people would have fled from state-controlled areas to the areas controlled by armed groups. What is happening is the exact opposite: everybody moves to the state-controlled areas.

Question 24: Mr. President, how do you think you will figure in history, as a man who saved Syria or a man who destroyed it?

President Assad: This depends on who will write the history. If it is the West, it will give me all the bad attributes. What’s important is how I think. Certainly, and self-evidently, I will seek, and that is what I’m doing now, to protect Syria, not to protect the chair I’m sitting on.

Question 25: Mr. President, do you still really intend to negotiate with the militants, or are you thinking of crushing them militarily?

President Assad: We have fully believed in negotiations and in political action since the beginning of the crisis; however, if we negotiate, it does not mean that we stop fighting terrorism. The two tracks are inevitable in Syria: first, through negotiations, and second through fighting terrorism. And the two tracks are separate from each other.

Question 26: Mr. President, what is your comment on the resignation of French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius? And do you believe that this will change French policy in any way? And would you make any initiative in the war against terrorism towards France in order to make communication possible with it and make it change its policy towards you?

President Assad: Changing personnel is not that significant. What’s important is the change of policies. The French administration changed almost completely between Sarkozy and Hollande, but for us the policies have not changed. They have been destructive policies extending direct support to terrorism. That’s why we should not assume that the foreign minister makes the policies. They are made by the whole state, headed by the president. As to what we can do in Syria, I don’t think that Syria has to do anything towards France. It is France which should do something towards fighting terrorism. So far, it supports terrorists, albeit politically, and in some cases it supported them militarily. It is France’s duty to reverse or change its policies in order to fight terrorism, particularly after hundreds of French citizens paid with their lives for their wrong policies.

Journalist: Thank you very much, Mr. President.

President Assad: Thank you.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on President Bashar al-Assad Interview: “The Refugee Crisis is Caused by Terrorism and Western Policies”

VIDEO: BBC Defends Decision to Censor the Word "Palestine"In Syria, If You Can’t Find Moderates, Dress Up Some Extremists

By Tony Cartalucci, February 12 2016

The BBC’s latest production is as absurd as it is transparent and abhorrent.

Al-Qaeda militants kill 24 civilians near Ras al-AinWhy Are The Neocons so Desperate to Rescue Al-Qaeda in Syria?

By Daniel McAdams, February 12 2016

Reading Dennis Ross and David Ignatius is a good reminder that the neocons live in a different world than the rest of us.

Former Cuban leader Castro speaks with Chossudovsky, director of the Center for Research on Globalization and editor of the Global Research website, in Havana

The Syria Proxy War against the Islamic State (ISIS) Has Reached its Climax. Military Escalation, Towards a US-NATO Sponsored Ground Invasion?

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, February 12 2016

Washington’s strategy consists in spearheading a broader regional war by inciting Turkey, Saudi Arabia as well as Israel to do the “dirty work for us”.

a-10US A-10s Bombed City of Aleppo, Shifted Blame onto Moscow – Russian Military

By RT, February 12 2016

Defense Ministry reported. The same day, the Pentagon accused Moscow of bombing two hospitals, despite no Russian flights over the city.

syrianarmy2-510x309Do We Need a Bigger War? What Next in the War on Syria? The Expulsion of Terrorist and Mercenary Forces

By Syria Solidarity Movement, February 12 2016

The Syrian Army and its allies have clearly turned the tide in the Syrian war.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: “The Syria Proxy War against the Islamic State (ISIS)”

The BBC’s latest production is as absurd as it is transparent and abhorrent.

Upon reading the increasingly desperate headlines pumped out by the Western media as Western-backed terrorist forces begin to fold under an effective joint Syrian-Russian offensive to take the country back, readers will notice that though the term “moderate rebels” or “moderate opposition” is used often, the Western media is seemingly incapable of naming a single faction or leader among them.

The reason for this is because there are no moderates and there never were. Since 2007, the US has conspired to arm and fund extremists affiliated with Al Qaeda to overthrow the government of Syria and destabilize Iranian influence across the entire Middle East.

Exposed in Seymour Hersh’s 2007 article, “The Redirection Is the Administration’s new policy benefitting our enemies in the war on terrorism?,” it stated explicitly that:

The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.

The “catastrophe” the Western media constantly cites in its increasingly hysterical headlines is the predictable manifestation of not Syrian and Russian security operations ongoing in Syria today, but of the conspiracy described by Hersh in 2007 that has indisputably been put into play, starting in 2011 under the guise of the so-called “Arab Spring.”

Image: If Major Yaser Abdulrahim looks like he’s never wore his FSA uniform out into the field, that’s because he hasn’t. He is not a member of the FSA at all, and is instead a commander of the Fatah Halab, an umbrella group for Al Qaeda affiliates armed and funded by both the US and Saudi Arabia. 

 

When the West does attempt to give names and faces to these so-called “moderates,” it is a simple matter to trace them directly back to Al Qaeda.

The BBC’s “Rebel Commander” Plays Dress-Up 

In a recent video report published by the BBC titled, “Syria conflict: Rebels ‘feel abandoned’ by Britain and US,” BBC’s Quentin Sommerville claims he “secretly” contacted US-backed rebels from Turkey. The alleged “remote” interview was covered in both locations by professional camera crews, despite Sommerville claiming the situation was so bad, the rebels could not be reached. The “senior rebel commander inside Aleppo” interviewed by the BBC was none other than Yaser Abdulrahim,

Image: Faylaq Al-Sham’s flag is clearly seen in the video of the BBC’s fake FSA commander when out in the field. Yaser Abdulrahim is seen out among other terrorists, missing his crisp, brand new FSA uniform and devoid of any FSA insignia. 

 

Despite appearing in a brand new, crisp “Free Syrian Army” uniform never worn once into the field, and sitting beside an equally pristine “Free Syrian Army” French colonial flag, Yaser Abdulrahim has absolutely no affiliations with the otherwise nonexistent “Free Syrian Army.”

Instead, he is a commander of Faylaq Al-Sham, composed of Al Qaeda terrorists and Muslim Brotherhood extremists. Faylaq Al-Sham and its commander Yaser Abdulrahim, according to Sommerville himself, are part of the larger  Fatah Halab umbrella group which also includes Al Qaeda affiliates Ahrar ash-Sham and Jaysh al-Islam – the latter of which literally placed civilians in metal cages on rooftops to use as human shields against Syrian-Russian airstrikes.

Human Right Watch, in their report titled, “Syria: Armed Groups Use Caged Hostages to Deter Attacks,” would reveal that:

In the course of fighting between armed groups and government forces in the nearby `Adra al-`Omalia in December 2013, Jabhat al-Nusra and Jaysh al-Islam abducted hundreds of civilians, mostly Alawites, according to the United Nations Commission of Inquiry on Syria. The hostages, many of them women and children, are being held in unidentified locations in Eastern Ghouta. The concern is that they are among those in these cages.

The Human Right Watch report is also very alarming, considering it implicates Jaysh al-Islam, a member of Yaser Abdulrahim’s Fatah Halab, as collaborating and fighting alongside US State Department listed terrorist group, Jabhat al-Nusra.

The US State Department’s official statement listing al-Nusra as a foreign terrorist organization, titled, “Terrorist Designations of the al-Nusrah Front as an Alias for al-Qa’ida in Iraq,” states:

Since November 2011, al-Nusrah Front has claimed nearly 600 attacks – ranging from more than 40 suicide attacks to small arms and improvised explosive device operations – in major city centers including Damascus, Aleppo, Hamah, Dara, Homs, Idlib, and Dayr al-Zawr. During these attacks numerous innocent Syrians have been killed. Through these attacks, al-Nusrah has sought to portray itself as part of the legitimate Syrian opposition while it is, in fact, an attempt by AQI to hijack the struggles of the Syrian people for its own malign purposes.

It appears, ironically enough, that through the deception of the Western media, al Nusra has been amply assisted in fully hijacking “the struggles of the Syrian people for its own malign purposes.”

Image: BBC’s “US-backed rebel commander” heads a faction that includes the terrorist Jaysh al-Islam faction who caged civilians and used them as human shields outside of Damascus. The US insists that Syria and Russia must negotiate with such organizations and that such organizations should play a role in Syria’s future.   

 

The BBC’s abhorrent dressing-up of literal members of Al Qaeda and their affiliates in their recent interview fits into a larger pattern of deceit aimed at salvaging the conspiracy described by Hersh in 2007, but upended when in late last year, the Russian Federation upon the invitation of the Syrian government, intervened in the conflict.

With Aleppo teetering at the edge of liberation from what are clearly terrorist forces – the BBC’s propaganda and propaganda like it being propagated by the West represents a cynical attempt to perpetuate – not end – the suffering of the Syrian people.

What is worse still, is that the BBC claims their Fatah Halab-Al Qaeda umbrella group commander dressed as a member of the “Free Syrian Army,” is “US-backed.”

This is either an attempt by the BBC to further deceive their audiences as to who the man they interviewed really was, or an inadvertent admission that the United States is in fact funding the very terrorist groups and their associates, populating their own US State Department list of foreign terrorist organizations.

Whatever the case, the fact that even a carefully staged production like the one published by the BBC is easily exposed as a deliberate attempt to cover up the terroristic identity of what’s left of the West’s “rebels,” adds further imperative to the Syrian government and their Russian, Lebanese, Iraqi, and Iranian allies to end the war and fully restore order to the entirety of Syria’s territory. To negotiate with “rebels” who are clearly terrorists dressed in literal costumes, is an absurdity the West would never accept foisted upon them – thus, no other nation on Earth should accept the West foisting such terms upon them.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on In Syria, If You Can’t Find Moderates, Dress Up Some Extremists

Reading Dennis Ross and David Ignatius is a good reminder that the neocons live in a different world than the rest of us. They do not conform their analysis to reality, but rather they conform reality to their view of the world. Where most people would be encouraged to read that Aleppo in Syria was about to be liberated from its 3.5 year occupation by al-Qaeda’s Syrian franchise, the neocons see a disaster. 

On the brink of al-Qaeda’s defeat in Aleppo, the Washington Post’s Ignatius is furious that, “President Obama won’t approve military tactics that could actually shift the balance.” Yes, he wants to shift the balance toward al-Qaeda because like the other neocons he is so invested in the idea of regime change in Syria that he would even prefer turning the country into another Libya than to see government forces defeat his jihadist insurgents. Failing to “shift the balance” toward al-Qaeda fighters in Aleppo only brings “greater misery for the Syrian people,” in the world of Ignatius.

undefined

Ignatius’s Washington Post, which has never seen a potential war it did not want to see turned into an actual war, thinks it a tragedy that the Syrian army’s advance on al-Qaeda occupied Aleppo has “cut off all vital routes of supply from Turkey to the rebel-held areas of the city.” Those would beTurkish supplies in support of al-Qaeda and ISIS rebels, but the Post is too deceptive to mention that fact.

It is as dishonest an inversion of reality as anything printed in Pravda of old.

In the same vein as Ignatius, former Bush/Clinton/Obama Administration Middle East “expert” Dennis Ross writes to tell us, “what Putin is really up to in Syria.” In the above-linked article, The Los Angeles Times does not reveal that Ross is hardly an objective observer of the situation. As one of the founders of AIPAC‘s Washington Institute for Near East Policy — and a current counselor to that organization — Ross strongly supports AIPAC’s position in favor of regime change in Syria and Israel’s active role in assisting jihadist rebels from al-Qaeda’s Nusra Front in their efforts to overthrow the Assad government.

So what does regime change neocon Dennis Ross want us to believe is happening in Syria? The Russians, he asserts, are playing a dirty game by stepping up their bombing campaign against ISIS, al-Qaeda, and affiliated rebels instead of pushing for a ceasefire. How funny that when the US/Turk/Saudi/Israeli-back jihadists were on the verge of taking over all of Syria not that long ago there was no talk from neocon quarters about a ceasefire or a negotiated political solution. Only now that al-Qaeda’s stronghold in Aleppo is on the verge of liberation by government forces are the neocons screaming that diplomacy should be given a chance.

Russian operations are “designed to strengthen the Assad regime and weaken the non-Islamic State Sunni opposition in different parts of the country,” writes Ross. He doesn’t mention that particularly when it comes to Aleppo, the “non-Islamic State Sunni opposition” means al-Qaeda’s Nusra Front and affiliated forces.

By relentlessly bombing Islamic State and other jihadist groups seeking to introduce Sharia law into secular Syria, “Putin is…undercutting our aim of isolating Islamic State and having Sunnis lead the fight against it.” Read that again. By attacking ISIS he is preventing the US from isolating ISIS. Doublespeak.

What is Putin really up to in the world of Dennis Ross? He is not sincere about defeating Islamist extremism in Syria or even helping Assad’s forces win the war. No, Putin “aims to demonstrate that Russia, and not America, is the main power broker in the region and increasingly elsewhere.” Ah yes, the old argument about Russian expansionism. Baltic invasion, restoration of the USSR. All the neocon tripe.

Ah but here is where Ross plants his seed, whispers in the Administration’s neocon power brokers’ ears:

“Certainly, were Russia’s costs to increase, Putin might look for a way out.”

Hmm, now we see what he’s getting at:

…it is time we make it clear to the Russians that unless they impose a cease-fire on Assad and Hezbollah and insist that humanitarian corridors are open, we will have no choice but to act with our partners to create a haven in Syria — for refugees and for the organization of the Syrian opposition.

In other words, tell Russia if you do not stop fighting al-Qaeda and its affiliates in Syria we will face-off in a WWIII-threatening stance to establish a “jihadistan” in part of Syria from where the hundredth or so version of a rebel fighting force can be re-assembled.

Ross’s plan is not for the weak of heart. “[W]e cannot threaten to create a haven without following through if Putin refused to alter his course,” he writes. Meaning of course that we must be willing to actually go through with WWIII if Putin does not blink, back down, and pull out of Syria just as Russia’s intervention is meeting its objective. Surrender when on the verge of victory in Syria or face a nuclear war with the United States.

No one ever accused the neocons of thinking small. But with much of the Middle East a smoldering ruin due to the disastrous interventions they lied us into, no one should count out even their most insane-sounding plan being seriously considered somewhere in Washington.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Why Are The Neocons so Desperate to Rescue Al-Qaeda in Syria?

Image left Michel Chossudovsky

Washington’s strategy consists in spearheading a broader regional war by inciting Turkey, Saudi Arabia as well as Israel to do the “dirty work for us”.

Until recently, Syrian Government Forces together with their allies (Russia, Iran, Hezbollah) have been confronting so-called “opposition rebels” largely composed of “moderate” terrorists and mercenaries, with US-NATO intelligence and special forces forces operating covertly within their ranks.

The Al Qaeda affiliated terrorists and the Islamic State (ISIS) forces are supported by US-NATO-Israel and their Persian Gulf GCC allies. Turkey and Saudi Arabia, in close liaison with Washington have played a central role in the recruitment, training and financing of the terrorists.

Sofar, this proxy war has unfolded without a direct confrontation between US-NATO allied forces and Syrian government forces, which are supported militarily by Russia and Iran.

A major transition is now occurring in the conduct of the war on Syria. The terrorists are being defeated by Syrian government forces with the support of Russia. The proxy war (under the formal banner of the “war on terrorism”) has reached its climax.

New Phase: The Role of Turkey and Saudi Arabia

Turkish forces are now directly involved in combat operations within Syrian territory.

stop_israel_us_saudi_arabia_turkey_qatar_supporting_isis_terrorists

In turn, Saudi Arabia, which is a State sponsor of terrorism has announced that it will be dispatching troops to Syria, allegedly with a view to combating the ISIS terrorists, which just so happen to be supported by Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia’s Brigadier. General Ahmed Al-Assiri, stated on behalf of Riyadh that Saudi Forces:

“will fight with its U.S.-led coalition allies to defeat ISIS militants in Syria, however, he said Washington is more suitable to answer questions on further details about any future ground operations.” Al Arabyia

What is the significance of this statement?

The proxy war against ISIS is over?

A new proxy war with Turkey and Saudi Arabia directly involved in ground operations is unfolding with US-NATO pulling the strings in the background. Riyadh has confirmed that a joint Turkish-Saudi military coordination body has also been set up.

Saudi Arabia is now planning to invade Syria on the orders of Washington:

“The kingdom is ready to participate in any ground operations that the coalition (against Islamic State) may agree to carry out in Syria,” …

Asseri said Saudi Arabia had been an active member of the U.S.-led coalition that had been fighting Islamic State in Syria since 2014, and had carried out more than 190 aerial missions.

“If there was a consensus from the leadership of the coalition, the kingdom is willing to participate in these efforts because we believe that aerial operations are not the ideal solution and there must be a twin mix of aerial and ground operations,” Asseri said. (Reuters, February 4, 2016)

The shift would be from air to ground operations implying the deployment of Saudi troops inside Syria.

“Talking Peace”, Planning the Next Phase of the War on Syria

In recent developments, Saudi Arabia’s Deputy Crown Prince and Defense Minister Mohammed bin Salman was in Brussels at NATO headquarters “to discuss the Syrian civil war”. This meeting was an initiative of the Pentagon rather than NATO. It was intended to plan the next phase of  the war on Syria.

Of significance, Crown Prince bin Salman met behind closed doors with US Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter.

Meanwhile in Munich, John Kerry and Sergei Lavrov were discussing the implementation of a nationwide “cessation of hostilities” in Syria.

 

Under the Pentagon’s diabolical scenario, confrontation on the ground in the war theater will be between Saudi Arabia and Syria government forces, which are respectively supported by US-NATO and Russia-Iran.

Reports confirm that the US-NATO sponsored terrorists supported by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, et al have in large part been defeated. Are they be replaced by conventional Saudi, Turkish forces, coupled with more US-NATO special forces which are already on the ground inside Syria?

Under this evolving scenario, there is also the danger that Turkey and Saudi Arabia forces acting on behalf of US-NATO could be involved in military confrontations with both Russia and Iran, opening up a dangerous pandora’s box, a door towards military escalation.

Saudi Arabia Brig. Gen. Ahmed Al-Assiri also sent a veiled threat to Iran  “saying that if Tehran is serious in fighting ISIS, then it must stop supporting “terrorism” in Syria or Yemen”. (Al Arabyia)

Washington’s strategy in this regard consists in spearheading a broader regional war by inciting Turkey, Saudi Arabia as well as Israel to do the “dirty work for us”.

This US sponsored war is ultimately directed against Russia and Iran.


original

The Globalization of War: America’s “Long War” against Humanity

Michel Chossudovsky

$14.00

Save 39%

Order directly from Global Research

America’s hegemonic project in the post 9/11 era is the “Globalization of War” whereby the U.S.-NATO military machine —coupled with covert intelligence operations, economic sanctions and the thrust of “regime change”— is deployed in all major regions of the world. The threat of pre-emptive nuclear war is also used to black-mail countries into submission.

This “Long War against Humanity” is carried out at the height of the most serious economic crisis in modern history.

It is intimately related to a process of global financial restructuring, which has resulted in the collapse of national economies and the impoverishment of large sectors of the World population.

The ultimate objective is World conquest under the cloak of “human rights” and “Western democracy”.

REVIEWS:

“Professor Michel Chossudovsky is the most realistic of all foreign policy commentators. He is a model of integrity in analysis, his book provides an honest appraisal of the extreme danger that U.S. hegemonic neoconservatism poses to life on earth.”

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, former Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury

““The Globalization of War” comprises war on two fronts: those countries that can either be “bought” or destabilized. In other cases, insurrection, riots and wars are used to solicit U.S. military intervention. Michel Chossudovsky’s book is a must read for anyone who prefers peace and hope to perpetual war, death, dislocation and despair.”

Hon. Paul Hellyer, former Canadian Minister of National Defence

“Michel Chossudovsky describes globalization as a hegemonic weapon that empowers the financial elites and enslaves 99 percent of the world’s population. “The Globalization of War” is diplomatic dynamite – and the fuse is burning rapidly.”

Michael Carmichael, President, the Planetary Movement

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Syria Proxy War against the Islamic State (ISIS) Has Reached its Climax. Military Escalation, Towards a US-NATO Sponsored Ground Invasion?

In December 2015, Urasoe City pledged to conduct a survey of former base employees to ascertain the extent of contamination at Camp Kinser, a 2.7 square kilometer US Marine Corps supply base located in the city.1 Urasoe’s director of planning, Shimoji Setsuo, announced that the municipality would work with prefectural authorities to carry out the investigation and he would also request funding from the national government. This is believed to be the first time that such a large-scale survey of former base workers has been launched in Japan.

Triggering Urasoe’s decision were Pentagon documents released under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) revealing serious contamination at Camp Kinser.2 According to the reports, military supplies returned during the Vietnam War leaked substances including dioxin, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and insecticides within the base, killing marine life. Subsequent clean-up attempts were so ineffective that U.S. authorities worried that civilian workers may have been poisoned in the 1980s and, as late as 1990, they expressed concern that toxic hotspots remained within the installation.

Following the FOIA release, United States Forces Japan (USFJ) attempted to allay worries about ongoing contamination at Camp Kinser. Spokesperson Tiffany Carter told The Japan Times that “levels of contamination pose no immediate health hazard,” but she refused to provide up-to-date environmental data to support her assurances. Asked whether USFJ would cooperate with Urasoe’s survey, Carter replied that they had not been contacted by city authorities. She also ruled out health checks for past and present Camp Kinser military personnel.3

Last year, suspicions that Camp Kinser remains contaminated were heightened when wildlife captured by Japanese scientists near the base was found to contain high levels of PCBs and the banned insecticide DDT.4

Japanese officials are blocked from directly investigating pollution in U.S. bases because the Japan-U.S. Status Of Forces Agreement does not authorize them access. Although an amendment to the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) last September gave Japanese authorities the right to request inspections following a toxic spill or imminent return of land, permission remains at the discretion of the U.S.5 Consequently, until now research has been limited to land already returned to civilian usage. These checks suggest that the problem of U.S. military contamination on Okinawa is chronic. In recent years, a range of toxins exceeding safe levels have been discovered on the island such as mercury, lead and cadmium.6

Three generations of suffering: Former South Vietnamese Army soldier Le Van Dan (left) blames the U.S. military for the health problems afflicting himself and his family. He suffers from skin and heart diseases, his daughter struggles to breathe, one grandchild has cerebral palsy, and another is bedridden.

In November, the Okinawa Defense Bureau revealed that a housing area in Kamisedo, Chatan Town, was contaminated with dioxin at levels 1.8 times environmental standards. The problem came to light after residents complained of offensive smells emanating from the land which used to be a U.S. military garbage dump prior to return in 1996.7 Meanwhile, in December, Japanese officials released test results on three more barrels unearthed from the Pentagon’s defoliant dumpsite in Okinawa City. The barrels, the latest of 108 found beneath a children’s soccer pitch, measured dioxin levels between 83 and 630 times environmental standards.8

The World Health Organization categorizes dioxin as “highly toxic” and links it to cancer, damage to the immune system and reproductive and developmental problems.9

On Okinawa, awareness of the dangers of dioxin is low. Last year in Okinawa City, for example, laborers at the former soccer pitch were photographed working without safety equipment, and storm water was pumped into a local conduit without any tests for contamination.10

Now expert advice is coming from a country with tragic experience of Pentagon dioxin poisoning: Vietnam.

“On Okinawa, people still don’t know about the risks. The problem is very new for them but they need to take action as soon as possible,” Phan Thanh Tien, Vice President of the Da Nang Association for Victims of Agent Orange / Dioxin (DAVA), said last month.

Created in 2005, DAVA has been raising Vietnamese people’s awareness of the dangers of dioxin left in the environment from the Pentagon’s usage of defoliants in the Vietnam War. Between 1962 and 1971, during Operation Ranch Hand, the U.S. military sprayed 76 million liters of herbicides in southeast Asia. Named after the colored stripes around the barrels, many of these herbicides such as Agents Pink, Purple and – by far the most common – Orange, were heavily contaminated by dioxin during the production process.11

During the Vietnam War, U.S. forces stored approximately 18 million litres of defoliants at Da Nang Airbase and sprayed them over nearby countryside to kill food crops and strip supply routes of jungle cover. The Pentagon particularly targeted rice, sweet potato and cassava crops.

According to U.S. veterans, these defoliants were shipped via Okinawa, America’s most important staging post for the Vietnam War.12 Former service members contend that defoliants were stockpiled at numerous bases – including Camp Kinser, then known as Machinato Service Area – and sprayed to keep runways and perimeter fences clear. Veterans also claim that surplus and damaged barrels of defoliants were buried within Okinawa’s bases.

These burials allegedly took place at Kadena Air Base, Camp Schwab, MCAS Futenma and Hamby Yard, in Chatan Town. At the time, the burial of surplus chemicals – including Agent Orange – was official U.S. military policy. For example, the FOIA documents detailing contamination at Camp Kinser also describe the burial of 12.5 tons of ferric chloride on the installation and the disposal of pesticides at Camp Hansen, Kin Town.

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs records show more than 200 retired service members are sick with illnesses they believe are caused by exposure to Agent Orange on Okinawa. A number of military documents corroborate their claims. These include a U.S. army report citing the presence of 25,000 barrels of the defoliant on the island prior to 1972 and the latest FOIA release which describes the discovery of “dioxin (agent orange component)” at Camp Kinser.13

“America’s use of Agent Orange in Vietname was a war crime; it was chemical warfare.  Today, we are starting to see the fourth generation of victims, so you can even call it a form of biological warfare”, says Pha Hanh Tien, vice-president of the Da Nang Association For Victims of Agent Orange/Dioxin.

Despite this evidence, the Department of Defense continues to deny that Agent Orange was ever on the island. In 2013, it published a report which concluded that there were no “records to validate that Herbicide Orange was shipped to or through, unloaded, used or buried on Okinawa.” The report caused anger among U.S. veterans claiming dioxin exposure on Okinawa since none of them was interviewed for the report, nor were any environmental tests of Okinawa bases conducted.14 The same Pentagon-funded scientist who wrote the report later attributed the discovery of dioxin beneath Okinawa City’s soccer pitch to the disposal of kitchen or medical waste.15

Such denials do not surprise DAVA vice president Phan. For decades, he explained, the U.S. government has been trying to mislead people about the impact of dioxin in Vietnam, too. For example, during the war, it assured people that defoliants would only harm trees.

“They lied. They knew about the human impact but they said nothing,” said Phan.

According to DAVA, today there are approximately 5,000 dioxin victims in Da Nang, which has a total population of 1 million. Nationwide, the Vietnamese Red Cross calculates 3 million are sick; DAVA estimates the number as closer to 4 million.16 DAVA – and the national organization Vietnam Association for Victims of Agent Orange / Dioxin – helps these survivors with vocational training, rehabilitative therapy and business start-up loans.

Le Van Dan is one of those helped by DAVA – and he knows firsthand the truth that contradicts the Pentagon’s lies.

During the war, he fought on America’s side in the South Vietnamese Army and he witnessed U.S. planes spraying the mountain ridges near Da Nang; later he saw the dead trees left in their wake. The U.S. military had assured the Vietnamese public that the spray was harmless so he and his fellow soldiers drank the local water and ate the fruit and vegetables. Today, the 66-year old suffers from skin and heart diseases, his daughter struggles to breath, one grandchild has cerebral palsy and another is bedridden.

Vietnam’s Ministry of Health categorizes 17 illnesses as related to dioxin – including cancers of the prostate and lung, type 2 diabetes and spina bifida. The U.S. government recognizes a similar list of dioxin-linked diseases – and it compensates sick American veterans who served in Vietnam. But it does nothing to help dioxin-poisoned Vietnamese people.17

The U.S. government’s refusal to acknowledge the human impact of Operation Ranch Hand angers Phan: “America’s use of Agent Orange in Vietnam was a war crime; it was chemical warfare. Today, we are starting to see the fourth generation of dioxin victims so you can even call it a form of biological warfare. And the problem still isn’t over.”

A number of dioxin hotspots remain on former U.S. military land in Vietnam; one of them is at Da Nang Air Base, today the site of the city’s international civilian airport. Although the U.S. government refuses to recognize the human impact of its dioxin in Vietnam, at Da Nang Airport it has engaged in environmental clean-up work since 2012. The estimated date of completion is later this year.18

Many have praised the cleanup as a positive first step – albeit one that is long overdue. The U.S. has also promised to help to remediate dioxin hotspots in other former bases in Vietnam.

This stands in stark contrast to Japan, including Okinawa, where SOFA places the financial burden of cleaning up U.S. military contamination entirely on Japanese taxpayers – and Tokyo has made no attempts to make the U.S. more responsible.

In November 2014, Phan visited Okinawa to attend the island’s first international symposium about military contamination and the inadequacies of SOFA.19 When he inspected the dioxin dumpsite in Okinawa City, he noted that it carried the same distinct odor as Da Nang Airport’s hot-spot. Given Japan’s reputation for technological expertise, Phan was surprised by the low safety standards at the site such as the lack of warning signs and tarpaulins to prevent the spread of contaminated dust.

Now Phan worries about what Urasoe’s base workers’ survey might uncover.

“When Da Nang airport was enlarged before 2007, the workers didn’t wear protective gear so they were exposed to dioxin. Prior to working at the site, these men had children born in perfect health. But afterwards, a number of them had children born with cerebral palsy and mental deficiencies,” he said.

Phan’s message for Okinawan authorities is clear.

One-hundred-and-eight barrels and counting: Work continues in December to remove dioxin from the U.S. military’s defoliant dump site in Okinawa City, which until recently had been used as a children’s soccer pitch.

“First they need to prevent the spread of dioxin from the dumpsite to outside. Stop pumping waste water into the river. Then they need to inform the public of the problem. Finally there needs to be research to check the health of residents in the area – particularly the children.”

Phan believes Urasoe’s survey is a move in the right direction. But to fully address the issues, action must originate from the national level.

“The Japanese government needs to research and push America to reveal the truth. But the Japanese government doesn’t want to damage its relationship with America. This is why they stay silent – even when Okinawa’s land is poisoned by dioxin.”

In May 2015, Welsh journalist, Jon Mitchell, was awarded the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Japan Freedom of the Press Award for Lifetime Achievement for his reporting about human rights issues – including military contamination – on Okinawa. He is the author of Tsuiseki: Okinawa no Karehazai(Chasing Agent Orange on Okinawa) (Kobunken 2014) and a visiting researcher at the International Peace Research Institute of Meiji Gakuin University, Tokyo. Mitchell is an Asia-Pacific Journal contributing editor. This is a revised and expanded version of an article that appeared in The Japan Times.

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on What Lessons Can Vietnam teach Okinawa about U.S. Military Dioxin?

In December 2015, Urasoe City pledged to conduct a survey of former base employees to ascertain the extent of contamination at Camp Kinser, a 2.7 square kilometer US Marine Corps supply base located in the city.1 Urasoe’s director of planning, Shimoji Setsuo, announced that the municipality would work with prefectural authorities to carry out the investigation and he would also request funding from the national government. This is believed to be the first time that such a large-scale survey of former base workers has been launched in Japan.

Triggering Urasoe’s decision were Pentagon documents released under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) revealing serious contamination at Camp Kinser.2 According to the reports, military supplies returned during the Vietnam War leaked substances including dioxin, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and insecticides within the base, killing marine life. Subsequent clean-up attempts were so ineffective that U.S. authorities worried that civilian workers may have been poisoned in the 1980s and, as late as 1990, they expressed concern that toxic hotspots remained within the installation.

Following the FOIA release, United States Forces Japan (USFJ) attempted to allay worries about ongoing contamination at Camp Kinser. Spokesperson Tiffany Carter told The Japan Times that “levels of contamination pose no immediate health hazard,” but she refused to provide up-to-date environmental data to support her assurances. Asked whether USFJ would cooperate with Urasoe’s survey, Carter replied that they had not been contacted by city authorities. She also ruled out health checks for past and present Camp Kinser military personnel.3

Last year, suspicions that Camp Kinser remains contaminated were heightened when wildlife captured by Japanese scientists near the base was found to contain high levels of PCBs and the banned insecticide DDT.4

Japanese officials are blocked from directly investigating pollution in U.S. bases because the Japan-U.S. Status Of Forces Agreement does not authorize them access. Although an amendment to the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) last September gave Japanese authorities the right to request inspections following a toxic spill or imminent return of land, permission remains at the discretion of the U.S.5 Consequently, until now research has been limited to land already returned to civilian usage. These checks suggest that the problem of U.S. military contamination on Okinawa is chronic. In recent years, a range of toxins exceeding safe levels have been discovered on the island such as mercury, lead and cadmium.6

Three generations of suffering: Former South Vietnamese Army soldier Le Van Dan (left) blames the U.S. military for the health problems afflicting himself and his family. He suffers from skin and heart diseases, his daughter struggles to breathe, one grandchild has cerebral palsy, and another is bedridden.

In November, the Okinawa Defense Bureau revealed that a housing area in Kamisedo, Chatan Town, was contaminated with dioxin at levels 1.8 times environmental standards. The problem came to light after residents complained of offensive smells emanating from the land which used to be a U.S. military garbage dump prior to return in 1996.7 Meanwhile, in December, Japanese officials released test results on three more barrels unearthed from the Pentagon’s defoliant dumpsite in Okinawa City. The barrels, the latest of 108 found beneath a children’s soccer pitch, measured dioxin levels between 83 and 630 times environmental standards.8

The World Health Organization categorizes dioxin as “highly toxic” and links it to cancer, damage to the immune system and reproductive and developmental problems.9

On Okinawa, awareness of the dangers of dioxin is low. Last year in Okinawa City, for example, laborers at the former soccer pitch were photographed working without safety equipment, and storm water was pumped into a local conduit without any tests for contamination.10

Now expert advice is coming from a country with tragic experience of Pentagon dioxin poisoning: Vietnam.

“On Okinawa, people still don’t know about the risks. The problem is very new for them but they need to take action as soon as possible,” Phan Thanh Tien, Vice President of the Da Nang Association for Victims of Agent Orange / Dioxin (DAVA), said last month.

Created in 2005, DAVA has been raising Vietnamese people’s awareness of the dangers of dioxin left in the environment from the Pentagon’s usage of defoliants in the Vietnam War. Between 1962 and 1971, during Operation Ranch Hand, the U.S. military sprayed 76 million liters of herbicides in southeast Asia. Named after the colored stripes around the barrels, many of these herbicides such as Agents Pink, Purple and – by far the most common – Orange, were heavily contaminated by dioxin during the production process.11

During the Vietnam War, U.S. forces stored approximately 18 million litres of defoliants at Da Nang Airbase and sprayed them over nearby countryside to kill food crops and strip supply routes of jungle cover. The Pentagon particularly targeted rice, sweet potato and cassava crops.

According to U.S. veterans, these defoliants were shipped via Okinawa, America’s most important staging post for the Vietnam War.12 Former service members contend that defoliants were stockpiled at numerous bases – including Camp Kinser, then known as Machinato Service Area – and sprayed to keep runways and perimeter fences clear. Veterans also claim that surplus and damaged barrels of defoliants were buried within Okinawa’s bases.

These burials allegedly took place at Kadena Air Base, Camp Schwab, MCAS Futenma and Hamby Yard, in Chatan Town. At the time, the burial of surplus chemicals – including Agent Orange – was official U.S. military policy. For example, the FOIA documents detailing contamination at Camp Kinser also describe the burial of 12.5 tons of ferric chloride on the installation and the disposal of pesticides at Camp Hansen, Kin Town.

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs records show more than 200 retired service members are sick with illnesses they believe are caused by exposure to Agent Orange on Okinawa. A number of military documents corroborate their claims. These include a U.S. army report citing the presence of 25,000 barrels of the defoliant on the island prior to 1972 and the latest FOIA release which describes the discovery of “dioxin (agent orange component)” at Camp Kinser.13

“America’s use of Agent Orange in Vietname was a war crime; it was chemical warfare.  Today, we are starting to see the fourth generation of victims, so you can even call it a form of biological warfare”, says Pha Hanh Tien, vice-president of the Da Nang Association For Victims of Agent Orange/Dioxin.

Despite this evidence, the Department of Defense continues to deny that Agent Orange was ever on the island. In 2013, it published a report which concluded that there were no “records to validate that Herbicide Orange was shipped to or through, unloaded, used or buried on Okinawa.” The report caused anger among U.S. veterans claiming dioxin exposure on Okinawa since none of them was interviewed for the report, nor were any environmental tests of Okinawa bases conducted.14 The same Pentagon-funded scientist who wrote the report later attributed the discovery of dioxin beneath Okinawa City’s soccer pitch to the disposal of kitchen or medical waste.15

Such denials do not surprise DAVA vice president Phan. For decades, he explained, the U.S. government has been trying to mislead people about the impact of dioxin in Vietnam, too. For example, during the war, it assured people that defoliants would only harm trees.

“They lied. They knew about the human impact but they said nothing,” said Phan.

According to DAVA, today there are approximately 5,000 dioxin victims in Da Nang, which has a total population of 1 million. Nationwide, the Vietnamese Red Cross calculates 3 million are sick; DAVA estimates the number as closer to 4 million.16 DAVA – and the national organization Vietnam Association for Victims of Agent Orange / Dioxin – helps these survivors with vocational training, rehabilitative therapy and business start-up loans.

Le Van Dan is one of those helped by DAVA – and he knows firsthand the truth that contradicts the Pentagon’s lies.

During the war, he fought on America’s side in the South Vietnamese Army and he witnessed U.S. planes spraying the mountain ridges near Da Nang; later he saw the dead trees left in their wake. The U.S. military had assured the Vietnamese public that the spray was harmless so he and his fellow soldiers drank the local water and ate the fruit and vegetables. Today, the 66-year old suffers from skin and heart diseases, his daughter struggles to breath, one grandchild has cerebral palsy and another is bedridden.

Vietnam’s Ministry of Health categorizes 17 illnesses as related to dioxin – including cancers of the prostate and lung, type 2 diabetes and spina bifida. The U.S. government recognizes a similar list of dioxin-linked diseases – and it compensates sick American veterans who served in Vietnam. But it does nothing to help dioxin-poisoned Vietnamese people.17

The U.S. government’s refusal to acknowledge the human impact of Operation Ranch Hand angers Phan: “America’s use of Agent Orange in Vietnam was a war crime; it was chemical warfare. Today, we are starting to see the fourth generation of dioxin victims so you can even call it a form of biological warfare. And the problem still isn’t over.”

A number of dioxin hotspots remain on former U.S. military land in Vietnam; one of them is at Da Nang Air Base, today the site of the city’s international civilian airport. Although the U.S. government refuses to recognize the human impact of its dioxin in Vietnam, at Da Nang Airport it has engaged in environmental clean-up work since 2012. The estimated date of completion is later this year.18

Many have praised the cleanup as a positive first step – albeit one that is long overdue. The U.S. has also promised to help to remediate dioxin hotspots in other former bases in Vietnam.

This stands in stark contrast to Japan, including Okinawa, where SOFA places the financial burden of cleaning up U.S. military contamination entirely on Japanese taxpayers – and Tokyo has made no attempts to make the U.S. more responsible.

