This week’s annual United Nations General Assembly summit brought the rare occasion of Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin face-to-face attending the same momentous session. With Obama appearing peevish and sheepish, the Russian strongman took center stage targeting the US president’s failed policy and leadership in his crosshairs:

Rather than bringing about reforms, an aggressive foreign interference has resulted in a brazen destruction of national institutions and life itself. Instead of the triumph of democracy and progress, we got violence, poverty and social disaster.

Nobody cares a bit about human rights, including the right to life. I cannot help asking those who have caused the situation, do you realize now what you’ve done? But I am afraid no one is going to answer that. Indeed, policies based on self-conceit and belief in one’s exceptionalism and impunity have never been abandoned.

Planet earth is rapidly changing drastically in a myriad of ways. On display before the world this week, the shifting geopolitics of an overextended US Empire in freefall decline is now fully underway for all to see. But a brief look back to last year’s events and developments provides the contextual explanation of how we got here.

The overt aggression in February 2014 of Hillary’s NGO-led coup in Kiev overthrowing the democratically elected Ukrainian president at Russia’s border violated and defied all international law regarding the sovereignty of nations. The imperialistic US Empire was chomping at the bit to gain full Black Sea access by stealing Russia’s naval base in Sevastopol. But Putin strategically outmaneuvered the Obama neocons by Crimea electing to be annexed by Russia as it had been for centuries earlier. Though it was clearly the US that was the foreign invader violently triggering another regime change, the feds began their nonstop attack demonizing Putin as the global villain ushering the latest installment of cold war II complete with a nuclear first strike contingency plan.

The subsequent re-emergence of the Russian-Chinese alliance in self-defense against an overly aggressive United States bent on isolating the two Eastern powers ever since has had profound implications militarily, politically and economically on the global chessboard. The establishment of China’s Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank a half year ago and the immediate exodus of longtime US allies rushing to join as founding members became a litmus test for what was to come. Clearly a dramatic global shift in power was afoot moving from West to East.

Not wanting another world war to break out in their backyard, the French and German leaders quickly brokered periodic rounds of peace talk negotiations in Minsk as needed between Kiev’s neo-Nazi US puppet and Russia in the face of escalating violence and war in Eastern Ukraine. Unfortunately with complicit approval from warmongering Washington, Ukraine forces have repeatedlyviolated the peace treaties.

Meanwhile, Obama was leading the charge rushing to ship heavy arms as well as send US military advisors to aid the Ukrainian military to engage in ethnic cleansing against the would-be freedom fighters asserting their independence from an illegitimate, corrupt and hostile Kiev regime. The hastened peace talks became another sign of Euro-defiance toward the US-NATO killing machine whose commander General Breedlove(aka Dr. Strangelove) was making wildly bogus claims that Russian soldiers were invading Ukraine, again rankling Merkel and others into calling for a diminished NATO role.

Obama’s economic sanctions against Russia have only hurt gas-dependent Western Europe far more than Putin as yet another costly consequence of America’s arrogant “full spectrum dominance” to surround and weaken rivals Russia and China. But then the EU, the UK, Europe and NATO have long been considered a mere extension as vassals to the monolithic empire operating out of Washington.

Still another over-the-top catastrophe plaguing the entire continent of Europe is this year’s tidal wave of migration from Syria, the Middle East and North Africa currently pouring into the continent, once again caused directly by the warring foreign policy of the US-NATO-Israel. The latest evidence of the crumbling influence of the US Empire is German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s welcoming embrace of Putin’s decisive move to eradicate ISIS in Syria. Merkel secretly knows America’s so called war against ISIS is simply another false fronted fake war by Obama and his Pentagon. The US-Israel-EU-NATO-Saudi-Turkey-Arab Gulf state funded creation of the terrorist monster-on-steroids has recently been exposed like never before. Obama’s pledge a year ago to “hunt down” and destroy ISIS proved to be yet another of his too many to count, empty false promises he never intended to keep.

For decades now al Qaeda/Islamic State jihadists have regularly been America’s secret go-to proxy ally, hired gun mercenary thugs used effectively to destroy wherever they’re unleashed, especially where US Empire chooses not to put GI boots on the ground. Then came the biggest false flag coup in human history – 9/11 – when we’re supposed to believe that 19 box-cutting al Qaeda “terrorists” murdered 3000 Americans when no solid evidence confirms it. Instead they were used as neocon stooges hired to be the fall guys for the 9/11 attacks. Half of those so called terrorists have subsequently been found alive, some are even currently suing the US government.

In fact evidence has now been uncovered that Israel and its Mossad conspired with the Bush-Cheney neocons along with a little help from their Saudi friends as the real 9/11 terrorists. The entire plan to destabilize and redraw the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) had already been hatched by the 9/11 architects with their Project for a New American Century (PNAC) long before the towers ever fell. Calling for a “new Pearl Harbor event,” the neocons conspired with Israel to launch an imperialistic blood-for-oil crusade under the false flag cover of their forever war on terror to take down every Arab nation not part of the US-Israeli crime cabal.

General Wesley Clark’s passing discovery a week after 9/11 of the Bush-Cheney foreign policy calling for a 7-nation regime change was simply the PNAC agenda still criminally operating today with the neocon/Obama obsession to remove Syria’s Assad from power. 9/11 became the diabolical excuse to invade, occupy, and murder millions of people to destroy Iraq and Afghanistan, respectively the world’s third largest oil producer and the world’s largest heroin producer. By the way, the feds’ international drug smuggling operation has been criminally funding US military Black Ops in 135 countries around the world, 85% of which is illegally laundered by IMF and the World Bank. Neocon lies of infamy and incessant false propaganda were used to remove two former US Empire allies Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi who both made the fatal error daring to defy the unholy sanctum of the US petrodollar. As Israel’s proxy ally the neocon-led US proceeded to systematically turn those two once prosperous, oil-rich nations into permanent, war ravaged, failed states along with half a dozen other hapless MENA nation fatalities.

This week’s events at the United Nations shed more gaping light and guilt on the demonic US Empire agenda. Even mainstreamCNN stated “Vladimir Putin stole Barack Hussein Obama’s thunder” on Monday calling out despot Obama on his failed policy to stop ISIS in its tracks. In Putin’s own words:

We should finally acknowledge that no one but President Assad’s armed forces and Kurdish militia are truly fighting the Islamic State and other terrorist organizations in Syria… We support the legitimate government of Syria. And it’s my deep belief that any actions to the contrary, in order to destroy the legitimate government, will create a situation which you can witness now in the other countries of the region or in other regions – for instance, in Libya, where all the state institutions are disintegrated. We see a similar situation in Iraq.

In contrast Obama’s softer approach toward the world’s enemy is fighting ISIS “with ideas, not violence.” In Barack Obama’s words:

This means defeating their ideology. Ideologies are not defeated with guns. They are defeated by better ideas – a more attractive and compelling vision.

This only makes sense when the world realizes that as the creator of ISIS in the first place, the US Commander-in-Chief’s own self-interest is to extend the war on terror well into the future (defeating ISIS “will take time”) by ensuring Islamic State’s continued protection and survival. After all, treasonous feds in Washington and the Islamic jihadists maintain a symbiotic relationship. The US needs ISIS as much for its forever war on terror as ISIS needs the secret US-Israeli cabal as its main backer-financier. Of course Saudi Arabia, Turkey and all the little oil-rich Arab Gulf state monarchies like Qatar, Kuwait and United Arab Emirates play their part in secretly funding their extremist partner against the Kurds, Syria and Iran. Hence as closeted bedfellows, Obama’s kid gloves approach towards his favorite proxy ally is revealed. Even former Defense Intelligence Agency director retired General Michael J. Flynn insists that back in 2012 even prior to ISIS becoming ISIS, Obama made his “willful” choice to favor, arm and support the Islamic State terrorists as his proxy ally against Assad.

As such, instead of destroying ISIS, Obama and the US Empire have been treasonously aiding and abetting the Islamic jihadists as they spread their malignant cancer to every hotspot in the Middle East, North Africa and well beyond.

While IS is still flourishing more than ever in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Pakistan, it has now linked up deeper into sub-Saharan Africa with other terrorist groups such as Nigeria’s Boko Harem and Somalia’s Al- Shabaab. The government watchdog group Judicial Watch earlier this year even reported ISIS co-training with a Mexican drug cartel at a camp just 8 miles from the El Paso, Texas border.

The Islamic State has even moved into Ukraine as a forward base and is now feared to be opportunistically hopping a ride onboard the globalist cabal orchestrated migration crisis. There are already reports of ISIS entering the Balkan nation states. Islamic extremists have also set their eyes eastward into the Caucasus and Central Asian regions. Thus, the urgency of this human crisis now has Germany and other European nations desperately looking toward leadership from Putin to be the real enemy of the terrorists as opposed to the paper tiger faker Obama.

Seizing on the opportunity to expose the US for its feeble response in its yearlong fake efforts to wipe out ISIS, now even China is joining Putin’s bandwagon by also coming to the aid of Assad’s Syria, Iraq and Iran in their earnest fight to eliminate the Islamic militants once and for all.

The Chinese aircraft carrier Liaoning-CV-16  and a Chinese guided missile cruiser are now docked in the Syrian port OF Tartus. Stephen Lendman rightly points out that perhaps Russia and China may extend an open invitation to other nations to join their newest coalition waging real war against the terrorists.

Chinese military advisors followed by more troops are scheduled to arrive in Syria tasked with freshly arriving Russian marines along with Iranian and Syrian anti-terrorism forces to defeat ISIS in Syria.

Moreover, usual stalwart US allied puppet Australia has just decided to abandon the US Empire’s imperialistic scheme to remove Assad, willing to see what happens in the long term as the new coalition led by US enemies Russia and China appear to be resolutely taking charge against ISIS after the US “accidentally on purpose” dropped the ball.