In November 2014, Phan visited Okinawa to attend the island’s first international symposium about military contamination and the inadequacies of SOFA.19 When he inspected the dioxin dumpsite in Okinawa City, he noted that it carried the same distinct odor as Da Nang Airport’s hot-spot. Given Japan’s reputation for technological expertise, Phan was surprised by the low safety standards at the site such as the lack of warning signs and tarpaulins to prevent the spread of contaminated dust.

Now Phan worries about what Urasoe’s base workers’ survey might uncover.

“When Da Nang airport was enlarged before 2007, the workers didn’t wear protective gear so they were exposed to dioxin. Prior to working at the site, these men had children born in perfect health. But afterwards, a number of them had children born with cerebral palsy and mental deficiencies,” he said.

Phan’s message for Okinawan authorities is clear.

One-hundred-and-eight barrels and counting: Work continues in December to remove dioxin from the U.S. military’s defoliant dump site in Okinawa City, which until recently had been used as a children’s soccer pitch.

“First they need to prevent the spread of dioxin from the dumpsite to outside. Stop pumping waste water into the river. Then they need to inform the public of the problem. Finally there needs to be research to check the health of residents in the area – particularly the children.”

Phan believes Urasoe’s survey is a move in the right direction. But to fully address the issues, action must originate from the national level.

“The Japanese government needs to research and push America to reveal the truth. But the Japanese government doesn’t want to damage its relationship with America. This is why they stay silent – even when Okinawa’s land is poisoned by dioxin.”

In May 2015, Welsh journalist, Jon Mitchell, was awarded the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Japan Freedom of the Press Award for Lifetime Achievement for his reporting about human rights issues – including military contamination – on Okinawa. He is the author of Tsuiseki: Okinawa no Karehazai(Chasing Agent Orange on Okinawa) (Kobunken 2014) and a visiting researcher at the International Peace Research Institute of Meiji Gakuin University, Tokyo. Mitchell is an Asia-Pacific Journal contributing editor. This is a revised and expanded version of an article that appeared in The Japan Times.

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on What Lessons Can Vietnam teach Okinawa about U.S. Military Dioxin?

Julian Assange, o preso político que expõe o Império

February 12th, 2016 by John Pilger

Como uma comissão da ONU desmontou farsa montada para calar Julian Assange e o Wikileaks. Por que EUA, constrangidos, já não podem falar em “liberdade de expressão”.

Uma das aberrações jurídicas mais épicas de nossa era está sendo desmascarada. O Grupo de Trabalho sobre Detenções Arbitrárias da ONU – o tribunal internacional que analisa e decide se os governos cumprem ou não suas obrigações em matéria de direitos humanos – julgou que Julian Assange está sendo detido ilegalmente pelo Reino Unido e a Suécia.

Após cinco anos lutando contra difamação impiedosa, Assange está mais próximo de obter justiça – e, quem sabe, liberdade – do que jamais esteve, desde que foi aprisionado em Londres sob um Mandado Europeu para Extradição, agora já desacreditado pelo próprio Parlamento britânico.

O Grupo de Trabalho da ONU baseia suas decisões na Convenção Europeia sobre Direitos Humanos e em três outros tratados de cumprimento obrigatório por seus signatários. Tanto o Reino Unido quanto a Suécia, participaram da investigação oficial da ONU, que durou 16 meses.Apresentando evidências e defendendo suas posições perante o tribunal. Será um tapa na cara do direito internacional se estes países não acatarem a decisão e permitirem que Assange deixe o refúgio oferecido pelo governo equatoriano em sua embaixada de Londres.

Em casos anteriores que o Grupo de Trabalho julgou, e foram festejados internacionalmente, ambos os países ofereceram apoiaram as decisões do tribunal sobre prisioneiros detidos ilegalmente. Foi o caso de Aung Sang Suu Kyi, em Myanmar; do líder oposicionista Anwar Ibrahim, na Malásia; e do jornalista do Washington Post Jason Rezaian, no Irã. A diferença agora é que a perseguição e confinamento de Assange acontece no coração de Londres.

O caso Assange nunca foi, primordialmente, sobre as alegações de má conduta sexual na Suécia – onde a chefe da promotoria de Estocolmo, Eva Finne, julgou a acusação improcedente, dizendo: “Eu não acredito que exista qualquer razão para suspeitar que ele tenha cometido estupro”. Além disso, uma das mulheres envolvidas acusou a polícia de fabricar evidências e forçá-la a prestar queixa, sendo que ela “não queria acusar Julian Assange de coisa alguma”. Foi quando um segundo promotor, misteriosamente, reabriu o caso após intervenção política.

A perseguição a Assange tem suas raízes do outro lado Atlântico, numa Washington dominada pelo Pentágono. Sua obsessão é perseguir e acusar whistleblowers – especialmente Assange e o WikiLeaks — por terem exposto os crimes cometidos pelos EUA no Afeganistão e no Iraque: a matança desenfreada de civis e a violação da soberania dos países e da lei internacional.

De acordo com a Constituição dos EUA, nenhuma dessas revelações é ilegal. Como candidato à presidência, em 2008, Barack Obama, professor de direito constitucional, afirmou que os whistleblowers são “parte de uma democracia saudável [e] devem ser protegidos contra qualquer vingança”.

Mas em seguida Obama, o traidor, perseguiu mais whistleblowers em seu governo, do que todos os outros presidentes norte-americanos juntos. A corajosa Chelsea Manning, que hoje cumpre 35 anos de prisão, foi torturada durante sua longa detenção pré-julgamento.

A perspectiva de um destino similar pairou sob Assange como uma espada de Dâmocles. De acordo com os documentos revelados por Edward Snowden, o nome de Assange está presente em uma “lista de alvos para caçada humana”. O vice-presidente dos EUA, Joe Biden, classificou-o como “cyber-terrorista”.

Em Alexandria, no estado da Virgínia, um tribunal secreto tentou fabricar algum crime pelo qual Assange pudesse ser acusado. Apesar de ele não ser cidadão norte-americano, os EUA desencavaram a Lei de Espionagem, criada quase cem anos atrás, e a usaram para enquadrar Assange. Sob tal lei, um acusado pode ser condenado a prisão perpétua ou pena de morte.

A capacidade de Assange se defender nesse mundo kafkiano foi prejudicada pelos EUA, que classificaram os autos de seu caso como segredo de Estado. Uma corte federal bloqueou a liberação de todas as informações sobre aquilo que é conhecido como a investigação para “segurança nacional” do WikiLeaks.

O papel de coadjuvante nesse jogo de cartas marcadas ficou para a segunda promotora sueca Marianne Ny. Até há pouco, Ny recusou-se a cumprir o procedimento de rotina europeu, que exige que ela viaje até Londres para interrogar Assange e, assim, dar prosseguimento ao caso que James Catlin, um dos advogados do jornalista, classificou como “uma piada… é como se eles fossem inventando as coisas com o passar do tempo”. De fato, antes mesmo de Assange deixar a Suécia e seguir para Londres, em 2010, Marianne Ny não realizou nenhuma tentativa de interrogá-lo.

Nos anos que se seguiram, ela nunca conseguiu explicar apropriadamente, até mesmo para as autoridades jurídicas da Suécia, a razão pela qual não prosseguiu com o caso que reabriu de maneira tão entusiasmada – assim como nunca explicou por que se recusou a oferecer a Assange a garantia de que ele não seria extraditado para os EUA, sob um arranjo secreto entre Washington e Estocolmo. Em 2010, o periódico britânico The Independent revelou que os dois governos já haviam conversado sobre a extradição de Assange.

E então aparece o pequenino e bravo Equador. Uma das razões pela qual o país sul-americano ofereceu asilo político a Assange é o fato de o governo de seu próprio país, a Austrália, não ter lhe oferecido qualquer ajuda – à qual ele tinha o direito legal. O conluio da Austrália com os EUA, contra o seu próprio cidadão, tornou-se evidente em documentos secretos revelados; não existem vassalos mais leais aos EUA do que os políticos obedientes da Austrália.

Há quatro anos, em Sydney, eu passei várias horas com o Malcolm Turnbull, então um parlamentar liberal. Discutimos as ameaças a Assange e suas implicações mais graves contra a liberdade de expressão, assim como a justiça; e por que a Austrália tinha a obrigação de ficar ao seu lado. Turnbull é agora o primeiro-ministro australiano e, enquanto escrevo, está participando de uma conferência internacional sobre a Síria, tendo como anfitrião o primeiro-ministro britânico David Cameron, a apenas 15 minutos de distância do quarto onde Julian Assange viveu os últimos três anos e meio, na pequena embaixada equatoriana.

A conexão síria é relevante, ainda que pouco conhecida.Foi o WikiLeaks que revelou que os EUA planejavam há muito tempo derrubar o governo Assad, na Síria. Hoje, enquanto troca apertos de mãos, o primeiro-ministro Turnbull tem a oportunidade de trazer um mínimo de propósito e verdade para a conferência, falando abertamente sobre o aprisionamento ilegal de seu compatriota, a quem ele demonstrara tanta preocupação quando nos encontramos. Tudo o que ele precisa fazer é citar a decisão do Grupo de Trabalho em Detenções Arbitrárias da ONU. Ele irá recuperar, para a Austrália, ao menos essa ínfima reputação perante o mundo decente?

O que é certo é que o mundo decente deve muito a Julian Assange. Ele nos contou como o poder indecente se comporta em segredo; como mente, manipula e se engaja em enormes atos de violência, mantendo guerras que matam, mutilam e transformam milhões de pessoas nos refugiados que agora vemos na televisão.

Apenas por isso, por nos contar essa verdade, Assange merece sua liberdade, ao passo que ter justiça é o seu direito.

 John Pilger

Fonte em inglês:

Le fondateur de Wikileaks Julian Assange s'exprime à partir de l'ambassade d'Equateur

Freeing Julian Assange: The Last Chapter, 5 de Febrero de 2016

Fonte em português: Tradução em português Vinícius Gomes Melo para Outras Palavras

John Pilger : Jornalista. Autor de livros como “O mundo nas mãos: o que os média não dizem sobre os novos donos do mundo”. Vencedor do prêmio “British Academy Television Richard Dimbleby Award”. johnpilger.com

  • Posted in Português
  • Comments Off on Julian Assange, o preso político que expõe o Império

Central Banks Are Trojan Horses, Looting Their Host Nations

February 12th, 2016 by Washington's Blog

A Nobel prize winning economist, former chief economist and senior vice president of the World Bank, and chairman of the President’s council of economic advisers (Joseph Stiglitz) says that the International Monetary Fund and World Bank loan money to third world countries as a way to force them to open up their markets and resources for looting by the West.

Do central banks do something similar?

Economics professor Richard Werner – who created the concept of quantitative easing – has documented that central banks intentionally impoverish their host countries to justify economic and legal changes which allow looting by foreign interests.

He focuses mainly on the Bank of Japan, which induced a huge bubble and then deflated it – crushing Japan’s economy in the process – as a way to promote and justify structural “reforms”.

The Bank of Japan has used a heavy hand on Japanese economy for many decades, but Japan is stuck in a horrible slump.

But Werner says the same thing about the European Central Bank (ECB).  The ECB has used loans and liquidity as a weapon to loot European nations.

Indeed, Greece (more), ItalyIreland (and here) and other European countries have all lost their national sovereignty to the ECB and the other members of the Troika.

ECB head Mario Draghi said in 2012:

The EU should have the power to police and interfere in member states’ national budgets.

***

I am certain, if we want to restore confidence in the eurozone, countries will have to transfer part of their sovereignty to the European level.

***

Several governments have not yet understood that they lost their national sovereignty long ago. Because they ran up huge debts in the past, they are now dependent on the goodwill of the financial markets.

And yet Europe has been stuck in a depression worse than the Great Depression, largely due to the ECB’s actions.

What about America’s central bank … the Federal Reserve?

Initially – contrary to what many Americans believe – the Federal Reserve had admitted that it is not really federal (more).

But – even if it’s not part of the government – hasn’t the Fed acted in America’s interest?

Let’s have a look …

The Fed:

  • Threw money at “several billionaires and tens of multi-millionaires”, including billionaire businessman H. Wayne Huizenga, billionaire Michael Dell of Dell computer, billionaire hedge fund manager John Paulson, billionaire private equity honcho J. Christopher Flowers, and the wife of Morgan Stanley CEO John Mack
  • Artificially “front-loaded an enormous [stock] market rally”.  Professor G. William Domhoff demonstrated that the richest 10% own 81% of all stocks and mutual funds (the top 1% own 35%).  The great majority of Americans – the bottom 90% – own less than 20% of all stocks and mutual funds. So the Fed’s effort overwhelmingly benefits the wealthiest Americans … and wealthy foreigninvestors
  • Acted as cheerleader in chief for unregulated use of derivatives at least as far back as 1999 (see thisand this), and is now backstopping derivatives loss
  • Allowed the giant banks to grow into mega-banks, even though most independent economists and financial experts say that the economy will not recover until the giant banks are broken up. For example, Citigroup’s former chief executive says that when Citigroup was formed in 1998 out of the merger of banking and insurance giants, Greenspan told him, “I have nothing against size. It doesn’t bother me at all”
  • Preached that a new bubble be blown every time the last one bursts
  • Had a hand in Watergate and arming Saddam Hussein, according to an economist with the U.S. House of Representatives Financial Services Committee for eleven years, assisting with oversight of the Federal Reserve, and subsequently Professor of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin.  See this and this

Moreover, the Fed’s main program for dealing with the financial crisis – quantitative easing – benefits the rich and hurts the little guy, as confirmed by former high-level Fed officials, the architect of Japan’s quantitative easing program and several academic economists.  Indeed, a high-level Federal Reserve official says quantitative easing is “the greatest backdoor Wall Street bailout of all time”.  And see this.

Some economists called the bank bailouts which the Fed helped engineer the greatest redistribution of wealth in history.

Tim Geithner – as head of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York – was complicit in Lehman’s accounting fraud, (and see this), and pushed to pay AIG’s CDS counterparties at full value, and then to keep the deal secret. And as Robert Reich notes, Geithner was “very much in the center of the action” regarding the secret bail out of Bear Stearns without Congressional approval. William Black points out: “Mr. Geithner, as President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York since October 2003, was one of those senior regulators who failed to take any effective regulatory action to prevent the crisis, but instead covered up its depth”

Indeed, the non-partisan Government Accountability Office calls the Fed corrupt and riddled with conflicts of interest. Nobel prize-winning economist Joe Stiglitz says the World Bank would view any country which had a banking structure like the Fed as being corrupt and untrustworthy. The former vice president at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas said said he worried that the failure of the government to provide more information about its rescue spending could signal corruption. “Nontransparency in government programs is always associated with corruption in other countries, so I don’t see why it wouldn’t be here,” he said.

But aren’t the Fed and other central banks crucial to stabilize the economy?

Not necessarily … the Fed caused the Great Depression and the current economic crisis, and many economists – including several Nobel prize winning economists – say that we should end the Fed in its current form.

They also say that the Fed does not help stabilize the economy. For example:

Thomas Sargent, the New York University professor who was announced Monday as a winner of the Nobel in economics … cites Walter Bagehot, who “said that what he called a ‘natural’ competitive banking system without a ‘central’ bank would be better…. ‘nothing can be more surely established by a larger experience than that a Government which interferes with any trade injures that trade. The best thing undeniably that a Government can do with the Money Market is to let it take care of itself.’”

Earlier U.S. central banks caused mischief, as well.  For example,  Austrian economist Murray Rothbard wrote:

The panics of 1837 and 1839 … were the consequence of a massive inflationary boom fueled by the Whig-run Second Bank of the United States.

Indeed, the Revolutionary War was largely due to the actions of the world’s first central bank, the Bank of England.   Specifically, when Benjamin Franklin went to London in 1764, this is what he observed:

When he arrived, he was surprised to find rampant unemployment and poverty among the British working classes… Franklin was then asked how the American colonies managed to collect enough money to support their poor houses. He reportedly replied:

“We have no poor houses in the Colonies; and if we had some, there would be nobody to put in them, since there is, in the Colonies, not a single unemployed person, neither beggars nor tramps.”

In 1764, the Bank of England used its influence on Parliament to get a Currency Act passed that made it illegal for any of the colonies to print their own money. The colonists were forced to pay all future taxes to Britain in silver or gold. Anyone lacking in those precious metals had to borrow them at interest from the banks.

Only a year later, Franklin said, the streets of the colonies were filled with unemployed beggars, just as they were in England. The money supply had suddenly been reduced by half, leaving insufficient funds to pay for the goods and services these workers could have provided. He maintained that it was “the poverty caused by the bad influence of the English bankers on the Parliament which has caused in the colonies hatred of the English and . . . the Revolutionary War.” This, he said, was the real reason for the Revolution: “the colonies would gladly have borne the little tax on tea and other matters had it not been that England took away from the colonies their money, which created unemployment and dissatisfaction.”

(for more on the Currency Act, see this.)

And things are getting worse … rather than better.  As Professor Werner tells Washington’s Blog:

Central banks have legally become more and more powerful in the past 30 years across the globe, yet they have become de facto less and less accountable. In fact, as I warned in my book New Paradigm in Macroeconomics in 2005, after each of the ‘recurring banking crises’, central banks are usually handed even more powers. This also happened after the 2008 crisis. [Background here and here.] So it is clear we have a regulatory moral hazard problem: central banks seem to benefit from crises. No wonder the rise of central banks to ever larger legal powers has been accompanied not by fewer and smaller business cycles and crises, but more crises and of larger amplitude.

Georgetown University historian Professor Carroll Quigley argued that the aim of the powers-that-be is “nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole.” This system is to be controlled “in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert by secret agreements,” central banks that “were themselves private corporations.”

Given the facts set forth above, this may be yet another conspiracy theory confirmed as conspiracy fact.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Central Banks Are Trojan Horses, Looting Their Host Nations

‘El caso Assange’: Capítulo final

February 12th, 2016 by John Pilger

Uno de los abortos épicos de la justicia de nuestro tiempo está resolviéndose. El Grupo de Trabajo sobre Detenciones Arbitrarias de las Naciones Unidas –el tribunal internacional que adjudica y decide si los gobiernos cumplen sus obligaciones respecto a los derechos humanos- ha dictaminado que Julian Assange ha sido ilegalmente detenido por Gran Bretaña y Suecia.

Después de cinco años luchando para limpiar su nombre –calumniado sin descanso aunque sin acusarle de delito alguno-, Assange está más cerca de la justicia y exculpación, y quizá de la libertad, que en ningún otro momento desde que fue arrestado y recluido en Londres en virtud de una orden de extradición europea, ahora desacreditada por el Parlamento.

El grupo de trabajo de la ONU basa su dictamen en el Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos y otros tres tratados que son vinculantes para todos sus firmantes. Tanto Gran Bretaña como Suecia han participado en la larga investigación de dieciséis meses de la ONU, presentando pruebas y defendiendo su posición ante el tribunal. Actuarían despectivamente ante el derecho internacional si no cumplieran la sentencia y no permitieran que Assange abandonara el refugio que el gobierno ecuatoriano le ha garantizado en su embajada en Londres.

En celebrados casos anteriores dictaminados por el Grupo de Trabajo –Aung Sang Suu Kyi en Birmania, el dirigente de la oposición encarcelado en Malasia Anwar Ibrahim, el periodista del Washington Post detenido en Irán Jason Rezaian-, tanto Gran Bretaña como Suecia apoyaron al tribunal. La diferencia ahora es que la persecución y confinamiento de Assange tiene lugar en el corazón de Londres.

El caso Assange no se debe ante todo a las alegaciones de conducta sexual inapropiada en Suecia, donde la fiscal jefe de Estocolmo, Eva Finne, descartó el caso diciendo: “No creo que haya razón alguna para sospechar que ha cometido una violación”, y una de las mujeres implicadas acusó a la policía de fabricar pruebas y de tratar de “encajarlas” y de protestar porque ella “no quisiera acusar de nada a Julian Assange”, y una segundo fiscal volvió a abrir misteriosamente el caso después de una intervención política y luego lo paró.

El caso Assange hunde sus raíces a través del Atlántico en un Washington dominado por el Pentágono, obsesionado con perseguir y procesar a los denunciantes, especialmente a Assange por haber expuesto en WikiLeaks los gravísimos crímenes de EEUU en Afganistán e Iraq: la matanza indiscriminada de civiles y el desprecio por la soberanía y el derecho internacional.

Nada de esto, decir la verdad, es ilegal en virtud de la Constitución estadounidense. Barack Obama, profesor de derecho constitucional, cuando era candidato presidencial en 2008 alabó a los denunciantes como “parte de una democracia sana y a quienes debe protegerse de represalias”.

Obama, el traidor, ha perseguido desde entonces a más denunciantes que todos los presidentes estadounidenses juntos. La valiente Chelsea Manning cumple una sentencia de 35 años de cárcel tras haber sido torturada durante el largo período de detención anterior al juicio.

La perspectiva de un destino similar ha colgado sobre Assange como una espada de Damocles. Según documentos publicados por Edward Snowden, Assange está en una “lista de caza de hombres”. El vicepresidente Joe Biden le ha llamado “terrorista cibernético”. En Alexandra, Virginia, un gran jurado secreto ha tratado de inventar un delito por el que Assange pueda ser procesado por un tribunal. Aunque no sea estadounidense, se le está intentando enredar desenterrando una ley de hace un siglo contra el espionaje, utilizada para silenciar a los objetores de conciencia durante la I Guerra Mundial; el Acta de Espionaje tiene disposiciones para castigar tanto con cadena perpetua como con pena de muerte.

La capacidad de defenderse de Assange en este mundo kafkiano se ha visto entorpecida al declarar EEUU que su caso es secreto de Estado. Un tribunal federal ha bloqueado la publicación de cualquier información acerca de lo que se conoce como la investigación de “seguridad nacional” de WikiLeaks.

El papel secundario en esta farsa lo ha jugado la segunda fiscal sueca, Marianne Ny. Hasta hacer poco, Ny se había negado a cumplir un procedimiento europeo de rutina que le exigía viajar a Londres para interrogar a Assange y así hacer avanzar el caso que James Catlin, uno de los abogados de Assange, llamó “un hazmerreir… es como si fueran inventándolo mientras intentan seguir adelante”.

De hecho, incluso antes de que Assange abandonara Suecia hacia Londres en 2010, Marianne Ny no hizo intento alguno de interrogarle. En los años siguientes no ha explicado nunca de forma adecuada, incluso ante sus propias autoridades judiciales, por qué no completó el caso que con tanto entusiasmo volvió a abrir, al igual que nunca ha explicado por qué se ha negado a garantizar a Assange que no será extraditado a EEUU en virtud de un acuerdo secreto entre Estocolmo y Washington. En 2010, el Independent de Londres reveló que los dos gobiernos habían discutido de forma anticipada sobre la extradición de Assange.

Luego tenemos al diminuto y valiente Ecuador. Una de las razones por las que Ecuador concedió asilo político a Julian Assange fue porque su propio gobierno, en Australia, no le había ofrecido la ayuda a la que tiene legalmente derecho y le había abandonado. La colusión de Australia con EEUU contra un ciudadano propio queda clara en documentos filtrados; no tiene EEUU vasallos más leales que los obedientes políticos de las Antípodas.

Hace cuatro años, en Sidney, pasé varias horas con Malcolm Turnbull, miembro liberal del parlamento federal. Debatimos sobre las amenazas a Assange y sus amplias implicaciones para la libertad de expresión y la justicia, y por qué Australia estaba obligada a apoyarle. Turnbull es ahora el primer ministro de Australia y, mientras escribo estas líneas, está asistiendo a una conferencia internacional sobre Siria acogida por el gobierno de Cameron, a unos quince minutos en taxi de la habitación que Julian Assange lleva ocupando desde hace tres años y medio en la pequeña embajada ecuatoriana, justo al lado de Harrod’s.

La conexión siria es importante aunque no se hable de ella; fue WikiLeaks quien reveló que EEUU había planeado hacía tiempo derrocar al gobierno de Asad en Siria. Hoy en día, entre encuentros y saludos, el primer ministro Turnbull tiene la oportunidad de contribuir a la conferencia con un propósito y verdad mínimos dejando oír su voz en defensa de un compatriota injustamente encarcelado por el que tanta preocupación mostró cuando nos reunimos. Todo lo que tiene que hacer es citar el dictamen del Grupo de Trabajo de la ONU sobre Detenciones Arbitraria. ¿Recuperará así una parte de la reputación de Australia para el mundo decente?

De lo que no cabe duda es que el mundo decente le debe mucho a Julian Assange. Nos contó cómo se comporta en secreto el poder indecente, cómo miente y manipula y se involucra en actos de enorme violencia, en mantener guerras que matan y mutilan y en convertir a millones de seres en los refugiados que vemos en las noticias.

Sólo por contarnos esa verdad Assange ya se ha ganado su libertad, aunque tiene derecho a la justicia.

John Pilger

Fuente en inglés:

Le fondateur de Wikileaks Julian Assange s'exprime à partir de l'ambassade d'Equateur

Freeing Julian Assange: The Last Chapter, 5 de Febrero de 2016

www.johnpilger.com

Fuente en español: Traducido del inglés para Rebelión por Sinfo Fernández. Rebelión

John Pilger : Periodista. Autor de livros como “O mundo nas mãos: o que os média não dizem sobre os novos donos do mundo”. Vencedor do prêmio “British Academy Television Richard Dimbleby Award”. johnpilger.com

  • Posted in Español
  • Comments Off on ‘El caso Assange’: Capítulo final

Defense Ministry reported. The same day, the Pentagon accused Moscow of bombing two hospitals, despite no Russian flights over the city.

“Yesterday, at 13:55 Moscow time (10:55 GMT), two American A-10 assault aircraft entered Syrian airspace from Turkey, flew right to the city of Aleppo and bombed targets there,” Russian Defense Ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov said Thursday.

Also on Wednesday, Konashenkov referenced, the Pentagon’s spokesman, Colonel Steven Warren claimed that Russian warplanes allegedly bombed two hospitals in Aleppo.

“In his words, some 50,000 Syrian have been allegedly deprived of vital services,” Konashenkov said, pointing out that Warren forgot to mention either hospitals’ coordinates, or the time of the airstrikes, or sources of information.“Absolutely nothing.”

“No Russian warplanes carried out airstrikes in Aleppo city area yesterday. The nearest target engaged was over 20km away from the city,” Konashenkov stressed, adding that on the contrary, airplanes from the US-led anti-ISIS coalition were active over Aleppo, “both aircrafts and UAVs.”

“I’m going to be honest with you: we did not have enough time to clarify what exactly those nine objects bombed out by US planes in Aleppo yesterday were,” Konashenkov said. “We will look more carefully.”

 

However, a senior State Department official denied the allegations, saying that Russian reports are “false,” and that the US did not carry out any missions over Aleppo on Wednesday or Thursday, NBC reports.

On Wednesday, the US accused the Russian Air Force of targeting two hospitals in Aleppo.

“The situation in and around Aleppo has become, in our view, increasingly dire,” Col. Steve Warren, Operation Inherent Resolve spokesman, said Wednesday. “With the destruction of the two main hospitals in Aleppo by Russian and regime attacks, over 50,000 Syrians are now without any access to live-saving assistance.”

Warren added, “There’s little or no ISIL in the Aleppo area, so they’re kind of, at this point, separate fights.”

The spokesman for the Russian Defense Ministry drew attention to the stunning similarity of the situation with the American airstrike on the Medecins Sans Frontieres hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan, and the US bombing of the positions of the Iraqi army in Fallujah.

“What they do first is make unfounded accusations against us – to deflect blame away from themselves. If it goes on like this, we’re going to make two media briefings: one for ourselves, another for those coalition guys,” Konashenkov said.

 

 

 

Western countries never bothered to share intelligence on terrorists in Syria with Moscow, although they did accept Russian maps with terrorists’ positions marked, the Russian MoD’s spokesman said.

“Now they criticize us, saying we fly wrong way and bomb wrong places. Should we send them more maps?”Konashenkov questioned.

He recalled what the Russian Defense Ministry had pointed out earlier – the more terrorists Russia destroys the more it is being accused of indiscriminate airstrikes.

“If you look at how Western media presents information, it looks like the cities not controlled by the Syrian government are full of peaceful opposition and human rights activists,” the spokesman said.

The Russian Defense Ministry and its partners in Syria operate multilevel intelligence, maintaining unimpeachable target spotting, the MoD representative said, adding that all airstrikes are delivered only after repeated verification of a target to avoid civilian casualties. Konashenkov said intelligence also comes from the armed units of the Syrian opposition.

Konashenkov accused Western TV channels of presenting the ruins of the city of Aleppo, devastated long before the Russian Air Force was deployed to Syria, as the results of recent Russian airstrikes.

“An experienced orchestrator has a finger in this pie,” the spokesman said. “The obvious trend is to trumpet about alleged Russia sins and be silent about the ‘effectiveness’ of the US-led anti-ISIS coalition in Syria.”

 

The Russian Air Force has performed over 500 sorties, eliminating nearly 1,900 terrorist facilities in Syria between February 4 and February 11. The Defense Ministry reports that two senior terrorist field commanders have been killed.

“Over the past week, February 4-11, the planes of Russia’s aviation group in Syria made 510 sorties during which 1,888 facilities of terrorists were destroyed in the provinces of Aleppo, Latakia, Hama, Deir ez-Zor, Daraa, Homs, Al-Hasakah and Raqqah,” Konashenkov said.

The MoD spokesman shared with the media about wholesale desertion among the terrorists in Aleppo. The jihadists intimidate local civilians and force them to walk en masse towards the Turkish border, while the militants try to melt into the crowd.

“They know for sure that neither the Russian Air Force nor the Syrian government troops ever deliver strikes on non-combatants,” Konashenkov said.

Elaborating on some details of the latest Russian airstrikes in Syria, he related how Sukhoi Su-25 ground-support fighters eliminated three terrorist convoys on the highway connecting Homs and Al-Qaryatayn. A reconnaissance check revealed that airstrikes destroyed nine trucks loaded with munitions, two armored vehicles and over 40 jihadists.

In Daraa province, a Sukhoi Su-34 bomber wiped out a hardened terrorist position near Ghariyah settlement. The strike that destroyed the fortified strong point also eliminated two armored vehicles parked nearby.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on US A-10s Bombed City of Aleppo, Shifted Blame onto Moscow – Russian Military

If you did not know the man’s name, and you were unfamiliar with the Western press’ habit of renaming what it fears, you would think that his family name was gang leader or bandit. For about a decade, Amaral Duclona, a charismatic Haitian, born and raised in the Cité Soleil slum of Port-au-Prince, has been the foreign occupation’s bogeyman. France, in particular, has been determined to imprison Duclona for allegedly kidnapping and killing a 51-year-old Haitian-French businessman, Claude Bernard Lauture, in January 2004. Lauture was well ensconced in the Haitian elite and belonged to the group of 184 that was plotting with the United States, France and Canada to depose Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide.

After the initial allegations about murdering Lauture, for a while Duclona was accused of killing every high-value foreigner who wound up dead in Haiti, including French Honorary Consul, Henri Paul Mourral, who was shot near Cité Soleil in May 2005 and Canadian policeman, Mark Bourque, of the United Nations Mission (MINUSTAH), who was shot in Cité Soleil in December 2005. Duclona continues to proclaim his innocence. He says that he is no murderer and merely an anti-occupation militant who has done consciousness raising in his community, assisted his people with voting, getting food and other services, and participated in a citizen’s police that has helped to defend Cité Soleil against the killings, rapes, and assaults by Haitian police and UN forces.

Peacekeeping - MINUSTAH

At least one judge in France appears to be listening to Duclona, because his defense secured the retrial on appeal against a May 2014 decision to convict him to 25 years in prison for the alleged murder of Lauture, with no possibility of parole until after 17 years. The new trial is in the Parisian suburb of Créteil on February 8 to 12, 2016.

JamesEmery-CiteSoleil-PoliceStationb

Duclona’s attorney says that a major shortcoming of the previous trial is that it had relied on a weak police investigation in Haiti. According to the published facts of the case, Lauture was kidnapped on January 6, 2004, and after a few hours, he called his brother to say that he would not be released without delivery of a $100,000 ransom. In a radio interview, Lauture’s widow has said that, during this call, Lauture tried to communicate information about his location and was caught doing so. The family was told the next day to go to a morgue; there they found his body riddled with bullets. The prosecution has tried to suggest a political motive for Lauture’s murder that implicates Aristide. The main witnesses at the trial were the widow and the former Ambassador of France to Haiti (2003-2006), Thierry Burkard. Marie-Louise Michelle Lauture told the court that Aristide was unhappy with her husband for joining the group of 184 and had tried to coax him into various government posts that he refused, and she said: “I am convinced that my husband’s kidnapping was remote-controlled by Jean-Bertrand Aristide and executed by Amaral Duclona.” Burkard, for his part, presented to the court the view that the Cité Soleil militias called “chimères… had access to the presidential palace where they took their orders and received money.” The prosecution treated as a key piece of evidence a cell phone, presumably dropped in the struggle during the kidnapping, which had been used to call the chief of Aristide’s security and had been called a total of 21 times by a number attributed to Duclona. The owner of the phone was reportedly killed in a shootout. No witness from Haiti appeared at the trial, not even Lauture’s aunt and cousin, who were supposed to have relayed much of the alleged inducements and threats from Aristide to Mr. and Mrs. Lauture.

AndreMellagi-CiteSoleil-Market

For about two years the accusations against Duclona were ignored, at least in Haiti, although he was formally the most wanted man there. In early February 2006, then 27-year-old Duclona publicly led protests to demand polling stations in Cité Soleil, which then had about 300,000 people. On the occasion, he said:

“People need to realize we’re human beings too, not the animals they think we are…. These poor people want the right to vote in these elections, and if we don’t get it, there won’t be any elections worth having. If you are fighting to take the people out of misery in Haiti, they will always call you a gang leader.”

When the polling stations did not materialize, he accompanied people to vote in the February 7, 2006 elections that returned René Preval to the presidency. Soon thereafter, Duclona disappeared underground, probably because his comrades in Cité Soleil were being killed. Amaral Duclona did not resurface until September 2009 when he was arrested in the Dominican Republic (DR), where he had been living under the alias Berthone Jolicoeur.

AndreMellagi-CiteSoleil-houses-b

If Duclona kidnapped anyone, the evidence for it is rather circumstantial. On the other hand, there is solid proof that France kidnapped Duclona. His arrest in the DR was quite irregular. For one, the Dominican National Directorate for Drug Control (DNCD) conducted the arrest and jailing. For another, it was prompted by an extradition request from France in which the charges were not those for which Duclona was eventually tried. France charged Duclona with murdering a French citizen and diplomat, Henri Paul Mourral, so that the extradition would go smoothly, and indeed, Duclona was extradited to France within four months. In the end, however, France tried Duclona, not for Mourral’s murder but for that of Claude Bernard Lauture, a Haitian-French citizen, although France should have had no jurisdiction in the trial of a Haitian national for a crime committed against another Haitian national on Haitian soil. In other words, real justice now would require a dismissal of the Duclona case and its retrial in Haiti.

UNPhoto_CiteSoleil-Alcookpot-d

Given the unjust basis of the case, it is unlikely that a retrial will clear Duclona. At best, he might get a lighter sentence than the scandalous one from the 2014 trial that made a travesty of the French justice system. This old colonial power imagines that its assaults on the sovereignty of countries like Haiti and the Ivory Coast have no cost. But just as in the late 16th century on the heels of its supposed enlightenment, France finds itself no longer free after it embraced racism as policy. This time around, it is under a state of emergency.

AndreMellagi-CiteSoleil-mural

Mural caption: “We are sown, we sprout, we make roots to give life.”

Dady Chery is the author of We Have Dared to Be Free.

Notes:

Photos one, three, and seven from UN Photo; two from Haitian Photos archive; four by James Emery; five, six, and eight by Andre Mellagi.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Amaral Duclona: Bogeyman of Haiti’s Foreign Occupation

On Feb.10, 555th Brigade of the 4th Mechanized Division of the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) supported by the National Defense Forces (NDF) and the Russian Air Force launched a full-scale military operation to recapture the road linking Ithriyah and Raqqa. The road also leads to the Tabaqa Military Airport. Following the heavy clashes with ISIS, the pro-government forces liberated Tal Abu Zayn and a water well at the village of Tal Zakiya. Now, the Syrian forces are pursuing the goal to liberate the Tabaqa Military Airport.

According to reports, some 800 fighters from Liwa Suqour al-Sahra, the pro-government Palestinian militia “Liwa al-Quds”, Fouj al-Joulan and Kata’ebat al-Ba’ath have arrived the town of Ithriyah in the Northeastern part of Hama in order to supply the efforts aimed to purge ISIS from the Tabaqa Military Airport.

In a separate development, the Syrian government forces backed up by the Russian and Syrian warplanes stormed the ISIS defense lines near the town of Zahiyeh in the Raqqa province.

In North Aleppo, the SAA supported by Hezbollah and Iraqi paramilitary units were able to take control of the village of Kafr Naya located directly south of the militants’ stronghold of Tal Rifa’at. In the nearest future, the SAA and its allies will likely to advance North-East towards Mare’ in order to cut off the militants in Misqan and Ahras from their only supply route heading from Azaz.

According to the Syrian intelligence sources, the militant groups operating in the Northeastern part of Lattakia province have called for more fresh forces to save their last main stronghold, Kinsibba, located at the border with Idlib province. We remember, the SAA and its allies with a significant air and artillery support have been continuing an offensive aimed to recapture this area from the terrorists.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) vehicles trying to enter al-Mazaya district of Damascus have been attacked by militants operating in this area on Feb.10. A number of aid workers were injured and three of them are reportedly in a critical condition.

If you’re able, and if you like our content and approach, please support the project. Our work wouldn’t be possible without your help: PayPal: [email protected] or via: http://southfront.org/donate/ or via: https://www.patreon.com/southfront

Subscribe our channel!: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaV1…

Visit us: http://southfront.org/

Follow us on Social Media:
http://google.com/+SouthfrontOrgNews
https://www.facebook.com/SouthFrontENTwo
https://twitter.com/southfronteng

Our Infopartners:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/
http://thesaker.is
http://www.sott.net/
http://in4s.net

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Syrian Government Forces and Russian Warplanes Storm Islamic State (ISIS) Defense Lines in Raqqa Province

The Syrian Army and its allies have clearly turned the tide in the Syrian war. The “facts on the ground” have changed dramatically for all the major players, and constitute a major reversal for all the forces that have tried to institute “regime change” in Syria, in violation of its sovereignty. The Geneva “Peace Conference” opposition delegation, composed of marginal figures representing a tiny fraction of the armed anti-government factions but ostensibly speaking for all of them, is now largely irrelevant. As the terrorists and foreign mercenaries and their families flee Aleppo, thousands or tens of thousands of Syrian civilians are returning to their homes in secure government held areas.

Given the reversal of fortunes for Turkey, Saudi Arabia, the US, NATO and their allies and mercenaries, what’s next? The sensible thing would be for all the actors to declare victory by finishing off the ostensible terrorist enemy and accepting a face saving solution that includes a Syrian government commitment to reform, with expertise provided by a friendly international team of experts that puts Russia, the US, Europe, Iran and perhaps even Saudi Arabia on the same side.

But this is not the advice we are hearing from the advisers that got us into this mess in the first place, and who are disappointed that Syria might not go way of Iraq, Libya and Somalia after all. They are suggesting that a more and bigger war is the way to complete the job of turning Syria into a failed state. Such a war would involve an invasion of Turkish forces amassed and poised on the border, direct intervention by Saudi forces, US and perhaps other NATO ground forces, and potentially Israeli forces as well.

Such a plan risks putting these forces directly in confrontation with Syrian and Russian units and objectives. It is a recipe for great power confrontation on a scale rarely seen since the Cuban missile crisis in 1962. Rarely, but not totally. When Turkey shot down a Russian aircraft on November 24, 2015, only very cool Russian heads prevented the unthinkable by deciding that the Russian response might best be served cold.

That dish is now on the table, and it is for the Turks and bigger warmongers to decide if they want to risk Armageddon by unleashing even greater forces of destruction. There are players that would love to do so; they profit from death, misery and cataclysm, and would never miss such an opportunity. Chief among them are the arms merchants that dominate in the US and Israel, the neoconservative movement, also heavily subsidized by Israel and its Zionist lobbies in other countries, and by Israel’s investment in weakening all potential adversaries. Saudi Arabia has decided that it has much the same adversaries and has therefore thrown its lot in with Israel. The Erdogan administration in Turkey finds that its interests, including territorial aggrandizement, are congruent, and US objectives are defined by the neoconservative movement and the Israel Lobby, which have kidnapped US strategic policy in this regard, to the dismay of the Foreign Service, intelligence and military professional core of the American government.

The Syria Solidarity Movement suggests that further escalation is not a solution, but that the application of international law can bring the hostilities to a close. Astonishingly, this a war in which there are few declared enemies. Of the many parties and their sponsored combatants, only the armed groups and the Syrian government have declared themselves to be enemies, unless you count the insincere protestations that “terrorist” groups are also enemies of the same nations that are aiding and abetting them.

Syria is still recognized universally and diplomatically as a sovereign state, and under international law no power may interfere in its security considerations except by invitation from the recognized government of that state. To seek “regime change” (overthrow) is strictly illegal under international law, and prohibited by the United Nations. Governments that are pursuing such an objective should be sanctioned by the UN, although there is no realistic possibility of such action.

The Syria Solidarity Movement believes that it is time to complete the expulsion of the terrorist and mercenary forces that have been attacking Syria for the last five years. This can be accomplished by denying all support of arms and funding from the US, Europe, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Israel and other countries. In addition, these countries can choose to either cooperate with the Syrian government and its allies to rid Syria of this scourge, or at least not interfere while Syrian, Russian and other allied forces complete the job. In this case, Syria can resume its role of providing government services and representation for its people, and its people can resume shaping their own government without outside interference.

It time to end this ill-advised adventurism, and to put to flight the rascals and criminals, not only in Syria but also inside the countries whose strategic policies have been hijacked by gangs who are in many respects worse than those who bring beheadings and crucifixions to our computer screens. 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Do We Need a Bigger War? What Next in the War on Syria? The Expulsion of Terrorist and Mercenary Forces

The Russian Aerospace Defense Forces have conducted 510 sorties destroying 1888 terrorist targets in in the Syrian provinces of Aleppo, Latakia, Hama, Deir ez-Zor, Daraa, Homs, Al-Hasakah and Raqqa over last 7 days.

The Syrian Army announced that it destroyed an ISIS oil tanker and a number of major military facilities and hardware in a concerted air and ground operation in the province of Suwayda. The Syrian troops are conducting military operations against militant targets at Dara’a province’s border with Suwayda.

ISIS launched a massive offensive with usage of suicide bombers and heavy military equipment on the Deir Ezzor Military Airport on Feb.11. The event continued a series of the terrorists’ attempts to break the base’s fortifications this year. Following the heavy clashes, the SAA was able to defend its positions in the area. Pro-Syrian sources also report heavy casualties among ISIS militants. Nonetheless this is not yet confirmed by photo and video proofs.

In a separate development, west of the airport, the SAA repeal another ISIS advance aimed on the 137th Brigade’s headquarters near Jabal Al-Thardeh. The recent developments have shown that ISIS still maintain a possibility to conduct offensive operations in the province of Deir Ezzor despite the loses in other areas of Syria.

On Feb.11, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that Russia made a proposal on a ceasefire in Syria. The proposal was supported by the U.S. and its allies. Thus, the ceasefire is set to begin next week and will continue indefinitely until further specified. It won’t extend to organizations which the UN Security Council designates as terrorist.

Thus, the Russian Aerospace Forces will be able to continue operations against ISIS, al-Nusra, Harakat Ahrar Al-Sham and other affiliated organizations. The ceasefire also should assist all non-jihadist forces in Syria to concentrate efforts on the terrorist groups in Syria. However, it’s a big question how the all sides of the conflict will act in practice.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Syrian Army Continues to Hold Off ISIS. Russia Proposes a Ceasefire.

Support Independent News and Views!

Tune in today, Friday February 12 at 1 pm Winnipeg time (2:00pm EST/ 7:00pm GMT). Stream live here.

This week’s Global Research News Hour will be a live broadcast to raise funds for radio station CKUW. It will feature interviews and discussion promoting the virtues of independent, non-commercial media. Guests include writer and political activist Roger Annis as well as Iraq war resister and deserter Joshua Key. 

Since its debut in the fall of 2012, the newly revamped Global Research News Hour has aired over one hundred thirty episodes. It has been picked up by several community radio stations across North America!

As regular listeners are aware, the programme has made strides in tackling diverse topics from 9/11 Truth, to the dynamics of the Israel-Palestine conflict, to the role of US/NATO (as opposed to Russia) in instigating conflict in Ukraine, to the role of so-called free trade agreements in suppressing the popular will to the advantage of elites, to the origins of Al Qaeda and ISIL, to the environmental crisis.

The Global Research News Hour takes pride in getting these alternative perspectives beyond the internet and taking them to the public airwaves.

CKUW is the campus-based radio station which hosts the GRNH. CKUW broadcasts at 95.9 MHz on the FM band and is based at the University of Winnipeg in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.

CKUW is now one of the few stations in Canada to operate completely without any ad revenue shaping its news content. In order to pay for the equipment and operating expenses that make it possible to put together the programme, the station must turn to its loyal listeners for revenue.

You can donate by phoning 204 774-6877 during today’s broadcast (long distance charges may apply! ) or by donating on-line:

fundrive.ckuw.ca (you can find Global Research News Hour in the drop down menu under ‘Pledge Options.’ Please note, tax receipts are only honoured for Canadian residents. Out of town residents must include instructions for delivery of incentives by mail.)

We call upon our readers to donate to to the Global Research News Hour. Click here to go to our donation

https://store.globalresearch.ca/donate  (indicate GRNH)

On behalf of Professor Michel Chossudovsky and the editors and staff of Global Research, as well as the staff and volunteers at CKUW 95.9FM in Winnipeg, I thank our devoted listeners for their ongoing support of this radio programme.

Michael Welch

Host and Producer , Global Research News Hour

The Global Research News Hour airs every Friday at 1pm CT on CKUW 95.9FM in Winnipeg. The programme is also podcast at globalresearch.ca .

The show can be heard on the Progressive Radio Network at prn.fm. Listen in every Monday at 3pm ET.

The Global Research News Hour airs every Friday at 1pm CT on CKUW 95.9FM in Winnipeg. The programme is also podcast at globalresearch.ca .

The  show can be heard on the Progressive Radio Network at prn.fm. Listen in every Monday at 3pm ET.

Community Radio Stations carrying the Global Research News Hour:

CFUV 101. 9 FM in Victoria. Airing Sundays from 7-8am PT.

CHLY 101.7 FM in Nanaimo, B.C – Thursdays at 1pm PT

Boston College Radio WZBC 90.3FM NEWTONS  during the Truth and Justice Radio Programming slot -Sundays at 7am ET.

Port Perry Radio in Port Perry, Ontario – Thursdays at 1pm ET

Burnaby Radio Station CJSF out of Simon Fraser University. 90.1FM to most of Greater Vancouver, from Langley to Point Grey and from the  North Shore to the US Border. It is also available on 93.9 FM cable in the communities of SFU, Burnaby, New Westminister, Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam, Port Moody, Surrey and Delta, in British Columbia Canada. – Tune in every Saturday at 6am.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Fundraiser Today – A Live Broadcast of the Global Research News Hour
  • Tags:

As you might have heard, the opposition in Syria is in serious trouble.

Last summer, Bashar al-Assad’s army was on the ropes, as the SAA fought a multi-front war against a dizzying array of rebel forces including ISIS. Then Quds commander Qassem Soleimani went to Russia. After that, everything changed.

As of September 30 the Russian air force began flying combat missions from Latakia, rolling back rebel gains and paving the way for a Hezbollah ground offensive. Once Moscow had stopped the bleeding for the SAA (both figuratively and literally), Iran called up Shiite militias from Iraq who, alongside Hassan Nasrallah’s forces, pushed north towards Aleppo.

Now, the city is surrounded and the rebels are cut off from their supply line to Turkey. In short: it’s just a matter of time before the opposition is routed.

So much for President Obama’s “Russia will get itself into a quagmire” line.

As you might have heard, the opposition in Syria is in serious trouble.

Last summer, Bashar al-Assad’s army was on the ropes, as the SAA fought a multi-front war against a dizzying array of rebel forces including ISIS. Then Quds commander Qassem Soleimani went to Russia. After that, everything changed.

As of September 30 the Russian air force began flying combat missions from Latakia, rolling back rebel gains and paving the way for a Hezbollah ground offensive. Once Moscow had stopped the bleeding for the SAA (both figuratively and literally), Iran called up Shiite militias from Iraq who, alongside Hassan Nasrallah’s forces, pushed north towards Aleppo.

Now, the city is surrounded and the rebels are cut off from their supply line to Turkey. In short: it’s just a matter of time before the opposition is routed.

So much for President Obama’s “Russia will get itself into a quagmire” line.

The only thing that can save the rebels at this juncture is a direct intervention by the groups’ Sunni benefactors including Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, and Turkey.

That, or an intervention by the US.

Both the Saudis and the Turkey have hinted at ground invasions over the past two weeks and just this morning, a sokesman said Riyadh’s decision to send in troops was “final.”

But direct interventions are tricky. Russia has never denied it intends to bolster Syrian government forces against the rebels, all of whom Moscow deems “terrorists.” On the other hand, Washington, Riyadh, Doha, and Ankara cling to the notion that while they don’t support Assad, they’re primary goal is to fight ISIS. Well ISIS is in Raqqa, which is nowhere near Aleppo, meaning there’s no way to help the rebels out in their fight against the Russians, Iranians, and Hezbollah under the guise of battling Islamic State.

Against that backdrop we found it interesting that Moscow and Washington are now delivering conflicting accounts of airstrikes in Aleppo on WednesdayThe Pentagon, without specifying what time the strikes allegedly took place, says Russia destroyed the city’s two main hospitals.

Defence Ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov notes that Warren didn’t provide either hospitals’ coordinates, or the time of the airstrikes, or sources of information. “Absolutely nothing,” he said, describing Warren’s report.

The Kremlin, on the other hand, says US warplanes conducted strikes at 1355 Moscow time. “Two U.S. Air Force A-10 attack aircraft entered Syrian airspace from Turkish territory,” Konashenkov said in a statement. “Reaching Aleppo by the most direct path, they made strikes against objects in the city.”

“Only aviation of the anti-ISIS coalition flew over the city yesterday,” he added.

“When asked on Wednesday whether the U.S.-led coalition could do more to help rebels in Aleppo or improve access for humanitarian aid to the city, Pentagon spokesman Colonel Steve Warren said that the coalition’s focus remained on fighting Islamic State,”Reuters wrote on Thursday. The group is “virtually non-existent in that part of Syria,” Warren said.

Right. Which makes you wonder what two US Air Force A-10 attack planes were doing bombing in and around Aleppo. Is the US set to conduct airstrikes in support of the rebels, thus marking a fresh and exceptionally dangerous escalation of hostilities in the country?

As for what exactly it was that the US warplanes struck, Konashenkov will have to get back to us. He’s too busy winning a war to care right now:

I’m going to be honest with you: we did not have enough time to clarify what exactly those nine objects bombed out by US planes in Aleppo yesterday were. We will look more carefully.

*  *  *

Below, find excerpts from “Will Russian Victories In Syria Spark A Regional War?” by Yaroslav Trofimov as originally published in WSJ

Defying U.S. predictions of a quagmire in Syria, Russia is achieving strategic victories there with this month’s Aleppo offensive. The question now is whether this is a turning point that hastens the five-year war’s end or the trigger for a counter-escalation that will drag other regional countries into the conflict.

Few expect that Moscow’s main target—the moderate rebels backed by Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the U.S.—would now be forced settle the conflict on the Kremlin’s, and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s, terms.

“Their victory in Aleppo is not the end of the war. It’s the beginning of a new war,” said Moncef Marzouki, who served in 2011-14 as the president of Tunisia, the nation that kicked off the Arab Spring, and who recently visited the Turkish-Syrian border. “Now, everybody would intervene.”

To be sure, Turkey and Saudi Arabia have few easy options to counter Russian military might in Syria. But because of national pride—and internal politics—neither can really afford to have the rebel cause in which they have invested so much wiped out by Moscow and its Iranian allies.

While the Obama administration has long been determined to minimize U.S. involvement there, for Turkey and Saudi Arabia the prospect of Syria falling under the sway of Russia and Iran would be a national-security catastrophe.

“The whole situation, not just for Turkey but for the entire Middle East, would be reshaped. The Western influence will fade away. The question is: Can we accept Russia, and the Iranians, calling the tune in the region?” said Umit Pamir, a former Turkish ambassador to NATO and the United Nations.

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Saudi Arabia Makes “Final” Decision To Send Troops To Syria As US, Russia Spar Over Aleppo Strikes

According to the ministry spokesman, Russian warplanes and Syrian government troops never target civilians

Terrorists in Syria are trying to flee to Turkey ‘blending into’ civilians of Aleppo as they know Russian warplanes don’t attack peaceful population, Russian Defense Ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov said on Thursday.

“Mass desertion is fixed among gunmen groups operating in the area of Aleppo. Terrorists intimidate local population and use force to drive people to the Turkish border,” he said.

Dropping their weapons, gunmen are trying to hide among these crowds as Russian warplanes and Syrian government troops never target civilians, he told reporters.

Russia’s intelligence system in Syria rules out risks for civilians

According to the officer, Russia has deployed a multi-layered intelligence system together with partners in Syria which rules out any risks for peaceful civilians.

“The Russian Armed Forces, together with partners, have deployed a multi-layered intelligence system that ensures reliable detection of targets. Only after multiple checks of the obtained data and ruling out any risks for peaceful civilians, airstrikes are delivered at those targets,” Konashenkov said.

Konashenkov also said western media were showing footage of Aleppo that was destroyed before the operation of the Russian Aerospace Forces began, to pass it off as the aftermath of Russian airstrikes.

Syrian opposition shifts to cooperation with government 

The spokesman pointed out that Syrian opposition groups are shifting to cooperation with the government, adding that in Daraa Province several groups agreed to lay down arms after talks.

“Syrian opposition groups have been productively sharing intelligence with us. Many are shifting to cooperation with the Syrian government,” he said.

On February 8, armed groups in Atbaa, Daraa province, laid down arms after negotiations and Syria’s state flag was hoisted over the city.

Russia’s Aerospace Forces started delivering pinpoint strikes in Syria at facilities of the Islamic State and Jabhat al-Nusra terrorist organisations – banned in Russia – on September 30, requested by Syrian President Bashar Assad.

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Fleeing Syria Militants Are Disguised as Aleppo Civilians. Several Opposition Groups “Cooperating with Syrian Government”

Russian envoy to the UN Vitaly Churkin [pictured left] has said Moscow is not “apologetic” about its anti-terror mission in Syria and that Russian air strikes were being undertaken in a “transparent manner”. He was reacting to the several UN Security Council members that pressed Russia on Wednesday to stop bombing around Syria’s Aleppo.

The 15-member Security Council met behind closed doors on Wednesday to discuss the humanitarian situation in Syria.

“We are not about being apologetic for what we are doing. We are acting in a very transparent manner… We are present there legally at the invitation of the Syrian government in contrast to what the so-called “US-led coalition” is doing in Syria where they are acting outside of international law and incidentally never telling anybody what exactly they are doing in Syria or Iraq — what their targets are, what the results of their campaign are.” Churkin said.

The UNSC meet came ahead of a crucial meeting of major powers in Germany on Thursday aimed at jump-starting talks between the Syrian government and opposition groups.

Western diplomats have argued that Russian airstrikes are deterring opposition groups from attending talks.

“The (Syrian) regime and its allies cannot pretend they are extending a hand to the opposition while with their other hand they are trying to destroy them,” French envoy to the UN Francois Delattre said on Wednesday.

Russia alleged some Security Council members have “crossed the line” by politically exploiting humanitarian issues.

“Our western colleagues on the eve of Geneva-2 used to say that some balance on the ground must be restored, so if there is some change in balance on the ground then that should be taken as a logical development in any armed conflict,” Churkin hit back.

Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad’s forces on the ground, supported by Russian airstrikes, are moving closer to winning the most decisive victory of the Syrian war by recapturing Aleppo, the largest (pre-war) city in Syria.

Churkin said Russia had been discussing a possible Syria ceasefire and humanitarian issues with the United States.

“We have a number of discussions with the US, including the possibility of a cease-fire and also some humanitarian discussions,” he said.

Russia also said it has noted the “heightened interest of the Security Council in humanitarian matters” and will now propose to the UNSC to also revisit the humanitarian situation in crisis-hit Yemen and Libya, alongwith Syria.

“Incidentally now that we see this heightened interest of the Security Council in humanitarian matters we are prepared to take that up. The Spanish representative said that they are going to convene the sixth, the seventh meetings of the Council on humanitarian situation in Syria. We responded that we are going to propose weekly meetings on humanitarian situation in Yemen till the political settlement is reached there and, given this heightened interest of the Security Council to humanitarian matters, we need to revisit the humanitarian situation in Libya,” the Russian envoy said.

“You will recall that in late 2011 we raised the issue of civilian victims of NATO bombings in Libya only to be rudely rebuffed by our western colleagues,” he added.

Meanwhile Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and his Chinese counterpart Wang Yi head to Munich on Thursday where they are expected to interact informally with US Secretary of State John Kerry.

China and Russia, both permanent members of the UN Security Council, have repeatedly called for a negotiated settlement to the Syrian crisis.

Since 2011, Syria has been mired in a civil war; the country’s government forces are fighting numerous opposition groups and terrorist organizations, including Daesh (Islamic State) and the al-Nusra Front. The violence has killed 250,000 people and already driven 11 million from their homes.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Russia Hits Back at UNSC Members Pressing for End to its Syrian Mission

Kerry Calls for Peace as NATO Proxies Lose Ground in Syria

February 12th, 2016 by Brandon Turbeville

The pattern is almost unmistakable for any observer with an adequate attention span – when the terrorists are gaining ground, the calls from the NATO corners are a united chorus of “Assad must go!” When the SAA is gaining ground, however, that chorus becomes united with calls for a “ceasefire.”

Thus, as the SAA continues to make immense gains across Syria and as the battle for Aleppo has all but seen the terrorists huddled inside the city completely eradicated, Secretary of State John Kerry is calling for a ceasefire at the top of his lungs.

As Michelle Nichols of the Huffington Post writes,

World powers pressed Russia on Wednesday to stop bombing around Aleppo in support of a Syrian government offensive to recapture the city and a Western official said Moscow had presented a proposal envisaging a truce in three weeks’ time.

Secretary of State John Kerry is pushing for a ceasefire and more aid access to Aleppo, where rebel-held areas are being cut off and the United Nations has warned a new humanitarian disaster could be on the way.

. . . . .

Kerry is hoping for agreement at a meeting in Munich on Thursday between Russia, the United States, Saudi Arabia, Iran and other powers, aimed at trying to revive peace negotiations that foundered earlier this month.

Of course, Kerry calls for peace now only because his terrorist proxies are losing and doing so decisively. They are all but surrounded in the largest city in Syria and it is only a matter of time before they cease to exist there as a relevant fighting force. Latakia province is almost entirely liberated. The border with Jordan is virtually sealed. The Turkish border is in the process of being sealed and the Jarablus corridor is slowly being shut. Even Raqqa, the terrorist stronghold, is now being assaulted by the SAA and Russian Air Force.

Kerry’s whining about “peace” now – after his deck of cards has fewer Aces – is hardly believable since it is the United States, NATO, Israel, the GCC, and Turkey that are responsible for the Syrian crisis to begin with. Indeed, as Patrick Henry once stated, “Gentlemen, may cry ‘Peace!’ ‘Peace!’ – but there is no peace!”

Of course, Kerry is not a gentlemen and the country he represents is much more reminiscent of the imperialist British Empire than the context in which Henry uttered his famous words. Nor is Kerry actually calling for peace. He is calling for the destruction of a people and their way of life and for the annihilation of their secular government in favor of a puppet regime as first choice or an impotent jihadist state as a consolation prize. Peace is only the cover story designed to allow jihadist savages breathing room to regroup and launch yet another assault.

It is the Syrian people and their military who are now in the position of being the country the world is watching to see whether or not a small population of proud people are able to resist the onslaught of a powerful conglomerate of nations bent on its destruction. It is Syria that represents a true resistance to imperialism.

John Kerry can call for his phony “peace” all he wants but he knows that his terrorists’ days are numbered. Even while his press conferences call for ceasefires, the terrorists are calling for emergency assistance because they also know their time is short.

Five years on and the Syrian people, along with their military, have demonstrated that their determination and refusal to submit to foreign demands are as powerful an idea as the desire to impose that foreign will on the part of the Western powers.

It is the Syrian people who are now uttering the famous quote by Patrick Henry,

It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace — but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

If Henry is right now as he was then that “the battle is not to the strong alone,” but to “the vigilant, the active, the brave,” we should soon see an acknowledgement from the United States that the invasion of Syria has failed. We should see a geopolitical retreat by NATO and the elimination of the terrorist contingent in Syria.

While we are aware that NATO and its allies are not completely out of tricks, we must encourage the Syrian people and the Syrian government to stay strong in this fight because the fate of the world – not just Syria – lies within its borders. If NATO can destroy Syria, it will move on to Iran and on still to Russia, a war that will involve us all.

We wish Syria victory in this fight against imperialism and terrorism.

We wish the NATO powers clarity and wisdom to realize the error of their ways before it is too late for us all.

Brandon Turbeville – article archive here – is the author of seven books, Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom7 Real ConspiraciesFive Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident, volume 1 andvolume 2The Road to Damascus: The Anglo-American Assault on Syria, and The Difference it Makes: 36 Reasons Why Hillary Clinton Should Never Be President. Turbeville has published over 650 articles dealing on a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville’s radio show Truth on The Tracks can be found every Monday night 9 pm EST atUCYTV. His website is BrandonTurbeville.com He is available for radio and TV interviews. Please contact activistpost (at) gmail.com.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Kerry Calls for Peace as NATO Proxies Lose Ground in Syria

*** See ‘10 Disturbing Facts about Israel’, at end of this document

Technical data on the five, German-built, Dolphin-class submersible nuclear-armed warships [pictured left] of the IDF’s Naval Warfare Arm:

The Dolphin class fleet actually comprises two related sub-classes of diesel-electric submarine developed and constructed by Howaldtswerke-Deutsche Werft AG (HDW), Germany for the Israeli Navy. The first boats of the class were based on the export-only German 209-class submarines, but modified and enlarged. The Dolphin 1 sub-class is slightly larger than the German Navy Type 212 in length and displacement. The three newer air-independent propulsion (AIP) equipped boats are similar to the Type 212 vessels in underwater endurance, are 12 metres (39 ft) longer, nearly 500 tonnes heavier in submerged displacement and have a larger crew than either the Type 212 or the Type 214.

The Dolphin 2-class are the largest submarines to have been built in Germany since World War II. The Dolphin class boats are the most expensive single vehicles in the Israel Defense Forces. The Dolphin-class replaced the aging Gal-class submarines, which had served in the Israeli navy since the late 1970s. Each Dolphin-class submarine is capable of carrying a combined total of up to 16 torpedoes and SLCMs.

The cruise missiles have a range of at least 1,500 km (930 mi) and are widely believed to be equipped with a 200-kilogram (440 lb) nuclear warhead containing up to 6 kilograms (13 lb) of plutonium. The latter, if true, would provide Israel with an offshore nuclear second strike capability and mean that virtually all the countries of Europe and North Africa would be within range of its nuclear warheads, if fired from an Israeli submarine in the central Mediterranean.  This would include:

ALGERIA| AUSTRIA| BULGARIA| EGYPT| FRANCE| GERMANY| GREECE| ITALY| HOLLAND| HUNGARY| JORDAN| LIBYA| MOROCCO| POLAND| SPAIN| SYRIA| SAUDI- ARABIA| TURKEY| UNITED-KINGDOM| UKRAINE , amongst others.

Each submarine is fitted with 6 × 533 mm (21.0 in) torpedo tubes, and 4 × 650 mm (26 in) torpedo tubes. The very large 650 mm tubes can be used for laying mines, larger submarine-launched cruise missiles, or swimmer delivery vehicles, and with liners the tubes could be used for standard torpedoes and submarine-launched missiles. According to the German Defense Ministry the 650 mm tubes are to have a liner installed for firing 533 mm UGM-84 Harpoon missiles although the Dolphin class already has six tubes of the 533 mm size. The boats were first armed with Atlas Elektronik DM2A3 torpedoes using wire-guided active homing to deliver a 260 kg (570 lb) warhead at a maximum speed of 35 knots (65 km/h; 40 mph) to a target over 13 km (8.1 mi) away, in passive homing mode a speed of 22 knots (41 km/h; 25 mph) and a range up to 28 km (17 mi) is possible. Israel has also has procured the DM2A4 torpedo, successor to their DM2A3s, which are electrically propelled, equipped with fiber optic communications and has countermeasure resistant signals processing and mission logic. A wet and dry compartment is installed for deploying underwater special operations teams. According to Defense Industry Daily the IDAS torpedo tube launched anti-helicopter missile, designed to defend against airborne threats while submerged in shallow water found in the Mediterranean where escape to depth is often not possible, is under development for the Dolphin and 212 classes.

Jane’s Defence Weekly reports that the Dolphin-class submarines are believed to be nuclear armed, offering Israel a sea based second strike capability. In adherence to Missile Technology Control Regime rules] the US Clinton administration refused an Israeli request in 2000 to purchase Tomahawk long range SLCMs. The U.S. Navy has deployed nuclear armed and conventional Tomahawk missiles for its submarine fleet which are launched from standard heavy 533 mm torpedo tubes.  The Federation of American Scientists and GlobalSecurity.org report that the four larger torpedo tubes are capable of launching Israeli built nuclear-armed Popeye Turbo cruise missiles (a variant of the Popeye standoff missile), and the U.S. Navy recorded an Israeli submarine-launched cruise missile test in the Indian Ocean ranging 1,500 km (930 mi).

The Dolphin class uses the ISUS 90-1 TCS weapon control system supplied by STN Atlas Elektronik, for automatic sensor management, fire control, navigation, and operations. The installed radar warning receiver is a 4CH(V)2 Timnex electronic support measures system, scanning from 2 GHz to 18 GHz frequency bands and able to pinpoint radar sites with accuracy between 1.4 to 5 degrees of angle (depending on frequency). It is developed by Elbit in Haifa. Active surface search radar is an Elta unit operating on I band. The sonar suite includes the Atlas Elektronik CSU 90 hull-mounted passive and active search and attack sonar. The PRS-3 passive ranging sonar is also supplied by Atlas Elektronik, the flank array is a FAS-3 passive search sonar. The submarines have two Kollmorgen periscopes.

The Dolphins are equipped with three V-16 396 SE 84 diesel engines built by MTU Friedrichshafen (now Tognum), developing 3.12 MW (4,180 hp) sustained power. The submarines are equipped with three Siemens 750 kW alternators, and a Siemens 2.85 MW sustained-power motor driving a single shaft. The propulsion system provides a speed of 20 knots (37 km/h; 23 mph) submerged and a snorkeling speed of 11 knots (20 km/h; 13 mph). The hull is rated for dives up to 350 m (1,150 ft). The maximum unrefuelled range is 8,000 nautical miles (15,000 km; 9,200 mi) traveling on the surface at 8 knots (15 km/h; 9.2 mph) and over 400 nautical miles (740 km; 460 mi) at 8 knots (15 km/h; 9.2 mph) submerged; they are designed to remain unsupplied for up to 30 days on station.

Operations and deployment

According to news reports the submarines are normally based in the Mediterranean.[51] One Dolphin was sent to the Red Sea for exercises, briefly docking in the naval base in Eilat in June 2009, which Israeli media interpreted as a warning to Iran.[52] In 2009 the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, quoting an Israeli defense official, reported that the small Eilat naval station is unsuited strategically to base the Dolphin-class boats, specifically noting the tight entrance of the Gulf of Aqaba at the Straits of Tiran as one held by potential adversaries including Saudi Arabia on the east and the demilitarized Egyptian Sinai to the west. Eilat is a 10 km (6.2 mi) strip of coast between Egypt and Jordan, the only two Arab states that currently have peace treaties with Israel. According to The London Sunday Times, the Israeli Navy decided in May 2010 to keep at least one submarine equipped with nuclear missiles there permanently as a deterrent in response to rumored ballistic missiles moved from Syria to Lebanon.[16]

If the boats are based at the larger Haifa naval base, access to the Persian Gulf area either requires openly sailing on the surface through the Egyptian controlled Suez Canal as permitted in the Egypt–Israel Peace Treaty or a long voyage sailing around Africa. According to the Convention of Constantinople signed by the ruling great powers of the time including the UK, France, and the Ottoman Empire in March 2, 1888; “The Suez Maritime Canal shall always be free and open, in time of war as in time of peace, to every vessel of commerce or of war, without distinction of flag.” Denied crossing at the Suez Canal and blockade of the Straits of Tiran occurred in both in 1956 and 1967 leading to Israel twice seizing the Sinai to break the blockade.[54] The Egypt–Israel Peace Treaty allows for the free passage of Israeli vessels through the Suez Canal, and recognizes the Strait of Tiran and the Gulf of Aqaba as international waterways. Even if a Red Sea or Indian Ocean base is unavailable other nations have used submarine tenders, ships that resupply, rearm, and refuel submarines at sea, when nearby friendly bases are unavailable.

*      *      *

http://www.nti.org/treaties-and-regimes/treaty-on-the-non-proliferation-of-nuclear-weapons/

http://www.nti.org/analysis/articles/israel-submarine-capabilities/

BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS    (*ISRAEL IS NOT A PARTY TO THE BWC)

·         Multilateral

o    Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons (BTWC)

The treaty prohibits the development, production, stockpiling, or acquisition of biological and toxin weapons, and mandates the elimination of existing weapons, weapons production material, and delivery means.

Parties: Algeria, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Brazil, Canada, China, Cuba, Egypt, Estonia, Former Yugoslavia, France, Georgia, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Japan, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Libya, Lithuania, Myanmar, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea, Syria, Taiwan, Tajikistan, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Vietnam

CHEMICAL WEAPONS    (*ISRAEL IS NOT A PARTY TO THE CWC)

·         Multilateral

o    Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction (CWC)

The CWC requires State Parties not to develop, produce, acquire, stockpile or retain, transfer, use, or make military preparations to use chemical weapons. It entered into force in 1997.

Parties: Algeria, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Brazil, Canada, China, Cuba, Estonia, Former Yugoslavia, France, Georgia, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Libya, Lithuania, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea, Taiwan, Tajikistan, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Vietnam

(*ISRAEL IS NOT A PARTY TO THE NPT- NUCLEAR  NON-PROLIFERATION TREATY)

ANNEX

*** 10 Disturbing Facts about Israel

1. Netanyahu heads the only undeclared nuclear weapons entity on the planet yet still alleges that non- nuclear Iran is trying to eliminate the state of Israel and its 100s of undeclared warheads in its Dimona secret arsenal, in an abortive effort to damage the internationally agreed Iran peace deal, painstakingly negotiated by the UN Security Council members and the EU. His political machinations in both Washington and Europe, have now resulted in ignominious failure as Iran re-joins the international community.

2. His Likud coalition government refuses to be a party to both the Chemical and Biological Weapons Conventions (CWC / BWC) to which EU members and other major UN states are signatories. Neither is it a party to the NPT nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as it refuses to submit its undeclared nuclear arsenal to the IAEA inspection of the United Nations.

3. His right-wing, extremist government supports the continued illegal occupation and settlement of the Palestinian West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights in violation of international law, in addition to continuing a blockade of essential materials to 1.8 million in Gaza, both of which have earned global condemnation.

4. He exerts a wholly undemocratic influence over the Republican, AIPAC -dominated US congress in Washington thereby disproportionately skewing American foreign policy in favour of Israel and obtaining US$6 billion of arms shipments annually to maintain its blockade of Gaza and its illegal settlement policy.

5. His family background includes a documented previous close association with terrorist organisations notably the Irgun Zvai Leumi paramilitary.

6. His government is in continued breach of the human rights provisions of the EU Association Agreement that currently affords Israel free trade access to the European single market – now subject to review.

7. He allows the so-called ‘pricetag’ terrorists to continue to persecute Arab residents in the Occupied Territories by the burning and destruction of olive groves and businesses in a program of uncontrolled intimidation.

8. He continually threatens to restrict access to Jerusalem’s Al-Aqsa mosque as did his failed predecessor, Ariel Sharon, apparently in a bid to provoke violence and dissent. This, notwithstanding the UN declaration of Jerusalem as an international city with unrestricted access to all faiths, in perpetuity.

9. He is the leader of a party whose published charter requires the ethnic cleansing of indigenous Palestinians in order to establish a Greater Israel in all of former Palestine.

10. Likud’s official agenda to establish the so-called ‘facts on the ground’ is a blatant attempt to abort the establishment of an independent Palestinian state. This illegal program has recently been condemned by the Chinese government as well as by the EU, Russia and the US and is now expected to lead to global economic, political and sporting sanctions.

Note: all the above facts are verifiable within the public domain

[email protected]

 London February 2016

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Israel’s Nuclear-Armed Submarine Fleet in Mediterranean, Threatens Middle East and Europe

With central bankers losing credibility left and right, and failing outright to boost the “wealth effect” no matter what they throw at it, the next big question is when will central planners around the world unveil the cashless society which is a necessary and sufficient condition to a regime of global NIRP.

And while in recent days we have seen op-eds by both Bloomberg and FT urging the banning of cash, the most disturbing development we have seen yet in the push for a cashless society has come from the following slide in a Morgan Stanley presentation, one in which the bank’s head of EMEA equity research Huw van Steenis, pointed out the following…

 

… and added this:

One of the most surprising comments this year came from a closed session on fintech where I sat next to someone in policy circles who argued that we should move quickly to a cashless economy so that we could introduce negative rates well below 1% – as they were concerned that Larry Summers’ secular stagnation was indeed playing out and we would be stuck with negative rates for a decade in Europe. They felt below (1.5)% depositors would start to hoard notes, leading to yet further complexities for monetary policy.

Consider this the latest, and loudest, warning on the road to digital fiat serfdom.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Something Very Disturbing: “Secular Stagnation”, Moving Towards Cashless Society

At 8:00 a.m. this morning, futures on the Dow Jones Industrial Average were flashing a 274 point plunge at the open of the stock market at 9:30 a.m. ET, following a selloff of 99.64 points by the close of trading yesterday.

There’s plenty of things rattling this market, not the least of which is the continued weakness in the share prices of the mega Wall Street and European banks. Analysts have started asking on business news outlets if there is something going on that the public can’t see.

Fed Chair Janet Yellen Testifying at the February 10, 2016 House Hearing

Fed Chair Janet Yellen Testifying at the February 10, 2016 House Hearing

Adding to the market angst was the jumble of questions Fed Chair Janet Yellen received during her semi-annual testimony before the House Financial Services Committee yesterday. One particular line of questioning from multiple members of the Committee was on whether the Federal Reserve has the legal authority to use negative interest rates as part of its monetary policy tools. Central banks in Europe and the Bank of Japan have deployed negative rates and financial markets have a built-in assumption that the Fed could do likewise. Yellen threw a bucket of cold water on that assumption with two revealing remarks.

First, Yellen said that the Fed had looked at the possibility of using negative rates in 2010, explaining:

We got only to the point of thinking it wasn’t a preferred tool. We were concerned about the impact it would have on money markets. We were worried it wouldn’t work in our institutional environment.

If you’re a hedge fund and you’ve staked a billion dollar bet on the potential for the Fed using negative rates in the U.S., this is not the answer you wanted to hear.

Read complete article 

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Federal Reserve Chair Yellen Rattles Markets Citing Obstacles to Negative Rates

The White House website published a petition accusing Obama of war crimes and demanding for him to be prosecuted. It already gained more than 7,000 signatures.

The petition states:

We demand conviction of a war criminal Barack Obama and trial in the International Criminal Court in [The] Hague. He is guilty of crimes not only against the USA citizens, but against the whole world”

The authors also note that “one of the most dreadful prisons in history – Guantanamo – continues to function.”

The US added to the de-stabilization of the situation in the Middle East, too, the petition’s authors state.

“Libya was destroyed as a result of Obama’s aggression. In Syria, Obama’s agents train, fund and organize terrorist groups, deceitfully naming them ‘moderate opposition,’ who, among other things, bear a relation to Al-Qaeda, implicated in crimes against the American people.”

Last but not least, the petition accuses the US government of constant illegal surveillance.

“Secret services collect the Americans’ personal data information on a 24-hour basis under the canopy battling terrorism, using electronic surveillance tools on political undesirables, effectively stomping on the Americans’ right for privacy.”

If the petition – published on Monday – gets 100,000 votes by March 9, the White House administration will have to respond to it.

You can see the petition here: White House Petition. You need to vote so we can get Obama out of the White House while it’s not too late!

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on White House Publishes Petition Which Calls Obama To Be Tried For ‘War Crimes’ In The Hague

Are Americans Too Insouciant To Survive?

February 12th, 2016 by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

When one looks at the deplorable state of the world, one cannot help but wonder at the insouciance of the American people.  Where are they?  Do they exist or are they a myth?  Have they been put to sleep by an evil demon? Are they so lost in The Matrix that they cannot get out?