Meanwhile, mounting evidence shows that traitor Obama, fellow traitor chicken-hawk McCain and war criminal Bibi Netanyahu have been caught red-handed secretly meeting with ISIS and coddling jihadist terrorists in a Golan Heights hospital respectively.

There have been one too many US or British aircraft shot down by Iraqi security forces carrying arms to IS. Or one too many US airdrops of medical, food and arms supplies “mistakenly” landing in so called enemy hands waiting on the ground instead of the legitimate anti-ISIS forces like the Kurds. To make matters demoralizingly worse, financially strapped US taxpayers are being forced to spend $10 million a day on a fake war that’s only making the enemy stronger. Adding insult to injury, these repeated incidents confirming Obama’s aiding and abetting support his and his Pentagon’s contentions that this long war on terror will be ongoing for “decades to come,” deceitfully ensuring that the enemy supply line is maintained at all cost. But now the cost of aiding and abetting the enemy is exposing the US president as a traitor like never before.

All the while the Pentagon has been presenting a far more optimistic and deceptive picture than the dismal reality on the ground honestly permits. A long history of US war commanders typically lie through their teeth to justify their wars. From General Westmoreland in Vietnam to General Petraeus in Afghanistan to the latest Central Commander General Lloyd Austin, the same old bloody song wags on. In late March General Austin went on record with his recommendation to the White House that a key US military role in Syria will be to “shield” several thousand US freshly trained jihadists fighting against Assad forces. Historically there’s been no difference between ISIS and the latest US financed, trained and armed hired gun jihadists. In a related deception, the Pentagon’s Inspector General is now investigating General Austin’s Central Command for lowballing lies about ISISexpansion after getting caught fudging intelligence reports. How long are we the citizenry going to put up with all these dishonest traitors as our leaders regularly committing treason against us? When we’re locked up or dead it’ll be too late.

Ironically Obama’s objective to weaken and isolate Russia and China has been backfiring miserably. As this week’s developments clearly show, it’s Obama who’s the weakest and most isolated. In stark contrast, both of the US adversaries are enjoying a resurgence in global strength and power that is now successfully challenging Washington’s unilateral policy of interventionism and in-your-face global hegemony.

That “Asian pivot” Obama boldly touted a couple years ago designed to expand US military influence and power throughout East Asia has also proven an abysmal failure. The US has chosen to militarize the region by arming its puppet allies Japan, South Korea, Philippines and Australia. Meanwhile, the onetime US enemy that suffered millions of lost lives during the Vietnam War has allowed the US to take over its naval base at Cam Ranh Bay in order to combat China’s surging regional dominance in the South China Sea. The pivot was an obvious attempt to willfully stir up tensions off China’s coast over disputed Pacific islands, all strategically designed to hem China in similar to Russia. Meanwhile, the Gulen Islamic Schools operating as a transparent CIA front throughout the Caucasus and Central Asia are subversively infiltrating western China’s Xinjiang Province funding and fomenting separatist terrorism amongst the local Uyghur population.

In an overt ploy to humiliate and undermine this week’s USA visit by China’s President Xi Jinping, Obama threatened to apply economic sanctions against China that could pose a fatal blow to the US hi-tech electronics industry in Seattle and Silicon Valley that heavily depends on the vast Chinese market for continued expansion. Similar to the Putin sanctions harming Europe far more than Putin, Obama’s latest offensive shot across the bow amidst a fiercely raging currency war, cyber war and heightened military tensions especially after the massive Tianjin chemical explosion that could well have been triggered by US military saboteurs a day after China chose to devalue its Yuan. Another large industrial explosion occurred in China several days later followed by yet another explosion in a US arsenal warehouse in Japan only ratcheting up hostilities and suspicions to a fever pitch.

Like virtually everything, the increasing conflicts between America and China in recent years have been caused by the US. In 2010 the NSA was busted using Google to spy on China’s military and trade secrets. Of course mainstream media never mentioned a word about this faux pas that soured China to do business with Google and other American IT companies, causing Beijing to implement a new trading policy requiring US corporate giants to begin sharing technologies locally with China’s rising electronics manufacturers.

This justified precautionary measure was retaliated against by the Obama administration with several high profile arrests falsely charging Chinese scientists as spies that were later dropped for lack of evidence. Then came the bogus accusations that Chinese hackers were behind the theft of US company trade secrets followed by more finger pointing after alleged sensitive personal info belonging to thousands of federal employees was compromised. Again without providing any substantiation backing up its claims, Washington and its MSM propaganda have launched a relentless assault to demonize China as the latest cold war enemy in a cyber war that the US in fact had started.

In case you haven’t noticed, for the longest time truth has been the enemy of the feds’ crime cabal government and it’s now fast catching up to the treasonous rogue aggressors misrepresenting Americans as the true enemy of the entire world. The seven decade run that the United States has enjoyed since World War II as the number one leader of the not-so-free world is all but over.

A quarter century ago with the fall of the Soviet Union the United States emerged from the cold war as sole victor and sole global superpower. But instead of using its economic, geopolitical and military might and power to benefit other nations on earth in order to enhance the lives of all humans, the US Empire proceeded to make war around the world killing over 30 million people in the process, ultimately alienating itself as the sole world bully-killer executioner of any and all nations that dared to resist its fascist imperialistic exploitation and naked aggression.

The US crime cabal acting as a front for the military industrial complex, the oil industry and the global elite has maintained a predatory policy of siccing the World Bank and IMF on every developing nation with non-repayable, insurmountable loan debtsthat then unleash the Fortune 500 sharks to privatize and otherwise rape, pillage and plunder this earth, sapping precious lifeblood resources right out of its Third World victims. And this is how US Empire victimizes the world short of going to war.

The parasitic nature of the pathologically impaired elite, the subhuman species comprising the psychopathy club’s innermost circle, has been calling all the shots for centuries, manipulating US Empire and its killing machine to do its dirty bidding. But with an awakened masses, empowered and informed sovereign citizens of the world united, its reign of terror and crimes against humanity are finally coming to an end.

Its brutal rule over the rest of the world using criminal assault, intimidation, threats, extortion, torture and murder in violation of every international law, UN Charter and Geneva Convention rule, the globalists’ Empire of chaos and destruction has long operated with complete impunity but ultimately its day of reckoning, judgment and karmic comeuppance is finally arriving.

Joachim Hagopian is a West Point graduate and former US Army officer. He has written a manuscript based on his unique military experience entitled “Don’t Let The Bastards Getcha Down.” It examines and focuses on US international relations, leadership and national security issues. After the military, Joachim earned a master’s degree in Clinical Psychology and worked as a licensed therapist in the mental health field for more than a quarter century. He now concentrates on his writing and has a blog site athttp://empireexposed.blogspot.co.id/.

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Putin and Obama’s UN Showdown Helps Expose How Washington Supports and Protects The Islamic State (ISIS)

Follow Global Research on Twitter

October 1st, 2015 by Global Research

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Follow Global Research on Twitter

russian-air-forceRussia to Use Air Force in Syria at President Assad’s Request to Destroy ISIS

By Pravda.ru, October 01 2015

Russia’s Federation Council gave its consent to President Putin for the use of the Russian Armed Forces outside the territory of the Russian Federation – in Syria, chairwoman of the Upper House of the Russian Parliament, Valentina Matviyenko, told TASS, Pravda.Ru reports.

Russian-Airborne-TroopsRussia Bombs ISIS

By Stephen Lendman, October 01 2015

After announcing it would conduct aerial operations in Syria, Russian warplanes struck Islamic State targets straightaway – in contrast to Washington’s campaign, attacking Syrian and Iraqi infrastructure targets, supporting its Islamic State foot soldiers on the ground.

ISISRussia Establishes ‘No Fly’ Zone for NATO Planes over Syria, Moves to Destroy “ISIS”. Pentagon Freaks Out

By Joe Quinn, October 01 2015

With a consistency between word and action that exposes Western governments for the liars they are, the Russian military, on the orders of Putin, today began carrying out air strikes against Jihadi targets in Syria.

obama-putin-510x383Putin’s Blitz Leaves Washington Rankled and Confused

By Mike Whitney, October 01 2015

Will [Putin’s] actions in Syria mirror those in South Ossetia? It’s hard to say, but it’s clear that the Obama crew is thunderstruck by the speed of the intervention. Check this out from the UK Guardian:  “Back at the White House, spokesperson Josh Earnest suggests that Vladimir Putin did not give Barack Obama warning about his intentions to begin air strikes in Syria.

ReutersObama Accuses Russia of Going After America’s “Good Guy Terrorists”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, October 01 2015

A major turning point in the dynamics of the Syria-Iraq war is unfolding. Russia is now directly involved in the counter-terrorism campaign in coordination with the Syrian and Iraqi governments. While Washington has acknowledged Moscow’s resolve, Obama is now complaining that the Russians are targeting the “good guy terrorists” who are supported by Washington.

Obama-Eyes-SyriaThe War on Syria. Obama Lied When He Said This

By Eric Zuesse, October 01 2015

U.S. President Obama’s central case against Syria’s Bashar al-Assad (and his central argument against Assad’s supporter Russia on that matter) is that Assad was behind the sarin gas attack in Ghouta Syria on 21 August 2013 — but it’s all a well-proven lie, as will be shown here.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: Putin Attacks ISIS, America Reacts and Further Exposes Its Sham “War against ISIS”

Putin’s Blitz Leaves Washington Rankled and Confused

October 1st, 2015 by Mike Whitney

On Monday, Russian President Vladimir Putin delivered a blistering critique of US foreign policy to the UN General Assembly.