Ever since Clinton’s second term the US has been consistently acting internationally and domestically as a criminal, disregarding its own laws, international laws, the sovereignty of other countries, and the US Constitution.  A worse criminal government has never existed.  Yet, Americans remain subservient to the criminals that they have placed in power over themselves.

According to polls, Hillary Clinton and Senator Bernie Sanders are splitting the Democratic vote 50-50 as preferred Democratic presidential candidate. This is extraordinary.

Hillary Clinton represents the interests of Wall Street and the mega-banks, the Israel Lobby, and the interests of the military/security complex.  These interests are totally opposed to the interests of the American people.

In his book, What’s the Matter with Kansas, Thomas Frank raised the question of why Americans vote against their own interests?  Why do

Americans go to the voting both and do themselves in?

Whether you agree with Thomas Frank’s answer or not, Americans do, on a regular basis, harm themselves by voting for people who are agents of vested interests diametrically opposed to the interests of American citizens.

How is it possible, if Democrats are informed people, that half of them prefer Hillary Clinton?  Between February 2001 and May 2015 Bill and Hillary collected $153 million in speaking fees.  The fees averaged $210,795 per speech.

I can remember when Bill and Hillary were in public office when their speeches were free. No one wanted to listen to them when the speeches were free.  Clearly, Bill is being paid off for his past services to the powerful interest groups that control the United States, and Hillary is being paid off for her future service to the same groups.

How then is it possible that half of Democrats would prefer Hillary?  Is it because she is a woman and women want a woman president more than they want their civil liberties, peace, and employment for themselves, their spouses and their children?

Or is it because, given the presstitute character of the American media, the people haven’t a clue?

If you vote for Hillary, you are voting for someone who has been paid off to the tune of $153 million by powerful vested interests who have no concern whatsoever for your interests.  In addition, Hillary has the necessary campaign funds from the powerful interest groups for her presidential nomination campaign. As if this isn’t damning enough, Hugh Wharton writes that the National Democratic Committee is in league with Hillary to steal, if necessary, the nomination from Sanders and the voters.

In contrast, the interest groups who rule America are not contributing to Sanders.

Therefore, the choice of Sanders is obvious, but 50% of Democrats are too braindead to  see it.

Although Hillary is a substantial threat to America, the threat of nuclear war is much greater, and the Democratic Obama regime in the hands of neoconservatives has just greatly amplified the threat of nuclear war.

The United States government, or perhaps we should say the exploiter and deceiver of the American people, has announced a three-fold increase in its military presence on Russia’s borders.  The excuse for this great boost in the profits and power of the US military-security complex is “Russian aggression.”

But there is no sign of this aggression. So Washington and its servile presstitutes in the Western media make it up. They proclaim a lie.

“Russia invaded Ukraine” proclaims the propaganda.  No mention is made of Washington’s coup in Ukraine that overthrew a democratically elected government and began a war against the Russian populations of eastern and southern Ukraine, former provinces of Russia added to the Ukrainian Soviet Republic by Soviet leaders. In the presstitute media, no mention is made of Washington’s intention of seizing Russia’s only warm water port in Crimea on the Black Sea.

Having created a nonexistant Russian invasion in place of the real US coup in Ukraine in the minds of the indoctrinated Americans, Washington now claims that Russia is going to invade the Baltics and Poland.  Nothing could be further from the truth, but this lie from the Obama regime now determines that the US military presence on Russia’s borders will increase three-fold.

The escalation of the US/NATO threat on Russia’s borders forces a Russian response.  Considering that the Russophobic governments in Poland and the Baltic States have unstable judgement, military buildups bring risks of miscalculations.

There is a limit to the level of threat that the Russian government can tolerate. The impotent Obama is in the firm grip of the neoconservatives and the military-security complex. The neoconservatives are motivated by their ideology of American world hegemony. The military-security complex is motivated by power and profit.  These motives bring the United States and its vassals into conflict with Russia’s (and China’s) sovereign existence.

Within the councils of American foreign policy there is not sufficient weight to counter the neoconservative drive to war with Russia and China.  In conventional war, the US is not a military match for the Russian/Chinese strategic alliance.  Therefore, the war would be nuclear.  The power of hydrogen bombs is immensely more powerful that the atomic bombs that the US dropped on Japan.  Nuclear war means the end of life on earth.

Americans can know that democracy has failed them, because there is no check on the neoconservatives’ ability to foment war with Russia and China.

The neocons control the press, and the press portrays Russia as “an existential threat to the United States.”  Once this fiction is drilled into the brains of Americans, it is child’s play for propagandists to create endless fears that deplete taxpayers of income in order to create profits for the military-security complex by relaunching the Cold War and an armaments race.

That is what is currently going on.  The inability of Americans to realize that they are being taken into a conflict that benefits only the profits and power of the military-security complex and the ideology of a small group of crazies demonstrates the impotence of American democracy.

Universities and think tanks are replete with ambitious people who, chasing grants and influence, fuel the Russophobic hysteria.  For example, on February 9 the Washington Post published an article by Michael Ignatieff, the Edward R. Murrow professor at Harvard University’s Kennedy School, and Leon Wieseltier, the Isaiah Berlin Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington. The article is a complete misrepresentation of the facts in Syria and called for US measures that would result in military conflict with Russia. It was irresponsible for the Washington Post to publish the article, but the decision is consistent with the Post’s presstitute nature.

The propaganda line maintained by the US government, the neoconservatives, the military/security complex, the presstitutes, and fiction-writers such as Ignatieff and Wieseltier is that Russia is not bombing the Islamic State jihadists who are attempting to overthrow the Syrian government in order to establish a jihadish state that would threaten the Middle East, Iran, and Russia herself.  The official line is that the Russians are bombing the democratic “rebels” who are trying to overthrow an alleged “brutal Syrian dictator.”  The conflict that the US government started by sending ISIS to Syria to overthrow the Syrian government is blamed on the Russian and Syrian governments.

Ignatieff and Wieseltier say that the US has put its “moral standing” at risk by permitting the Russians to bomb and to starve innocent women and children, as if the US had any moral standing after destroying seven countries so far in the 21st century, producing millions of dead and displaced persons, many of whom are now overrunning Europe as refugees from Washington’s wars.

The recently retired head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Michael Flynn, has said that the Obama regime made a “willful decision” to support ISIS and use ISIS against the Assad government in Syria.  That the violence in Syria originated in a US/ISIS conspiracy against Syria is ignored by Ignatieff and Wieseltier.  Instead, they blame Russia despite the fact that it is Russia’s air support for the Syrian Army that has rolled back ISIS.

Where were Ignatieff and Wieseltier when Washington and its vassals destroyed Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Afghanistan, Yemen, much of Pakistan, overthrew the first democratically elected government in Egypt, overthrew the government in Ukraine and started a war against the Russian population, and supplied Israel with the weapons and money to steal Palestine from the Palestinians?  Where were they when Clinton destroyed Yugoslavia and Serbia? Where are they when ISIS murders Syrians and eats the livers of its executed victims?

It would  be interesting to know who financed the professorship in Edward R. Murrow’s name and the fellowship in Isiah Berlin’s name and how these positions came to be staffed with their current occupants.

Reagan and Gorbachev brought the Cold War to an end.  The George H.W. Bush administration supported the end of the Cold War and gave further guarantees to Russia.  But Clinton attacked Serbia, a Russian ally and broke the agreement that NATO would not expand into Eastern Europe to Russia’s border.  When the neoconservatives’ plans to invade Syria and to attack Iran were frustrated by Russian diplomacy, the neocons turned on Russia with fury.

In 1961 President Eisenhower warned the American people of the threat posed by the military-security complex. That was 55 years ago.  This complex is so strong today that it is able to divert massive taxpayer resources to its coffers while the living standard and economic prospects of the American people decline.

The military/security complex requires an enemy.  When the Cold War ended, the “Muslim Threat” was created. This “threat” has now been superceded by the “Russian Threat,” which is much more useful in keeping Europe in line and in scaring people with prospective invasions and nuclear attacks that are far beyond the power and reach of jihadists.

Superpower America required a more dangerous enemy than a few lightly armed jihadists, so the “Russian threat” was created.  To drive home the threat, Russia and her president are constantly demonized.  The conclusion is unavoidable that the insouciant American people are being prepared for war.

 

Paul Craig Roberts has had careers in scholarship and academia, journalism, public service, and business. He is chairman of The Institute for Political Economy.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Are Americans Too Insouciant To Survive?

America’s Endless Wars

February 12th, 2016 by Margaret Kimberley

America’s grand fantasy of a Project for a New American Century has experienced a serious setback. Yet this country still isn’t dissuaded from pursuing the imperial effort. For five years Syrian president Bashar al-Assad stood his ground and ignored Barack Obama’s refrain that he “must go.” Fortunately Assad didn’t leave or give up the fight. Russian president Vladimir Putin finally stood beside him in deed and not just in words. The alliance is a textbook case of how nations ought to behave within the parameters of international law.

Russian air strikes bolstered the Syrian army and in just four months ISIS and the rest of its jihadists allies are on the run. The Syrian peace conference in Geneva is now under a “temporary pause” (*link pause) for the simple reason that there is no longer any need for it. The issue is settled. Assad isn’t going anywhere.

For nearly five years the Syrian people have suffered as a direct result of American aggression. More than 250,000 people are dead and 9 million are refugees in their country and abroad. The humanitarian disaster is a direct result of America’s intervention and blame for the bloodshed should be placed at Barack Obama’s feet. Now that America’s jihadists allies are losing, there is suddenly concern expressed for the Syrian people who wouldn’t be suffering at all absent the regime change plot.

While Republican and Democratic presidential candidates, including “socialist” Bernie Sanders, express unending support for imperialism and brutality in Syria, the project is falling apart. The failure is a good thing for humanity. The United States should not be allowed to act like the schoolyard bully who steals lunch money for fun.

The Russian success should have taught America a lesson but that doesn’t appear to be the case. The United States has pursued another brand of warfare against that country for the past two years. First by overthrowing the president of neighboring Ukraine and then by exacting sanctions which have damaged the Russian economy. The corporate media has played its part by fanning the flames with anti-Russian propaganda. One day they claim that Russia threatens European nations, then they claim Russian submarines will cut underwater cables. Any Russian who was ever murdered is now said to have died at Putin’s hands.

The United States is determined to try and snatch some victory from the jaws of defeat. While the Syria project is heading south, the cold war appears to be getting warm. The defense department announced that it will take the unprecedented action of  installing weapons and personnel in the Baltic states bordering Russia. (*link weapons) The most hawkish American presidents respected the old Soviet spheres of influence and didn’t dare provoke so openly. Now it is clear that there will be no respite from imperialism even as it fails.

Barack Obama will be president for less than one year but his successor won’t be any better for the rest of humanity. The Democratic and Republican candidates sound alike as they eagerly proclaim their loathing for Putin and their determination to continue war by other means. Not one of them has dared to call the Syria intervention the unlawful aggression that it obviously is and none has expressed an intention to change foreign policy. Even liberal darling Bernie Sanders spouts nonsense about “Saudi skin in the game” in Syria when the Saudis have been an integral part of the regime change effort. Not only has Obama declared unending war against the rest of the world, but so has the rest of the two party duopoly.

The lack of debate among the establishment and the slavish devotion of the corporate media make America a very dangerous country. If candidates like Barack Obama and Bernie Sanders are slick enough they can market themselves as peacemakers when in fact they will create as much chaos and suffering as any of the Republicans.

How can Bernie Sanders bring social democracy to the United States if he won’t cut the military budget or foreswear interventions? He learned a lot from Barack Obama’s 2008 comment that he was only opposed to “dumb wars.” The Republicans openly brag about aggressions while Democrats dissemble and use weasel words to pretend they won’t do the same thing.

Every global conflict from the small, like Haiti, to the largest, like Iraq and Syria, is the result of American interventions. But presidential candidates and major newspapers won’t acknowledge American responsibility for the suffering of millions of people. It is yet another reason to reject the Democrats and Republicans and their tag team politics of pretense. No one can say for certain who will be president of the United States one year from now. We do know that he or she will continue to bring disaster all over the world.

Margaret Kimberley‘s Freedom Rider column appears weekly in BAR, and is widely reprinted elsewhere. She maintains a frequently updated blog as well as athttp://freedomrider.blogspot.com. Ms. Kimberley lives in New York City, and can be reached via e-Mail at Margaret.Kimberley(at)BlackAgendaReport.com.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on America’s Endless Wars

Stock Market Panic Risks New Financial Crisis

February 12th, 2016 by Andre Damon

Global stock markets formally entered a bear market Wednesday, as the MSCI All-Country World Index fell by 1.3 percent, with the index down 20 percent from its high last May. Yesterday, after further losses in Asia, European markets closed down, with the German DAX falling by nearly 5 percent, the Spanish IBEX down by nearly 5 percent, and the US DOW off by 250 points.

The selloff accelerated in early trading Friday, with the Japanese Nikkei falling by more than 5 percent at the opening bell.

The stock sell-off both reflected and helped catalyze a broader crisis of confidence in financial markets, amid a rapid deceleration of the global economy, a sell-off in emerging market debt, a downward spiral in commodities prices, and the seeming perplexity of central banks as to how to deal with a renewed outbreak of panic eight years after the 2008 financial crisis.

The global selloff continued in the US after congressional testimony by Federal Reserve chairwoman Janet Yellen, who made no explicit statement that the Federal Reserve would change its plans to continue raising the benchmark federal funds rate over the next year.

Yellen did, however, say that the Federal Reserve would not rule out cutting interest rates below zero if economic conditions continued to deteriorate. If this were to happen, the Fed would follow the Bank of Japan, which late last month announced a surprise interest rate cut, and Sweden, which Thursday cut its benchmark interest rate further into negative territory.

These moves, coupled with a generalized flight to safety, have led to a massive jump in the proportion of bonds with a negative yield. According to figures from JPMorgan, the share of government bonds with a negative yield, once only considered a theoretical possibility, have reached 25 percent. All told, negatively-yielding assets have hit $5.5 trillion worldwide.

The deepening sell-off, and the seeming inability of central banks to formulate any coherent response to the panic, have triggered a general crisis of confidence, not only in the health of the financial system, but in the ability of central banks and governments to offset the crisis through radically expansionary monetary policy: their panacea for every economic ill since 2008.

A Citigroup executive summed up the sentiment in a comment to Reuters: “One of the new themes in markets is that (quantitative easing) has damaged the banks and that therefore it exacerbates the risk-off environment.”

In other words, the panicked sell-off expresses growing fears in financial markets that the vast quantities of cash pumped into the financial system since 2008 have done nothing to improve its underlying health, and may have sown the seeds for a crash on an even greater scale.

This time, however, with central banks having expended so much of their “ammunition” on seeking to keep financial assets afloat for years, there are increasing fears that they will be powerless to respond to a new financial panic.

In particular, the explosive growth in negative-yielding financial assets means that banks, whose core business involves borrowing long-term and lending short-term, will be put under even further financial stress if central banks continue to lower interest rates.

These fears have hammered the banking sector. The S&P 500 financials index has dropped by 18 percent since the start of the year, making banking by far the worst-affected sector, facing an even more rapid selloff rate than that of the beleaguered energy and transport industries.

And that is saying something. The energy and materials sectors have seen share value declines of over 31 percent over the past year, with “companies going Chapter 11 or trading at 50 cents on the dollar,” one portfolio manager told Bloomberg.

Meanwhile the global shipping and transport sector is facing business conditions that, in the words of Nils Andersen, the CEO of Maersk, the largest transportation company in the world, are “worse than in 2008.” The company’s share value, which was down by more than 50 percent in the past year, fell a further 8 percent Wednesday.

Meanwhile the prospects that US economic growth would somehow offset the slump in global output receded further this week, as US corporations posted sharply reduced earnings and outlooks. Earnings for S&P 500 companies fell 4.5 percent in the fourth quarter, and are expected to fall 6.3 percent this quarter. “The general feeling is that the U.S. economy is nearing a peak and there is not much left as far as trends to be talked about,” one hedge fund manager told Reuters.

The fall-off in real economic activity can be expected to further dampen oil prices, which have hit 13-year lows of $27 per barrel, and has triggered a further round of sell-offs in commodity related stocks, with “investors … liquidating because they need the cash,” as one chief investment officer told Reuters.

Eight years since the 2008 financial crash, it is clear that the capitalist governments and central banks have been unable to address any of its underlying causes. Instead, they have poured cash into financial markets, triggering a feedback loop of speculation and parasitism in the form of mergers and consolidations, which have sharply cut back production and led to mass layoffs.

The end result has been only a further acceleration of the growth of social inequality, with the fantastic enrichment of the parasitic financial oligarchy financed by the wholesale destruction of productive activity and the vast impoverishment of the working class.

In other words, the conditions that gave rise to the 2008 financial crisis have been reproduced once again in even sharper form, and risk a similar outcome.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Stock Market Panic Risks New Financial Crisis

The US “Plan B” for Syria and the Threat of World War

February 12th, 2016 by Bill Van Auken

Negotiations on Syria’s bloody armed conflict were held in Munich Thursday against the backdrop of a government offensive, supported by Russian airstrikes, to break the grip of Western-backed “rebels” over the largely shattered eastern part of Aleppo.

The talks were convened under the auspices of the 17-member International Syria Support Group, which includes the US and its regional allies—Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar—in the war for regime change in Syria, along with Russia and Iran, which are allied with and actively aiding the government of President Bashar al-Assad.

Washington demanded an immediate cease-fire and halt to Russian airstrikes in Syria. The US, together with the reactionary Arab monarchies and the regime in Turkey, fears that without a halt to the fighting, the Islamist militias that they have supported, financed and armed for nearly five years may face irreparable defeat.

Russia, for its part, reportedly proposed a cease-fire that would begin on March 1, thus allowing enough time for the Syrian government to reestablish its control over Aleppo.

Late Friday night, US Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov announced that they had reached a tentative deal that would see a ceasefire “within a week” along with expedited humanitarian aid. Kerry allowed that while the agreement looked good “on paper,” it was yet to be tested. All of the underlying conflicts remain unresolved, and both US and Russian military operations are to continue in the name of the struggle against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

On the eve of the Munich talks, Kerry, in an interview with Washington Postcolumnist David Ignatius, delivered an unmistakable threat in connection with the US negotiating strategy in Munich: “What we’re doing is testing [Russian and Iranian] seriousness.” he said. “And if they’re not serious, then there has to be consideration of a Plan B… You can’t just sit there.”

“Plan B” would consist of a sharp escalation of the US military intervention in Syria, carried out under the cover of combating ISIS, but directed at toppling the Assad government.

Saudi Arabia and Qatar have also reportedly spent the last several days discussing a “Plan B” that would involve their participation in direct military intervention to save the “rebels” that they have supported. The Saudi-owned news group al-Arabiya has quoted officials in Riyadh as confirming the House of Saud’s decision to send troops into Syria in what would constitute a provocatively hostile invasion.

Responding to the ominous implications of such an escalation, Russia’s Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev told the German daily Handelsblatt Thursday: “The Americans and our Arab partners must think hard about this—do they want a permanent war? All sides must be forced to the negotiating table instead of sparking a new world war.”

Medvedev’s choice of words was not mere hyperbole. A military intervention to rescue the “rebels,” which amounts to a war to save Al Qaeda’s Syrian affiliate, the Al Nusra Front, the leading force on the ground in Aleppo province, could quickly bring the US and its allies into combat with Russia, an armed confrontation between the world’s two major nuclear powers.

US officials have spoken in recent days of creating a “humanitarian corridor” to Aleppo and other rebel areas under siege by government forces. Presumably this “corridor” is meant to replace the main supply route for the “rebels” from Turkey, which has been cut off by the government offensive, disrupting the CIA-orchestrated arming of the “rebels” with stockpiles poured in from Libya, the Gulf oil kingdoms and beyond. Such a corridor would require a military force to protect it and enforcement of a “no-fly zone,” meaning a confrontation not only with Syrian government forces, but with Russian warplanes as well.

Turkey, Washington’s NATO ally, is meanwhile blocking its border to Syrian refugees in order to create the maximum crisis possible so that it can pursue its own strategic aims, which include not only regime change in Damascus, but also the bloody suppression of the Kurdish minority on both sides of the frontier.

The Obama administration has issued no warning to the American people that it is embarking on a policy in Syria that could pit the US against the Russian military and potentially trigger a global catastrophe.

There is no significant popular support for US military intervention in Syria, which has been promoted under the false flag of “humanitarianism,” aided by a whole coterie of pseudo-left organizations that have specialized in portraying a bloody sectarian campaign by CIA-backed Islamist militias as a “Syrian revolution.”

The extent of the catastrophe unleashed upon Syria through this intervention was spelled out in shocking terms with the release of a new study by the Syrian Center for Policy Research, which found that fully 11.5 per cent of the population inside Syria has been either killed or injured as a result of the armed conflict. The death toll from the war—combined with the systematic destruction of the country’s social infrastructure and health care system and a dramatic drop in living standards—has caused life expectancy to plummet from 70.5 years in 2010 to an estimated 55.4 years in 2015.

The study found further that the country’s unemployment rate had soared from 14.9 percent in 2011 to 52.9 percent by the end of 2015, and that the overall poverty rate is estimated at 85.2 percent.

In short, the Obama administration has inflicted upon Syria a war that is every bit as criminal and lethal as the war carried out by the Bush administration against Iraq.

The Syrian people are the victims of a US-orchestrated war that is driven by the global strategy of American imperialism to reverse its economic decline through the use or threat of military force. Washington sought regime change in Syria as a means to an end: the weakening of the two principal allies of Damascus, Russia and Iran, and the reassertion of a Western stranglehold on the vast energy resources of the Middle East.

The threat of world war is posed not merely by the prospect of US and Russian warplanes facing off in the skies over Syria, but by the entire logic of the Syrian war for regime change and the broader strategic aims that it serves. This finds expression in NATO’s escalation of the military encirclement of Russia and the increasingly provocative anti-Chinese policy being pursued by the Pentagon in the South China Sea.

The US drive for global hegemony was articulated in the strategic maxim enunciated by the Pentagon nearly a quarter of a century ago that Washington must prevent the emergence of any power capable of challenging the dominance of American capitalism on a global or even regional scale. This “grand strategy” has led to unceasing US wars of aggression since and now poses the real threat of a third, nuclear, world war.

Against this barbaric strategy of the US ruling establishment, the American and international working class must advance its own independent strategy, fighting for the withdrawal of US and all foreign military forces from Syria, Iraq and the entire Middle East and for the unity of the working class across all national, religious and ethnic boundaries in a common struggle to put an end to capitalism, the source of militarism and war.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The US “Plan B” for Syria and the Threat of World War

“I can tell you that shaming me and essentially calling me misinformed and stupid is NOT the way to win my vote.” – Zoe Trimboli, Feb 9, 2015

The Clinton campaign is showing signs of desperation.  Bernie Sanders is not only putting in a fight, but offering firm punches in the electoral bouts.  The days are early: a narrow Clinton victory in the Iowa caucus; and a very convincing showing by Sanders in the New Hampshire primary.

Rattled, the dirt machine was bound to get busy against the septuagenarian Vermont socialist.  Fittingly, the issue of sex and gender had to come into play, showing how the ideas factory had run dry in the winter months.  “Obviously,” suggested stormy dissident feminist Camille Paglia, “they are desperate because Hillary’s numbers are falling, so they are really pulling out the heavy artillery.”

In this rhetorical scrap within the Democratic spread, the matter of gender seems to be coupled with generational politics. Older women are more likely to go for Clinton, another factor that simply adds to the ennui of the issue, while the younger generation are gravitating towards Sanders.  They claim to have wiser heads, hoping to direct the younger ones off the path with Bernie.

This is the key rule of corporate feminism in action.[1]  In 2008, such a form found expression in the endorsement by the National Organization of Women (NOW) for Clinton’s “long history of support for women’s empowerment.”  A collective of 250 academics and activists, calling themselves “Feminists for Clinton” found her “advocacy of the human rights of women” to be “powerful”.

Such views presuppose that Clinton has a record of making policy that combated gender inequality. It is a far from sustainable point, given her history of corporate coddling and Big Town smooching.  Her refusal to question Walmart’s campaign against labour unions in their quest to represent store workers while on the board (1986-1992) is a glaring case in point. Walmart continues to exert a pull on Clinton, with Alice Walton donating the permitted maximum amount in 2013 to the “Ready for Hillary” Super PAC in 2013.[2]

It has become incumbent, then, to suggest that the Clinton aura is distinctly against establishment politics, that she is herself permanently fighting it in a battle of attrition.  Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright claimed last Saturday, in a rally introducing Clinton, that voting for Sanders was hardly revolutionary while putting a woman in the White House (no matter whom) would itself be a truly revolutionary gesture.

Albright then moved into the chiding phase of her address.  “We can tell our story of how we climbed the ladder, and how a lot of you younger women think it’s done.”  They, she insisted, had gotten it wrong.  “It’s not done.  There’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other!”

This has been a theme of the Hillary camp: assume that women do not want to vote for her because she is, in fact, a woman.  Convince women voters, in fact, that they ought to vote for her because of the grand sisterhood, gunning for the big White House win.  The fact that she might be an appalling establishment candidate, whose perpetuation of unaccountable power and links to Wall Street turns off voters, have not figured in that analysis.  Shallowness reigns in absolute gracelessness.

Clinton has instead relied upon gender inequality as an argument that she was never an establishment figure, and could never be.  In the Democratic debates, she decided to plough the line that she could not “imagine anyone more of an outsider than the first woman president.”

Paglia has had little time for the dynamics of Hillary-styled feminism, which she regards as a Gloria Steinem notion of “blame-men-first feminism, which defines women as perpetual victims requiring government protections.”  The candidate has come across at times as “impatient” even “patronizing” in her “tone about men”, something which limits appeal.[3]

Unsurprisingly, Steinem has pinned her own colours to the mast, and they are not favourable to Sanders.  In a Friday interview with Bill Maher, taking a dump on young women’s motivations to even be politically active, let alone vote for Sanders, seemed to be in vogue. “When you’re young, you’re thinking: ‘Where are the boys?  The boys are with Bernie.”  Yes, it’s all about mating, the pheromone count and the erotic moment.

Such comments did return to haunt her.  “In a case of talk-show Interruptus, I misspoke on the Bill Maher show recently, and apologize for what’s been misinterpreted as implying young women aren’t serious in their politics.”

Even husband and former President Bill Clinton has decided, in a gesture of awkward ridiculousness, to use a misogynist card to favour his wife’s chances.  This is where politics moves into farcical gear, a discordant register.  He did his utmost best in Iowa to link Sanders to the “Bernie Bro” grouping which has trolled female Clinton supporters with claims of “voting with their vaginas”. Somewhat ironically his wife’s campaign has done little to dissuade the theoretical basis of that assumption.

Clinton’s tactical thinking has proven distinctly totalitarian in flavour. It presupposes a lack of thought on the part of voters, and determines that anyone who is a woman (the wonders of gender politics come full circle) cannot, by the Albright-Steinem code vote for anyone other than Clinton.[4]  This is a neat, and gruesome defanging of ideas, supplanting it with the most sinister one of all: that gender is excusing in its form, providing a shield against valid criticisms of credentials.

This is logic that carries across.  Will there be, asks Frank Bruni, a “special place in hell” for him if, as a gay man, he did not support a hypothetical openly gay presidential candidate?[5]  This is diktat masquerading as reason.

 

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne.  Email: [email protected]

Notes:

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Hillary’s “Dirt Machine”, Warring Against Bernie Sanders. Totalitarian Thinking, Feminism and the Clintons

The Dirty War on Syria: Interview with Tim Anderson

February 11th, 2016 by Prof. Tim Anderson

Unusual Sources’ Brendan Stone interviews Tim Anderson about his important new book, “The Dirty War in Syria,” which addresses the monumental lies and profound propaganda that has accompanied Washington’s regime change operation in Syria. 

Listen to the interview here

The following is an extract from the introductory chapter of Prof. Tim Anderson’s comprehensive account of the real – and propaganda – war against Syria:

Click to order

Although every war makes ample use of lies and deception, the dirty war on Syria has relied on a level of mass disinformation not seen in living memory. The British-Australian journalist Philip Knightley pointed out that war propaganda typically involves ‘a depressingly predictable pattern’ of demonising the enemy leader, then demonising the enemy people through atrocity stories, real or imagined (Knightley 2001). Accordingly, a mild-mannered eye doctor called Bashar al Assad became the new evil in the world and, according to consistent western media reports, the Syrian Army did nothing but kill civilians for more than four years. To this day, many imagine the Syrian conflict is a ‘civil war’, a ‘popular revolt’ or some sort of internal sectarian conflict. These myths are, in many respects, a substantial achievement for the big powers which have driven a series of ‘regime change’ operations in the Middle East region, all on false pretexts, over the past 15 years.

This book is a careful academic work, but also a strong defence of the right of the Syrian people to determine their own society and political system. That position is consistent with international law and human rights principles, but may irritate western sensibilities, accustomed as we are to an assumed prerogative to intervene. At times I have to be blunt, to cut through the double-speak. In Syria the big powers have sought to hide their hand, using proxy armies while demonising the Syrian Government and Army, accusing them of constant atrocities; then pretending to rescue the Syrian people from their own government. Far fewer western people opposed the war on Syria than opposed the invasion of Iraq, because they were deceived about its true nature.

Purchase your copy here

Prof. Tim Anderson is a distinguished author and senior lecturer of political economy at the University of Sydney, Australia

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Dirty War on Syria: Interview with Tim Anderson

Fifteen Health Problems Linked to Monsanto’s Roundup

February 11th, 2016 by Alexis Baden-Mayer

Monsanto invented the herbicide glyphosate and brought it to market under the trade name Roundup in 1974, after DDT was banned. But it wasn’t until the late 1990s that the use of Roundup surged, thanks to Monsanto’s ingenious marketing strategy. The strategy? Genetically engineer seeds to grow food crops that could tolerate high doses of Roundup. With the introduction of these new GE seeds, farmers could now easily control weeds on their corn, soy, cotton, canola, sugar beets and alfalfa crops—crops that thrived while the weeds around them were wiped out by Roundup.

Eager to sell more of its flagship herbicide, Monsanto also encouraged farmers to use Roundup as a dessicant, to dry out all of their crops so they could harvest them faster. So Roundup is now routinely sprayed directly on a host of non-GMO crops, including wheat, barley, oats, canola, flax, peas, lentils, soybeans, dry beans and sugar cane.

Between 1996 – 2011, the widespread use of Roundup Ready GMO crops increased herbicide use in the U.S. by 527 million pounds—even though Monsanto claimed its GMO crops would reduce pesticide and herbicide use.

Monsanto has falsified data on Roundup’s safety, and marketed it to parks departments and consumers as “environmentally friendly” and “biodegradable, to encourage its use it on roadsides, playgrounds, golf courses, schoolyards, lawns and home gardens. A French court ruled those marketing claims amounted to false advertising.

In the nearly 20 years of intensifying exposure, scientists have been documenting the health consequences of Roundup and glyphosate in our food, in the water we drink, in the air we breathe and where our children play.

They’ve found that people who are sick have higher levels of glyphosate in their bodies than healthy people.

They’ve also found the following health problems which they attribute to exposure to Roundup and/or glyphosate:

ADHD: In farming communities, there’s a strong correlation between Roundup exposure and attention deficit disorder (ADHD), likely due to glyphosate’s capacity to disrupt thyroid hormone functions.

Alzheimer’s disease: In the lab, Roundup causes the same type of oxidative stress and neural cell death observed in Alzheimer’s disease. And it affects CaMKII, an enzyme whose dysregulation has also been linked to the disease.

Anencephaly (birth defect): An investigation into neural tube defects among babies born to women living within 1,000 meters of pesticide applications showed an association for glyphosate with anencephaly, the absence of a major portion of the brain, skull and scalp that forms during embryonic development.

Autism: Glyphosate has a number of known biological effects that align with the known pathologies associated with autism. One of these parallels is the gut dysbiosis observed in autistic children and the toxicity of glyphosate to beneficial bacteria that suppress pathogenic bacteria, along with pathogenic bacteria’s high resistance to glyphosate. In addition, glyphosate’s capacity to promote aluminum accumulation in the brain may make it the principal cause of autism in the U.S.

Birth defects: Roundup and glyphosate can disrupt the Vitamin A (retinoic acid) signaling pathway, which is crucial for normal fetal development. The babies of women living within one kilometer of fields sprayed with glyphosate were more than twice as likely to have birth defects according to a study from Paraguay. Congenital defects quadrupled in the decade after Roundup Ready crops arrived in Chaco, a province in Argentina where glyphosate is used roughly eight to ten times more per acre than in the U.S. A study of one farming family in the U.S. documented elevated levels of glyphosate and birth defects in the children, including an imperforate anus, growth hormone deficiency, hypospadias (an abnormally placed urinary hole), a heart defect and a micro penis.

Brain cancer: In a study of children with brain cancer compared with healthy children, researchers found that if either parent had been exposed to Roundup during the two years before the child’s birth, the chances of the child developing brain cancer doubled.

Breast cancer: Glyphosate induces human breast cancer cells growth via estrogen receptors. The only long-term animal study of glyphosate exposure produced rats with mammary tumors and shortened life-spans.

Cancer: House-to-house surveys of 65,000 people in farming communities in Argentina where Roundup is used, known there as the fumigated towns, found cancer rates two to four times higher than the national average, with increases in breast, prostate and lung cancers. In a comparison of two villages, in the one where Roundup was sprayed, 31 percent of residents had a family member with cancer, while only 3 percent of residents in a ranching village without spraying had one. The high cancer rates among people exposed to Roundup likely stem from glyphosate’s known capacity to induce DNA damage, which has been demonstrated in numerous lab tests.

Celiac disease and gluten intolerance: Fish exposed to glyphosate develop digestive problems that are reminiscent of celiac disease. There are parallels between the characteristics of celiac disease and the known effects of glyphosate. These include imbalances in gut bacteria, impairment in enzymes involved with detoxifying environmental toxins, mineral deficiencies and amino acid depletion.

Chronic kidney disease: Increases in the use of glyphosate may explain the recent surge in kidney failure among agricultural workers in Central America, Sri Lanka and India. Scientists have concluded, “Although glyphosate alone does not cause an epidemic of chronic kidney disease, it seems to have acquired the ability to destroy the renal tissues of thousands of farmers when it forms complexes with [hard water] and nephrotoxic metals.”

Colitis: The toxicity of glyphosate to beneficial bacteria that suppress clostridia, along with clostridia’s high resistance to glyphosate, could be a significant predisposing factor in the overgrowth of clostridia. Overgrowth of clostridia, specifically C. difficile, is a well-established causal factor in colitis.

Depression: Glyphosate disrupts chemical processes that impact the production of serotonin, an important neurotransmitter that regulates mood, appetite and sleep. Serotonin impairment has been linked to depression.

Diabetes: Low levels of testosterone are a risk factor for Type 2 diabetes. Rats fed environmentally relevant doses of Roundup over a period of 30 days spanning the onset of puberty had reduced testosterone production sufficient to alter testicular cell morphology and to delay the onset of puberty.

Heart disease: Glyphosate can disrupt the body’s enzymes, causing lysosomal dysfunction, a major factor in cardiovascular disease and heart failure.

Hypothyroidism: House-to-house surveys of 65,000 people in farming communities in Argentina where Roundup is used, known there as the fumigated towns, found higher rates of hypothyroidism.

Inflammatory Bowl Disease (“Leaky Gut Syndrome”): Glyphosate can induce severe tryptophan deficiency, which can lead to an extreme inflammatory bowel disease that severely impairs the ability to absorb nutrients through the gut, due to inflammation, bleeding and diarrhea.

Liver disease: Very low doses of Roundup can disrupt human liver cell function, according to a 2009 study published in Toxicology.

Lou Gehrig’s Disease (ALS): Sulfate deficiency in the brain has been associated with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS). Glyphosate disrupts sulfate transport from the gut to the liver, and may lead over time to severe sulfate deficiency throughout all the tissues, including the brain.

Multiple Sclerosis (MS): An increased incidence of inflammatory bowel disease (IBS) has been found in association with MS. Glyphosate may be a causal factor. The hypothesis is that glyphosate-induced IBS causes gut bacteria to leak into the vasculature, triggering an immune reaction and consequently an autoimmune disorder resulting in destruction of the myelin sheath.

Non-Hodgkin lymphoma: A systematic review and a series of meta-analyses of nearly three decades worth of epidemiologic research on the relationship between non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) and occupational exposure to agricultural pesticides found that B cell lymphoma was positively associated with glyphosate.

Parkinson’s disease: The brain-damaging effects of herbicides have been recognized as the main environmental factor associated with neurodegenerative disorders, including Parkinson’s disease. The onset of Parkinson’s following exposure to glyphosate has been well documented and lab studies show that glyphosate induces the cell death characteristic of the disease.

Pregnancy problems (infertility, miscarriages, stillbirths): Glyphosate is toxic to human placental cells, which, scientists say, explains the pregnancy problems of agricultural workers exposed to the herbicide.

Obesity: An experiment involving the transfer of a strain of endotoxin-producing bacteria from the gut of an obese human to the guts of mice caused the mice to become obese. Since glyphosate induces a shift in gut bacteria towards endotoxin-producers, glyphosate exposure may contribute to obesity in this way.

Reproductive problemsStudies of laboratory animals have found that male rats exposed to high levels of glyphosate, either during prenatal or pubertal development, suffer from reproductive problems, including delayed puberty, decreased sperm production, and decreased testosterone production.

Respiratory illnesses: House-to-house surveys of 65,000 people in farming communities in Argentina where Roundup is used, known there as the fumigated towns, found higher rates of chronic respiratory illnesses.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Fifteen Health Problems Linked to Monsanto’s Roundup

Beyonce and the Politics of Cultural Dominance

February 11th, 2016 by Ajamu Baraka

I confess, I am a culturally alienated, old, disconnected 1960s and ‘70s radical trying to live and struggle for revolutionary change in a world that might have passed me by, because I cannot for the life of me understand how Beyonce’s commodified caricature of black opposition was in any way progressive. Instead what I saw was the cultural power of neoliberal capitalism to co-opt opposition, monetize it and provide some mindless entertainment all at the same time.  I didn’t see opposition; I saw the imagery and symbols of authentic black radicalism grotesquely transformed into a de-politicized spectacle by gyrating, light-skinned booty-short-clad sisters. 

I am told that I am being too harsh. That there were positive messages encoded into Beyonce’s performance. In their rebuke of my interpretation, my friends return to that old canard that “we got to meet the people where they are at” and take every opportunity within the domain of popular culture to push positive messages.

This sad and reactionary position only reflects the deep cynicism and alienation of black radical politics that has never recovered from the systematic assault on our movement from the ‘70s onward. An assault that was not only military, but as a centerpiece of its strategy, pushed for a cultural and ideological assimilation of the Black/African working class and the artificially created middle-class. Understanding the power of ideas to shape consciousness, the objective was to “Americanize” the African American. Saner people would call that process genocide, but in the U.S. it is called racial progress.

The success of that strategy – the elimination of the “us,” an emerging “people” committed to radical transformational politics with a healthy psychological and emotional distance from “them,” the U.S. state, its racist and colonialist/imperialist history – was on display in Selma at the commemoration of the 50th anniversary of the march. In Selma, Barack Obama, the living personification of that strategy, delivered a version of the American narrative that was infused with all of the racist jingoism of bold settlers and the marginalization of genocide and slavery. But instead of Obama being run off the stage and out of town, his rendering of the story of white manifest destiny, U.S. exceptionalism and black advancement within the context of capitalism, was warmly embraced and praised by the new Negroes of empire.

In an era where the image is dominant and meaning fluid, what is still real, concrete and observable is the operation of power. Situated and controlled by an elite that bell hooks refers to as the White Male, capitalist Patriarchy, it’s a power that exercises with devastating efficiency its ability to shape consciousness through its control of the major means of communication and cultural production. It was those white men and their representatives that placed Beyoncé on that stage at the Super Bowl. It is incredibly naive to think that anything subversive or even remotely oppositional to the interests of the capitalist oligarchy would be allowed expression on a stage that it controlled.

Beyonce’s performance and her video is as conservative and accommodationist as the demand for justice for …, fill in the blank, after one of the defenders of the capitalist order executes one of our folks. Everyone can give lip service to the demand for racial justice or oppose the “bad apples” in the police forces that abuse their power, and most people, (except the most rabid racists) can and do get behind the idea that black lives should matter. That is why the movement has not been shut down, at least not yet!

No folks, real opposition to this white supremacist, colonialist/imperialist order is not cool, or sexy. Being a black revolutionary means the possibility of death, it can mean facing decades of incarceration as a political prisoner, it can mean exile or the inability to make a living because your liberal friends consider you dangerous. It is facing the naked power of the national security state with its power to engage in extra-judicial murder with impunity, surveillance and infiltration.

Those who claim that Assata taught them should have been outraged by the brazen, commodified blackness being pushed by capitalist marketers. Didn’t Assata say that we could never be free while the American government and American capitalism remain intact? That is a call for total resistance that can’t be co-opted by bourgeois culture.

I recognize that we are in a new era.  Structural and ideological changes have profoundly altered the U.S. social formation. Even in the period of the most serious crisis of the capitalist order, the ethical framework of liberal capitalist individualism is still dominant.  And within the black community, post-modernism is in open competition for hegemony with our ever-developing radical tradition.

In this period of media-driven pseudo-opposition in the form of Ta-Nehisi Coates, Beyoncé or even Bernie Sanders, it is increasingly difficult to make the distinction between image and reality, especially when the production of images and symbols is controlled by dominant forces with an interest in keeping us all stupid.

It is only through ruthless criticism and a commitment to struggling beyond the accepted paradigms that we can penetrate the BS and engage in a politics that is truly subversive. And that kind of politics will not be brought to you in living color in the safety of your homes while you stuff yourself with poison foods and spirits to dull the mind.

Ajamu Baraka is a human rights activist, organizer and geo-political analyst.  Baraka is an Associate Fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) in Washington, D.C. and editor and contributing columnist for the Black Agenda Report. His latest publications include contributions to” Killing Trayvons: An Anthology of American Violence” (Counterpunch Books, 2014), “Imagine: Living in a Socialist USA”(HarperCollins, 2014)  and “Claim No Easy Victories: The Legacy of Amilcar Cabral” ( CODESRIA, 2013). He can be reached atwww.AjamuBaraka.com

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Beyonce and the Politics of Cultural Dominance

petsicides_roundup_chemicals_735_350Global Ban on Glyphosate Called for by Portuguese Medical Association President

By Christina Sarich, February 11 2016

President of the Portuguese Medical Association, José Manuel Silva, is calling for a worldwide ban on Big Ag’s most used herbicide, glyphosate. With so many health concerns surrounding the chemical, its days are surely numbered.

gmo-India-Farmers-anti-gmo-Demonstration-02_725_329Trojan Horse Arguments and the GMO Issue: Indian Food and Agriculture Under Attack

By Colin Todhunter, February 11 2016

In 2013, India’s former Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar accused US companies of derailing the nation’s oilseeds production programme. Similar claims had been made before. For instance, we could revisit the 1998 mustard oil tragedy.

ZIKA-CLOSE-UPMicrocephaly in Brazil. What are the Causes? “The Focus is on the Mosquito as the Vector”?

By Dr. David Halpin, February 10 2016

There are pictures of mothers cradling babies with shallow skulls in Brazil. The Brazilian health authorities have reported more than 3,500 microcephaly cases between October 2015 and January 2016. These babies are badly disabled because their brains are grossly underdeveloped…

labMore on the Zika Virus-Microcephaly Freak-out

By Dr. Gary G. Kohls, February 10 2016

Last week’s Duty to Warn column on the Zika virus/microcephaly “freak-out” (published by Global Research) has been widely circulated around the planetary blogosphere, but not, apparently (and not unsurprisingly), among the gatekeepers of information in Big Government, Big Medicine, Big Pharma, Big Media and the CDC despite many of those organizations being duly informed about the “unspeakable” reality of yet another vaccine-induced, iatrogenic (medical industry-caused) disease.

FRANCE-GOVERNMENT-UN-CLIMATEHow the Broad Climate Movement Has Failed Us

By James Jordan, February 08 2016

Only a few weeks after COP 21, the world experienced a wave of floods and extreme weather exacerbated by global warming.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: Health and Environment. GMOs, Viruses, and the Climate Change Movement.

Haggai Segal: Israel’s Terrorist Journalist

February 11th, 2016 by Ira Glunts

Image: Haggai Segal in 2011 (Photo: Nir Keidar)

I first became aware of Haggai Segal about eight months ago after noticing a sniping tweet (similar to the one below) that was sent about him by another Israeli journalist to the tweeter feed of his son, the well-known TV reporter, Amit Segal.  About a month ago, my curiosity about the elder Segal led me to obtain a copy of his book about the Jewish Underground.  I also followed him on Twitter until a response I sent, referring to his past crimes, led Segal to block me. When reading his twitter feed, which was not all that active, I was surprised that even journalists from so-called left-wing outlets, like Barak Ravid, treated him with great respect and affection. What follows is some of what I learned about Israel’s terrorist journalist.

In 1984 Haggai Segal was convicted of belonging to a terrorist organization, causing grievous harm, and possessing illegal firearms.  Of the two bombs he planted, one blew off the foot of Karim Khalaf, the then mayor of Ramallah.  A second, which was intended for the mayor of el Bireh, was discovered, but exploded when it was being deactivated, permanently blinding Suleiman Hirbawi, a Druze member of the Israeli Border Police.

The Jewish Underground, as Segal’s gang came to be known, was also responsible for blowing off both legs of the mayor of Nablus, Bassam Shakaa.  They attacked the Islamic College in Hebron, randomly killing three students and injuring 33 others. The Underground devoted much effort to developing a plan and stockpiling weapons, some stolen from the army, in a plot to blow up the Dome of the Rock.  They hoped that destroying the holy Muslim shrine would somehow inspire Israel to rebuild a Jewish Temple in its stead.  These are just the crimes we know about this gang carrying out over the course of at least five years of operation.

Some of Segal’s co-conspirators were caught by police after planting five large bombs under five public buses in East Jerusalem.  These bombs were set to explode at a time when they would have been full of Palestinian passengers.  The explosives were deactivated by the General Security Services and arrests were made that led to the detention of other suspects including Segal.

Segal was sentenced to five years imprisonment, but only served two.  His already light sentence was reduced as were those of all the other members of the Underground, due to intense public and political pressure.  It appears that many Israelis did not think of Segal’s actions as a crime.  This is a sentiment echoed by his two sons, who are also now journalists.

During his time behind bars, Segal wrote a history of the Jewish Underground and described his own role in it.  The book, Dear Brothers: The West Bank Jewish Underground, was published in Hebrew in 1987 and then in an English translation a year later.  The book is a paean to the members of the Underground and the tenets of the most extreme religious settler Zionism.  Segal wrote that the result of blowing up the Dome of the Rock Mosque would be “purifying the Temple Mount.” (p.156, all page numbers refer to the English edition of Dear Brothers)

In the book Segal portrays much of the Israeli public and many politicians as sympathetic to the Underground.  Among those he named as supporters was the late Prime Minister, Menachem Begin, who at one point ordered authorities not to investigate the Underground (p. 122).  Segal quoted Raphael Eitan, who was Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF), as saying jokingly to one of the conspirators before any of the Underground had been arrested:

Turn your pockets inside out….. I can see the detonator wires sticking out… Come off if ….  You think I don’t know?  Are you joking with us?  Next time you do something like this, coordinate it with us.  Had we known we wouldn’t have evicted Dawasmeh and Milhem [two West Bank mayors, p. 120].

The entire gang of arrested conspirators served their prison time together and according to Segal, had the status of celebrities in and outside of prison.  The long-time Israeli politician and career soldier, Binyamin Ben-Eliezar was mentioned as among their many frequent and admiring visitors (p. 122).

Although Segal has claimed that his role in the Underground only involved the bombing of the mayors, and that his participation was marginal, his book gives a completely different impression.  In a 2013 interview published in the Israeli daily, Ma’ariv, and quoted below, the journalist/terrorist admitted that Dear Brothers did indeed give the impression that he had a significant role in the Underground, but now says that impression was incorrect. However, it is difficult not to come to the conclusion when reading the book that Segal was, at the very least, an accessory before the fact in the crimes committed.

The descriptions of his co-conspirators are glowing and his criticism of their crimes minimal. Any moral qualms are, in the end, justified by invoking the actions of the perceived enemy, the Palestinians.  In the interview, almost 30 years after leaving prison, Segal is more restrained, but hardly penitent.

Ma’ariv — Do you have any regret today about the Jewish Underground?

Haggai Segal — Regret?  The word “regret” is not exact.  I have another way of looking at it.

M — Meaning?

HS — I said to the judge in court that I will not lie to him, and I won’t behave like some convicted criminal that begs for a pardon or expresses regret.  However, from my point of view this was a one-time event. It isn’t something that is appropriate now.

M — Then no regret, but are you sorry that you were in the Underground?

HS — I wrote a book on the affair, “Dear Brothers.”  It apparently magnified retroactively my participation with this group.  And the truth is that my participation was marginal.  I was involved in one episode, the attack on the mayors, who were evil doers without a doubt.

If the question is whether a private group should attack them [Palestinians?, ig], yes or no, then its seems the answer is no.  It is not healthy for the country.  In spite of this, I don’t have to mention to you, that when this happened, if you would have done a poll, you would have seen that most of the public didn’t like Basem al-Shakaa and Karim Khalaf.  [My translation of a 2013 interview inMa’ariv.]

Not exactly an expression of remorse that you would expect from a rehabilitated terrorist, is it?

The elder Segal has two sons who are also journalists. The older son, Arnon Segal, is a print journalist.  He writes a weekly column about temple activism for the newspaper for which his father serves as editor. He is also a temple mount activist, who is a member of The Headquarters for Temple Movements (Hebrew Facebook page).  These temple activists believe that a Jewish temple should be built on the present site of the Dome of the Rock, which is a 1300-year-old mosque, holy to Muslims all over the world.

Arnon is a frequent visitor to the al Aqsa plaza, the site of the Dome of the Rock and the al Aqsa Mosque.  He conducts “tours” at the site, events that are considered provocative in the extreme by Palestinians.  The “tours” often lead to violent confrontations between Palestinian worshippers and the Israeli police who guard the Jewish groups.  Visits to the plaza by religious Jewish settlers, like Arnon Segal, have been said to be one of the major causes of the current Intifada.

Arnon has publicly stated that as a child there was much talk at home about rebuilding the Jewish temple.  In other words, Arnon is a chip off the old block, and his insanity is further confirmed by the fact that he wants to sacrifice animals at the temple’s altar as was done in ancient times.  He believes that the sacrifices will lead to a time of redemption, at least for himself and his Jewish compatriots.

The younger son, Amit Segal, is a rising star on Israeli television news.  In a video interview with Mako News, (in Hebrew) a smiling and laughing Amit dismissed the fact that his father had been a violent criminal (begin 4 min and 50 sec.).  When the interviewer insisted that growing up with a father in prison for a violent crime must have been traumatizing, Amit categorically denied that the status of his father as a convicted criminal ever caused him discomfort.  Firstly, he said that there were other children his age that he knew who also had fathers in prison for their participation in the Underground.  Secondly, he reminisced about the support his father had in his hometown of Ofra, as well as in much of Israel.  Despite the smile and laugh, moments later Amit testily called the questions which continue to be directed toward him about his father’s lurid past, “bullshit” claiming they were just unwarranted personal attacks on him as a journalist.  To Amit, what his father did to the Palestinian mayors was a justifiable political act.  As he said to the interviewer: “it is not as if my father was in prison for embezzling money.”

This past July, Haggai Segal was appointed (Hebrew) by the right-wing Israeli Justice Minister, Ayelet Shaked, to a blue ribbon commission which will investigate incitement on the Internet.  The purpose of the group, according to Shaked, is to protect public officials from threats and slander while safeguarding the right of the public to free speech.  Despite some objections to appointing the elder Segal to the panel, including the resignation of one of the commission member in protest, Segal joined the commission.  Edna Arbel, a former Head of the Supreme Court, who is the chairperson of the commission, had also expressed reservations about the Segal appointment, but in the end agreed to his inclusion.

Children should not be judged by the sins of their fathers and it is only natural for sons to protect their fathers from hurtful criticism. However, learning about Haggai, Amit and Arnon Segal you can only think the worst of the Jewish-Israeli society which affords the three of them a prominent and respected place in the social order.

Who knows? Maybe one day Amiram Ben Uliel,a young religious Israeli settler currently awaiting trial for throwing a bomb into a home in the West Bank village of Duma, will become the Israeli Minister of Communications.

A tweet from Ha’aretz reporter Chaim Levinson that says, “Prediction: In 30 years Amiram Ben Uliel is a respected newspaper editor in Israel.”

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Haggai Segal: Israel’s Terrorist Journalist

President of the Portuguese Medical Association, José Manuel Silva, is calling for a worldwide ban on Big Ag’s most used herbicide, glyphosate. With so many health concerns surrounding the chemical, its days are surely numbered. [1]

The announcement follows the World Health Organization’s Cancer research arm, the IARC, called glyphosate ‘probably carcinogenic,’ followed by the State of California’s move to force Monsanto to label Round Up bottles with a carcinogen warning.

The Portuguese Parliament approved the new statutes of the Portuguese Medical Association, which allow for a significant improvement in its management, organization, and response time. Issues of ecological stewardship are among Silva’s concerns. He reminded his peers that even Pope Francis has been emphasizing ecological issues.

Among these is the use of glyphosate. This is the most used herbicide in Portuguese agriculture and urban areas for weed control.

As reported by SustainablePulse:

“In the last decade, glyphosate use has increased about 50%, with 1400 tons applied in 2010 alone. In total, more than 130 million tons a year are used around the world. Because of this glyphosate is routinely detected in food, air, rainwater and rivers, urine, blood and even breast milk.” [1]

Ecowatch states that between 1996 – 2011, the widespread use of Roundup Ready GMO crops sparked an increased herbicide use in the U.S. by 527 million pounds—even though Monsanto claimed its GMO crops would reduce pesticide and herbicide use.

Glyphosate is used so profusely that the legal limits have had to be stretched in many countries for it to be allowed. Numerous studies are now showing that the overwhelming amount of glyphosate used is causing increased risk factors the development of celiac disease, infertility, congenital malformations, kidney disease, autism and other pathologies.

‘Mortality in acute intoxication varies between 3.2 and 29.3%, mostly by pulmonary or kidney disease, or both. The various pathological mechanisms for glyphosate are well-known and include changes in the intestinal micro-biome, disruption of cytochrome P450, vitamin deficiencies, metal chelation, molybdenum and selenium deficiencies, etc.’

These findings are duplicated again and again, even though mouthpieces for the biotech industry swear that glyphosate in breast milk should be of no concern. The industry claims:

“Human exposure to glyphosate most often occurs from the very minute amounts that remain on food that is consumed. Since it is among the safest agents used to control weed growth the US Environmental Protection Agency has set an Allowable Daily Intake (ADI) of 1750 micrograms (ug) of glyphosate for every kilogram (kg) of body weight.”

But even if this is true, they are discounting ample evidence that more glyphosate is being used, and it interacts with other chemicals that cause environmental and health degradation.

Many studies argue that the amount of glyphosate people are being exposed to is far higher than earlier estimates provided by the industry. Americans are more at risk for increased exposure than Europeans, too, since so many of our crops – soy, corn, cotton, etc. are grown with Monsanto’s GM ‘Round Up Ready’ seeds.

article-GlyChart_US_EU

The president further notes that 3 of the studies referenced by the IARC showed a connection between glyphosate exposure and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), whose incidence has increased significantly in the last 30 years.

Furthermore, two additional bits of information suggest the IARC is erring on the conservative side. The first is that evaluations have focused on the active ingredient – glyphosate itself – even though the commercial formulation contains other chemical compounds, often called ‘inert ingredients.’

For example, herbicides such as glyphosate are often mixed with POEA, polyoxyethylene alkylamine, to make the herbicide glyphosate more efficient. Meanwhile, POEA is known to be more highly toxic than glyphosate.

Consistent research shows that a significant share of the pesticides’ total toxicity may be attributed to these adjuvants, or inert ingredients. Despite its benign reputation, Roundup is among the most toxic herbicides used anywhere in the world.

Moreover, human beings are exposed simultaneously to chemical compounds of multiple origins which may interact synergistically. Once you add glyphosate to the other 5.2 billion pounds of various pesticides used around the globe annually, it is a toxic mix like none one could imagine.

Silva argues:

“Taken together, this data suggests that a careful reflection on glyphosate’s future, and globally on the management of food chemical risks, is in order. The worldwide acknowledged precautionary principle says that, in the face of clear evidence of harm, action to protect human health and the environment should not wait for final scientific evidence. For glyphosate the conclusion is clear: this herbicide should be banned worldwide.”

He says that in Portugal the Government and the Directorate-General for Health must take the lead. Economic interests cannot, and must not, suppress the moral imperative of citizen health protection. The sluggishness of legal procedures does not excuse inertia either.

Notes:

SustainablePulse

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Global Ban on Glyphosate Called for by Portuguese Medical Association President

US FEMA Detainment Camps

February 11th, 2016 by Geopolitical Monitor

Article originally published by the Geopolitical Monitor on the 20th of September 2007 and cross-posted by GR on January 10, 2008.

Contents

1. Executive Summary
2. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
3. Powers and Preparations for a Declared State of Emergency

4. Detainment Camps

5. End Notes

1.    Executive Summary

The United States Federal Emergency Management Agency has numerous detainment camps throughout the United States. Some camps have been recently constructed and / or renovated and are fully staffed. The existence of the camps coupled with Presidential Executive Orders giving the President and Department of Homeland Security (of which FEMA is now part) control over ‘national essential functions’ in the event of ‘catastrophic emergency’ have resulted in concerns that the camps will be used to forcefully detain American citizens for unconstitutional purposes.

2.     Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)

History

FEMA was created on April 1, 1979 pursuant to President Jimmy Carter’s Executive Order 12127. It amalgamated the Federal Insurance Administration, the National Fire Prevention and Control Administration, the National Weather Service Community Preparedness Program, the Federal Preparedness Agency and the Federal Disaster Assistance Administration activities formerly carried out by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. It also took over Civil Defense from the Department of Defense, which was in charge of preparing citizens for military attack. [1]

In 1993 Bill Clinton turned the directorship of FEMA into a Cabinet position. In 2003 FEMA became part of the Department of Homeland Security’s Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate. [2]

       Stated Purpose

The stated purpose of FEMA is to “reduce the loss of life and property and protect the Nation from all hazards, including natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other man-made disasters, by leading and supporting the nation in a risk-based, comprehensive emergency management system of preparedness, protection, response, recovery, and mitigation.” [3]

Recent Operations

FEMA’s most notable large-scale operation in recent times was in the aftermath of August 2005 hurricane Katrina, which occurred along the north-central Gulf Coast, particularly affecting New Orleans, Louisiana. FEMA’s response to the disaster was widely criticized due to a slow and inadequate response, blocking external private and public assistance from individuals and groups including the Red Cross, [4] banning photographs of the dead [5] and confiscating reporter’s equipment [6] and homeowner’s registered firearms. [7]

The 2006 Congressional report on FEMA’s handling of Katrina stated that it was “… a national failure, an abdication of the most solemn obligation to provide for the common welfare,” [8]

       Criticisms

Some have criticized FEMA’s failure as being due to is focus on ‘civil defense’ continuity of government and terrorism response programs to the detriment of its natural disaster response readiness. It is further alleged that hurricane Katrina was used to test run of a continuity of government program, allowing FEMA to rehearse rounding up and relocating large numbers of people to camps, suspending their constitutional rights and militarizing the region [9] with the help of private military contractors (mercenaries). Black Water USA, a private security company, was used in the aftermath of Katrina. [10]

3.     Powers and Preparations for a Declared State of Emergency

       REX-84 and Operation Garden Plot

Readiness Exercise 1984 (REX-84) is an emergency response program involving the implementation of martial law, the movement of civilian populations and the arrest and detainment of segments of the population. A rehearsal of the program was carried out April 5-13, 1984. It was led by FEMA and the Department of Defense and involved the coordination of 34 other Federal departments and agencies. [11] REX-84 was mentioned during the Iran-Contra hearings [12] and publicly exposed by the Miami Herald on Sunday July 5th, 1987. [13]

Similar large-scale emergency preparedness drills have taken place regularly since then. The most recently announced, organized by NORTHCOM, are scheduled for October 15-20. [14] Some assert that the drills continue to include preparations for the suspension of the Constitution and the implementation of martial law. [15]

Operation Garden Plot is a United States Army and National Guard program under control of the US Northern Command (NORTHCOM) to provide Federal military support during domestic civil disturbances. One example of the program’s implementation was during the 1992 Los Angeles riots when US Army and Marine forces were used in conjunction with the California National Guard. [16] In Los Angeles an Executive Order was made to permit the use of the Federal army to uphold domestic laws pursuant to the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act, which places restrictions on the domestic use of the military for law enforcement purposes. [17]

Recently, however, Section 1076 Public Law 109-364, or the “John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007” (H.R.5122) has amended Posse Comitatus and The Insurrection Act (which also places limits on domestic military deployment) to allow the Federal government to unilaterally take control of state National Guards and position Federal troops anywhere in the country during a ‘public emergency’. [18]

       Executive Orders

Throughout the 1960s numerous Presidential Executive Orders were issued authorizing Federal agencies to take over essential functions in the case of a declared emergency. The powers include, among many others, the authority of the Federal government to take over transportation infrastructure including highways and seaports (10990), food resources and farms (10998) and mobilize citizens into government supervised work brigades (11000). [19]

On May 9, 2007 President George Bush reasserted the role of the Federal government during a declared emergency by issuing Executive Order NSPD 51/ HSPD-20. The Order states that in the event of a ‘catastrophic emergency’ all ‘national essential functions’ may be taken over by the Executive branch of government and the Department of Homeland Security (including FEMA). [20]

4.     Detainment Camps

       Developments and Construction

In August 2002, then Attorney General John Ashcroft called for American citizens who are deemed ‘enemy combatants’ to be detained indefinitely without charge and independently of the judiciary. [21] This legal position was upheld in the case of a US citizen detained abroad by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a January 2003 ruling. [22]

In October 2006 the Military Commissions Act was passed by Congress. [23] The legislation applies to non-US citizens and permits individuals labeled as ‘enemy combatants’ to be imprisoned indefinitely and without charge. It also denies non-military tribunal judicial review of detainment (Section 7), disregards international treaties such as the Geneva Convention, and states that it is the President who defines what constitutes torture (Sections 5 & 6).

In January of 2007 the American Civil Liberties Union released a report based on documents obtained by a Freedom of Information Act suit showing that the Pentagon had monitored at least “186 anti-military protests in the United States and collected more than 2,800 reports involving Americans in an anti-terrorist threat database.” [24]

For some time FEMA has been renovating and constructing new detention camps throughout the country. In January 2006 Haliburton subsidiary KBR announced that it had been awarded an “indefinite delivery / indefinite quantity contract to construct detention facilities for the Department of Homeland Security worth a maximum of $385 million over 5 years. [25]

       Stated Purpose

Little has been said about the purpose of the detainment camps but when official comment has been made it has stated that the camps are for the temporary detainment of illegal immigrants. [26]

Quantity and Locations

Citizens who are concerned about the purpose and potential use of the detainment camps have documented and, when possible, filmed the detainment facilities. A current estimate of the number of detainment camps is over 800 located in all regions of the United States with varying maximum capacities. [27] If one includes government buildings currently used for other purposes the number is far greater. Video of renovated but empty detainment camps has also been released. [28]

5.    End Notes

[1] Executive Order 12127–Federal Emergency Management Agency
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo/eo-12127.htm.

[2] Federal Emergency Management Agency. “About FEMA” April 1, 2007 <http://www.fema.gov/about/history.shtm>.

[3] Ibid.

[4]  Federal Emergency Management Agency. News Release. “First Responders Urged Not To Respond To Hurricane Impact Areas Unless Dispatched By State, Local
Authorities” 29 August 2005  http://www.fema.gov/news/newsrelease.fema?id=18470;

Rodgers, Ann. “Homeland Security won’t let Red Cross deliver food” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. 3 September 2005 <http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05246/565143.stm;

Zarend-Kubatko, Jill. “Disaster touches area residents” Valley Life. 2 September 2005 http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=15147862&BRD=>.

[5] Editorandpublisher.com. “Journalist Groups Protest FEMA Ban on Photos of Dead” 7
September 2005 http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001055768>.

[6] Gebauer, Matthias. “The Eye of the Hurricane” Spiegel Online International.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,373590,00.html>.

[7] Berenson, Alex and Timothy Williams. “New Orleans Begins Confiscating Firearms as Water Recedes” New York Times. 8 September 2005 http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/08/national/nationalspecial
08cnd-storm.html?ex=1189483200&en=b7a5f1efcf668506&ei=5070
>.

[8] Cable News Network (CNN). “Report: Katrina response a ‘failure of leadership’:
Homeland Security secretary described as ‘detached’” 14 February 2006
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/13/katrina.congress/index.html?iref=newssearch>.

[9] Nimmo, Kurt. “Attacks on democratic rights, breaching legal barriers: FEMA and
Katrina: REX-84 Revisited” Global Research. 11 September 2005 www.//globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=NIM20050911&articleId=929>.

[10] Scahill, Jeremy. “In the Black(water)” The Nation. 22 May 2006
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060605/scahill>.

[11] Reynolds, Diana. “The Rise of the National Security State: FEMA and the NSC.” Publiceye.org. 1990 <http://www.publiceye.org/liberty/fema/Fema_1.html>.

[12] “Suspension of American Constitution Oliver North.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8tQAYYtLok&mode=related&search=>.

[13] Chardy, Alfonso. “Reagan Aides and the ‘Secret’ Government.” The Miami Herald. 5 July 1987 http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/secret_white_house_plans.htm>.

[14] United States Northern Command. “Exercise Vigilant Shield ’08 slated for October.” 30 August 2007 http://www.northcom.mil/News/2007/083007.html>.

[15] Rogers, Lee. “NORTHCOM Plans 5 Day Martial Law Exercise.” Intel Strike. 5 September 2007 http://intelstrike.com/?p=57>.

[16] Global Security. “Operation Garden Plot JTF-LAJoint Task Force Los Angeles”<http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/jtf-la.htm>.

[17] Morales, Frank. “U.S. Military Civil Disturbance Planning:
The War At Home” Covert Action Quarterly, #69 Spring / Summer 2000. http://cryptome.org/garden-plot.htm>.

[18] Morales, Frank. “Bush Moves Towards Martial Law” Toward Freedom. 26 October 2006 <http://www.towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/911/>.

[19] Anonymous. “FEMA Concentration Camps: Locations and Executive Orders” Friends of Liberty. http://www.sianews.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1062>.

[20] The White House. “Presidential Directive NSPD 51, HSPD-20.” 9 May 2007 <http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070509-12.html>.

[21] Turley, Jonathan. “Camps for Citizens: Ashcroft’s Hellish Vision” Los Angeles Times. 14 August 2002 <http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0814-05.htm>.

[22] Cable News Network (CNN). “Americans may be held as ‘enemy combatants,’ appeals court rules.” 8 January 2003 http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/01/08/enemy.combatants>.

[23] The Library of Congress. Military Commissions Act of 2006. 17 October 2007 http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:S.3930:>.

[24] American Civil Liberties Union. “ACLU Report Shows Widespread Pentagon Surveillance of Peace Activists” Press Release. 17 January 2007 http://www.aclu.org/safefree/spyfiles/28024prs20070117.html>.

[25] Halliburton Public Relations “KBR Awarded U.S. Department of Homeland Security Contingency Support Project for Emergency Support Services.” 24 January 2006 http://www.kbr.com/news/2006/govnews_060124.aspx>.

[26] Ibid.

Scott, Peter Dale. “Homeland Security Contracts for Vast New Detention Camps.” New America Media. 8 February 2006 http://news.pacificnews.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=eed74d9d44c30493706fe03f4c9b3a77>.

[27] Friends of Liberty “FEMA Concentration Camps: Locations and Executive Orders.”
http://www.sianews.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1062>.

[28] FEMA Camp Footage (Concentrations Camps in USA). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0P-hvPJPTi4.

Palestinian human rights activists are calling on Oscar nominees not to accept travel vouchers supplied by the Israeli government as part of the gift bag that will be given to the nominees in the acting and directing categories.

statement from the Israeli ministry of tourism boasted that its initiative is a chance to have “leading opinion-formers” share their visit “among millions of fans and followers”.

Omar Barghouti from the Palestinian BDS National Committee, the largest coalition of Palestinian civil society organisations that leads the international Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, said:

“There are no Hunger Games in Gaza but there is real hunger, and it is induced by years of Israeli occupation and siege. We hope Oscar nominees will take the moral path of rejecting this free propaganda gift from Capitol while its brutal troops and settlers burn and colonize our District 12.”

In 2012, it was revealed that Israel used “calorie count” to severely limit food supply to the 1.8 million Palestinian under siege in Gaza. A top advisor to Israel’s prime minister in 2006 said:

“The idea is to put the Palestinians on a diet, but not to make them die of hunger.”

“Israel is desperately trying to fight its increasing international isolation through bribes and intimidation rather than by ending its occupation and apartheid.”

An increasing number of Israeli politicians and intellectuals have admitted that Israel is practicing apartheid against Palestinians. The publisher of Haaretz, a prominent Israeli daily, has recently written that “only international pressure will end Israeli apartheid.”

A recent US poll has shown a significant shift among the Democratic Party’s “opinion elites,” whereby 47% of the party’s “opinion elites” viewed Israel as a “racist state” and as high as 31% supported boycott and sanctions against it.

“Just as Jonathan Demme and Martin Scorsese founded Filmmakers United Against Apartheid to protest the racist regime in South Africa in the 1980s,” added Barghouti,

“Palestinian artists and civil society expect Hollywood figures to act with conscience by refusing to lend their name to Israel’s desperate attempts to cover up its war crimes and racism against the Palestinian people.”

“The proposed tour sets out to create the impression that occupied East Jerusalem, including the Old City, is part of Israel despite the fact that the UN, including the US, recognises it as occupied Palestinian territory. This comes at a time when Israel is accelerating its ethnic cleansing and killing of Palestinians in Jerusalem and entrenching its colonialism and apartheid policies.”

Two of this year’s Oscar nominees, Mark Ruffalo and Mark Rylance, have criticised Israeli policies.

The European Union has issued guidelines stating that governments should not recognise Israeli sovereignty over occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem.

The news about the decision of the Academy to allow Israel to use the awards as a propaganda vehicle comes in the midst of the #OscarsSoWhite scandal. Israel has over 50 racist laws that directly discriminate against its indigenous Palestinian citizens on the basis of race, meeting the UN definition of the crime of apartheid.

“The Academy’s association with Israel further tarnishes its image regarding racism and evokes memories of Hollywood’s past collaboration with criminal regimes,” said Barghouti.

The nonviolent BDS movement for Palestinian rights, launched by Palestinian civil society in 2005, seeks freedom, justice and equality in accordance with international law.

Israeli officials associated with the “Brand Israel” campaign have repeatedly admitted that Israel uses culture as a propaganda tool to show its “prettier face” and whitewash its crimes in an attempt to counteract the fast growing reach and impact of the BDS movement.

Celebrities such as Roger Waters, Elvis Costello and Lauryn Hill have refused to perform in Israel. Thousands of artists and cultural figures in Canada, South Africa, Ireland, the UK, Norway, and elsewhere have come out in support of an institutional cultural boycott of Israel.

Major European firms VeoliaOrange and CRH have all recently quit Israel as a result of BDS campaigns.

Foreign direct investment in Israel dropped by 46% in 2014 as compared to 2013, according to a UN report, partially due to BDS campaigning, as stated by one of the report’s authors.

The Israel Export Institute has revealed that Israel’s exports in 2015 have dropped by 7% over 2014.

Moody’s, a leading credit ratings agency, has warned that “the Israeli economy could suffer should BDS gain greater traction.

Several mainline US churches and student governments across the US have voted to support divestment from companies and banks that are implicated in Israeli violations of international law.

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Palestinians Call on Oscar Nominees to Reject Israel Propaganda Trip

Hillary Clinton’s Very Bad Night

February 11th, 2016 by Robert Parry

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s stunning 22-point loss to Sen. Bernie Sanders in New Hampshire is even more devastating when looked at in the context of the modern history of this first-in-the-nation primary: No one has ever lost by such a margin and gone on to win the presidency.

Among Democrats, no one who lost by even half that margin in New Hampshire has recovered to win the party’s nomination. In 2008, Barack Obama lost to Hillary Clinton by 2.6 percentage points; in 1992, Bill Clinton lost to Paul Tsongas by 8.4 percentage points; in 1984, Walter Mondale lost to Gary Hart by 9.4 percentage points; in 1972, George McGovern lost to Edmund Muskie by 9.3 percentage points.

In two of those cases, New Hampshire did favor neighboring politicians – Sen. Tsongas from Massachusetts and Sen. Muskie from Maine – but Tuesday’s 22-point margin for Vermont Sen. Sanders cannot be explained simply by making the “nearby-favorite-son” argument. Sanders swept nearly every demographic group, including women, losing only to Clinton among New Hampshire’s senior citizens and the state’s small number of non-white voters. Sanders’s margin among young voters was particularly impressive, 82 percent, roughly the same proportion as the Iowa caucuses last week.

If Hillary Clinton hopes to overcome her New Hampshire drubbing, she would have to look for encouragement from the legacy of Republican George W. Bush who lost the 2000 New Hampshire primary to Sen. John McCain by a margin of 49 percent to 30.2 percent, but even Bush’s landslide loss represented a smaller margin of defeat than Clinton suffered on Tuesday.

A Worried Establishment

Clinton’s failure to generate momentum or much enthusiasm in her pursuit of the Democratic presidential nomination presents the Democratic Party establishment with a dilemma, since many senior party leaders fret about the risk that Sanders, a self-described “democratic socialist,” might lead the Democrats to the kind of electoral disaster that Sen. George McGovern did in 1972.

Though the Democrats rebounded in 1976 with Jimmy Carter’s victory amid Republican disarray over Richard Nixon’s Watergate scandal, the Republicans soon reestablished their domination over presidential politics for a dozen years with Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. For the Democrats to reclaim the White House in 1992, it took a “New Democrat,” Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton, to repackage the Democratic message into one proposing “neo-liberal” (anti-regulatory, free-trade) economics, embracing Republican tough-on-crime tactics, and rejecting “Big Government.”

President Clinton also emphasized “micro-policies,” best illustrated by his call for “school uniforms,” rather than proposing “macro-policies” for addressing poverty and other structural problems facing Americans. Though the economy performed fairly well under Clinton – his success lessening pressures from liberal groups – he also opened the door to Wall Street and other corporate excesses (by supporting deregulation of the financial and media industries).

At that point in the 1990s, the “neo-liberal” strategies had not been tested in the U.S. economy and thus many Americans were caught off-guard when this new anti-regulatory, free-trade fervor contributed to a hollowing out of the Great American Middle Class and a bloated Gilded Age for the top One Percent.

The full consequences of neo-liberalism became painfully apparent with the Wall Street Crash of 2008 and the resulting Great Recession. The suffering and hopelessness now affecting many Americans, including the white working class, has led to an angry political rejection of the American Establishment as reflected in the insurgent candidacies of Donald Trump and Sanders.

A Legacy Campaign

Hillary Clinton (like Jeb Bush) faces the misfortune of running a legacy campaign at a time when the voters are angry about the legacies of both “ruling families,” the Clintons and the Bushes. Though Sanders is a flawed candidate faulted for his muddled foreign-policy prescriptions, he (like Trump) has seized the mantle of fighting the Establishment at a time when millions of Americans are fed up with the Establishment and its self-serving policies.

In some ways, the Iowa and New Hampshire results represented the worst outcome for establishment Democrats. Clinton’s razor-thin victory in Iowa and her slashing defeat in New Hampshire have left Democratic strategists uncertain as to whether they should rally behind her – despite her lukewarm to freezing-cold reception from voters – or try to recruit another candidate who could cut off Sanders’s path to the nomination and represent a “more electable” choice in November.

If Clinton continues to stumble, there will be enormous pressure from Democratic leaders to push her aside and draw Vice President Joe Biden or perhaps Sen. Elizabeth Warren into the race.

If that were to occur — and, granted, the Clintons are notoriously unwilling to admit defeat — the Democrats could experience a political dynamic comparable to 1968 when anti-Vietnam War Sen. Eugene McCarthy challenged the prohibitive favorite President Lyndon Johnson and came close enough in New Hampshire to prompt Sen. Robert Kennedy to jump into the race — and to convince Johnson to announce that he would not seek another term.

Many idealistic Democrats who had backed McCarthy in his seemingly quixotic fight against Johnson were furious against “Bobby-come-lately,” setting up a battle between two anti-war factions of the Democratic Party. Of course, the history of the 1968 campaign was marred by the assassinations of Martin Luther King Jr. and then Robert Kennedy, followed by the chaotic Chicago convention, which handed the nomination to Johnson’s Vice President Hubert Humphrey.

Then, after Republican Richard Nixon secretly sabotaged Johnson’s Vietnam peace talks, Nixon managed to eke out a victory over Humphrey.

While Campaign 2016 reflects a very different America – and the key Democratic issue is “income inequality,” not the Vietnam War – some parallels could become obvious if the presumptive nominee (Johnson in 1968 and Clinton in 2016) is pushed out or chooses to step aside.