On Tuesday, Barack Obama shoved a knife in Putin’s back. This is from Reuters:

“France will discuss with its partners in the coming days a proposal by Turkey and members of the Syrian opposition for a no-fly zone in northern Syria, French President Francois Hollande said on Monday…

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius “in the coming days will look at what the demarcation would be, how this zone could be secured and what our partners think,” Hollande told reporters on the sidelines of the annual United Nations General Assembly…

Hollande said such a proposal could eventually be rubber-stamped with a U.N. Security Council resolution that “would give international legitimacy to what’s happening in this zone.”…(France, partners to discuss northern Syria ‘safe zone’: Hollande, Reuters)

Hollande is a liar and a puppet. He knows the Security Council will never approve a no-fly zone. Russia and China have already said so. And they’ve explained why they are opposed to it, too. It’s because they don’t want another failed state on their hands like Libya, which is what happened last time the US and NATO imposed a no-fly zone.

But that’s beside the point. The real reason the no-fly zone issue has resurfaced is because it was one of the concessions Obama made to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan for the use of Incirlik airbase.  Washington has kept the terms of that deal secret, but Hollande has let the cat out of the bag.

So who put sock-puppet Hollande up to this no-fly zone nonsense?

Why the Obama administration, of course. Does anyone seriously believe that Hollande is conducting his own independent policy in Syria?  Of course not.  Hollande is just doing what he’s been told to do, just like he did when he was told to scotch the Mistral deal that cost France a whopping $1.2 billion. Washington and NATO didn’t like the idea that France was selling state-of-the-art helicopter carriers to arch-rival Putin, so they ordered Hollande to put the kibosh on the deal. Which he did, because that’s what puppets do; they obey their masters.  Now he’s providing cover for Obama so the real details of the Incirlik agreement remain off the public’s radar. That’s why we say,  Obama shoved a knife in Putin’s back, because, ultimately, the no-fly zone damages Russia’s interests in Syria.

The significance of the Reuters article cannot be overstated. It suggests that there was a quid pro quo for the use of Incirlik, and that Turkey’s demands were accepted. Why is that important?

Because Turkey had three demands:

1–Safe zones in north Syria (which means that Turkey would basically annex a good portion of Syrian sovereign territory.)
2–A no-fly zone (which would allow either Turkish troops, US Special Forces or US-backed jihadi militants to conduct their military operations with the support of US air cover.)
3–A commitment from the US that it will help Turkey remove Assad.

Did Obama agree to all three of these demands before Erdogan agreed to let the USAF use Incirlik?

Yes, at least I think he did, which is why I think we are at the beginning of Phase 2 of the US aggression against Syria. Incirlik changes everything. US bombers, drones and fighters can enter Syrian airspace in just 15 minutes instead of 3 to 4 hours from Bahrain. That means more sorties, more surveillance drones, and more air-cover for US-backed militias and Special Forces on the ground.  It means the US can impose a de facto no-fly zone over most of Syria that will expose and weaken Syrian forces tipping the odds decisively in favor of Obama’s jihadi army. Incirlik is a game-changer, the cornerstone of US policy in Syria.  With access to Incirlik, victory is within Washington’s reach. That’s how important Incirlik is.

And that’s why the normally-cautious Putin decided to deploy his warplanes, troops and weaponry so soon after the Incirlik deal was signed. He could see the handwriting on the wall. He knew he had to either act fast and turn the tide or accept the fact that the US and Turkey were going to topple Assad sometime after Turkey’s snap elections on November 1. That was his timeline for action. So he did the right thing and joined the fighting.

But what does Putin do now?

On Wednesday, just two days after Putin announced to the UN General Assembly:  “We can no longer tolerate the current state of affairs in the world,” Putin ordered the bombing of targets in Homs, an ISIS stronghold in West Syria. The attacks, which were unanimously approved by the Russian parliament earlier in the day, and which are entirely legal under international law (Putin was invited by Syria’s sitting president, Assad, to carry out the airstrikes), have put US policy in a tailspin. While the Russian military is maintaining an open channel to the Pentagon and reporting when-and-where it is carrying out its airstrikes, U.S. State Department spokesman John Kirby said that the US plans to “continue to fly missions over Iraq and Syria” increasing the possibility of an unintended clash that could lead to a confrontation between the US and Russia.

Is that what Washington wants, a violent incident that pits one nuclear-armed adversary against the other?

Let’s consider one probable scenario: Let’s say an F-16 is shot down over Syria while providing air cover for Obama’s militants on the ground. Now that Russia is conducting air raids over Syria, there’s a good chance that Putin would be blamed for the incident like he was when the Malaysian airliner was downed over East Ukraine.

So what happens next?

Judging by similar incidents in the past,  the media would swing into full-propaganda mode exhorting the administration to launch retaliatory attacks on Russian military sites while calling for a broader US-NATO mobilization. That, in turn, would force Putin to either fight back and up-the-ante or back-down and face disgrace.  Either way, Putin loses and the US gets one step closer to its objective of toppling Bashar al Assad.

Putin knows all this. He understands the risks of military involvement which is why he has only reluctantly committed to the present campaign. That said; we should expect him to act in much the same way as he did when Georgian troops invaded South Ossetia in 2007. Putin immediately deployed the tanks to push the invading troops back over the border into Georgia and then quickly ended the hostilities. He was lambasted by critics on the right for not invading Georgia and removing their leader, Mikheil Saakashvili, in the Capital. But as it turned out, Putin’s restraint spared Russia the unnecessary hardship of occupation which can drain resources and erode public support. Putin was right and his critics were wrong.

Will his actions in Syria mirror those in South Ossetia?

It’s hard to say, but it’s clear that the Obama crew is thunderstruck by the speed of the intervention. Check this out from the UK Guardian:  “Back at the White House, spokesperson Josh Earnest suggests that Vladimir Putin did not give Barack Obama warning about his intentions to begin air strikes in Syria.

“We have long said we would welcome constructive Russian coordination,” Earnest says, before qualifying that the talks between US and Russian militaries will be purely tactical: “to ensure that our military activities and the military activities of coalition partners would be safely conducted.” (The Guardian)

What does Earnest’s statement mean?  It means the entire US political class was caught off-guard by Putin’s  blitz and has not yet settled on an appropriate response. They know that Putin is undoing years of work by rolling up proxy-units that were supposed to achieve US objectives, but there is no agreement among ruling elites about what should be done. And making a decision of that magnitude could take time, which means that Putin should be able to obliterate a fair number of the terrorist hideouts and restore control of large parts of the country to Assad before the US ever agrees to a strategy. In fact, if he moves fast, he might even be able to force the US and their Gulf allies to the bargaining table where a political solution could be reached.

It’s a long-shot, but it’s a much better option then waiting around for the US to impose a no-fly zone that would collapse the central government and reduce Syria to Libya-type anarchy. There’s no future in that at all.

Mike Whitney lives in Washington state. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press). Hopeless is also available in a Kindle edition. He can be reached at [email protected].

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Putin’s Blitz Leaves Washington Rankled and Confused

Editor’s Note: This article was first published on January 8, 2015, one day after the Charlie Hebdo shooting in Paris, France.

Shooters were radicalized in Europe, sent to Syria, returned, have been previously arrested by Western security agencies for terrorism and long on the watch-list of French and other Western intelligence agencies. Yet “somehow” they still managed to execute a highly organized attack in the heart of Europe.  

In an all too familiar pattern and as predicted, the shooters involved in the attack in Paris Wednesday, January 7, 2015, were French citizens, radicalized in Europe and exported to Syria to fight in NATO’s proxy war against the government in Damascus, then brought back where they have now carried out a domestic attack. Additionally, as have been many other domestic attacks, the suspects were long under the watch of Western intelligence services, with at least one suspect having already been arrested on terrorism charges.

USA Today would report in an article titled, “Manhunt continues for two French terror suspects,” that:

The suspects are two brothers — Said, 34, and Cherif Kouachi, 32, both French nationals — and Hamyd Mourad, 18, whose nationality wasn’t known, a Paris police official told the Associated Press. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly.

USA Today would also report (emphasis added):

The brothers were born in Paris of Algerian descent. Cherif was sentenced to three years in prison on terrorism charges in May 2008. Both brothers returned from Syria this summer.

The implications of yet another case of Western-radicalized terrorists, first exported to fight NATO’s proxy war in Syria, then imported and well-known to Western intelligence agencies, being able to carry out a highly organized, well-executed attack, is that the attack itself was sanctioned and engineered by Western intelligence agencies themselves,. This mirrors almost verbatim the type of operations NATO intelligence carried out during the Cold War with similar networks of radicalized militants used both as foreign mercenaries and domestic provocateurs. Toward the end of the Cold War, one of these militant groups was literally Al Qaeda – a proxy mercenary front armed, funded, and employed by the West to this very day.

Additionally, in all likelihood, the brothers who took part in the attack in Paris may have been fighting in Syria with weapons provided to them by the French government itself.  France 24 would report last year in an article titled, “France delivered arms to Syrian rebels, Hollande confirms,” that:

President Francois Hollande said on Thursday that France had delivered weapons to rebels battling the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad “a few months ago.”

Deflecting blame for the current attack on “radical Islam” is but a canard obscuring the truth that these terrorists were created intentionally by the West, to fight the West’s enemies abroad, and to intimidate and terrorize their populations at home.

We Must Sidestep the Canards 

As with any false flag attack engineered by a government for the purpose of manipulating public perception and pushing through otherwise unjustifiable policy both foreign and domestic, a series of canards are erected to distract the public from the true nature of the attack.

In the recent attack in Paris, France, the canards of “free speech,” “condemning radical Islam,” “tolerance,” and “extremism” have all taken center stage, displacing the fact that the terrorists who carried out the attack were long on the leash not of “Islamic extremists” but Western intelligence agencies, fighting in a Western proxy war, as a member of a well-funded, armed, and trained mercenary force that has, on record since as early as 2007, been an essential component of Western foreign policy.

Indeed, Al Qaeda and its various rebrandings are not the creation of “Islamic extremism,” but rather Western foreign policy using “extremism” as part of indoctrinating the rank and file, but directed by and solely for the purpose of serving an entirely Western agenda.