Then, the Democratic choice would be plunging ahead with a back-bench candidate (McCarthy in 1968 and Sanders in 2016) or looking for a higher-profile and more mainstream alternative, such as Biden who (like Humphrey) would offer continuity with the sitting president or Warren who shares many of Sanders’s positions (like Robert Kennedy did with McCarthy) but who might be more acceptable to “party regulars.”

A Warren candidacy also might lessen the disappointment of women who wanted to see Hillary Clinton as the first female president. At the moment, however, the question is: Did New Hampshire deal a death blow to Hillary Clinton’s campaign or can she become the first candidate in modern U.S. political history to bounce back from a 22-point loss in the first-in-the-nation primary?

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America’s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com).

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Hillary Clinton’s Very Bad Night

US Federal Reserve chair Janet Yellen testified Wednesday before the Financial Services Committee of the House of Representatives, presenting the central bank’s semiannual Monetary Policy Report. Yellen will appear today before the Senate Banking Committee.

In her opening statement and her replies to questions from Democrats and Republicans on the committee, Yellen sought to reassure financial markets in the US and around the world that have taken huge losses since the beginning of the year and are being further pummeled by recessionary pressures and signs of a new banking crisis.

Yellen broadly hinted that the Fed would hold off on a further increase in its benchmark federal funds interest rate when its policy-making Federal Open Market Committee meets again in mid-March. At the same time, while not ruling out a possible reversal of the quarter percentage point increase the central bank imposed in December, its first interest hike in nine years, Yellen said the Fed stood by its announced intention to institute incremental and gradual increases in the course of 2016.

Yellen’s prepared statement, released early Tuesday morning along with the Monetary Policy Report, helped fuel a rebound on European stock markets. They had fallen for six straight sessions amid new indications of slowing growth in the US as well as China and further declines in the price of oil and other industrial commodities, combined with mounting concerns over the financial stability of major European banks.

US stocks initially rose in response to Yellen’s testimony, but her assurances proved insufficient to overcome the general mood of gloom and foreboding. The US indexes closed mixed, with the Nasdaq registering a gain, the Standard & Poor’s 500 ending flat, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average losing 99 points.

The slide toward global recession was sharply expressed this week in the descent of Japanese government bond yields into negative territory. In the US, the yield on 10-year Treasury bonds has plunged well below 2 percent, reflecting the same deflationary trends.

The proliferation of super-low and even negative interest rates is wreaking havoc on banks that remain burdened with bad loans and stand to incur more losses from energy-related assets that are souring due to the collapse of oil prices and its impact on energy revenues and profits.

Bank stocks in Europe are down an average of 27 percent so far this year, with Deutsche Bank, Germany’s biggest, suffering a loss of more than 40 percent. In the US, bank stocks are down 18 percent, with shares of Bank of America and Morgan Stanley having dropped 27 percent and 28 percent, respectively.

US stocks overall have fallen by more than 9 percent since the beginning of the year, and stocks in Europe have declined even more sharply. In the US, tens of thousands of job cuts have been announced in both the industrial and retail sectors. Among the major non-retail firms announcing layoffs are Johnson & Johnson, Norfolk Southern, US Steel, Yahoo and Altria. Energy and mining firms have laid off thousands more workers.

The worsening social crisis impacting broad sections of the US population is reflected in the wave of store closings and layoffs by major retail chains, including Wal-Mart (269 stores, 16,000 job cuts), Macy’s (40 stores, 4,500 layoffs) and Sears-Kmart (more than 50 stores, thousands of job cuts).

US economic growth is estimated by the government to have slowed to 0.7 percent in the final quarter of 2015, and data on manufacturing continues to show recessionary conditions.

US corporate profits are also down. Profits reported by firms in the S&P 500 index for the fourth quarter of 2015 are down 4.1 percent from a year earlier. Sales are down 3.5 percent. This means profits have declined, year-on-year, for two straight quarters, the first time that has occurred since 2009. Sales have fallen for four consecutive quarters.

The near panic in financial circles was summed up in a statement released last week by strategists at Citibank, which declared, “The world appears to be trapped in a circular reference death spiral.” Predicting that the world economy would grow by only 2.7 percent this year, far below the already depressed projections of the International Monetary Fund, Citibank warned of “a proper/full global recession and dangerous disorder across financial markets.” Its report concluded, “The stakes are high, perhaps higher than they have ever been in the post-World War II era.”

Leading economists, including former treasury secretary Lawrence Summers, are raising their estimates of the chances of a recession in the US this year. Summers, echoing estimates by JPMorgan Chase, puts the likelihood at one in three. Others say the recession has already begun.

In her statement and her responses to members of the House committee, Yellen played down the prospect of an economic contraction in the US. However, she acknowledged the slowdown in the US and pointed to other trends, such as falling share prices, higher interest rates for high-risk borrowers, and a further appreciation of the dollar, as increasing the downside risks to the economy. She implied that these trends could lead the Fed to hold off on further interest rate hikes.

Significantly, she also pointed in some detail to negative international trends and said the Fed was monitoring them closely in considering whether and when to again raise rates.

“As is always the case,” Yellen said in her opening remarks,

“the economic outlook is uncertain. Foreign economic developments, in particular, pose risks to US economic growth. Most notably…declines in the foreign exchange value of the renminbi have intensified uncertainty about China’s exchange rate policy and the prospects for its economy.

“This uncertainty led to increased volatility in global financial markets and, against the background of persistent weakness abroad, exacerbated concerns about the outlook for global growth. These growth concerns…contributed to the recent fall in the prices of oil and other commodities. In turn, low commodity prices could trigger financial stresses in commodity-producing firms in many countries. Should any of these downside risks materialize, foreign activity and the demand for US exports could weaken and financial market conditions could tighten further. …”

She once again stressed that any further rate increases would be small, that the Fed’s monetary policy would remain “accommodative,” and that the federal funds rate would remain below normal levels for the foreseeable future.

In a further reassurance to banks and hedge funds demanding a continuation of cheap credit, Yellen added,

“Of course, monetary policy is by no means on a preset course. We will take into account…readings on financial and international developments. … If the economy were to disappoint, a lower path of the federal funds rate would be appropriate.”

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Fed Seeks to Reassure Markets on Rate Increases amid Mounting Signs of Slump and Financial Crisis

Torture, Murder and Donald Trump

February 11th, 2016 by Patrick Martin

Only four days after his public defense of torture and “a hell of a lot worse” in US military-intelligence interrogations, billionaire Donald Trump added assassination to his foreign policy arsenal as well. Speaking Wednesday on the “CBS This Morning” program, Trump said that his solution to the US conflict with North Korea over its nuclear weapons program would be to eliminate North Korean leader Kim Jong-un.

“I would get China to make that guy disappear in one form or another very quickly,” Trump told interviewer Norah O’Donnell. When she followed up by asking if that meant having Kim Jong-un assassinated, Trump replied, “Well, I’ve heard of worse things, frankly. I mean, this guy’s a bad dude.”

Trump was responding to the declaration by US Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who told a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing Tuesday that Pyongyang had made progress in developing both nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles, and could conceivably reach parts of the United States with a nuclear warhead.

The billionaire demagogue, fresh off a victory in the New Hampshire primary Tuesday that confirmed his status as the frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination, said the US government could engineer Kim’s removal through China. Beijing has “absolute control” over North Korea, he said, and “I would force the Chinese to do it—economically.”

“I wouldn’t leave it up to them. I would say, ‘You gotta do it. You gotta do it,’” Trump said.

If China refuses, he said he would repeat the demand and “do it a little more forcefully.”

Trump was escalating the thuggish, gangster language that has been the hallmark of his campaign for the Republican presidential nomination. At last Saturday’s debate in New Hampshire, he declared his support for waterboarding, adding, “I would bring back waterboarding and I’d bring back a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding.”

At a campaign rally the next day, Trump used a vulgar term for Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, one of his major rivals for the nomination, because Cruz expressed some reservations about waterboarding, suggesting that its use should be infrequent rather than widespread.

The candidate took the same tack in a series of appearances on Sunday network television interview programs. On CNN, NBC and ABC he was asked about his comments on waterboarding, and each instance he reiterated his support for torture, although he declined to spell out what methods of interrogation would be “a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding.”

On CNN, interviewer Jake Tapper pointed out that US law bans treatment of prisoners that causes “serious and nontransitory mental harm,” like waterboarding, then asked Trump, “How would you bring it back, if it is currently a war crime under US law?”

Trump responded, “I would go through a process and get it declassified, frankly.” He portrayed this form of torture as necessary retribution for the methods of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, even if it was ineffective in extracting information. “They laugh at us when they hear that we’re not going to approve waterboarding,” he said,

“and then they will have a James Foley and others where they cut off their heads. And, you know, you can say what you want. I have no doubt that it does work in terms of information and other things, and maybe not always, but nothing works always. But I have no doubt that it works. But, more importantly, when they’re chopping off the heads of people, and innocent people in most cases, beyond waterboarding is fine with me.”

On NBC’s “Meet the Press” program, interviewer Chuck Todd asked Trump what was worse than waterboarding, but Trump declined to define it.

Todd suggested, referring to ISIS, “They want to be barbaric. We’re not barbaric.” Trump disagreed, declaring, “OK. They can do it, but we can’t?” Then he added, “You can do waterboarding and you can go a step beyond waterboarding. It wouldn’t bother me even a little bit.”

On the ABC program “This Week,” interviewer George Stephanopoulos asked directly, “As president, you would authorize torture?” Trump replied, “I would absolutely authorize something beyond waterboarding. And believe me, it will be effective. If we need information, George, you have our enemy cutting heads off of Christians and plenty of others, by the hundreds, by the thousands.”

This exchange followed:

STEPHANOPOULOS: Do we win by being more like them?

TRUMP: Yes. I’m sorry. You have to do it that way. And I’m not sure everybody agrees with me. I guess a lot of people don’t. We are living in a time that’s as evil as any time that there has ever been. You know, when I was a young man, I studied Medieval times. That’s what they did, they chopped off heads. That’s what we have …

STEPHANOPOULOS: So we’re going to chop off heads?

TRUMP: We’re going to do things beyond waterboarding perhaps, if that happens to come.

Stephanopoulos was the only interviewer to pose the torture question to another candidate, in this case Florida Senator Marco Rubio, a Republican. Rubio declared that there shouldn’t be public discussion of specific interrogation techniques, such as waterboarding, to avoid alerting suspected terrorists. But he made it clear he had no differences with Trump on resuming waterboarding and other forms of torture-interrogation.

With that, the corporate-controlled media has turned the page, more or less dropping the subject. The question was not raised during the saturation coverage of the New Hampshire primary Tuesday. Network television news broadcasts on Wednesday did not mention Trump’s call to assassinate Kim Jong-un or his campaign for torture.

Significantly, neither Democratic candidate, Senator Bernie Sanders or former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, criticized Trump for his embrace of torture and murder. Clinton, of course, has her own record of endorsing barbarism, with her notorious comment during the US-NATO war against Libya, referring laughingly to the torture and murder of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, “We came. We saw. He died.”

Clinton was part of the Obama administration during the initial campaign of drone missile assassinations, including the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki in 2011 and his teenage son two weeks afterward. She was in the cabinet when Obama made his decision to block any prosecution of CIA officials for torture, when he suppressed evidence of torture, including graphic photos, and while the CIA fought a protracted battle against the release of the Senate Intelligence Committee report on torture.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Torture, Murder and Donald Trump

The United States and the 27 other NATO-member nations on Wednesday agreed to a new multinational force that will patrol the eastern European border setting up what many believe is “a dangerous dynamic…that has every possibility of spiraling out of control.”

During a press conference on Wednesday, alliance ministers, who are meeting this week for a two-day conference in Brussels, Belgium, cast themselves as defenders against Russian aggression—a charge that Russian officials have repeatedly denied.

NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg told reporters that the force will rotate in and out of eastern European member states. The new strategy includes “a network of new alliance outposts, forces on rotation, warehoused equipment and regular war games, all backed by a rapid-reaction force,” which includes “air, naval and special operations units of up to 40,000 personnel,” Reuters reports.

Stoltenberg said the deployment “will be multinational to make clear that an attack against one ally is any attack against all allies and that the alliance as a whole will respond.”

Robert Bridge, an American journalist based in Moscow, said Wednesday that the new fighting force is clearly a provocation.

“The result of this massive increase of spending will be more military hardware, more troops, more provocative exercises on Russia’s western flank and much more tension between Moscow and NATO—which once upon a time promised Russia it would not expand ‘one inch east’ following the collapse of the Soviet Union,” Bridge wrote.

“The fact is,” he continued, “from Russia’s point of view, foreign troops are there; they will have a constant presence regardless as to how they are defined. And that is how NATO—not Russia—is aggravating tensions with Russia.”

Russia officials have also maintained that the heightened tensions are the result of European leaders, and western media, over-hyping the threat.

“The leaders of NATO member states and a number of European countries, especially Britain, the Nordic countries, the Baltic counties neighboring us, Poland, Romania and some others, are whipping up ‘Russia’s threat’ myth,” Russia’s foreign minister Sergei Lavrov said in an interview with the Moskovsky Komsomolets daily.

“There is the impression that Russia is nearly the main stumbling block in international relations, because today the dominant media sources spread news from only the Western point of view,” he added. Lavrov and Stoltenberg are scheduled to meet later this week at the Munich Security Conference in Germany.

What’s more, according to a Kremlin spokesperson, the Russian government was given no advance warning of the new deployment.

“We don’t understand what has provoked these actions,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova told reporters after NATO’s announcement. “The goal is to keep Russia in check.”

The news follows last week’s announcement by U.S. President Barack Obama that he is ratcheting up the deployment of heavy weapons and armored vehicles to bolster defenses along Europe’s eastern flank, and $3.4 billion in new defense spending to pay for those arms, equipment, and training resources.

NATO leaders are expected to formally endorse the plans at a summit in Poland this July.

 

Lauren McCauley is a staff writer for Common Dreams.

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on After ‘Whipping Up Myth of Russian Threat,’ NATO Approves New Fighting Force

Can the Establishment Fix Its Bernie Sanders Problem?

February 11th, 2016 by Shamus Cooke

The Democrats’ fight against Bernie is appearing futile. Like a python choking on an elephant, they’ve miscalculated. The Party elites underestimated their opponent, and with each new attack the snake swallows an extra inch, harming only itself. Establishment figureheads are taking turns ruining their reputation as they attempt to ruin Bernie’s.  

The U.S. ruling class as a whole revealed the depth of its crisis in this election: not since the Vietnam War have both wings of the establishment thoroughly discredited themselves. The Republican wing combusted quickly while the Democrats have chosen a slower, more torturous form of self-harm.

The problem with both parties is their inability to serve the super rich while successfully appealing to voters. As inequality widens, democracy suffers. Focusing on the “billionaire class” has catapulted Bernie’s campaign, but the presidency is not an institution that just anybody is allowed to capture.

How will this all play out? Nobody knows. Polls swing wildly in times of flux, making predictions risky. Here are two questions whose answers will guide the future of the election:

1) Can Bernie win the Democratic nomination?

2) If Bernie wins, what next? Will the establishment try to make a deal with him? And will Bernie take it? Or will he remain true to his rhetoric and be a candidate of the 99%?

Nobody except his cheerleaders believed Bernie could actually win, until recently. His momentum combined with Hillary’s crash has forced many to rethink.

An excellent article by Arun Gupta lays bare the machinery of the Party that could be used to decapitate Bernie’s campaign. Yes, the Democratic Party machine could destroy Bernie’s campaign, but it could come at a cost they might not be willing to pay. Most of the Party’s weapons are blunt instruments that leave too much evidence. And millions of people are watching closely.

The first major Party attack misfired badly when the Democrats tried to sabotage Bernie by restricting access to voter data. Hundreds of thousands of people expressed outrage on social media and by signing petitions.

The blowback stunned the Party, which quickly backtracked. They learned a powerful lesson: By destroying Bernie, they could destroy the Party, completely discrediting themselves in front of millions of people.

They didn’t realize how fast the political ground was shifting beneath their feet. Nobody did, and unless an anti-Bernie cryptonite is found soon, the crisis will deepen. Their own electoral game is rigged, yet out of their control.

The trump card of the Party elites is their control of “superdelegates.” But overplaying your best cards is risky too. Imagine Sanders winning the popular vote by wide margins in state after state, only to have the Party machine give the delegates to Clinton. Acting this undemocratically could trigger a deep crisis and destroy the veneer of democracy.

For now the Democrats have opted for a backup plan. It isn’t working. They launched a coordinated pro-Hillary bandwagon campaign, foolishly thinking that Bernie’s populist message could be drowned by a flood of “respected individuals” offering glowing endorsements of Clinton or making cheap attacks against Bernie.

Hillary’s bloated list of endorsers is a “who’s who” among Party elites; nearly every Democratic senator and House representative has endorsed Hillary, while an array of intellectuals have emitted a stream of drivel from their pens and mouths. But their pro-Hillary hack pieces have only invited rage and insults. Nobody likes an arrogant salesman with a shoddy product.

Gloria Steinem, Paul Krugman, Bernie Frank, Madeleine Albright, and a host of others have proven themselves cheap hit-men for the establishment. But their aim is off. The self-inflicted wounds are exposing the hollow intellectualism of the Party elites. Trying to sound smart is tough while making dumb arguments.

Esteemed liberal economist Paul Krugman proved to everyone how clueless he was about political change in his anti-Bernie article “How Change Happens.” His readers skillfully torched him in the comments section.

Famous feminist Gloria Steinem had to apologize for her sexist comment that young women like Bernie because “boys” do.

And Madeline Albright would apologize too, had she any dignity. In her pro-Hillary rant she said there was a “special place in hell” for women who would vote Bernie. But if hell does exist, Albright certainly has her own very special place reserved, for having argued that it was “worth it” that 500,0000 Iraqi children died as a consequence of the U.S. Clinton-era sanctions levied against Iraq.

These “influential” people have lost their authority, which hinged on a political equilibrium that has drastically changed. They can no longer stuff their beliefs down others’ throats. There is a resounding clash of realities which the elites are smashing their heads against, one after another. Young people care nothing about what these so-called experts say. Nor should they.

The mass discrediting of “respected” individuals represents another side of the establishment’s crisis. The question is being posed: who really has the ear of the people? It turns out that very few elites can exert much influence.

They are too alienated. Historic inequality has shrunken the establishment to 1% of the population. Meanwhile, the ranks of the “middle class” have been reduced, most of those still in the “middle class” are now struggling to get by, and the poor are getting poorer.   By breaching this alienation Bernie has exposed the whole rotten system that Hillary hopes to preserve.

The many organizations endorsing Hillary faced similar denunciations from their adherents. Groups like Planned Parenthood, national labor unions, The New York Times, and the League of Conservation Voters proved how unrepresentative they were of their followers and members.

An article by the Intercept noted that “Bernie gets endorsements when members decide; Hillary gets endorsements when leaders decide.” The leaders of these groups miscalculated; they tried to play the old political game without realizing the game had changed. They tried to help Hillary but only harmed themselves.

This dynamic can’t go on much longer. It’s too dangerous; it creates unpredictable political chaos. If Bernie survives the multi-state primary “Super Tuesday” on March 1st, the Party establishment may give up and approach him to make a deal. If they can’t beat Bernie they’ll join him; or more accurately, they’ll officially ask Bernie to join them.

What might an offer look like? Broadly speaking, they would ask Bernie to focus his campaign against the Republicans in certain ways, and if he were to become president they’d ask that he’d adhere to a small list of policy considerations.

But would Bernie take the bait as Obama did? Yes, most likely he would. As argued in a previous article, Bernie supports the unifying priority of the establishment: war and imperialism abroad, which requires less domestic spending at home.

His allegiance to the juggernaut of the U.S. military-industrial complex isn’t a blind spot of his politics; he’s trying to play ball. You’ll notice that Bernie isn’t advocating the slashing of the military budget during the debates, even though the vast majority of people would enthusiastically support such an idea, especially if it meant funding the programs Bernie is promoting.

Another indication that Bernie would be willing to join hands with the 1% is his stated willingness to support Hillary if he loses. If he is so anti-establishment why would he campaign for one of its most notorious figures? As author Diana Johnstone shows in her new book “Queen of Chaos,” Hillary is a quintessential member of the ruling class, representing everything that Bernie claims to be against. His principles are mushier than they appear on TV.

Sanders would surely justify his pro-Hillary campaigning as a “fighting against the right wing,” a common theme of Sanders’ politics over the years. He’s attacks have been limited to Republicans, which is why Obama’s establishment presidency provoked little criticism from Sanders, and never a strong denunciation.

Sanders has already made overtures to the Democratic establishment during his campaign. At a Party conference he pleaded for support, arguing that he is the candidate the Party should unite around since his popularity would increase voter turnout.

There is plenty of other evidence that Bernie could make peace with a Democratic Party agenda, based on the years that he caucused with Democrats in the Senate. It’s true the establishment doesn’t identify with Bernie. They don’t trust him. But Bernie identifies with them.

Many have compared Bernie Sanders with the UK Labor Party leader, Jeremy Corbyn. But several articles have made the case, correctly, that Corbyn’s politics are far to the left of Bernie’s, who could taper his rhetoric just a bit to fit into the mold of the Democratic Party elites.  The Democrats wouldn’t be able to make a deal with a Jeremy Corbyn, who’s been a consistent anti-war politician for decades, but they could possibly do business with Bernie, were they desperate enough.

The emperor can easily change clothes, and feels comfortable in different skin colors or genders. But capitalism will shed its democratic clothing if needed. If Bernie posed a real threat to core economic interests, the establishment would go to greater undemocratic lengths to prevent him from taking office.

And if Bernie somehow manages to become president without agreeing to a deal, his physical safety would be at risk. It may already be at risk. The U.S. ruling class just doesn’t allow anybody to become president. There is too much money and power at stake. The next few months are sure to be fascinating.

 

Shamus Cooke is a social service worker, trade unionist, and writer for Workers Action (www.workerscompass.org). He can be reached at [email protected]

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Can the Establishment Fix Its Bernie Sanders Problem?

The Syrian Arab Army Recently achieved a major victory in Aleppo, and is on the offensive all over Syria liberating terrorist occupied territories and preparing for an even wider offensive.

Meanwhile the empire of chaos (the US) and it’s allies the axis of chaos ( the NATO-GCC-Israel forces) are so desperate they are threatening open war. We can only hope that they are bluffing and do not plan to destroy the world in a childish temper tantrum over their inability to destroy Syria.

The Geneva peace talks collapsed to the surprise of no one as the so called “opposition” (front men for terrorists) seemed unable to adjust to the reality that they are loosing and continued to make demands. Obviously the longer diplomacy is delayed the better although Russia and Syria had no plans to interrupt their offensive even if Geneva III had not collapsed.

The only way to restore peace to Syria is to drive the terrorists out of Syria once and for all, and to cut off all their routes into the country. Thanks to the bravery of the SAA (Syrian Arab Army) this is exactly what is taking place. Aleppo which a year ago Erdogan bragged had become a new turkish province and which he looted whole factories from to enrich his gangster friends and family, Aleppo is on the verge of being liberated from the terrorists. Aleppo is not alone Latakia is almost completely liberated, the terrorist stronghold of Daraa is under assault, they are preparing an offensive in Idlib. Clearly the SAA’s offensive is only expanding in strength and momentum.

First I’ll discuss the threat of expanded Imperialist intervention in Syria. Most outrageously, the US decided to illegally occupy Syrian territory and build a base against the wishes of the Syrian people and government on Syrian soil. They also announced plan to send an ever expanding force into Syria supposedly to fight ISIS but in reality to aid them and other terrorists. Their motives are so transparent the more victories Syria and Iraq win against their terrorist proxies the more desperate they are to intervene in both countries.

Yet what are a few thousand troops going to accomplish when more then a hundred thousand proved unable to contain the Iraqi resistance. They will be used to advise and support the terrorists but they have been doing that all along. In response to the Russian intervention, the Axis of Chaos began pouring weapons troops and advisers into but aside from achieving some temporary successes early on they now face utter defeat. Lets hope this new scheme proves equally futile. Ironically they are building the base in Kurdish territory but the Syrian Kurds are moving closer and closer to Russia and Syria.

Thus Russia was able to counter by building it’s own base in Kurdish territory. Currently the YPG are on the offensive trying to seize the terrorist held area separating the two halves of their autonomous zone. This leads to the next danger Turkey is threatening to invade northern Syria. For Erdogan YPG control of his precious terrorist highway is a red line. Yet such an invasion would lead him into a confrontation with Russian and Syrian airpower. It would probably end in disaster for Turkey. In reality of course Turkey invaded long ago it’s troops pretend to be rebels and fight shoulder to shoulder with the terrorists.

The final threat is the most absurd of all the Saudis are threatening to invade “to fight terrorism” fooling only the most ignorant. The saudis are the top ideological and financial source for terrorism in the world as even the New York Times admits. Of course they carry out all this out with the full cooperation of western intelligence. Saudi Arabia is nothing more then the islamic state in a more respectable (simply because it’s older) form as everyone knows. But what makes it truly absurd is that it is a hollow threat.

Saudi Arabia is already loosing in Yemen where despite overwhelming military superiority they have completely failed to reconquer the country to reinstall their ousted puppet al-Hadi. Despite starving the populace, destroying schools, hospitals, and Yemen’s historical heritage they are loosing. Despite unleashing their terrorist proxies they are loosing. The Saudi Army reportedly doesn’t even dare fight itself hiding in bases while foreign mercenaries especially veterans of Colombian death squads do the fighting and have suffered heavy losses. The Saudis can’t even protect their own territories the Houthi’s control parts of Saudi Arabia. In other words I almost hope they do invade Syria where they have funded so much mayhem and destruction. This would allow the SAA to take a terrible revenge on the notoriously soft saudis and would hopefully hasten the end of the treacherous Saudi Monarchy those puppets of the UK, the US, and Israel.

Unfortunately the Saudis would invade with an entire alliance but they also invaded Yemen with an alliance. We will have to see how far the axis of chaos is willing to go, they risk plunging the world into nuclear war as the Russians have not so subtly threatened to protect their forces in Syria by any means necessary including nuclear. Unfortunately since the start of the war in Ukraine and the beginning of Cold War 2.0 the “new normal” apparently involves keeping the world permanently on the brink of Nuclear War. Such is the perpetual state of madness we live in under the Empire of Chaos. Syria has been surrounded by enemies and under constant threat since it gained it’s independence. Whatever threats it faces it will remain defiantly ready to fight to retain that independence. As Walid al-Moallem Syria’s Foreign minister said “Any aggressor will be sent back to their country in a wooden box.”

All these threats, diplomatic schemes, and of course a propaganda campaign absurd in it’s selective outrage are motivated by the axis of chaos’ current inability to do anything to stop the triumphant offensive of the Syrian Arab Army and it’s allies as they reclaim town after town and city after city. The province of Lattakia is almost completely liberated. The SAA recently captured the terrorist stronghold Salma which they had spent 2 and a half years and lost many brave fighters trying to capture. Aleppo is on the verge of being the next liberated territory. Theterrorists forces there began to collapse a month ago and now the SAA have won a stunning strategic victory that will bring doom to all the various terrorist militias.

By capturing Ratyan and Mayer the SAA have managed to cut off the Aleppo-Gaziantep Highway the main terrorist supply route into the province and beyond. Cut off from food and ammunition, surrounded by the SAA, and with nowhere to hide as everywhere the locals are hungry for revenge for the horrors they suffered under terrorist occupation they will be lucky if they escape alive and thousands are already fleeing. The SAA also broke the Siege of Nubbul and al-Zahran where the locals had been starved and terrorized for years they were greeted with tremendous joy it was one of the most uplifting moments since the lifting of the siege of Kuweires airbase last fall.

Far to the east in Deir Ezzor the heroic defense continues with the SAA forces and the local civilians resisting the attempts by ISIS to destroy this loyalist foothold in the midst of their territory. Luckily the defense of Deir Ezzor is being lead by the legendary General Issaam Zahraadeen who fights on the front lones with his men manning a machine gun. ISIS has been desperately trying to seize Deir Ezzor and the americans even helped them at one point bombing the base then blaming the Russians. Yet Deir Ezzor is still standing and ISIS’s many attacks have only lead to repeated defeats. Remember the heroes of Deir Ezzor their heroic resistance is symbolic of the whole Syrian war surrounded by enemies and under constant attack they have not only survived they have triumphed. Elsewhere the SAA seem to be advancing or preparing to advance on almost every front. Even in Raqqah the ISIS capital (or it was until the leaders fled due to Russian airstrikes) the Syrian forces delivered devastating strikes today.

Thanks to their Russian allies the Syrian Arab army has been rearming and retraining. Russia has clearly been subtly increasing it’s presence on the ground and the first Russian adviser recently lost his life. Unfortunately I can’t record his name here as it is classified. He may have been from Chechnya and Russia in one of it’s famous “non-denial” denials recently denied there were Chechen Special forces in Syria while basically just objecting to the term and pretty much admitting it. Of course Russia has always had advisers in Syria but clearly they are now openly waging a covert war in aid of their Syrian allies.

In addition their artillery advisers and supplies or new artillery battery have helped the SAA offensive gain momentum and even western experts are using the word “cauldron” to describe what is about to happen to the terrorists. Whoever this unknown soldier was I salute their willingness to risk their lives in defense of Syria. I also hope that Russia will increase it’s ground forces in Syria both to counter the American special forces and to guard against any reckless moves by the “Sultan of Chaos” as Pepe Escobar calls Erdogan. And I’m thankful Ramzan Kadyrovhas sent in his feared Chechens to battle ISIS.

These are only some of the fronts in Syria’s war yet on every front Syria is either making dramatic advances or laying the groundwork for future advances. They are on the offensive against the terrorist stronghold of Daara. They are preparing an attack on Idlib province. We can only hope that the coming months will bring further victories from the SAA and it’s allies Hezbollah, Iran, Iraq and the Russians. They are aided by masses of volunteers from the Syrians public who have joined the NDF militias and who have the important job of securing the recaptured territories so that the SAA can move on to further offensives. Victory to Syria!

Before I end I’d also like to remember the heroic people of Yemen who are battling the Axis of Chaos and against all the odds managing not just to survive but to inflict terrible punishment on their invaders.

And Sadly I must warn of a grave danger to Libya where western powers are planning to reinvade on the excuse of battling ISIS when they are the ones who installed ISIS to occupy the former green resistance stronghold of Sirte. We must oppose any second invasion of Libya under the phony excuse of battling the terrorists that NATO itself put in charge of the country.

And of course we must keep a close eye on Venezuela where fascism threatens to seize control of the country and destroy the Bolivarian Socialist Revolution. Last month the Fascists murdered prominent loyalist journalist Ricardo Durant another in the seemingly endless list of victims of Operation Condor/ The Phoenix Program. In Argentina Fascism is already on the rampage. Amidst such grim news the continued victories of the SAA provide a beacon of hope for the world and an example of heroic struggle. No matter the odds against them they have refused to surrender and the people of the world must follow this example if we ever hope to end this empire of chaos before it decides to end the world.

Sources

I Highly Recommend the book Asad the Struggle for the Middle East By Patrick Seale on Syria’s heroic history. And Tim Anderson’s definitive book on the topic “The Dirty War on Syria” is now available in E Format at Global Research.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-dirty-war-on-syria-new-e-book-by-prof-tim-anderson/5506819

Subscribe to Eric Draitser’s You Tube Channel every Sunday he appears on Don Debar’s CPR Sunday as a guest with Mark Sleboda for an hour long discussion and Syria is usually the main topic a must listen for those following the war. It usually appears a couple days later.

A Wonderful Site with news on Syria, Palestine and Yemen is Vanessa Beeley’s The Wall Will Fall

https://thewallwillfall.wordpress.com

Eva Bartlett printed this great account from a Syrian on the Liberation of Salma

https://ingaza.wordpress.com/2016/01/13/selma-village-finally-after-so-many-years-and-so-many-martyred-syrian-arab-army-soldiers-and-civilians-we-have-victory/

A must read Article on the strategic significance of the victory in Aleppo

https://syria360.wordpress.com/2016/02/09/the-syria-war-will-not-be-a-quagmire-because-putin-and-assad-are-winning/

al-Moallem gives Syria’s defiant response to anyone threatening to invade

https://syria360.wordpress.com/2016/02/06/al-moallem-any-intervention-is-an-act-of-aggression/

A mocking assessment of Saudi Arabia’s Syrian invasion plans in the context of their failures in Yemen

https://syria360.wordpress.com/2016/02/08/saudis-poised-for-hazardous-intervention-in-syria/

Turkey’s Fascist Gray Wolves are playing an increasing role in Syria

https://syria360.wordpress.com/2016/02/07/turkeys-gray-wolves-in-syria/

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Victory in Aleppo.The Syrian Arab Army is on the Offensive

This month marked the 25th anniversary to the already forgotten crimes against humanity committed against the Iraqi people during the First Gulf War. These crimes are not only forgotten, but most of those who committed them under the banner of the “Coalition Forces” are still free and probably either acting as advisers, consultants, or policy-makers for more such crimes to be committed elsewhere, or they are happily retired on some quiet, peaceful, and colonized island. The First Gulf War is known as the “reaction” of the so-called “international community” led by the Coalition Forces to Iraq’s catastrophic invasion of Kuwait. As a primary school child during those years, my head still carries so many memories, images, scents, and deaths, that I have documented in my diary over the years. Today I would like to share with you a selection of my diary pages from that period as I originally wrote them, with no changes, except for linguistic and editorial purposes related to length.

When the First Gulf war started in 1991, I was a child who had a strong passion for raising chickens. I had four chickens of different colors, and my favorite was a black and white one with sharp and beautiful orange-colored eyes. My four chickens were also loved by the other members of the family, mainly because they laid eggs. For me, however, my love for raising chickens was beyond the material benefits gained from them. I spent a big chunk of my day observing their behaviors: how they ate, how they played, and even how they laid eggs in the coop that I built for them from cement blocks. My time was divided between school, doing homework, and spending time with my chickens. They were my indispensable friends.

I did not like to mingle with school children so much because I had no mutual interests with most of them. One incident I still remember vividly is the first day my favorite chicken laid her first egg. I was near the coop watching her trying to lay her first egg. I was overjoyed that the long-awaited day had finally come. She spent a long time trying to let the egg out, but with little success. After some time, I heard a loud noise of what sounded like a heavy explosion outside. The sound startled both me and my little chicken, a thing that forced her to release her first egg onto the coop’s muddy floor and it broke—the first Gulf War had started.

Our neighbors in Kirkuk at that time were mostly nice people, with whom we built rapport since we moved to the neighborhood. The wall-to-wall neighbors were especially kind and helpful. They were a Shi’ite family from the southern Iraqi city of Najaf. During the early days of the war, my father, like many Iraqi men then, was drafted by the Iraqi state to enroll into what was then called al-Jaish al-Sha’bi [the popular army], which consisted of poorly-equipped groups of supposedly “civilian volunteers” to form defense units during wartime. As noted, the “volunteers” were forced by the state to join these groups. At any rate, my father was put with a group of other men to “protect the surroundings of Kirkuk”.

However, as soon as the bombing started, most of his mates escaped, and he found himself along with two other men out of nowhere. We had no clue where he was taken at the time. We were not even sure whether he was living or dead, and as the bombing intensified and the electricity went off in most parts of the city, we were frightened in our house, and we did not know what to do. My mother was pregnant at the time with my youngest sister. The louder the bombing became, the more we were intimidated by it. In fact, my young sisters started crying and my mother did not know how to console them.

During the early nights of the war, when we, the children, started crying out of fear, the mother of our wall-to-wall Shi’a neighbors came to talk to us over the wall and said that she knows my dad is not home and we are scared just as they were, but she suggested that we should join them for the night and, in her words, “if we die, we shall die together; if we survive, we shall survive together.” The power was off all the time, which made the bombing even more intense and frightening. There was a total blackout. Some people said that this was a tactic used by the government to keep it dark to make it hard for the American planes to find their targets. When the night fell, it felt like there will be no more mornings to come. The nights were so cold, dark, rainy, lonely, and long. There was also no water at all. The only way for us to get water to drink was by collecting rain water.

We put a big, wide pot in the middle of the garden, and waited for it to collect rain water. After rain stopped falling, we went to the garden to see that the pot was filled with black water (water mixed with the residue of bombs, smoke, gases, and God knows what else in the air). We waited for the black particles to settle down, and then used it as “drinking water”. We did this throughout our stay at home in the First Gulf War. At this point, my family’s life was reduced into: A lost father, frightened and crying children, darkness, shortage of food, water, and heat, and uncertainty surrounding every corner of our lives. I will never forget sitting in the living room of our kind neighbors on the floor with some pillows behind our backs and their father reading to us stories on the light of the lantern to distract us from the loud sounds of bombs and missiles thrown on places we did not know, but sounded like they were exploding right inside our ears. One morning we saw many people gathered around one house nearby, and when we went closer, we found that a bomb had been dropped on that house the previous night and the entire family was dead. By the time I arrived there with many other people in the neighborhood, the bodies were taken away, but the images of the house that was totally demolished were so devastating. I still remember paying attention to the details of the scene such as the crushed closet with clothes, utensils, ties, sheets, and kitchenware, crushed fridge and furniture, all mixed with cement, blood, and rubble.

Spending the nights with our wall-to-wall neighbors continued for a few days until they were too scared to stay in the city anymore, especially after many rumors started spreading about how the war was going to intensify and more blood was going to be shed in Kirkuk. People in our area were especially frightened by the thought that if the regime is toppled, and the Kurdish forces invade Kirkuk from the north, some revengeful massacres were surely going to take place. When there is nothing but darkness, I think it is easy for people to both spread rumors and subscribe to them at the same time. As the old saying goes: “They lie and believe their own lies.” Our neighbors decided to escape to the south, where they at least had their extended family. Some of the rumors that people started spreading were that the Coalition Forces had “won the battle,” and that “the Kurdish forces are on their way from the north to revenge and kill all the non-Kurds in the city,” since Saddam’s regime was no longer in place.

This was the time when people thought that the Kurds and Shi’a were going to get the full American support and blessings for their intifada. Others said that Iran will start bombing to avenge the damage Iraq had caused them during the eight years of the Iraq-Iran war, and on and on went the rumors. There is no doubt that a chaotic environment is a perfect one for spreading rumors. People in the times of war and conflict can be like flocks of sheep heading towards any destination they are told is the “safe” one, even if it is in fact a fatal one. It is precisely during such times that people lose all sense of direction.

As the war progressed, our neighborhood became almost empty, the doors of the houses were wide open, living cattle and poultry were left in the streets with no one to take care of them or feed them. Since I loved animals, I wanted to gather all the animals to take care of them, but of course it was the most impossible wish to fulfill. My mother said, “Your four chickens are enough burdens for us at this time when we can barely feed ourselves.” As the neighborhood became almost empty, my mother’s fears increased. She started to take these rumors more seriously; her main fear was that the Iraqi Army could indeed enter the city and clash with the Kurdish forces, the Peshmerga, and we could be caught up in their fires.

The idea of staying home and accepting our fate to live or die together was no longer an option, and my mother started thinking about leaving. However, for us, the destination would be northward, since that is where we belonged more (my parents being both Christians originally from villages in northern Iraq). Yet, we were not sure where exactly in the north we could go to be safe. Putting myself in mother’s shoes then,

I can only imagine how it felt to be a pregnant woman with six little, vulnerable and powerless children, a lost husband, an empty neighborhood. I still remember a moment when I saw her looking helplessly through the kitchen window trying to think how and where to escape to save the lives of her children. The decision to leave the city came rather late. There were no cars left in the streets; people were saying that all the fuel-stations in the city were closed because there were no fuel supplies from gas stations anymore. That did not only mean a shortage of car fuel, but also a shortage in any source of energy that made all the streets in the city as dead as a grave, or as we Assyrians say in Aramaic: “There were even no birds to be seen in the sky!”

A very poor family occupied one of the houses in the same row on our street, and they were one of the few families who had nowhere to go to. Their father told us that there were still a few buses in an area about an hour and half by foot from where we lived. There, he suggested, we could find buses going to the north. So, by that time, we had no direction to go to other than head further north, even if it was not any safer than Kirkuk. Despite the constant bombing, and at this stage, the absence of any means of communication and the extremely limited transportation, my mother decided to walk us to the bus station and try to take us all to the north, hoping we could find a better shelter there, but knowing well that there were no guarantees whether we stayed or left. This is exactly how the destruction caused by war feels: leaving or staying become the same.

Life and death become the same. We packed two small bags that contained some warm clothes and what was left of the bread we had in the house—bread becomes the dearest and most sacred item during wartime. We walked for about two hours until we reached the bus station where we found no buses at all. Instead, there were hundreds of people (mostly Kurds and Christians) waiting for the next bus to show up. There were very few buses showing once in a while to help these people go to their unknown destinations. Every now and then a bus arrived and all we could see was how the bus got loaded with people before coming to a full stop. People were running for their lives in the most frantic way I have ever seen in my life. For me, as a child, it was both shocking and fascinating to witness at that early age how people behave during wartime. People, I thought, can be incredibly cruel unpredictable, and destructive when it comes to their survival during wars. Even at that time, I found it quite ironic that humans have to be so cruel and destructive for the sake of survival. Since then, I often wondered what better captures our human nature: the way we act during times of conflicts or the way we behave during times of “peace”. Even more, I always wondered whether peace ever exist anywhere in our sad and lonely world.

We did not have much luck in catching a bus until it started getting dark. As we were waiting to cling to any bus, we met another Christian family, much smaller in number than us—two women and two children close to my age. One woman was the mother of the two children, and the other was her sister-in-law. Their story in many ways resembled ours. Their father, too, was forced to join the popular army and they had no idea what had happened to him. They were too scared to stay home, and so decided to escape northward seeking safety. After a small chat with the family, we liked each other and decided to stick together throughout our upcoming journey. Before the end of the day, we somehow succeeded to get on a bus that was headed to Erbil. All I remember is my mother and the other two women holding our hands tight and running as fast as they could to catch the bus despite the crowd, a feeling that was like a stampede.

The next thing I remember is being on the bus, and the heavy rain falling outside—we were heading to Erbil. The fuel crisis was serious in Erbil too. It was impossible to find a car to reach our final and safe destination, which was unknown. We were just going with the flow, along with hundreds and thousands of people. In Erbil, however, the war was more severe and there was a conflict between the Kurdish forces and the Iraqi Army. People were running away with their bags, luggage, and children. I saw people getting so tired of running that they were getting rid of their loads little by little just to save their lives. Though war is disastrous and no human being deserves to go through it, I always remember people throwing away any possessions they were carrying just to survive. In a way, this makes me think about how owning anything is never as important as saving one’s own body and soul in the end. If people understand this lesson under normal circumstances, will they still be striving to own things or consume the way they do in many places around the world? If they understood this during times of “peace”, will there ever be wars on our planet?

As the bombing of the tanks and airplanes continued, people kept running and throwing away their loads gradually. First, bags, then food, then water, then, I always feel sad when I come to this part, some women got so tired of carrying their little children that they left them on the side of the road and kept running for their lives—or perhaps towards their deaths? While running with many people, I saw one woman with two little kids on her shoulders. She kept running and looked extremely tired. At some point, she became too tired to carry her two children, so she put them both in a big hole on the side of the road and carried on. That was one of the harshest moments of forced abandonment I had ever witnessed in my life. To this day, it makes me wonder what “love” is, how much can one really love, what are the limits of love?

It was sad to see people get rid of their ration food when it was the most essential thing for their survival at that time. They were unable to keep even the most basic items for survival, because of tanks behind their backs firing left and right, and the planes over their heads throwing bombs haphazardly. My mother was struggling to keep us around her while running and holding our hands and looking in all directions at once. I still remember how I released myself from her dress and went to look at a deep hole caused by a bomb where I found four living chickens left behind by somebody. I wanted to go down inside the hole, grab them, and take them with me. Before I knew it, my mother pulled my hand, dragged me, and kept running. As we kept moving, we kept our eyes open trying to find another bus to take us to our next city, Sulaimani, but finding another bus was proving increasingly difficult with every second ticking away. In a warzone, seconds matter and can well become a matter of life or death. As the bombing became heavier, it became impossible to keep running, because now we started seeing the tanks of the Iraqi army only a few meters behind us, while the American planes were bombing from above. I still remember my mother shouting at two Iraqi soldiers at the top of the tank and asking why they were doing this to people. “Don’t you have mothers or families,” she shouted at them.

We reached a location near Erbil city center, and people said that one of the big buildings there had a safe basement where many families sheltered themselves waiting for the bombing to slow down or stop. We followed people and entered the first floor of that big building that looked painted in yellow from the outside, but the painting had started fade away, a thing that made it look like it was painted with rust. Inside the building, we found stairs leading to the shelter that was full of families. After about half an hour of waiting in that shelter, packed with the hundreds of people with hardly any space to move one’s feet, the sound of missiles and bombs became louder and scarier than ever. While waiting, my mother was chatting with a Kurdish family of a man and his wife who had two college-age daughters who looked in their twenties. The man looked like he was in his late fifties. He spoke the same Kurdish accent spoken in Kirkuk (Sorani), so I understood what he was saying. He was telling my mother that he thinks if this building gets bombed, it will be fatal for us all. He advised us to join them and leave the building immediately. My mother was reluctant to take his advice, but after negotiating it with the Christian family accompanying us, they agreed that he was right. Everyone seemed to know that it was a risky thing to do, but we decided to follow the man and his family out of that basement. It was the most serious act of gambling to take given the time, the place, and the circumstances.

As we were crossing the street, the building became on the other far side of the street. Meanwhile, something happened and changed my view of this world and humanity. We heard a loud sound of a bomb mixed with the shattering of glass and rubble. It was so loud that it felt that we would lose our hearing after it. The entire building in which we were sheltered a few minutes ago collapsed over the families who were left there before our eyes. Those left inside became in the past tense in a matter of minutes.

That memory is still frozen in my mind just like an old painting in an old museum. Although we survived because we left that building, when I think of the destiny of the people who stayed in that shelter, I refuse to attribute this to “God’s care,” because how could God love some of us more than others? I equally refuse to attribute it to “luck”. In fact, this disaster often makes me question the very notions of “luck” as we know it. I think if one has to really think of it as a matter of luck, then it must be that the people who died there were “luckier” than us, because, as Plato says, “only the dead have seen the end of war.” I have learned that surviving a war is never a matter of luck, because we never heal from its wounds, and it never dies or ceases to exist inside the heads of the “survivors”.

At the same time, I believe that the people who died inside that building would have been the most qualified witnesses to tell us how catastrophic the first Gulf War was. At this point, all I feel is that the hundreds of people who most likely died there became a wound in my heart that will never heal. They have become a stigma on the foreheads of the entire international community that let such appalling things happen to innocent people under different pretexts like: “Fighting a dictator,” “fighting terrorism,” and “liberating the oppressed,” and so on and so forth of such hypocritical rhetoric that continues to this day in other selected Middle Eastern countries.

After a few hours of waiting inside another shelter that was about a ten-minute walk from the demolished building, we decided to resume walking. After about an hour of walking under the rain, we reached the outskirts of the city and the scene changed from buildings and streets to wide, green, and muddy fields. The speed of our footsteps was in tune with the hard rainfall. In an ironic sense, our walking was like a military march in itself. This continued until we glimpsed a few houses in the outskirts of the city. We knocked on the first door and the door opened. A woman of average height, rather overweight, with green eyes, and dark skin asked: “Hello, how may I help you?” My mother briefly told her our story. She told her that we needed any kind of shelter even temporarily and anything edible, because we were starving. At that time, we had not eaten anything for about two days. The woman burst into tears as she started telling her own story which was no less tragic than ours. She told us that her husband was lost and she, too, does not know whether he was living or dead.

The kind woman let us into her mud-brick house. There was barely any furniture in it. On the floor there was a shabby red carpet. The bed and sheets were unmade on the floor. They looked filthy and smelt badly. There was an old fridge in one corner of the living room. The house was entirely dirty and looked like it had not been cleaned for weeks. There were four young children who looked like they had not had a shower in weeks also. They were playing on the floor unaware of what was going on around them.

The woman swore that she had little food left: some eggs and a few pieces of flat bread. Yet, she said that she was happy to share half of what she had with us, hoping that we would find a car as soon as possible to take us to our next destination. She also smiled and said, “I can make you some tea, but there is no sugar in the house, and you will have to drink it bitter!” My mother agreed wholeheartedly because she loves tea. The three women laughed as if to let go of a big pain they were carrying in their chests. In such situations, I have learned that laughter is a gift to people, especially in the time of war. Laughter is healing and it defeats some of the horrors of war and destruction.

The woman prepared scrambled eggs with the little bread she had for us, and made a pot of tea that was served bitter—like our days. The food was gone in a few minutes. I found it hard to eat from the pan in which she cooked the eggs because it looked like it had not been washed since its first use. Perhaps because of the shortage in water, she cooked in it several times without washing it? The kindness of that woman at the most difficult time a human being can go through—a war—is something that this entire humanity should not only recognize, but also learn how to emulate. Her kindness did not end there. She went as far as going out in the village to ask her neighbors whether they knew of anyone who could help us reach our destination to be in a safer place. Eventually, she found a man who had a pickup truck and was driving somewhere near Sulaimani. She begged him to take us with him. He did.

The next thing I remember is us with the Christian family in Sulaimani. I remember us walking in a crowded bazaar where the war felt less intense. Since we had no place to stay at in Sulaimani, we resorted to an abandoned school for a few days, then to an old church that was said to be housing lots of refugees and displaced people like us. The church’s annex was connected to the main building and contained many rooms that were full of refugees from different Iraqi cities, especially from the north and the middle parts of the country. People were not only Christians. In fact, many were Muslims or from other minorities and ethnic groups. According to what we had heard from people there, the church was also getting a small portion of ration food from a UN organization. Many other humanitarian organizations were also providing aid to the refugees on the Iraqi-Iranian borders, which were only a couple of hours from where we had been staying. The church provided the families with one meal per day, which consisted of: Two apples, two boiled eggs, and two loaves of bread for each family, regardless of the number of the family members. This small amount of food was just to keep people alive. Despite the few memories I have about the time we spent in that church and the time we spent in Sulaimani,

I still clearly remember how dark and gloomy the rooms of the church were. The rooms were square-shaped, without windows, and with depressing, dimmed lights. I think the fact that the war was in progress, and we had been away from home made everything look even darker than it was. It felt that there was no difference between days and nights. All I could see as a child was an endless dark tunnel with no light in the end. It felt like the sun was not going to ever rise again, and there was little difference between the light outside and the light inside those rooms—nothing but endless darkness. It was perhaps in such days we learn how to see so much and better in darkness.

One of the biggest surprises to us was to meet the same family we had met in the building that collapsed in Erbil (the Kurdish man who convinced us to leave that building before it was turned into debris and rubble). The father, I learned later, was a history professor. Both parents were professors and the daughters were undergraduate college students. They liked my mother and spent hours discussing literature, despite the time and the place, or perhaps because of them? I think in times of war and death, books become a means to remember and to forget the pain. At the end, they asked us and the Christian family to join them and go to the Iraqi-Iranian borders. They heard that there were many humanitarian organizations there providing better care for refugees and registering them to be resettled in Scandinavian countries. We joined them and took the trip to the Iraq-Iran border.

Once there, we found thousands of Iraqi families living in tents waiting fate. There were flags all over the place, each representing one of the humanitarian organizations involved. The humanitarian organization flags looked like multiple countries divided by tents next to each other. It was as though each organization was promoting itself by displaying its logo on each and every item they handed the refugees and displaced people. Human beings are so brainwashed with flags and logos that they do not seem to be able to function without them even under the most difficult and pathetic conditions.

During our stay there, the Kurdish family tried to convince my mother to join them and register with one of the organizations helping Iraqis to get resettled in Europe. The professor was overjoyed at hearing about this opportunity. He told us that we should go for it. My mother refused firmly and told him that she cannot possibly leave without knowing what had happened to my father. The professor argued (a thing that professors like to do even in warzones) that if my father was still alive, he can always follow us later. If he was not alive, there was no point putting our lives in such a risk with an uncertain future by going all the way back to Kirkuk. My mother insisted on her position and said that she was not going anywhere without my father.

Indeed, many people staying in that camp were resettled in Europe, but my mother decided that the only way to know my father’s fate was to return home for it is the only place for him to return looking for us, if he was still alive. This story was my first lesson about the meaning of love and how far one can go to reconnect with the ones they love. To me, apart from the sufferings and the ugliness of the war that surrounded us, my mother never lost sight of how much she loved my father, despite the difficulty of having to make such a hard decision. A pregnant woman refusing to save herself and her six children for the sake of the man she loves.

Many of the families staying at those camps left and we returned home when the bombing phase of the war was over. This was the time when Iraq and its infrastructure were fully destroyed, the Coalition Forces withdrew from Iraqi territories, and Saddam’s army was severely punishing all those suspected in having participated in the uprising against its regime. So, as the world well knows today, Iraqi people were crushed and purged twice: once by the barbaric bombings of the Coalition Forces, and then by the retaliation of Saddam’s regime, after the former withdrew from Iraq and left Iraqi people in the hands of the latter. To this day, one of the things that really hurts most Iraqi people is the number of people who have lost their lives, especially after the lie called the “liberation of Iraq”. How can criminals—Western governments—liberate people from another criminal—Saddam? Most of the world doesn’t seem to have learned this lesson to this day, it seems to me. We went all the way back to Kirkuk through the same route.

On the way back, I remember the dead bodies from a close distance when we were walking in the streets of Erbil. I was shocked, devastated, and appalled at what I saw. I stopped in the middle of the street to closely look at one of the dead bodies. It was a man in a military uniform with so much blood around the area of his chest. His face looked grey, as if covered with ashes of cigarettes. His eyes were wide open as if in protest for one last thing he needed to do, say, or see, before his life was put out forever. The body was scary and those images are still vivid in my head as if it was yesterday. My shock increased as we walked faster only to see many more dead bodies in the street. They were everywhere. The horrific scenes of dead bodies, hanged bodies, blood, broken glass, and destruction continued all the way home. We were able to find a bus on its way to Kirkuk, and my mother decided to take us back home. I was sitting next to the window in the bus. In the background I could hear my siblings making noise and talking.

My mother was also chatting with the two women from the family that remained with us throughout entire journey. I was looking through the bus window at the scenes of destruction. I was trying hard to capture each and every image because the scenes were moving fast through the bus window, but there was a strange voice in my head asking me to register what I have been seeing; to capture those ugly scenes of death and destruction into my mind to speak about them for the rest of my life. Perhaps that was the voice of justice in a child’s mind telling him that this is what adults are good at doing in this world, and that I have to refuse the role of becoming an adult like those who practice death and destruction. When we arrived in Kirkuk, we said goodbye to the family, which, like us, was hoping to go home and wait for any thread that may lead them to know about their father’s destiny. We knew that we were going to see each other soon, but the goodbye was still sad because of the context in which we met them and all that we had gone through together.

On the way home, the neighborhoods looked empty; the streets looked like they were all assassinated. When we arrived home, our house looked dry though it was spring time. My dad was there. It was the first time I had ever seen him cry. My mom said that it was the second time (the first was when my oldest sister was born). Seeing him again was too hard to believe. After our long, tiresome, and scary journey, it was hard to believe that the family was reunited again. He told us that he had gone through times that were even worse than ours. Most of the people who were with him ran away when the bombing intensified. He found himself with a couple of his mates out of nowhere.

They walked for days and nights without any food. They had to drink rainwater from dirty ditches to survive. Before they became close to Kirkuk, they passed through many villages. In one village, they talked with some strangers who provided them with shelter, water, and food. Strangers, once again, had proved to be kind and caring. One of the unforgettable things was that, as he passed through another village, one kind villager gave him a pot of yogurt for the rest of his journey, but he did not eat it. He wanted to come home as soon as possible to find out what had happened to us. In case we were still alive, he wanted us to enjoy the yogurt with him. We did. For that time, and under those circumstances, it became the yogurt of life.

This was just the beginning of what followed in our lives: a much longer and more devastating journey of thirteen years of UN sanctions that must be considered by any conscientious human being as one of the biggest crimes against humanity committed in the 20th century against the Iraqi people. The trajectory of what has been done to Iraq and its people (and now to many Middle Eastern countries, like Syria) are so horrific and genocidal that they must put each and every person around the world squarely in front one and only one question that is worth asking about the region, that is: when, why, and who decided to turn most people of the Middle East into a target for systematic extermination?

This, to me, is the only scholarly question worth asking and confronting by any honest writer and thinker studying the region. The sad story of what happened during the UN sanctions imposed on Iraqi people is to be continued when I decide to rip more pages from my diary to share with you. Today, after 25 years have passed since the First Gulf War crimes against humanity, the world is at its worst and humanity doesn’t seem to have learned any lessons from it whatsoever. Why do I bother writing all this, you may ask me? Although, deep inside, I feel that all my writing is no more than words written on the walls of indifference, I still want to bear witness to what happened. I still hope that there are people left around this world who will read this testimony and whose hearts, minds, and homes will become like shelters to protect these stories from being totally forgotten and erased from humanity’s short and awful memory. I still hope that one day the seeds of my alphabet will grow and bloom creating a more tolerable world to live in.

Louis Yako is an Iraqi-American poet, writer, and a PhD candidate of cultural anthropology researching Iraqi higher education and intellectuals at Duke University.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Pages from my Diary: A Child’s Memories of Iraq’s First Gulf War

The Syrian Arab Army (SAA) and local militias liberated the town of Bashoura in the Northern part of Latakia province on Feb.8. The SAA also purged terrorists from the town of al-Hour town and deployed the force in the suburbs of al-Raqaqieh. The militant groups reportedly pulled their units back from the positions near the villages of Dahret al-Baiday al-Mahrouq and Ard al-Kataf.

A major convoy of Jeish al-Fatah terrorist group, loaded with weapons and ammunition was destroyed by the Russian Aerospace Defense Forces on the road linking the Eastern part of Idlib and the Western part of Aleppo. A number of militants, guarding the convoy, also were killed or wounded in the air raid.

On Feb.9, the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), predominantly Kurdish YPG units, has reportedly seized the Mennagh Military Airport in northern Aleppo. On account of this, the militants of Harakat Ahrar Al-Sham, the Free Syrian Army (FSA), and Jabhat Al-Shamiyah were force to withdraw in direction of ‘Azaz.

We remember, Russian warplanes conducted air raids in the area of the airport on Feb.9 while the U.S. ignored this area to avoid additional jitters in the relations with the Erdogan’s regime.

The Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) announced on Feb. 9 that it purged ISIS from Ramadi’s eastern suburbs and secured the road between Baghdad and Ramadi. However, this area still remains vulnerable to attacks and will need to be cleared of IEDs.

Peshmerga and Suni tribals have conducted several military operations west of Makhmur. The U.S.-trained 1st Battalion of the 91st Brigade of the 16th Iraqi Army Division participated in them.

ISF and local militias continue to clash with ISIS between Samarra and Lake Thar Thar despite previous claims over the control of the areas west of Samarra. ISIS has launched an operation to push the ISF and its allies in Khat al-Layn and the Jazeera desert.

If you’re able, and if you like our content and approach, please support the project. Our work wouldn’t be possible without your help: PayPal: [email protected] or via: http://southfront.org/donate/ or via: https://www.patreon.com/southfront

Subscribe our channel!: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaV1…

Visit us: http://southfront.org/

Follow us on Social Media:
http://google.com/+SouthfrontOrgNews
https://www.facebook.com/SouthFrontENTwo
https://twitter.com/southfronteng

Our Infopartners:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/
http://thesaker.is
http://www.sott.net/
http://in4s.net

<iframe width=”690″ height=”400″ src=”https://www.youtube.com/embed/vQ26Rlcc40U” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen></iframe>

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: Syrian Arab Army Liberates Bashoura in Northern Latakia, Terrorists’ Weapons Convoy Destroyed by Russian Air Strikes

The government is already spying on us through spying on us through our computers, phones, cars, buses, streetlights, at airports and on the street, via mobile scanners and drones, through our credit cards and smart meters (update), televisiondoll, and in many other ways.

Spying in the U.S. is worse than under Nazi Germany, the Stasi, J. Edgar Hoover … or Orwell’s 1984.

Yesterday, U.S. Intelligence Boss James Clapper said that the government will spy on Americans through the internet of things (“IoT”):

In the future, intelligence services might use the [IoT] for identification, surveillance, monitoring, location tracking, and targeting for recruitment, or to gain access to networks or user credentials.

Yves Smith has the definitive comment on Clapper’s statement:

Oh, come on. The whole point of the IoT is spying. The officialdom is just trying to persuade you that it really is a big consumer benefit to be able to tell your oven to start heating up before you get home.

Personally, I’m a tech geek, and love the latest gadgets and toys.  But I don’t want my dishwasher or refrigerator sending messages to me … let alone the intelligence agencies.  Despite all of the hype about IoT, I don’t know anyone who does.

We’ve previously noted that the CIA wants to spy on you through your dishwasher and other “smart” appliances. As Slate notes:

Watch out: the CIA may soon be spying on you—through your beloved, intelligent household appliances, according to Wired.

In early March, at a meeting for the CIA’s venture capital firm In-Q-Tel, CIA Director David Petraeus reportedly noted that “smart appliances” connected to the Internet could someday be used by the CIA to track individuals. If your grocery-list-generating refrigerator knows when you’re home, the CIA could, too, by using geo-location data from your wired appliancesaccording to SmartPlanet.

“The current ‘Internet of PCs’ will move, of course, toward an ‘Internet of Things’—of devices of all types—50 to 100 billion of which will be connected to the Internet by 2020,”Petraeus said in his speech. He continued:

Items of interest will be located, identified, monitored, and remotely controlled through technologies such as radio-frequency identification, sensor networks, tiny embedded servers, and energy harvesters—all connected to the next-generation Internet using abundant, low cost, and high-power computing—the latter now going to cloud computing, in many areas greater and greater supercomputing, and, ultimately, heading to quantum computing.

And see these comments by John Whitehead and Michael Snyder.

The Guardian notes:

Just a few weeks ago, a security researcher found that Google’s Nest thermostats were leaking users’ zipcodes over the internet. There’s even an entire search engine for the internet of things called Shodan that allows users to easily search for unsecured webcams that are broadcasting from inside people’s houses without their knowledge.

While people voluntarily use all these devices, the chances are close to zero that they fully understand that a lot of their data is being sent back to various companies to be stored on servers that can either be accessed by governments or hackers.

***

Author and persistent Silicon Valley critic Evgeny Morozov summed up the entire problem with the internet of things and “smart” technology in a tweet last week:

Update:  The highest-level NSA whistleblower in history (William Binney) – the NSA executive who created the agency’s mass surveillance program for digital information, 36-year NSA veteran widely regarded as a “legend” within the agency, who served as the senior technical director within the agency, and managed thousands of NSA employees – read this post, and told Washington’s Blog:

Yep, that summarizes it fairly well.  It does not deal with industry or how they will use the data; but, that will probably be an extension of what they do now.  This whole idea of monitoring electronic devices is objectionable.

If forced to buy that stuff,  I will do my best to disconnect these monitoring devices also look for equipment on the market that is not connected in any way

Postscript: As security expert Bruce Schneier points out, the entire concept of the IoT is wildly insecure and vulnerable to hacking.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Whole POINT of the “Internet of Things” (“IoT”) Is So Big Brother Can Spy on You

In 2013, India’s former Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar accused US companies of derailing the nation’s oilseeds production programme. Similar claims had been made before. For instance, we could revisit the 1998 mustard oil tragedy. At the time, Rajasthan Oil Industries Association claimed that a “conspiracy” was being hatched to undermine the mustard oil trade and charged that the “invisible hands of the multinationals” were involved (see the article ‘Monsanto and the Mustard Seed

India was almost self-sufficient in edible oils by the mid-1990s. Its farmers met 97% of domestic need. However, its edible oil import bill has increased dramatically since then. By 2013, India was the world’s second biggest importer of edible oils. Food and trade policy analyst Devinder Sharma notes that between 2006-07 and 2011-12 alone edible oil imports rose by 380%.

Sharma asserts self-sufficiency was not palatable to international financial institutions, and that, under pressure from the World Bank, India began to reduce the import tariffs on edible oils and imports then began to increase. The impact has been felt by millions of farmers. Instead of paying Indonesian, Malaysian, American and Brazilian farmers from where India imports edible oils, he argues the effort should be to support domestic farmers.

India meets more than half its cooking oil requirements through imports, with palm oil shipped from Indonesia and Malaysia and soybean oil from the US, Brazil and Argentina. Notwithstanding the environmental damage resulting from industrial-size mono-crop plantations (see this on palm oil in Indonesia and this on soy in Brazil), soybean imports are expected to grow even more and further threaten domestic cultivation.

In an editorial piece for Kisan Ki Awaaz (National Voice of the Farmers) in November 2015, Kishan Bir Chaudhary highlights the trend to undermine indigenous production by noting the move to completely wipe out India’s soybean cultivation. The large-scale import of soybean meal is being contemplated at cheap prices from South America, China and USA, which would flood the Indian market. This is despite there being a more than adequate quantity of soybean meal available from locally produced soybean.

Currently, the import of soybean meal is freely permitted, with a low customs duty. Soybean prices in the exporting countries are between 30% to 40% lower because of huge subsidies. This could leave few outlets for indigenous production.

Although current laws do not permit the import of any GMO-based food or feed item into India, the fear is importers may ship in GMO soybean and soybean meal at cheap rates, which will get cleared at ports without testing for the presence of GMOs.

Chaudhary notes India’s soybean farmers are under pressure due to: the import of GM cheap soybean meal; a clamour for the import of soybean itself; the discouragement of soy cultivation by political leaders; and the active involvement of foreign seed and pesticide companies in promoting GM Soy cultivation.

He calls for an immediate ban on soybean imports as well as for customs officers to uphold the law of the land with regard to prohibiting the import of GMOs by carrying out proper checks in government laboratories.

With risks of GM entering India via imports clear, we are also currently witnessing the push to get GM mustard (and other crops) commercialised and grown in Indian fields. The justification being put forward for this if that GM mustard is a high-yielding crop, but, more importantly, it would diminish the reliance on edible oil imports.

These arguments are little more than smokescreens to divert attention from 1) the actual reality of increased import costs and the associated running down of indigenous agriculture, which stem from trade policies driven by the vested interests of global agribusiness, and 2) myths about the efficacy of GM. Such Trojan horse logic is being used to ease the entry of GMOs into India.

And such entry is at risk of being done by by-passing proper processes and procedures in what Aruna Rodrigues calls a case of “unremitting fraud” and by side-lining four high-level reports advising against the adoption of these crops in India (the ‘Jairam Ramesh Report’ of February 2010, imposing an indefinite moratorium on Bt Brinjal; the ‘Sopory Committee Report’ [August 2012]; the ‘Parliamentary Standing Committee’ [PSC] Report on GM crops [August 2012]; and the ‘Technical Expert Committee [TEC] Final Report’ [June-July 2013]).

As far as the claim GM producing better yields, Devinder Sharma points out that in the US, crop yields of GM soy have been found 4% to 20% less than non-GM varieties. Whether it concerns soy, mustard or just about any other GM crop, the claims that GM produces increased yields is a myth.

If GM cannot increase yields even in the US, where high-input, irrigated, heavily subsidized commodity farming is the norm, it is irresponsible to assume that it would improve yields in the Global South, where farmers may literally bet their farms and livelihoods on a crop.

The above quote is from the report GMO Myths and Truths, which provides evidence in support of Sharma’s claims.

And farmers have indeed ‘bet’ their farms and livelihoods on a crop – and have lost (see this report from India’s The Statesman newspaper) or are being taken for a ride (see this on GM cotton, illegal royalties and financial distress).

Where, therefore, is the logic in promoting GM varieties which produce less than existing improved varieties that are not genetically modified?

Improving production should not be based on a supposed GM techno quick-fix, which the pro-GMO lobby would like us to believe in. The answer lies in adopting appropriate trade policies that favour indigenous production and local farmers and which, as Devinder Sharma notes, provides assured procurement and assured prices to farmers.

The fact that GM is not wanted or required, leads us to question why GMOs are being forced into the country (and are in fact already being consumed in terms of cotton seed oil). But it doesn’t take a genius as to why this might be.

Rajesh Krishnan, Convenor of Coalition for a GM-Free India argues that GM mustard is a backdoor entry for various other GM crops in the regulatory pipeline.

He adds:

GM mustard hybrid has been created mainly to facilitate the seed production work of seed manufacturers whereas farmers already have a choice of non-GM mustard hybrids in the market, in addition to high yielding non hybrid mustard varieties. There are non-GM agro-ecological options like System of Mustard Intensification yielding far higher production than the claimed yields of this GM mustard… This is clearly one more GMO that is unwanted and unneeded and is being thrust on citizens in violation of our right to choices, as farmers and consumers.

Little wonder then that most state governments have been unwilling to take up field trials.

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Trojan Horse Arguments and the GMO Issue: Indian Food and Agriculture Under Attack

The interview (transcript below)  from questions with Prof. John McMurtry was conducted for the 15th Anniversary of “Geopolitika” a journal of geopolitical and cultural analysis in Belgrade which was broadcast on Radio Belgrade by the weekly show “Silen” on February 12 from questions posed by Biljana Đorović.

The depth of the abyss into which the world is falling is ever clearer to people, but not the cause or the way out. Could you give us some kind of structure to explain what is at the heart of this empire of chaos that is reigning across the world?

In a nutshell, social evolution itself has been reversed by a US-led war on social and ecological life organisation driven by one corrupt master value – to free transnational corporations and their shareholders from social responsibility to multiply private fortunes without limit. It is a counter-revolution against the long development of democratic government and the welfare state that once crossed across the divisions of the Cold War.

The ultimate driver of the disorder can be explained in one underlying principle. The sole and absolute organising principle of the world’s reproduction and growth is turning private money into maximally more money for private money controllers. The ‘empire of chaos’ is the result.

The more this transnational financial capitalism is deregulated and subsidized , the more it multiplies itself through organic, social and ecological life hosts, the more predatorily destructive it becomes at all levels. This is ultimately a cancer system at the macro level, and it has quickly spread through the world. It was effectively with the Reagan-Thatcher counter-revolution against the social state with a US $500-billion tax-cut to the rich deliberately bankrupting the base of social programs, simultaneously pervasive media worship of the ‘free market’ and hatred of socialism, behind-the-scenes presidential permission of mass media monopolies proclaiming this mindless propaganda line, the systematic smashing of organised labour and sites of progressive intellectual discourses, ghoulish leashing of death squads in Latin Central America to reverse socialist forces while spending the opposing superpower USSR into bankruptcy on the arms race, and – finally but perhaps most importantly – preparation and passing of the world’s first major binding treaty absolutizing transnational corporate rights over all past or future democratic policies or legislation reducing foreign profit opportunities.

This sets the historical parameters of the current empire of chaos by reversing the post-1945 social evolution towards life security for all by the master principle of commodity and money-demand maximization across cultures and permanent war against any alternative.

How could this possibly be proclaimed, as it always has been, a victory for global freedom morality and justice?

The key is always in the US-designated Enemy whose destruction is equated to the victory of Good over Evil. There is no positive substance of the Good but destruction of the designated Enemy. There is in fact no common life interest of US civilization. There is the Enemy that must be defeated on the collective level, the sole collectivity. The money that must be made to survive is the only obligatory individual value, with self-maximization the logic of success.

The global turning point to ‘Communism’ as the Enemy came in 1991 with the fall of the USSR. This was triumphally proclaimed the victory of US freedom, the death of marxism and socialism, and the end of history itself.

In fact, the USSR fell by being hollowed out by the arms race and the Cold War, a deliberate US strategy, and from fighting the first jihadi terrorist uprising financed by the US in quasi-socialist Afghanistan. It was on Russia’s border, and the way to “bleed Russia to death” when it intervened to assist the secular social order with new equality for women. Yugoslavia at this same time was an iconically successful socialist society across ethnic divisions. But its US-led financial destruction was planned by secret presidential directive in 1981, and led to a chaos of ethnic wars and hatred ending in the 1999 bombing of Belgrade by NATO – – which was also during the US-British sanction bombing of Iraq, and more society-destroying bombings to come across the Middle East. Now the new designated Enemy was Saddam once the USSR fell.

One can see here that always a great Enemy is declared. It was long Communism which covered any alternative secular order with any socially owned economic base, the real danger being that it outperforms capitalist societies in serving the life needs of its people. But no sooner had this threat been apparently eliminated in even the Third World with death squads, international slanders and financial sabotage usually doing the trick than a new great Enemy called Saddam was declared just as the USSR was falling next door and unable to intervene.

Another new war, worse than the Cold War went into motion. As always there was constructed pretext, but this time without any USSR to limit it, the US (and Britain) bombed the long-evolved socialist infrastructure of Iraq into ruins and perpetrated an eco-genocidal invasion from 1991 to 2003 that was, as always, justified by the Enemy it attacked – although the enemy Saddam was long on the CIA payroll, just as Osama Laden, the next great Enemy to appear, was financed and armed by the US in Afghanistan to begin the new greatest enemy of all replacing Communism.

This Enemy is Islamic Terror which still morphs on into ISIS suddenly appearing in June 2014 to keep the ball rolling into Syria bombing by NATO, a reprise of the complete society destruction of Libya by US-led NATO bombing in 2011. The end of the Cold War gave rise not to peace, but wars of aggression by the US whenever it could take the people along with false cover stories. The constant throughout is a great Enemy, the cornerstone of US ideology, with constructed pretext or false flag event always justifying war against the now perpetually changing Enemy – in fact, sitting duck with no air defenses to stop imperial bombing and expansion of the transnational money-cancer system.

Do you think there is a fundamental difference between the US-led empire during the Cold War and after it? The years of the US-Soviet conflict seem almost pastoral compared to now.

1991 was supposed to bring about the great Peace Dividend with no US enemy to justify the always rising military spending to stop the “communist plot for world rule”. Now we know better who was aiming for world rule, as always projecting onto the designated Enemy the US’s own objective. The carpet bombings of helpless societies by US-led forces since 1991 are, like Vietnam, eco-genocidal in nature, only now one after another. They force-metastasize the exponential private financial growth of Wall Street and company, but transnational corporate treaty and social-state stripping is the ultimate inner logic of the US-led spreading chaos.

Before 1991, the US and allies had developed social life support systems and a welfare state to compete with state socialism. No longer. Since the fall of the USSR, whole peoples and their life conditions are destroyed and looted across continents from Yugoslavia to the Ukraine, from Iraq to Libya to Syria to who knows where next. Propelling every degenerate trend from behind has been the carcinomic financialization of real economies into multiplying private money sequences devouring life and life support systems as ‘global market freedom and prosperity’. This is the borderless transnational globalization of the private money-power system that has changed all the rules.

Dividing societies into civil war or helpless bankruptcy or both is the new and unnamed master pattern, destroying whatever collective economic and social success has been achieved everywhere, clearing s the way for foreign control of once sovereign resources, markets and peoples. Greece is a current example of these external money sequences cored in transnational banks hollowing out an evolved Western society to recoup foreign bank revenues after the Wall-Street-engineered bank collapse of 2008 – stripping ever more peoples to pay for big banks’ ponzi schemes even if the society’s unemployment goes over 30%, the public sector is dismantled and looted at fire-sale prices, and the majority’s lives and life conditions are turned towards the living hell formerly reserved for the Third World death-squad dictatorships.

This systemic money-sequenced destruction of evolved societies, their public resources and life support systems is now plundering all societies including the US and Britain. It is inconceivable that what is now normalized as “necessary market reforms” today could have been even proposed by these countries from 1950 to 1991. But things have also changed at the oppositional level. Latin America has largely evolved out of the US-led oligarchies of fascist tyranny.

Why is this underlying pattern – essentially a global multi-front war against humanity – not recognised in even academic discourses?

This is a very complex matter in all the levels of systemic degeneration and attack. The inherited methods and categories of understanding are incapable of comprehension so long as they are divided into siloes, mechanistically organised into atomic agents and aggregates, and increasingly funded for proprietary corporate research for profit.

The academy led by its own multiplying corporate managements has been largely converted into a servo-mechanism to the financial cancer system, a long war, with a new underclass of casualized worker- profs doing most of the teaching with no time for research. System diagnosis is prohibited at every step by this context. Marxist analysis itself is bound to categories unable to grasp the system’s disorder where more means and conditions of life are now destroyed than produced.

So-called ‘economics’ is most of all a set-point of the self-referential stupefaction. It is based on a life-blind liquid mechanics of the nineteenth century disguised by algebraic notations whose referents are idealized money coordinates in dyadic and exponential repetitions. The reigning models are structured a-priori not to see any of the real-life failures and depredations of the runaway disorder. Policy-setting ‘economics’ is without any framework to factor in the life needs of people, societies and environments at all. Academically trained critics name the problem as ‘neo-liberalism’, but this is a vacuously equivocal slogan. – – The classical liberals John Stuart Mill and John Dewey were both mild socialists and advocated a reasoned social progress of humanity’s permanent life interests, which this transnational private money-sequence system rules out in principle.

Could you say more about the “false ruling categories” misleading even the academic Left and most concerned citizens?

To begin with, this system is not as almost everyone assumes, a ‘free market’. Its trade and investment treaties across borders prove it to be a transnational corporate dictatorship in principle. Corporate lawyers write all the rules in secret. They override the policies of elected legislatures. Global supply and demand are controlled by dominant transnational corporations. Open market competition is ruled out by predatory and transfer pricing, corporate lobby control of state policies, and vast and growing government subsidies to favoured players.