To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. 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

To this day, the US, its NATO partners including Turkey, and regional partners including Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar are arming, funding, harboring, training, and otherwise perpetuating these “Islamic extremists” within and along both Syria and now Iraq’s borders.
In reality, without Western backing, “laundered” through the Persian Gulf autocracies and manifesting themselves in a global network of mosques jointly run by Persian Gulf and Western intelligence agencies, there would be no “Islamic extremism” to speak of. To focus on “extremism” as a cause, rather than as a means used by the true perpetrators of this global-spanning campaign of Western-sanctioned terrorism, is not only to perpetuate such canards, but to invite the perpetuation of this very terrorism we are shocked and horrified by.

West Apparently Maintaining Domestic Radicalization/Recruitment Centers 

The recent Sydney cafe hostage crisis featuring an Iranian dissident granted Australian asylum and featured in anti-Iranian propaganda, exposed a vast network of radicalization and recruitment run in the Australian city of Sydney, used to organize support and fighters to be sent to the West’s proxy war in Syria. The network included many notorious individuals, well known to Australian law enforcement and intelligence agencies, and many of whom had traveled to Syria, taken part in fighting alongside known terrorist organizations, and were allowed to return and continue their political activities in Australia.

The Daily Mail’s article, “Why did police ask former terror suspect for an ISIS flag?” would state:

Counter terrorism police have contacted Sydney man and one time terror accused Zaky Mallah and asked him for an ISIS flag. 

Just over four hours into the Martin Place siege, officers the NSW Police Joint Counter Terrorism Team and asked him if he could give them an ISIS flag. 

Zaky Mallah, 30, from Westmead in western Sydney offered the Counter Terrorist police the flag that hangs on the wall of his apartment, the moderate Islamic Front flag, but ‘they weren’t interested’. 

The article would also state:

Two years ago Mr Mallah travelled to Syria and lived with the FSA rebels engaged in the bloody civil war against Muslim hardliner President Bashar el Assad ‘before it got crazy over there’. After returning home, he encouraged young people to go to Syria and engage in jihad to experience the freedom fight taken up against El Assad… 

As in Australia, France apparently also has a stable of former terrorists who had traveled to Syria and returned, all while on their watch lists – and in Australia at least – some of these terrorists are literally on security agency speed dials and are clearly a part of a network the intelligence community both monitors and in fact, maintains.

Such networks have turned out thousands of recruits to fight in NATO’s war in Syria. The BBC would report in an article titled, “Islamic State crisis: ‘3,000 European jihadists join fight’,” that:

The number of Europeans joining Islamist fighters in Syria and Iraq has risen to more than 3,000, the EU’s anti-terrorism chief has told the BBC. 

Gilles de Kerchove also warned that Western air strikes would increase the risk of retaliatory attacks in Europe.

How exactly is the public expected to believe that such a vast number of terrorists can migrate overseas to fight alongside terrorist forces the West is currently, allegedly, fighting, without the West being able to stem such a tide? Clearly, just as arming Al Qaeda in Syria was done intentionally, so to have the floodgates been open, allowing European terrorists to both join NATO’s proxy war in Syria, and to return home and join NATO’s growing war against its own people.

Operation Gladio on Steroids 

Such networks don’t just mirror NATO’s “stay behind networks” formed during the Cold War, supposedly created to activate in the wake of a full-scale Soviet invasion of Western Europe, but instead used as a covert front of political and terroristic provocation – such networks today are a continuation of NATO’s secret armies.

NATO’s provocateurs used during the Cold War were a mixture of nationalists, anti-communists, former Nazi SS officers, and extremists of every stripe. Their particular beliefs were, however, ultimately irrelevant since they were used for a singular agenda defined not by these beliefs, but by NATO’s own agenda.

Many of the militants and extremists NATO used were liquidated upon the completion of the many false flag attacks NATO organized at the cost of hundreds of innocent European lives. Likewise, today, many of the gunmen or bombers involved in the long string of suspicious domestic attacks carried out by NATO’s modern “stay behind network” are either killed on sight, or imprisoned and forgotten.

While NATO’s Cold War operations appeared confined to conducting terrorism upon its own people, today’s networks are used to carry out both proxy wars overseas as well as to carry out terrorist attacks at home. The expansive nature of this network and the threat it poses to global peace and stability should be at the center of the Paris attack debate – not the alleged beliefs, religion, or supposed agenda of the attackers who, just like their Cold War counterparts, were nothing more than patsies and pawns amid a much larger and insidious game.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine New Eastern Outlook”.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Paris Shooters Just Returned from NATO’s Proxy War in Syria

Editor’s Note: This article was originally published in January 2015.

Ukraine’s top general is contradicting allegations by the Obama Administration and by his own Ukrainian Government, by saying that no Russian troops are fighting against the Ukrainian Government’s forces in the formerly Ukrainian, but now separatist, area, where the Ukrainian civil war is being waged.

Here is a screen-print of a google-chrome auto-translation of that statement:

The Chief of Staff of Ukraine’s Armed Forces, General Viktor Muzhenko, is saying, in that news-report, which is dated on Thursday January 29th [2015], that the only Russian citizens who are fighting in the contested region, are residents in that region, or of Ukraine, and also some Russian citizens (and this does not deny that perhaps some of other countries’ citizens are fighting there, inasmuch as American mercenaries have already been noted to have been participating on the Ukrainian Government’s side), who “are members of illegal armed groups,” meaning fighters who are not paid by any government, but instead are just “individual citizens” (as opposed to foreign-government-paid ones). General Muzhenko also says, emphatically, that the “Ukrainian army is not fighting with the regular units of the Russian army.”

In other words: He is explicitly and clearly denying the very basis for the EU’s sanctions against Russia, and for the U.S.’s sanctions against Russia: all of the sanctions against Russia are based on the falsehood that Ukraine is fighting against “the regular units of the Russian army” — i.e., against the Russian-Government-controlled-and-trained fighting forces.

The allegation to the effect that Ukraine is instead fighting against “regular units of the Russian army” is the allegation that Vladimir Putin’s Russia has invaded Ukraine, and it is the entire basis for the economic sanctions that are in force against Russia.

Those sanctions should therefore be immediately removed, with apology, and with compensation being paid to all individuals who have been suffering them; and it is therefore incumbent upon the Russian Government to pursue, through all legally available channels, restitution, plus damages, against the perpetrators of that dangerous fraud — and the news reports have already made clear precisely whom those persons are, who have asserted, as public officials, what can only be considered to be major libel.

Otherwise, Ukraine’s top general should be fired, for asserting what he has just asserted.

If what General Muzhenko says is true, then he is a hero for having risked his entire career by having gone public with this courageous statement. And, if what he says is false, then he has no place heading Ukraine’s military.

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Ukrainian Government: “No Russian Troops Are Fighting Against Us”. Sanctions against Russia based on Falsehoods
  • Tags: ,

At first I thought the “9-11” event was merely allowed to happen like Pearl Harbour. But the facts showed that only U.S. capacities could explain the logistics of the otherwise physically impossible execution of the crime – from the near free-fall acceleration of the fire-proofed buildings into their footprints and the absence, inaccessibility and removal of evidence, to the detailed police-state law ready to apply.

On the other hand, some evidence, such as the F.B.I. reports not followed up on and the many people led to believe beforehand that there was a foreign plane attack coming, ensured that people were ready to believe that only an alien conspiracy could explain the event. Moral outrage would be directed at jihadist Arabs and at U.S. intelligence and defense forces for not doing enough in time. In fact, this was the very scenario proposed before 9-11 by the man who came to be the head of the 9-11 Commission.

But the immediate historic transformation of the powers of the Bush Jr. administration was the most dramatic effect of the 9-11 event. Its apotheosis of power from near political dead-end to master saviour and superpower leader above question was mythical in proportions. It completely reversed the rising public smell of corruption from Enron, the biggest financial backer of Bush Jr., which was then imploding as a giant energy-futures crime that had bankrupted California. It reversed the unprecedented illegitimacy of a president by stolen election and vote repression who had a record of alcohol and cocaine addiction and cultural illiteracy. It diverted all eyes from the inside-dealing of federal oil and energy policy being determined by oligopolist corporations with V-P Cheney behind closed doors and from financial scandals whose records were destroyed by the WTC collapse. The metamorphosis of the Bush Jr. administration from national disgrace to exalted and limitless command was the most miraculous reversal of fortune in political history. But it received no press or political attention. It was if the past had never happened but disappeared down the memory hole.

In fact, it was taboo to identify the one-way benefits. The mutation of Bush Jr., hiding out on his Texas estate for months after the 2000 lost-but-won election, to an all-powerful “War President”overnight had a staggering effect on the rapidly rising international and domestic opposition against the illegal president. The Nixon-age Cheney-Rumsfeld duo as revolving-door CEO’s in charge of a new supranational program of war was unlikely to get much support before 9-11. But it was now in full-spectrum motion with “terror alerts” around the clock as justification for martial laws and formerly unacceptable invasions. Overnight the strategic objectives of the PNAC vaulted into absolute power across borders, and the Bush oil-military-and-money party was the sole beneficiary in the U.S. The rapid slide downwards in financial security of the 99% was not worthy of comment. The social security of public programs was in line for still more attacks. Bush’s extreme-right conviction that the Roosevelt New Deal was “an aberration” he wanted to eliminate was not mentioned. Instead, in perfect convenience, all field of meaning was occupied by “the terrorist threat” and how to war against it.