While “the free market” is still absurdly assumed as given, “efficiency” is even more universally assumed as its regulating discipline and logic of progress. Indeed it is the justification for all the jobs continuously lost, all the deregulations, pollutions, resource-mining horrors, and inhuman exploitations from one place to the next across the globe.

Yet in fact this system is the opposite of ‘efficient’ in life means production and reproduction – the substance of any real economy. What is miscalled ‘efficiency’ merely lowers money costs for private profit agents. In reality, this system is now by far the most wasteful system ever, wasting more life value than it produces. 90% of the biomass it converts into commodities for profit end up as waste within six weeks. 40% of even final food products are thrown away without consumption. Fresh water lakes and aquifers are everywhere polluted and drawn down without efficient water use entering the equations. .

‘Absence of waste’ is the definition of efficiency. But this system wastes everything to multiply private money sequences with ever more people jobless, species in spasm extinctions, oceans poisoned and hollowed out, junks of every kind becoming more dominant across domains.

Do you think there are dark corridors of power where the game is rigged by master manipulators with their own ruling goals and forms of action? If so, what are they

Well they definitely exist as a self-flattering transnational money party bending the system to limitless rule. In the cases I know, the imaginary global free market is covertly structured to make private money rights sovereign over all that exists with no accountability to any human or ecological life need at all. This is conceived as “global market freedom”. The corrupt self-conceit is mind-stopping.

Banker David Rockefeller elliptically expressed this program back in 1991. “A supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and bankers”, he intoned to fellow Bilderburgers, “is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries”. This statement has never been denied. It implicitly entails a dark meaning. The ruling goal and form of action is to stop history’s democratic trend, to end peoples bonded by national identity, to override people’s say over their collective future, to eliminate public sectors except as serving this private money sovereign, and to accept this banker sovereignty as the proper replacement of the self-determination of nations and peoples.

Banker Rockefeller only refers to the ‘intellectual elite’ to deploy their Platonic conceit. He is more ignorant than they that Plato’s ‘philosopher kings’ live in community ownership of goods without private money gain to corrupt their reason by the lowest level of the soul, the self’s appetites. In contrast, Rockefeller’s ‘intellectual elite’ are exemplified by Rockefeller’s own money-obsequious German protégé, Leo Strauss who preaches the sovereignty of private money over society in Talmudic style that is hard to decipher. Yet as Rockefeller’s parachuted University of Chicago professor and godfather of the U.S. National Security Council, Strauss affirms the goal in his Natural Right and History: “limitless [money] capital accumulation” is “a moral duty and perhaps the highest moral duty”. Wasted expenditures at will , no productive function, genocides of the conquered, each and all are rationalized away by Strauss as moral rectitude by the ‘natural right’ of private money capital. He justifies every one.

This is only one dark corridor leading to the financial cancer system we face today. Its NSC branch rooted in Harvard’s graduate apparatus of ‘political science’ over decades is still dominated by the Russia-hating Zbigniew Brzezinski. Undergirded by the more substantial ‘free market’ worship dominating graduate schools everywhere up to US presidential appointees, all agents are propelled by big corporate and bank money power which they all worship. This ultimate money power explicitly and bilaterally seeks ‘full spectrum dominance’ of the world, as in the 2000 project for a New American Century signed by US leaders and advisers across parties. Its dark vision was then followed into 9-11 and the 9-11 Wars.

9-11 itself was corridors covered by darkness in how it happened. The first question of forensic justice, cui bon (who benefits?), remains publicly silenced. The official conspiracy theory of the World Trade Center buildings melting and collapsing into their own footprints violated the laws of physics at every step, beginning with the blamed Arabs with box-cutters and no remains. The US secret state is so covered in dark hidden corners that we can only predict in principle what will happen next – for recent example, the fully-armed ISIS killing machine springing onto the stage out of nowhere mass murdering everywhere it can, but somehow never touches Israel.

But a cautionary word. The deep global game-changers here are institutional moves at the level of sweeping trade treaties and thousands of new bureaucratic laws and regulations. They silently replace sovereign government and democratically legislated policies and laws everywhere “to compete in the global market”, with few observing that they are massive corporate-lawyer fiats multiplying protections of transnational business profits as their single unifying objective. They too are secret in negotiations, corporate lobby construction, thousands of pages of prescriptions, and closed tribunals punishing states which disobey. It is hard to see where the dark financial global coup d’etat stops.

Could you step us through a paradigm case of this financcial cancer system’ at work and how progressive voices fail to see its meaning?

The recently released Oxfam Davos Report (January 16) is a perfect example because it clearly succeeds in informing us of the escalating extremes of inequality which this system has produced – a fact on which now everyone agrees. The first essential fact it identifies reports from global business statistics that 62 individuals now own more wealth than 50% of the world’s population. More shockingly, the second essential fact reported is that this share of wealth by half the world’s people has collapsed by over 40% in the last five years.

Yet even in this report the big lie continues that “the world has made great progress in tackling world poverty” and that “extreme poverty has been halved since 1990”. The near automatic assumption that the poor are being “lifted out of poverty in greater numbers” thus persists even though the business evidence itself shows that, in fact, the poorer half of humanity has lost 42% of their wealth in just the last few years. What does this mean for “trickle-down theory”, “global competition nets more wealth for all”, and “Parteo optimal markets”? It means that they are all delusionary. The World Bank and other figures purporting to show great gains for the poor are based on income gains of less than a cup of coffee a day – typically of emigrants forced into big polluted cities who formerly had at least a family home, clean air and green surroundings.

Yet observe that throughout the revolutionary redistribution of wealth from the poor to the rich, the magic of the market and globalization are proclaimed as “enhanced competition”, “liberalized de-regulation”, “‘more labour flexibility”, “reduced welfare costs” and “austerity programs to correct excesses”. In fact beneath the pervasive propaganda conditioning citizens to believe in the money shell game devouring the world, the poorer half of humanity has been deprived of one trillion dollars of wealth in five years while the 62 richest people have gained almost twice as much for themselves by the operations of this system.

But the end is not yet. Other figures in the Davos Report show that a further $760 billion flowing to non-producing investors has been gained by transnational tax evasion with impunity across the world. This is another revolutionary turn of ‘globalization’ to enrich the richest while doubling down on deprivation of the poor. Yet at the same time, it strips the funding of public sectors and institutions which have evolved to serve the common life interest of societies outside the global market. Governments which could once protect the deprived at all levels of life organization are now widely bankrupted or debt enslaved along with most citizens. Who has reported any of this?

In consequence, the world slips into deeper recession from the collapse of demand at the public and majority levels as the poorest half’s share of wealth is almost halved and the share of the richest is more than doubled for accumulation. But this cause of the Great Recession is ignored by governments and international policy meetings as if it did not exist.

As these and other facts show, borderless and de-regulated corporate globalization is eating the world alive. That is why these facts are never reported by the mass media or politicians. It is why claimed actions to stop the world bleeding never face the system disorder causing them. It is why even concerned organizations continue to repeat falsehoods as if they were true. Once again like a cancer system at the macro level, this exponentially multiplying private money-sequence system has no committed life functions but to feed on life and life conditions to grow itself. But what progressive journal or even book connects all of these dots?

Can there be any resolution to the fragmentation and paralysis of unifying vision?

Our problem now is that is not even the informed and the progressive join the dots and realise the meaning of their own senses and the rising evidence. As with Oxfam, they pre-consciously deny the collapsing position of the majority of humankind by repeating the lies of the ruling doctrine like ‘progress in eliminating poverty’ and ‘halving of absolute destitution’.

Nowhere is the criterion of human needs across cultures identified. Nowhere are the truly ‘changed rules of the game’ specified and shown as cause of the systemic catastrophes for humanity and planetary life support systems. Nowhere do we see a policy-structure change spelled out that connects across crises. Yet everywhere the diagnosis and tracking of financial- ization can detect and show the CSC drivers of world society today.

Resolution requires recognition of the ultimately regulating principle of humanity’s social evolution that moves underneath technological development to what it is for and the basic institutional bases to rule out the great blind alleys of post-1900 social evolution such as state Stalinism and global financialization. The underlying pattern of progress is now lost in superstructural debates, but is control of currency and credit by public-bank authority linked to defined life standards of investment and production to protect human beings and their shared life support systems. History shows this underlying pattern of progress in varying degrees such as the Scandinavian countries and the old Yugoslavia, but a conscious life code has been lacking at the society-wide level. This missing link is a life-coherent collective value system  translated into self-evident principles of how to live as a society beyond individual choices.

I leave this ultimate issue and its challenges to our next discussion.

John McMurtry is University Professor Emeritus at the University of Guelph and elected Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada. His work has been translated from Latin America to Japan, and he is the author/editor of UNESCO’s three-volume Philosophy and World Problems, as well as more recently, The Cancer Stage of Capitalism; From Crisis to Cure.

  

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Decoding the US Empire of Chaos: The Global Reversal of the Social Evolution of Humanity

Apartheid in Israel

February 11th, 2016 by Anthony Bellchambers

The lack of human dignity experienced by Palestinian Arabs is the direct result of the policy of Israeli supremacy. Israeli supremacy implies Arab inferiority. Legislation designed to preserve Israeli supremacy entrenches this notion. Menial tasks in Israel are invariably performed by Arabs. When anything has to be carried or cleaned, the Israeli will look around for an Arab to do it for him, whether the Arab is employed by him or not.

Because of this sort of attitude, Israelis tend to regard Palestinian Arabs as a separate breed. They do not look upon them as people with families of their own; they do not realise that they have emotions – that they fall in love like Israelis do; that they want to be with their wives and children like Israelis want to be with theirs; that they want to earn enough money to support their families properly, to feed and clothe them and send them to school. And what Arab servant or labourer can ever hope to do this?

ID laws, which to Palestinians are the most hated bits of legislation in Israel, render any Arab liable to police surveillance at any time. I doubt that there is a single Palestinian male in Israel who has not at some stage had a brush with the police over his ID papers. Hundreds and thousands of Arabs are thrown into jail each year under these laws. Even worse than this is the fact that these discriminatory laws keep husband and wife apart and lead to the breakdown of family life.

Arabs want to be paid a living wage. Arabs want to perform work which they are capable of doing, and not work which the government declares them to be capable of. Arabs want to be allowed to live where they obtain work, and not be endorsed out of an area because they were not born there. Arabs want to be allowed to own land in places where they work, and not be obliged to live in rented houses which they can never call their own.

Arabs want to be part of the general population, and not confined to living in their own ghettoes. Arab men want to have their wives and children to live with them where they work and not be forced into an unnatural existence in men’s hostels. Arab women want to be with their menfolk and not be permanently widowed in IDF policed villages.

Palestinian Arabs want to be allowed to travel freely within their own country and to seek work where they want to and not where the Labour Ministry tells them to. Arabs want a just share in the whole of former Palestine; they want security and a stake in society.

Above all, we want equal political rights although we know this makes the Israeli fear democracy. But this fear cannot be allowed to stand in the way of the only solution which will guarantee racial harmony and freedom for all. It is not true that enfranchisement of all will result in racial domination. Political division, based on ethnicity or religion, is entirely artificial, and when it disappears, so will the domination of one ethnic group over another. Western democracies have spent nearly a century fighting against racialism.

This struggle is a national one. It is a struggle for the right to live.

*Taken from a speech by the late Nelson Mandela, the first President of an independent South Africa.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Apartheid in Israel

Bernie Sanders is a self-declared Democratic Socialist who believes that the US middle class and the working families who produce the wealth of America, deserve a decent standard of living. He believes that international trade agreements as written by corporate America, Wall Street and the political lobbyists, have been a disaster for the American worker.  He advocates comprehensive financial reforms that will focus on income and wealth inequality.

Sanders was a strong opponent of the US invasion of Iraq and the misconceived Bush ‘war on terror’. He is a strong advocate for a two-state solution in the Palestine-Israel conflict. This means that he is opposed to the right-wing extremist policies of the Netanyahu Likud government and its agenda of illegal settlements in the Occupied Territories. Mr Sanders is no fan of Binyamin Netanyahu and, therefore, no fan of AIPAC, the Israel lobby.

He advocates a crackdown on police brutality and bold action to reverse global warming.  Bernie Sanders describes himself as a secular Jew and is proud to be Jewish. His wife is Roman Catholic. They believe that they cannot turn their backs on the suffering of other people. That is not Judaism or Roman Catholicism and he has denounced institutional racism.

The result in New Hampshire is a defence for an American democracy that has for too long been hijacked by the powerful lobbies for Israel and other vested interests.

[email protected]

London   February 2016

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Pro-Israel Lobby Shudders as Bernie Sanders Beats Clinton and Threatens Neocons in Washington and Wall Street

More on the Zika Virus-Microcephaly Freak-out

February 10th, 2016 by Dr. Gary G. Kohls

“…[O]ur current results are consistent with the existing evidence on the toxicology and pharmacokinetics of aluminum adjuvants which altogether strongly implicate these compounds as contributors to the rising prevalence of neurobehavioral disorders in children. Given that autism has devastating consequences in a life of a child, and that currently in the developed world over 1% of children suffer from some form of ASD, it would seem wise to make efforts towards reducing infant exposure to aluminum from vaccines.“ — CA Shaw, PhD

“There is a serious problem with vaccine safety. Vaccine aluminum adjuvants have adverse neurological effects, at dosages that are recommended by the US CDC. Vaccine critics are supported by the science. Parents refusing to vaccinate according to the recommended CDC schedule are supported by the science. Use aluminum-containing vaccines with great caution, or not at all.” — CA Shaw, PhD http://vaccinepapers.org/category/aluminum/

The CDC’s recommendation that doctors give every pregnant woman a Tdap vaccination during every pregnancy—regardless of whether a woman has already received one dose of Tdap—is an off-label use of the vaccine.” — Carol Adl

“Yielding to the pressure from Big Pharma and with a mis-placed confidence in the Big Pharma-dominated CDC, FDA and his Big Medicine health advisors, President Obama has recommended that Congress spend $1,800,000,000 for defending America against a non-disease and for the fast track development of a Zika virus vaccine. Most of the money will go to corporations.” – GG Kohls

Last week’s Duty to Warn column on the Zika virus/microcephaly “freak-out” (published by Global Research) has been widely circulated around the planetary blogosphere, but not, apparently (and not unsurprisingly), among the gatekeepers of information in Big Government, Big Medicine, Big Pharma, Big Media and the CDC despite many of those organizations being duly informed about the “unspeakable” reality of yet another vaccine-induced, iatrogenic (medical industry-caused) disease.

For those organizations and industries, it must be preferable to blame iatrogenic illnesses on innocent mosquitos, viruses and people (for not spraying enough neurotoxic insecticides or neurotoxic repellants on themselves). For guilty medical industries, it must be preferable to blame anything other than the true culprits rather than risk losing public confidence in drugs or the over-vaccination programs that are constantly being forced on our ever-sickening children. For more understanding on the issue, check out last week’s Duty to Warn column at:

http://duluthreader.com/articles/2016/02/04/6685_the_zika_virus_outbreak_covering_up_another-1.

Alternative websites, alternative talk shows and assorted, non-brain-washed critical thinkers around the world (that have not been co-opted by Big Business) have expressed profound interest in the information contained in the handful of exposes from various whistle-blowers

(check out www.nomorefakenews.org;

http://yournewswire.com/video-the-zika-false-flag-fraud-fizzles/;

and  www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6O0Cnv9UJ4),

that have correctly asserted that the most likely causative factor in the epidemic of microcephaly is NOT Zika virus. Rather, it is Brazil’s desperate act of mandating that every pregnant women in Brazil – starting in early 2015 – be inoculated with GlaxoSmithKline’s Tdap vaccine (a neurotoxic aluminum-containing vaccine that is supposed to prevent whooping cough).

Pregnant women, trusting the wisdom of the public health agencies and also their physicians, took the shot (some right along with their mercury-containing flu shot!) and before the year was out, those deceived women began delivering an increased number of microcephalic babies with shrunken, underdeveloped brains and therefore shrunken skulls.

Aluminum Toxicity in Sao Paulo and Lead Toxicity in Flint

What could possibly go wrong when neurotoxic heavy metals like aluminum or mercury (thimerosal) or lead get into the developing brains of fetuses, whose blood-brain barriers are at their most immature?

Brazilian public health authorities didn’t check into aluminum neurotoxicity before they issued the mandate last year. The victims had no choice.

Speaking of no choice, it is instructive to ponder some of the similarities between what happened to the aluminum-poisoned pregnant women and fetuses in Sao Paulo and what is likely to happen to some of the lead-poisoned pregnant women in Flint, Michigan. Don’t expect the public health officials to do the right thing in either city.

Of course, it remains to be seen what other neurological, hormonal, endocrine, mental, behavioral, sexual, physical or spiritual abnormalities will develop over the next decades in the Brazilian babies that were lucky enough to not be born with gross anomalies like microcephaly. Vaccine-induced (or other) toxic microcephalies are, after all, spectrum disorders, with stillborn anencephalics at one end of the spectrum and grossly normal-appearing babies, that have only invisible synaptic- and/or cellular-level brain defects at the other end.

Guilty or embarrassed public health officials, threatened with humiliating exposes, lawsuits and/or criminal indictments (financially supported by Big Pharma’s powerful corporate forces) can be expected to fail to do a thorough, unbiased, scientific investigation into the emerging catastrophe – after trying to stonewall it initially.

What every mainstream media outlet in America failed to report when the public health authorities released the Brazilian data (after finally getting their stories straight) was the fact that there were no unusual numbers of Brazilian microcephalics born in the summer and fall of 2015, whereas there were reportedly1200 in November, another 1200 in December and by the end of January 2016 there was a total of 4000. Nobody seems to know the exact details. Crimes and their ever-present cover-ups work that way.

It is important to recognize that none of the other risk factors for brain toxicity, brain cell death and therefore brain atrophy in Brazil changed since 2015 – except for the dramatic injections of the toxic aluminum adjuvant into developing fetuses.

Let’s list some of those factors.

A Short List of Risk Factors for Fetal Brain Atrophy

Brazil is a world leader in poverty in the developed world, but it is not alone in desperately trying to maximize its position as a world leader in agriculture. Because of that desperation, Brazil has succumbed to the temptation from Big Agribusiness to raise heavily drugged (with antibiotics), very sickened livestock (that eat GMO grains that haven’t been tested adequately for long-term safety).

Brazil has also succumbed to Big Agrichemical’s siren song to use more and more toxic chemicals on its crops. Thus it is genetically-altering its livestock feeding program, which requires a lot of Round-up in order to force its increasingly micronutrient-depleted soil to grow more malnourishing grains and food. The poor in Brazil and, of course, their fetuses may be among the most seriously malnourished in the developed world. Poor maternal and prenatal nutrition can’t grow healthy fetal brains and bodies.

Before 2015, Brazil was (and still is) a world leader in the heavy use of Monsanto’s mitochondrial and cellular toxin, Round-up (which contains glyphosate, a carcinogenic herbicide [according to WHO]).

What could possibly go wrong when fetal brains are exposed to mitochondrial toxins that are sprayed (both before and after harvesting) on any number of Round-up Ready GMO foodstuffs that seem to be in every non-organic grocery store and restaurant?

Before 2015, Brazil was (and still is) a world leader in the heavy use of Syngenta’s hormone-disrupting Atrazine (the synthetic herbicide that was behind Minnesota’s infamous rural Atrazine-toxified farmland epidemic of hermaphroditic frogs that also exhibited a slew of physical defects, including extra or absent limbs [not to mention the near-extinction of the species]). Hermaphrodites, it should be noted, contain both sex organs, thanks to Syngenta, and cannot reproduce. Atrazine contaminates the drinking water of half of southern Minnesota.

What could possibly go wrong with the fetal development in pregnant Brazilian women when they are exposed to estrogen-mimicking chemicals like Atrazine?

Brazil has been, and is still a world leader in the use of insecticides that are designed to poison the nervous systems of insects.

DEET isn’t as Safe as Public Health Agencies Want us to Believe

What could possibly go wrong when insecticides or repellants are inhaled or are applied to the highly absorbent skin of pregnant women? 

Back in the 1980s there were a number of cases reported in the medical literature of childhood “toxic encephalopathy” that were caused by the popular insect repellant DEET (which is widely – and falsely – “generally regarded as safe” [gras]). The encephalopathy in those cases was characterized by agitation, weakness, disorientation, ataxia, seizures, coma and even death. One of fatal cases that was autopsied showed necrotic lesions in the cerebellum and spinal cord plus an enlarged liver. According to other published toxicology reports, DEET is rapidly absorbed through the skin and is distributed to all organs including the brain and the fetus of pregnant women. The chemical is secreted in the breast milk of lactating women but is primarily excreted from the body through the urine. No long-term safety studies for DEET have been done on pregnant women or their exposed fetuses, but the public health authorities in Brazil are silent on the issue.

And even America’s Center for Disease Control and Prevention is silent on the known adverse fetal effects of DEET, neurotoxic insecticides, neurotoxic mercury in flu shots and the neurotoxic metal aluminum. The CDC gives the impression that some neurotoxins might be safe for pregnant women and fetuses at some level, while it simultaneously preaches total abstinence of even small amounts of alcohol in pregnancy, proclaiming that ”there is no safe amount of alcohol for a woman during any stage of pregnancy” implying that there must be a safe amount for vaccine ingredients.

The CDC is the public health agency (unfortunately heavily influenced by Big Pharma) that the American public and most physicians look to for honest, unbiased, well-researched information about xenobiotics like drugs and vaccines and about events like pandemics and epidemics, and here it is blatantly failing to truthfully inform the public about all aspects of the Zika virus/microcephaly event.

How can we ever trust the CDC again (or WHO or the media) when they refuse to tell us the truth of the matter: that there “is no safe amount of aluminum, mercury or lead” for fetuses or infants?

That is the most important lesson to be learned in this whole sad Zika hoax. My hope is that readers of this column will demand truthfulness from the journalists and editors who are the gate-keepers of “all the news that’s fit to print”.

Yielding to the pressure from Big Pharma and with a mis-placed confidence in the Big Pharma-dominated CDC, FDA and his Big Medicine health advisors, President Obama has recommended that Congress spend $1,800,000,000 for defending America against a non-disease and for the fast track development of a Zika virus vaccine. Most of the money will go to corporations.

I end this piece with some revealing information that I have excerpted from the internet that also needs wide attention:

Excerpts From the CDC’s “Toxicological Profile for Aluminum”

(http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp22-c3.pdf)

“…neurofibrillary pathological changes have been associated with several neurodegenerative disorders, suggesting that the cause of aluminum-related abnormal neuronal function may involve changes in cytoskeletal protein functions in affected cells.“ ( p 118)

 ”Fetal exposure (to aluminum) may result in a higher distribution of aluminum to the brain, as compared to adults. In the fetuses of rats receiving a single subcutaneous injection of aluminum on gestation day 5, the amount of the radio-labelled aluminum in the brain was 30% higher than in the liver; in the dams, brain aluminum levels were only 1% of the levels found in the liver (Yumoto et al. 2000). Aluminum is distributed transplacentally, and elevated levels of aluminum have been measured in the fetus and placenta following oral, dermal, or parenteral exposure to aluminum (Anane et al. 1997; Cranmer et al. 1986; Yumoto et al. 2000).” (p 122)

“Preterm infants may also be particularly sensitive to the toxicity of aluminum due to reduced renal capacity” (Tsou et al. 1991.” (p 127)

Vaccine Company Package Inserts That List Encephalopathy as an Adverse Reaction

Merck M-M-R® II (Measles, Mumps, and Rubella Virus Vaccine Live)

ADVERSE REACTIONS: Encephalitis; encephalopathy

Merck RECOMBIVAX HB® Hepatitis B Vaccine
ADVERSE REACTIONS:
Encephalitis

Merck GARDASIL (Human Papillomavirus Quadrivalent)

ADVERSE REACTIONS (Postmarketing):Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis

Merck VARIVAX Varicella (Chickenpox ) Live Virus Vaccine
ADVERSE REACTIONS, (Post-marketing):
Encephalitis

Glaxo INFANRIX (DTaP) Pertussis Vaccine
Postmarketing Experience:
Encephalopathy

Sanofi Pasteur PENTACEL DTaP IPV and HIB Combo Vaccine  
Data from Clinical Studies, Serious Adverse Events:
Encephalopathy

MedImmune FLUMIST Vaccine  (Influenza Vaccine Live, Intranasal Spray)
Postmarketing Experience:
Vaccine-associated encephalitis

Merck AFLURIA Flu Vaccine
Postmarketing Experience:
Encephalopathy

Novartis Vaccines AGRIFLU Flu Vaccine
Postmarketing Experience:
Encephalomyelitis and transverse myelitis

GlaxoSmithKline FLUARIX Flu Vaccine
Postmarketing Experience:
Encephalomyelitis

Note that the cases of vaccine-induced encephalomyelitis warned about above occurred in infants, children and adolescents. Think how much more common or serious such cases might be in immature fetuses!

*      *      *

The following extended excerpt was from Carol Adl’s article

“Is Zika Virus Or The Tdap Vaccine Causing Birth Defects In Brazil?”

It has been published at: http://yournewswire.com/is-zika-virus-or-the-dtap-vaccine-causing-birth-defects-in-brazil/

“FACT—Drug companies did not test the safety and effectiveness of giving Tdap vaccine to pregnant women before the vaccines were licensed in the U.S. and there is almost no data on inflammatory or other biological responses to this vaccine that could affect pregnancy and birth outcomes.

“FACT—According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) adequate testing has not been done in humans to demonstrate safety for pregnant women and it is not known whether the vaccines can cause fetal harm or affect reproduction capacity. The manufacturers of the Tdap vaccine state that human toxicity and fertility studies are inadequate and warn that Tdap should “be given to a pregnant woman only if clearly needed.”

“FACT—There are ingredients in pertussis containing Tdap vaccine that have not been fully evaluated for potential genotoxic or other adverse effects on the human fetus developing in the womb that may negatively affect health after birth, including aluminum adjuvants, mercury containing (Thimerosal) preservatives and many more bioactive and potentially toxic ingredients.

“FACT—There are no published biological mechanism studies that assess pre-vaccination health status and measure changes in brain and immune function and chromosomal integrity after vaccination of pregnant women or their babies developing in the womb.

“FACT—Since licensure of Tdap vaccine in the U.S., there have been no well-designed prospective case-controlled studies comparing the health outcomes of large groups of women who get pertussis containing Tdap vaccine during pregnancy either separately or simultaneously compared to those who do not get the vaccines, and no similar health outcome comparisons of their newborns at birth or in the first year of life have been conducted. Safety and effectiveness evaluations that have been conducted are either small, retrospective, compare vaccinated women to vaccinated women or have been performed by drug company or government health officials using unpublished data.

“FACT—The FDA has licensed Tdap vaccines to be given once as a single dose pertussis booster shot to individuals over 10 or 11 years old. The CDC’s recommendation that doctors give every pregnant woman a Tdap vaccination during every pregnancy—regardless of whether a woman has already received one dose of Tdap—is an off-label use of the vaccine.

“FACT—Injuries and deaths from pertussis-containing vaccines are the most compensated claims in the federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) and influenza vaccine injuries and deaths are the second most compensated claim.

“FACT—A 2013 published study evaluating reports of acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) following vaccination in the U. S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) and in a European vaccine reaction reporting system found that pertussis containing DTaP was among the vaccines most frequently associated with brain inflammation in children between birth and age five.

“Tdap is manufactured by two pharmaceutical companies: Sanofi Pasteur of France and GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) of the United Kingdom.

“Unsurprisingly, the Brazilian government announced on January 15, 2016 it will direct funds to a biomedical research center (Sao Paulo-based Butantan Institute) to help develop a vaccine against Zika. Development of the vaccine is expected to take 3-5 years. Again, no consideration to the irony that you may be developing a vaccine to address a problem that may have been CAUSED by a vaccine, and that that new vaccine may COMPOUND the problem No consideration to the possibility that the answer to the problem may not be to do MORE, but rather to do LESS (simply STOP giving Tdap to pregnant women).

“The number of cases of microcephaly in Brazil has grown to 3,530 babies, as of mid-January 2016. Fewer than 150 such cases were seen in all of 2014.”

Dr Kohls is a retired physician from Duluth, MN, USA. He writes a weekly column for the Reader, Duluth’s alternative newsweekly magazine. His columns mostly deal with the dangers of American fascism, corporatism, militarism, racism, malnutrition, psychiatric drugging, over-vaccination regimens, Big Pharma and other movements that threaten the environment or America’s health, democracy, civility and longevity. Many of his columns are archived at http://duluthreader.com/articles/categories/200_Duty_to_Warn

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on More on the Zika Virus-Microcephaly Freak-out

The situation with Turkey is rapidly getting out of control: not only have the Turks conducted artillery strikes across the Syrian border, Turkey has refused to comply with its obligations under the Open Skies Treaty and refused to let a Russian surveillance aircraft overfly Turkey. The Russian military has now declared that it had detected signs of Turkish preparations for an invasion. The Turkish refusal to abide by the Open Skies Treaty is an extremely worrisome development, especially when combined with the Russian warnings about the preparation for an invasion of Syria, and the Russians are not mincing their words:

There are plenty more indicators and warnings showing that an escalation is possible: the Geneva negotiations have been abruptly terminated, the Saudis are threatening to invade Syria and there are signs that the Syrian army is slowly but surely preparing an operation to liberate Aleppo from the Takfiris, creating a panic in Ankara and Riyadh (so much for the stupid notions that the Russians are not winning or that the Syrian military does not exist).

In the meantime, there are plenty of signs that Erdogan’s entire “grand plan” for Syria has completely collapsed that that he has no more options left (please read the excellent analysis by Ghassan Kadi on this topic posted today as well as Pepe Escobar’s take on the same issue).

I am not a psychic or a prophet. I cannot tell what Erdogan is really thinking, or whether the Turks will try to invade Syria. But what I can do is to try to make some educated guesses about possible Russian responses to such an event.

First, two basic principles:

1) If Russian forces are attacked they will hit back. Putin already gave them that authority and this will happen almost automatically with only local commanders making the final call. In other words, such an exchange of fire would not automatically be tantamount to a full-scale war between Turkey and Russia.

2) If Turkey invades Syria, Russia will act in strict compliance with international law. That means that she will demand an emergency meeting of the UNSC and that much will depend upon what the Council’s reaction will be. If the usual gangs of puppets “covers” for Turkey (which is by no means certain, in my opinion, at least not for very long, maybe a week or so max) then the Russians will then refer to their obligations to assist Syria under the 1980 “Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation” between the two countries (Russia being today the successor state to the USSR the treaty is still in force) and the 2015 “Agreement between the Russian Federation and the Syrian Arab Republic on thedeployment of aviation group of the Armed Forces on the territory of the Syrian Arab Republic“.

In other words, Russia will retain a degree of flexibility to interpret the situation in one way or another. That, in turn, means that much will depend on what the Turks really try achieve.

If we are talking about the typical Turkish violation of a national border to attack the Kurds, like what they did many times in the past already, and if that intervention is limited in depth, Russia will probably chose non-military means to put pressure on Turkey. Again, while the crazies in Turkey badly want a war with Russia to internationalize the conflict and force NATO to intervene, the Russians have no interest at all in such an escalation. Just as in the Donbass, the West is trying to bait Russia into a war and Russia is refusing to take that bait. The problem is that unlike the Ukronazis, the Turks have a much more powerful military machine which the Russian cannot ignore like they have ignored the Ukronazi military and various death squads. So if Erdogan’s goal is just to look macho and flex some muscle, say like what Reagan did in Grenada, then he can probably get away with it, at least for a short operation. But if Erdogan is dead set in having a conflict with Russia, the Russian won’t be able to just hunker down and wait for him to calm down.

In the latter case, Russia will have a number of escalatory options.

The first obvious options is to help the Syrians and Kurds with intelligence. This is already taking place now and will only intensify in the case of a Turkish invasion.

The second is to shoot Turkish fixed or rotary-wing aircraft out of the skies. This is an easy option as the Syrians already have some pretty good air defense systems (including some Pantsir-S1, Buk-M1/2E, Tunguskas 2K22 and a fairly robust early-warning system) and a few more or less capable aircraft (possibly including upgraded MiG-29s). The Kremlin can thus enjoy a degree of what the CIA called “plausible deniability”.

The third option for Russia is to help the Syrians with the artillery system she reportedly deployed in the country including 52-millimeter MTSA-B guns, BM-27 Uragan and BM-30 Smerch rocket launchers.

All these options would still fall short of a “full-scale” war between Russia and Turkey. But if Erdogan is determined to escalate further then a war will be inevitable. If Turkey tries to attack Khmeimim directly, then Russia will strike back, no doubt about it.

What could it look like?

The first thing I would say is that neither country will try to invade the other one. The notion of Turkey invading Russia is self-evidently ludicrous, but while Turkey does fall within the 1000km depth the Russian military is trained to fight in, I don’t believe that Russia would ever attempt this. For one thing, and just as was the case with Georgia, nobody in Russia really believes that the Turks, as a nation, want war. If anything, Erdogan is much more of a “Saakashvili v2″ then a Hitler and he will be dealt with similarly. Furthermore, while during the 08.08.08 war Russia had to protect the Ossetians from the quasi-genocidal Georgians, Russia has no such obligations in Kurdistan.

A much more likely scenario is a repeat what we have already seen, but on a much larger scale: if Erdogan really forces Russia into a war, what will happen will be cruise and ballistic missile attacks on the infrastructure supporting the Turkish invasion, the sinking of any Turkish Navy ship involved in this effort, and bomb and missile attacks on Turkish force concentrations, ammo and fuel (POL) dumps and, especially, airfields. The goal of the Russian response will not be to “defeat” Turkey militarily, but to push back the Turks long enough to force some kind of a ceasefire upon Erdogan. Even if the Russian military is capable of completely defeating Turkey in a war, the Kremlin also realizes that any war between Turkey and Russia ought to be stopped as soon as possible and that rather than “defeating Turkey” the real Russian objective ought be to defeat Erdogan.

For this reason, the Russians, far from being trigger happy, will undertake every imaginable effort to show that they did not initiate the war, even if that means letting Turkey enter into Syria, at least as long as the Turks stay close to their border and do not attempt to change the course of the war. If all the Turks want is a thin “security zone” inside Syria, I don’t see the Russians using military force to deny this to them. They will protest, vehemently, on a diplomatic level, and they will help the Syrians and Kurds, but they will not directly attack the Turkish forces.

What about the Saudis? Well, what about them? They can’t even deal with the Houthis in Yemen, why would anyone think that they could make a difference in Syria? The Saudi military is a joke, a degenerate repression force barely capable of engaging in anti-Shia repression operations. They can make all the threats they want, but if they try to move into Syria the Syrians, Russians, Iranians and Hezbollah will all try to race each other to be the first one to finally get a hold of these SOBs in teach them a lesson they shall not forget in a long time.

Frankly, I simply don’t want to believe that Erdogan and his advisors are crazy enough to try to trigger a war with Russia or even to invade Syria. While Erdogan himself is clearly a maniac, I cannot believe that his entire staff is also composed of lunatics. Furthermore, I cannot imagine that the US/NATO/EU would actually support a Turkish invasion of Syria or, even less so, an attack on Russia. Russophobia is great only as long as it does not expose you to a continental war, at which point your self-interest and survival prevails over any ideological notions. At least I hope so.

And maybe I am naive, but I want to believe that the Turkish people are not going to just sit back and do nothing while their leader is dragging their country towards a war with Russia.

The Elder Saint Paisios the Athonite. Credit: The Saker

In conclusion, I want to mention one disturbing thing. A Greek elder, a monastic named Paisios, whom the Greek Orthodox Church has glorified as a saint, was known for his prophetic visions. One of the most famous one was his prediction that Turkey and Russia would have a major war which would result in a complete break-up of Turkey and the liberation of Constantinople from the Ottoman yoke (if you are interested by the details, click here and here). Now I quite realize that in our times most people will immediately dismiss such things as meaningless nonsense, obscurantism, superstition, wishful thinking on the part of a “resentful Greek”, religious gobbledygook etc. But please keep in mind that between the 15th and the 20th century, Russia and Turkey have already fought 12 wars (!). That over 2 wars (2.4 exactly) per century and that the last one happened a century ago.

The Elder Saint Paisios the Athonite. Credit: The Saker

So whether you look at prophecies, past experience or statistics, things look very, very scary, at least to me. And, as Ghassan Kadi and Pepe Escobar have explained, Erdogan is now cornered. That also makes him very dangerous.

The AngloZionists are experts at unleashing crazed ideologues (Wahabis in the Middle-East and Nazis in the Ukraine) but that they always seem to eventually somehow lose control over them. I just hope that the American ‘cover’ of the Turkish regime did not result in the unleashing of yet another rabid ideology – Ottoman Imperialism – or, if it has, that it is not too late for the US to rein in this lunatic before it is too late.

Erdogan and his regime are a threat to regional and even world piece. I don’t really care who removes him, the Turkish people or the White House, but I sure hope that his days in power are numbered because as long as he is in power a catastrophe of major proportions can happen.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Week 17 of the Russian Intervention in Syria: Does Erdogan Want War with Russia?

Selected Articles: More Political Corruption is Exposed Everyday

February 10th, 2016 by Global Research News

kadenalanding-USAirbase-JapanJapan: New Docs Link Polluted Drinking Water Supply to Massive US Military Base

By Andrea Germanos, February 10 2016

Internal documents obtained by the Japan Times offer evidence that the contamination of local drinking water sources near a massive U.S. airbase in Japan is the result of years of repeated mishaps and “lax safety standards” by U.S. military forces.

soldier-hand-machine gunCanada Sells Weapons to State Sponsor of Terrorism: Class Action Law Suit against Ottawa over $15 Billion Saudi Arms Deal

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, February 10 2016

Canada is selling weapons to a country which is supporting and sponsoring terrorist organizations. Moreover Saudi Arabia is currently involved in a war of aggression against Yemen in blatant derogation of international law.

FRANCE-ATTACKS-CHARLIE-HEBDO-SECURITY - MOSQUEHuman Rights Watch Report Exposes Abusive French State of Emergency

By Stéphane Hugues, February 09 2016

In a report published February 3, international NGO Human Rights Watch (HRW), has denounced the abuses of the Police and the French State under the State of urgency.

Israeli MK Hanin ZoabiIsrael Demolishes Homes and Tells Palestinian Owners to Pay the Costs

By Middle East Monitor, February 09 2016

The Israeli occupation authorities have told the Palestinian owners of homes destroyed by security forces to pay the demolition costs, Safa news agency reported on Sunday.

torture-16_0Pentagon Releases 200 Photos of Bush-Era Prisoner Abuse, Thousands Kept Secret

By Lauren McCauley, February 08 2016

The Pentagon on Friday was forced to release nearly 200 photographs of bruises, lacerations, and other injuries inflicted on prisoners presumably by U.S. military personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: More Political Corruption is Exposed Everyday