Cui bono? – the first forensic question at any murderous crime – shouted from every circumstance and consequence. But it was unspeakable in public. The “war administration” could do and did anything it chose – from privatizing the military to putting everyone on terror alerts to torture chambers across continents to a rule of fear in the U.S. the like of which had never been seen before. Most of all, the supreme moral goal and the covert U.S. state were released from any question or impediment. Everything that happened after 9-11 was consistent with them and the known plan of “full spectrum dominance”. As Brzezinski and the PNAC had themselves observed beforehand, the plan had not been politically feasible then. Now the supreme value objective had its moving war machine in action into the Middle East and Central Asia. A supranational police state was being formed at home and abroad to “protect America’s interests” – in particular the oil-energy bases the private transnational money-sequence system and its armed forces ran on.37

The Ruling Group-Mind: 

It looked remarkably like fascism being built after the Reichstag Fire in 1930’s Germany.38 In fact I later debated Michael Albert on Z-Net on this institutional analogue when he and his illustrious friend Noam Chomsky were dismissing 9-11 “conspiracy theory” along with the media – not noticing that the ultimate conspiracy theory was the official one which was refused examination. But I took the Albert-Chomsky argument at its word, and argued that the “9-11” event was institutional all the way down and had a disturbing precedent in the last fascist turn of the West including Bush’s grandfather as a Nazi money man through the Union Banking Corporation. Albert might as well not have read a word.39 Everyone on the U.S. Left as well as Right seemed to be of one mind – the “ruling group-mind”. Its nature is blocking against all reason and fact.40

The official conspiracy theory of 9-11 was a paradigm of the group-mind phenomenon and the media unspeakable at once. Only others could have a “conspiracy theory”. The official theory was final fact, although the most implausible conspiracy theory of all. Locked in the thrall of the group-mind, even a strictly legal meaning of a central category of criminal law – a criminal conspiracy, prosecuted all the time in the U.S. – was now taboo in connection to 9-11. No scientific finding is allowed through this mind-lock. A closed Orwellian circle is constructed. All not believing the official conspiracy theory are reverse-accused as believers in a conspiracy theory. The official conspiracy theory is, simultaneously, assumed as the opposite of what it is. Double-think – holding contradictory thoughts in the mind as the same in meaning – is normalized as given. Such is the ruling group-mind on 9-11.

The supreme moral objective and its strategic planning depend on this reverse operation and its group-mind cement to succeed. It is a deep psychological disorder that is not decoded, but isinvariably used in the larger disorder of which it is a signature pathology. As the individual liar relies on a defense mechanism of aggressive accusation to switch the tables to protect and advance his own interests, so too at the covert state and corporate media level. Ruling groupmind, reverse-accusation operation, and the ruling interests they serve all seamlessly interlock. The conditioning is so pervasive it succeeds in being experienced as an act of individual belief with no option. Because the mass media’s lights of publicity fall only on what is consistent with the official conspiracy theory and attack all that does not conform to the ruling story, the mechanism of delusion is locked in.

This is why payroll journalists who otherwise seem progressive abuse those who see through the delusion – in part because they are hired not to think beneath the hook of selling copy; partlybecause exposing the moral truth on 9-11 is a fast way to get isolated inside any corporate milieu; and, most basically, because stepping outside of the ruling group-mind on any life-and-deathmatter brings anathema and perhaps social annihilation. When we recognise these constraints on free inquiry, we had better understand why so many who are normally not duped by official cover stories shy away from forensic and causal understanding of 9-11. They sustain the group-mind morale across parties inside the bonds of the absurd. This is why almost no-one would follow through the motive and causal investigation of the most important single event of the era.

In the end, one worries about English-speaking culture’s incapacity to think about the perpetual war and dispossession system of which 9-11 is a track-switch override of prior blocks to thesupreme value objective. Total control of world human and natural resources and their organisation for the transnational money-sequence system has been vastly advanced by 9-11 to crush all human rights standing in the way, from habeas corpus and due process to protection from war-criminal aggression to seize other societies’ most basic sovereign means of production. The carcinogenic disorder advances from strength to strength, recurring at another level in the “financial 9-11” of 2008. It even more centrally dispossesses the world to serve the “supranational sovereignty” of private money-sequence world rule with no committed life function. Behind them both lies the ultimately regulating supreme value system which cumulatively overruns and devours world life and life means as its globalizing feeding cycle. Observe that every step of the global world corporate-rights system conforms.41

At the level of the 9-11 process itself, the primary oil-war-and-banking beneficiaries of 9-11 and the 9-11 wars profit hugely, however ruinously – all in accordance with prior invocation of “acatastrophic and catalyzing event” to enable just what has happened. Leading the fall of the rule of life-protective state and law is the complete erasure of the first forensic questions of all criminal investigation – greatest motive and benefit, capacity to commit the crime, concealment of facts, and continuous false reports. Each and all remain effectively stricken from the record of the “free press” and all official accounts.

From Inside Experience of the 9-11 Machine of Denial to Laying Bare the Moral Program

Shortly after September 11, 2001, I spoke on invitation by Science for Peace on the coming Afghanistan invasion after “9-11”. It was a packed hall at the University of Toronto, and I raised the issues as well as I then could, focusing on the criminal war preparation and the evidence of pretext and falsehood. I must have been the only one to speak out in a public forum at that timebecause all the major media were immediately denouncing me across borders. The Wall Street Journal called me Osama McMurtry. The New York Times blog-hated me. Fox News ranted. The Globe and Mail wrote editorials of fierce if inane indignation from John Ibbitson (twice) and Margaret Wente. The eminent neo-Darwinian Michael Ruse wrote a letter of condemnation from a Florida university joining the flood of e-mails to the department chair and the university president demanding my head.

The moral constant across variations was absolute refusal to engage a fact or inference, militant attack on any questions, and – as always – reversal of value meaning. The perfect unreason wasas paradigmatic as in any rush to war for ruling interests. One could understand why people stopped thinking. Barry Zwicker was the only journalist I knew next to Alex Jones who took on the 9-11 machine of reversal and suppression, although even he would not dare the concept of “official conspiracy theory”. He was accused of “anti-Semitism” by a noted left economist for linking Mossad to the 9-11 event.42 My friend Mathew Stanton, a long time executive of Chicago Media Watch, law professor and effective unbeliever in the official conspiracy theory, was attacked in front of his home by a riot-armed policeman macing him through his front door. The bigger picture was and remains, however, more sinister than any of its parts. The “war presidency” of the money-oil-and-weapons party was released into “limitless capital accumulation” and “supranational sovereignty” with no inhibitors left. No-one named the official conspiracy theory which featured amateurs with box-cutters leading a central air-space attack over hours with no intervention, no evidence of their identity at the scene of the crime, and firetested steel frame buildings turning in seconds into fine dust and piles of steel – the remains removed before examination.43 Least of all did critical analysis link the crime back to the ruling value system driving every step before, through and after it.

Of course, many brave and intelligent people came forward. Hundreds of experts have courageously reported from every relevant domain and stood through all the reverse projections of “conspiracy theorist” and smear attacks. But the moral through-line before, during and after 9-11 to the 9-11 Wars was not itself decoded as a perfectly consistent inner logic and decision string confirmed at every step. Even the classic critical study of 9-11, The New Pearl Harbour, never comes to grips with the supreme value system behind the covert state continuously expressing it before and after 9-11. Indeed, the governing moral meaning is reversed by the title of the book, an exonerating phrase used by Brzezinski and the PNAC itself. When David Griffin and I were in correspondence about the book before publication, I brought this moral reversal to his attention. I emphasised that Roosevelt’s foreknowledge of the 1941 attack was used to fight against international fascism, not to institute it. Moreover the attacks were opposite in source – one from the other side of the earth, and the other from the inside. The very opposite moral motives and methods were equated by even the heroic David Griffin. Such is the block against 9-11 truth and the power of the group-mind field of meaning.

The descriptor of “false flag operation” is favoured by the 9-11 truth movement since. But it refers only to the moral cover of “the flag”. It does not decode the supreme moral driver itself, or the covert meaning of “the flag”, or the value logic of “U.S. interests”, or the plan in motion, which all express one interlocked ruling value program. What joins the covert U.S. state to the global monopolist money sequences it serves in 9-11 as the new criminal-state axis is lost in contending against the ruling story.

Unlike prior moral pretexts for war the U.S. has long specialized in, the 9-11 pretext has distinct markings of its moral code – the life-blind absolutism of the ruling value program which lawlessly serves the rich at the rising cost of the growing majority and their life conditions becoming poorer. Unlike former constructed pretexts, 9-11 serves only U.S global corporate and bank feeding cycles to unlimitedly more human dispossession for more private money demand for the under 1%. Unlike prior false pretences, it simultaneously diverts from the unprecedented crises of system-propelled depredation, looting and pollution of organic, social and ecological life fabrics and bases. The cancer pattern is plain, but unthinkable.

Meanwhile the worst was unfolding into the war-criminal bombing of Iraq on the fabricated basis of “weapons of mass destruction”. During the great child massacre after 1991, I was in close contact with physician Dr. Allan Connolly of Vancouver who at his own considerable expense flew back and forth reporting the medical horrors of the Iraq bombing “sanctions” amidst (his words) “a medical care system of doctors and advanced knowledge comparable to our own”. Just before the next genocidal onslaught on Iraq in 2003, I received an invitation from CBC Television to debate a proponent of the U.S. position. A woman U.S. professor – middleaged, quiet, and in the mode of the ruling group-mind – had been on the week before explaining why a U.S. invasion fully qualified as “Just War” in Christian and legal doctrine. It was the CBC Sunday Night News Hour three days before the bombing began, and the debater for the U.S. administration position was Thomas Donnelly, “a senior fellow of the Project for the New American Century and policy head of the U.S. House Committee on Armed Services”, with special expertise in post-Soviet U.S. strategic interests and modern military campaign planning. To make a long story short, he emphasized “how America had saved freedom in Europe” and how America only seeks peace, while I emphasized “the nature of the crime of war you are advocating” with definitions, and the mass homicide of children the previous U.S. attack on Iraq had engineered.

I thought I had decisively shown the problems none would talk about on the media anywhere, or allow to be said in published correspondence – even the London Guardian in which I had oftenpublished. Canada was not involved that I could see, and surely what I defined verbatim in the law is what public broadcasting should be pleased to communicate. But the CBC re-assigned thereporter who had arranged for me to debate, effectively firing him in the longer term – he was unwilling ever to talk to me about it, and CBC has scrubbed the debate from its records –

although Canada was officially not part of the “coalition of the willing” to commit war crime.44

We see here that not even the 9-11 Wars could be opposed although demonstrably the “supreme crime” under law. The international criminal law itself, stemming from the Nuremburg Charter to “prevent wars of aggression” that caused the greatest war destructions of all time, was now unspeakable in the “Free World” too. The supreme crime under the law of the community of nations could not be spoken even in a country purporting not to participate in it. The speech act itself was treated as an offence.

What could possibly account for such overriding of life-protective law, millions of peoples’ lives, and life value itself? Was it another holocaust of the Semitic? What could explain the criminal acts of more mass murder? Only an overriding moral commitment makes it logically possible.

The Supreme Moral Program Behind the Life-Blind Mechanism of Full-Spectrum Rule

The ultimate moral absolute expressed by the 9-11 operation is a meta program across U.S. wars. But 9-11 moved the level of strategic permission for U.S. invasions and aggression to a newlevel – including indiscriminate kidnap and torture of citizens across borders and non-stop rising murders by drones today. It has also enlisted from U.S. unemployment the bravest and mostdesperate young people. By their actions to enforce the supreme morality, the criminal and covert U.S state serves the private transnational money-sequence multiplication system.

Thus since 9-11, tens of thousands of innocent peoples across borders have been murdered, tortured, and caged in the name of “stopping the terrorists”. Police state methods have becomenormalized as “necessary to defend the Free World against terrorism”. Reverse projection is the moral constant of confusion. Erasure of fact and record is now selectively commonplace.

This is anticipated. Air travellers across the world are therefore subjugated to confiscation of water to drink and airline search and seizure by orders from the top. These may seem merely absurd system oppressions, but they subjugate individuals at the most basic level of their lives – clothes, water, shoes, personal privacy, and juridical identity. All using air-travel are now subject to this system’s law – with caging or shooting for defiance – the systematic strip-down required as reinforcement of the absurd U.S. official conspiracy doctrine of 9-11.

At the same time a stream of laws, regulations and acts under ever new names of defense and security reverse ancient constitutional rights back to the Magna Carta – essentially enablingpresidential-directive assassination at will, worse than before the curb of kings. This is the great reversal 9-11 made normatively justifiable so that CEO prime can do as the most dominanttransnational money sequences demand. People are now subject to death on suspicion of “terrorist activity” without any due process – as the drone murders and application of the laws enabling them to U.S. citizens demonstrate. Here as well every step has been made possible by and legally confirms the official conspiracy theory.

The real threats to global life security are greater than ever before – an ever greater majority without secure livelihoods, the disappearance of meaningful work and social life supports systems, and the cumulative poisoning and looting of the bases of planetary life itself. But all are diverted by the manufactured wars and the “terrorist” reverse projection to grow the system of dispossession wider and deeper. This is the real global terror system. Meanwhile the new designated “Enemy” that bonds “the Free World” is, in fact, assisted through covert funding, arms, and direct participation in its acts of terror against our freedoms to sustain the multiple payoff war games. All is permitted by the legal and illegal elaborations of criminal permission and secret presidential directives that have become written into the rogue U.S. state as the Leviathan of the U.S. corporate rich, the “fascism at home” as Roosevelt called it.

The ultimate cover story of the supreme moral objective in “the new American century” has been 9-11 in whose “catalyzing event” all regime and system motives of self-aggrandisement dissolve.What else but such an event could have so armoured the sole beneficiaries of the “new world order” against social fightback at the great stripping of nations’ and peoples’ life and life meansacross the world? All the while in accord with the unexamined supreme value system, big bank and corporate money sequences override social and natural life support systems everywhere more than ever to record ever higher profits as everyone else is dispossessed in proportion to how little they have. 2008 redoubles and deepens the process of stripping life fabrics to grow money sequences behind the permanent war front that 9-11 has provided. Now greater tides of public funds pour out to the private bank system in the trillions across borders, “austerity programs” pay back the banks for the bailouts of them, and ever fewer rights to oppose are ensured by post-9-11 police state methods. The pre-2001 rising and unarmed global insurgency of the civil commons for peace, for social life security, for human rights, for real food, for protection of the environment, for everything that has been dispossessed by the supranational corporate rights system has been rolled over by the 9-11 turn.

2001 was the turning point after unilateral transnational corporate rights over markets and resources were established as absolute over legislatures through the 1990’s with a rising tide of global opposition joining into all movements to protect and enable human and natural life against the eyeless transnational money-sequence juggernauts of immiserization. 9-11 was strategically ideal to stop the human tides of awakening and common action because it ruled out all political resistance to the supreme moral goal. But the dots are not joined back to the ultimate value program even by 9-11 unbelievers. Attention has become fixed, rather, on the foreground operations and contradictions with the official conspiracy doctrine – all crucial as anomaly detections, but not yet grounded in opposing moral systems. What is required is logico-moral understanding of the institutional act of 9-11 as strategically rational from the regulating value system of global money-sequence rule. This is the ultimately ruling moral disorder, and it instrumentalizes and attacks human and natural life and life support systems to grow itself with no limit or regulation by life requirements. 9-11 embodies and exemplifies the supreme moral program in action to full spectrum control, consumption and profit by force of arms wherever it can. But its inner axiology evades recognition. Its agents no more examine or question it than the players of a kill-all video game. And its opponents have not penetrated its meta program or the principled life-ground to steer beyond it at the system level.

The multiple motive for every step, the supreme value system driving every one, the strategic logic of fulfilment, and the 9-11 track-switch promoting all are perfectly consistent with each other. But their unifying meaning and progression across every moment of execution as a moral system in action has not been laid bare. Social taboo against recognising life-blind disorder in the surrounding system of rule is as old as human tribes and civilisations, but never so global and deep-structural as now. While the Right never stops talking of “moral anchor”, “moral compass”, and “principled stands”, the ultimate value system at work is no more critically examined in its life-blind principles than the wars it propels. Neither Left nor Right has cracked the life code and the money code at war which determines the fate of the planet.45

Joining the Dots of Forensic History: Who Benefits from 9-11?

From day one of the 9-11 event, the question of cui bono “who benefits?” – has been nowhere posed in official Western culture. Even as insults rain on those repudiating the official conspiracy theory, the question is not named. The suspicion of an “inside job” idea is now widespread outside the corporate media, but not even the Left poses the forensic questions nor recognises the official conspiracy theory as the essential cover-up of them. Nowhere have the defining questions been joined into unified meaning and value frame. Who had the most compelling motives for the event? Who alone had the means? Who removed all the evidence from the crime scenes? Who put out continuous false reports? Who blocked all impartial inquiry? Who has solely benefitted since in private money-sequencing to limitlessly more?

This defining set of forensic questions remains effectively taboo, and the crime is least of all connected back to the ruling value system now more supreme in power than ever. After 9-11 apresidency primarily funded and campaign-transported by Enron swindle money and “Kenny-Boy” Lay as the “asset-light” leader of the new energy futures market now running the world was the first meaning to disappear from sight. Another was Dick Cheney presiding over a closed energy policy-making committee deciding the laws, regulations and subsidies to govern the big oil and utility oligarchy in total conflict of interest. Then there were major financial charges and lawsuits by government in action whose records were destroyed on 9-11.

But the most immediately compelling motive for the event was the fatal lack of legitimacy of the Bush. Jr. presidency itself. There was an unprecedentedly wide public contempt across borders for the unqualified president, his election by cancelled votes, the loaded Supreme Court blocking the votes from being counted, and the tanking of the U.S. economy, which had shown its first signs of permanent recession. This recession was led by the very policies of hollowing out aggregate demand that the Bush Jr. administration was pushing hard on – ever more reduced taxes on the rich, slashed and defunded social programs, privatization of public pensions, and the erasure of labour rights as freedom – still going hard today. All the trends were downwards, all were led by the supreme moral goal of the money party, and peoples across borders were resisting as never before. How, I wondered before 9-11, can this rising tide of global resistance be contained?

In fact, it was reversed in under a day. Bush Jr. went from disgrace to apotheosis. The “war president” and his cabal were now suddenly astride the U.S. and the world with absolute powers.Before “9-11”, one could not see how the rising global peace, anti-corporate and environmental movements could be stopped with no plausible Enemy to anchor the ruling ideology and its policies of public dispossession. Even America’s corporate economy was increasingly unable to compete with societies not being bled by Wall Street and armaments-spending. All the while life support bases beneath were in slow-motion collapse towards the New Orleans mass destruction of the poor to come.

Three weeks before the 9-11 event, an over one-million strong demonstration of people across Europe erupted in Genoa against the U.S.-led global corporate system in which NATO flewwarplanes overhead and police attacked hundreds of people as they slept. The billion-dollar-a-day military-industrial complex and the national ideology of war needed a new Enemy to justify it as much as Bush Jr. and his cabal needed it to save them from illegitimacy and impotence. With their primary constituency as big oil, banks and military contractors, control of Middle East and Central Asia oilfields now unblocked with the end of the Soviet Union was essential to the PNAC plan. With its signatories baying for world empire “responsibilities”, the 9-11 explosions of the WTC buildings (the totem of the supranational New World Order planned and financed by David Rockefeller himself) coincidentally occurred as “an act of war on America” by “those who hate our freedoms”. Every motive of the Bush Jr. regime, its oil-war-money constituency and its future was satisfied by the 9-11 action. As a thought experiment, try to conceive of any alternative that could have delivered all at once. Every major private transnational oil, military, and bank constituency was served by the event. Even investors in the corporate media were given a steroid boost.46

How could one argue against this strategy for “recovery and extension of America’s vital U.S. interests”? To create the binding crisis of self-defense in war was an already self-evident strategic necessity in the bipartisan spook world. Indeed, perhaps the most remarkable fact of the 9-11 story is that Philip Zelikow, the President of the 9-11 Commission, was the administration strategist who first proposed the 9-11 scenario itself.

More specifically, Zelikow was the executive director of the Aspen Strategy Group whose members included Dick Cheney, Condoleeza Rica, and Paul Wolfowitz. He had been in the National Security Council during the set-up war with Iraq in 1990-91. In 1998, he had the scenario worked out in the same year Brzezinski floated it in his book The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives. Let Zelikow speak for himself in 1998:

“Readers should imagine the possibilities for themselves, because the most serious constraint on current policy is lack of imagination. An act of catastrophic terrorism that killed thousands or tens of thousands of people and/or disrupted the necessities of life for hundreds of thousands, or even millions, would be a watershed event in America’s history. It could involve loss of life and property unprecedented for peacetime and undermine Americans’ fundamental sense of security within their own borders in a manner akin to the1949 Soviet atomic bomb test, or perhaps even worse. Constitutional liberties would be challenged as the United States sought to protect itself from further attacks by pressing against allowable limits in surveillance of citizens, detention of suspects, and the use of deadly force. More violence would follow, either as other terrorists seek to imitate this great ‘success’ or as the United States strikes out at those considered responsible. Like Pearl Harbor, such an event would divide our past and future into a ‘before’ and ‘after.’

The effort and resources we devote to averting or containing this threat now, in the ‘before’ period, will seem woeful, even pathetic, when compared to what will happen ‘after.’ Our leaders will be judged negligent for not addressing catastrophic terrorism more urgently.” 47

The Necessary Crisis for America and System Erasure of the Facts and their Design

We might infer from Zelikow’s 1998 paper projecting a 9-11 scenario that the rising Washington chatter about a coming plane attack on the WTC and unpursued suspects were part of the strategic plan for precisely the reasons Zelikow gives. “The effort and resources we devote to averting or containing this threat now, in the ‘before’ period”, he says, “will seem woeful, even pathetic, when compared to what will happen ‘after’”. The before-period when nothing was done, and plainly seen not to be done, in fact occurred just as imagined. And it justified to the majority the after-period when the U.S. state merely proclaims “terrorists” non-stop to justify a war rampage to get what it wants in the Middle East and Central Asia. Overriding basic human rights and civil liberties within and without the U.S., the arbitrary mass arrests, serial kidnappings and torture, murders without stop are the means and cover-up methods to ensure the supreme value goal and system into the future.

This criminality on a mass scale seems immoral beyond conception – like the Nazi regime with which the U.S. covert state has had strong ties from the start. On the other hand, all of the planmakers from Rockefeller to Zelikow are only doing what they must for the binding supreme moral goal – U.S. supremacy to serve its ruling global money sequences as the ultimately meaning of “the Free World”. This is the underlying value driver across contending parties. Given the supreme moral goal, the maximizing strategic culture with no limit, and the acceptance of “noble lies” to ensure “free capital accumulation”, what could one say to deter this moral logic of U.S. world rule? Any life-grounded morality would be “soft” and “naive” to the ruling mindset which glories in “creative destruction”. At the same time, the Bush Jr. regime needed 9-11 as a steering event even more than its “constituency of the rich and the very rich”.

All knew that something must bind the people as their former job and welfare security comes apart under “the New World Order”. The Soviet Union is gone, the whole oil-base region is in flux, another Enemy is required to hold America and the empire together – the last idea coming from the Nazi philosopher Carl Schmitt. The key is to understand the inner moral logic so all the U.S. covert state’s moves become clear within the underlying framework of moral meaning they express. Recognition begins with laying bare the value program behind every move before and after 9-11, and maintaining a stable understanding of physical laws to avoid being taken in by magic-thinking explanations. Magic thinking is endemic to the ruling world-view. It is not only required to believe that the transnational money sequence system necessarily produces the social optimum within “the global free market” – the invisible-hand metaphysic of the market God.48 It is also required at the microcosm level to believe that jet fuel has reduced fireproofed steel buildings to mostly dust within 11 seconds. Magic illusions are the stock in trade of the system. They pervade the culture from miracle commodities transforming clothes, faces, status and sex appeal by their purchase to Arabs with box-cutters who reappear alive, having just turned buildings into smithereens in the financial centre of the United States.

Reason thus needs to begin with the self-evident logistics of material plausibility and coherence. At even the level of preparations and immediate effects, only insiders could have access control of all the stations required with ready-made justifications, police-state laws, and evidence destruction in place. If the Arab “hijackers” alleged as guilty without forensic evidence were known guilty, how could they have been left free as covert assets for years except to provide red herring scent paths. If a cover-up Arab conspiracy was already to go from before 1996 – Project Bojinka for civilian aircraft hijacking and crashing into buildings was already rehearsed by air defense and FEMA – to whom was the attack a surprise? If the blocks on full FBI investigation from the White House were so obstructive that its Director of Anti-Terrorism, John O’Neill, resigned in protest, can it be sheer trillion-to-one coincidence that he started his new position on 9-11 as Director of Security at the Trade Towers and was killed his first day on the job? If WTC Security shut down one week prior to 9-11, as required to wire the building for the types of explosive materials that can alone explain the instant demolition of huge fire-proofed towers, can the event be disconnected from its material cause? If a principal of the firm responsible for security in the Towers, Securacom, was Marvin T. Bush, the president’s younger brother, are not these linkages relevant to comprehending the line of material connections to the crime?49 Prior to theory, only magical thinking can explain belief in a long string of coincidences, all in accord with one design.

A high-level Bush Republican organiser in Chicago, lawyer David Philip Schippers, telephoned me via Matthew Stanton to advise that try as he might to get the attention of his friend AttorneyGeneral John Ashcroft about the buzz on a coming attack using “commercial airlines as bombs”, the calls were strangely unreturned by Ashcroft despite many tries over a month before 9-11.Ashcroft and top military officers were told not to fly that day. The coincidences multiply the more deeply one looks. The stand-by jets planes that would normally have intercepted the hijacked aircraft within minutes did not because, as we know, Cheney got control of the airdefence of NORAD six months before the event and fighter jets were playing scenario games far away instead. The claimed Boeing 757 jet hitting the Pentagon was not only another physical impossibility due to the “ground factor”, but disappeared into thin air with not even the motor left although it runs at 1800 degrees hot and cannot physically be incinerated. Unprecedented violation of U.S. crime-scene laws then occurred at the materials scene of the collapsed steelbacked WTC buildings with any remains of the metal meltdown and the fine dust of the vaporizing explosion quickly covered with mud, hosed and shipped overseas.

What part of the official conspiracy theory holds at even the level of the physical laws? It is difficult to find one step that does. Rather magical coincidences, transmutations and shell-gamesproliferate the more carefully the now known facts are examined. In the wider purview of the event, what physically possible executive organisational agency could have been responsible for all the coordinated cover-up and false reports before and after effectively fulfilling one design? All points to the only coherent through-line of 9-11 and this is what is not diagnosed even by critics – the ruling value program and its strategic enactment to which every stitch conforms.

Of course no crime evidence remains if it disappears into thin air, is removed, purely invented, killed, erased from the record, or smeared into non-credible witness. All here has occurred in the 9-11 construction. So known was the set-up coming by insiders that market futures betting on airlines beforehand occurred with an unprecedented imbalance of puts and calls. More magicalcoincidence. But we can’t find out the facts because the U.S. Security and Exchange Commission has blocked all request for information. “This letter is in response to your request seeking access to and copies of the documentary evidence referred to in footnote 130 of Chapter 5 of the September 11 (9/11) Commission Report. We have been advised that the potentially responsive records have been destroyed”.50 There are many ways in which the 9-11 cover-up moves, and all seek to erase the steps of the crime and physical evidence of them.

Yet because the official conspiracy theory cannot explain how the inspected fire-proofed steelframe WTC buildings built to withstand more than jet-fuel heat fell at almost free-fall acceleration and converted into a great cloud of dust at the same time, people rise at the level of professional competence to question the ruling story – they are America’s remaining mind. Thus the 1,600 architectural and engineering professionals, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, observe that the official story cannot explain what are in effect violations of the laws of physics. Only a controlled demolition or its equivalent can explain the buildings’ rapid fall through the path of greatest resistance, the debris being symmetrically distributed, the rapid onset of the buildings’ falls, the explosions and flashes reported by witnesses, the steel elements expelled from the building at high speed, the pulverization of the concrete, the expanding pyroclastic-like clouds, the isolated explosions 20 to 40 stories below the wave of destruction, the molten steel and thermite traces found in recovered debris, and the lack of pancaked stories in the debris.51

The Grammar of Delusion, 9-11 Myth and Cooked Corporate Science

From start to finish, federal U.S. agency is stacked against any detection of historical background, character and moral raison d’etre, strength of motives to commit the crime, capacity to execute the physical destruction unimpeded, subsequent vast payoffs to one party, and systematic removal and erasure of all evidence – all tending in one direction only.

That Kissinger was the first choice to lead the 9-11 Commission, a master of the art of the supreme crimes – crimes against peace, planning and waging wars of aggression, war crimes and crimes against humanity – is all of a piece with the rest. That he was to be the chief investigator and judge of the 9-11 crime is almost as revealing as who got the position instead. The man appointed as the Director of the 9-11 Commission was the very man who had designed the 9-11 myth itself. Reverse projection of “conspiracy theory” on all who did not believe it was the master psy-op still at work today warning everyone away from asking questions. But still thinking people do even at the cost of media mobbing and ostracism by the mindless.

So the questions did not stop. Thus the official Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States was eventually put in motion to stop them 441 days after the attack. Observe the “Final”. Certainly the Final Report is dressed in all the official costume of the Government of the United States, seals of approval and authoritative finality to impress readers. This has not worked on the still thinking like David Ray Griffin who has taken the official Final Report apart in books of analysis. But there is in principle only one logical trick that needs to be known to recognise its fallacious nature from start to finish. The Final Report frames the entire inquiry and causation of the event by presupposing the official story as true. That leaves lots of room for “omissions and distortions”, and Griffin has posted them in detail. But the fallacy of presupposing what is supposed to be proved is the meta disorder that is at work everywhere, and this a-priori derangement is not yet clear.

More profoundly still, some critics apparently do not notice that the man who had designed the mythic rationale of 9-11 directed the 9-11 Commission itself. I never knew this until I found Zelikow’s once Harvard-posted paper. It reveals the throughline of meaning not seen, as reported in the prior pages of this analysis. Thus not only are physical laws violated by official doctrine at every step required to sustain the official story. Not only are the known laws of forensic, evidence and juridical investigation usurped and suspended throughout. But the very agent who imagined the scenario of the 9-11 official story myth is made the Executive Director of the Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States. The mind reels at the supreme confidence in propagating a big lie about a big lie with the major imaginer of both in charge of the official truth. It reveals the totalitarian nature of covert U.S. state rule and the corporate media and political control on which it can rely to turn black white underneath public and critic notice.

Predictably, therefore, one meta operation must regulate all that is reported in the official report. All facts and reasons conflicting with the official conspiracy theory must be and are erased from the official 9-11 Commission as an a priori requirement of its story. That the person in control of the Commission for 9-11 truth is the very author of the 9-11 myth is the logical smoking gun stillsometimes omitted from the analysis. Zelikow was the master strategist for how to divert U.S. citizens’ concern from the “detention of suspects and the use of deadly force”. He was the strategist behind why U.S. state response to the “threat” was so “pathetic” as to allow it to happen – the justification for the police-state legislation and the 9-11 Wars. And he directed the 9-11 Commission of the U.S. government itself to validate the myth as true.

In this way, the U.S. administration was exculpated a priori from all the forensic questions that implicated it. Such manipulation of assumptions for war based on myth is and was in fact Zelikow’s long specialty. He was a co-author of the notorious strategy of “pre-emptive war” on the basis of such projections. His academic specialty is in his own words, “the construction and maintenance of public myths – – forming the public’s presumptions about its immediate past”.52 That the “9-11 Commission” under Zelikow’s direction simply erases the issue of the physical impossibility of the fire-proofed buildings exploding into dust and free-falling into their own footprints thus follows as essential to sustain the official myth. No official version of these facts can stand up to scrutiny, so the standard technique follows. Eliminate the facts. The first step is to blinker them out from the Report altogether, and the second is to eliminate any evidence remaining in the possession of the Zelikow Commission. When request is then made to the Commission for the scientific documents pertaining to the building collapse, the Commission’s response is “the documents have been destroyed”.

To get a sense of the exactitude of the cover-up against all physical evidence, even that which has made its way into the official 9-11 inquiry, the response is meticulously total: “All input andresults files of the ANSYS 16-story collapse initiation model with detailed connection models that were used to analyze the structural response to thermal loads, break element source code,ANSYS script files for the break elements, custom executable ANSYS file, and all Excel spreadsheets and other supporting calculations used to develop floor connection failure modes  and capacities”.

Erasure of records and evidence is the defining epistemological technique of the covert state, and an annihilative propaganda machine goes into operation when this cannot be done – as in callingthe Journal of 9-11 Studies names on an exactly next-door website and sabotaging the Wikipedia entries of critics of the official conspiracy theory. The CIA has fulltime people doing this by its own admission. From war crimes and big lies to attack of reputations of critics, all serves the supreme moral goal of supranational sovereignty of the transnational private money-sequence system and its covert institutional agencies of strategic planning and action. This descriptive law is testable. It is the ultimate value logic of the system, and has manifold expressions across domains. There is no determinism by physical laws here. There are always alternatives that are better so far as they enable rather than destroy human life and life bases.53

The ultimate problem is that the ruling money-sequence system has become increasingly totalitarian, and 9-11 has been a turning-point advance against all that stands in its way.

“What about the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) verifying the official account of the building collapses?” the reader might ask. Certainly a public scientific institutionaccountable to scientific method and open inspection of data and conclusions would better get to the truth of the matter than a 9-11 Commission run by a strategic planner of the covert U.S. statewho proposed its very scenario three years before the event. Here, above all, one would have hoped for publicly reliable science that once distinguished U.S. civilization. But in fact, NIST by its own description is a “federal technology agency that works with industry” featuring collaboration in “bio-technology”. Knowing well the corporate-university partnerships in biotech which research only corporate commodity development as “innovative science”, the NIST set-up does not inspire scientific confidence. One method regulates all across fields of communication: to frame out any other result than the desired one while describing the process in exalted terms (e.g., “rigorous scientific standards”).

In this case, the framing-out principle built into the NIST investigation again followed the ruling pattern to erase all relevant evidence in conflict with the official story. In fact this unrecognisedprinciple of evidence repression governs all government and media accounts of the 9-11 crime. Nothing gets through which conflicts with the assumptions of the reigning story of reality. Indeed, there is a rule against recognising this rule as well as against recognising the rule itself. This syntax of thought repression and control is always at work in 9-11 thinking unless thought can break free from the underlying loop of repressive normalization – the essential liberation. No freedom of thought is more important. In the wider commercial and state media, the same system-serving loop is more deeply rooted in the same transnational private money sequence regime. Its supreme and supranational moral goal is the covert ruling subject of the System in all modes. Its underlying grammar of thought is to rule out anything that conflicts with assumption of it as “the Free World”.

While rarely spoken in deep-system terms, this totalizing regulator governs the ruling culture across domains as the ultimate economic /political/normative /speech/  thought determiner of truth and value. As a normalized syntax regulates speakers without their awareness of it, so too this regulator. It works because it operates at the level of unexamined ruling assumptions. Zelikowresearches and hypothesizes at one level of its hold – “the construction and maintenance of public myths – – forming the public’s presumptions about its immediate past”. This is how he deduced by the “need of imagination” the generic strategy of the 9-11 myth. But unlike philosophy and science, the structure of assumption is not critically exposed, but taken as a political given for manipulation. Freedom from it is not sought.

Yet materials science and technology in service to the system must perform at a different professional level. They must appear to be upholding the obligations of scientific method and not cooking conclusions in accordance with a predetermined story or value program. Cooked corporate science has become, however, the transnational norm, and it works by exactly ensuring that all test results but the profitable ones are kept secret as “proprietary information”. Not even public regulators get to see them. Since the National Institute of Standards and Technology is “partnered with industry”, it does not challenge the ruling value program any more than corporate researchers do. But how can NIST specifically explain the collapse of the fireproofed WTC towers to get the results that support the official story and still remain scientific? This seems an impossible task until one recognises the ruling meta assumption across domains which frames out all inconsistent data a priori.

The NIST follows in line by eliminating the time period within which all the physical phenomena conflicting with the ruling myth occur – namely, the period of time during which the buildings explode into dust and iron-rich microspheres and so on, and then fully collapse at freefall acceleration. Instead NIST attends solely and exclusively to the prior time of the planes hitting the buildings and of “collapse initiation”. If it does this, it appears to be “scientific” while in fact it is the opposite by exclusion of the most relevant data.

Once again we see the underlying rule of repressive elimination at work. All that can conflict with the official story is erased – not merely by mass removal, seizure or destruction of evidence, but by blocking out the very time frame within which the explosions, outward projectiles, and total collapse occurred. The conclusion (the planes did it) is thus already built into the first premise of the investigation (investigate the impact of the planes and the initiation of destruction, but not the full period of destruction). Once again we discern the master pattern of lie and delusion.

Logically speaking, it is the ancient fallacy of petitio principii – assuming what is required to be proved in the pseudo proof of it. Here the vicious circle is dressed in technological-scientific uniform. Yet the false explanation deserves more detailed analysis because the technology of the 9-11 explosions has become so central to the 9-11 truth movement.54 In the NIST’s impressivemethodological description of why it would cost $40 million to do the job, it includes (direct quote) “the expense of stockpiling the steel and other debris [the few bits retained by FEMA andvolunteers]; examining the steel; physically testing the steel; partial parametric computer modeling of the steel, the fire, the plane and the blast; and the examination of egress issues”. For this highly profitable price (emphases added), “tools could be developed to address fire as a structural design load and to understand the behavior of structural connections under fire conditions.” As the italics show, fire alone is already assumed as the cause of the buildings’ explosion and free-fall against all the evidence to the contrary. This evidence is ruled out a priori by focus on the fire alone – an assumption that locks out all the relevant facts showing that fire alone cannot explain the buildings’ collapse in seconds, the severing of massive fireproof steel columns, the ejecting of steel assemblies, the melted-down metal in and around the explosion, and conversion of fire-proof buildings into fuming remains and dust. In short, all the evidence contradicting the official story iserased by the NIST account by its starting frame of reference, which blocks it all out a-priori.

In this way, the NIST too assumes the official story in investigating it, and remains locked within the same vicious circle as the 9-11 Commission – only this time by cooked science. Nothing isallowed in except the impact of the planes and the fires. No simulations of the full collapses are ever made, and every physical moment of the collapses after “collapse initiation” is disappeared.With models and computer simulations cooked in this way, the NIST fixes against the evidence with the same trick of erasure as the 9-11 Commission at another level – from non-investigation to pseudo science. Thus the explanation that is alone consistent with the evidence – controlled demolition55 – and the evidence are eliminated in the NIST study. Predictably, no media report one step of the structure of delusion, the supreme interests in sustaining it, or the real science of explaining the suppressed facts. Thus the duped are led to believe that science supports the accepted account.

We may witness here the collapse of logic and scientific method along with the collapse of the buildings. The ruling syntax of value and delusion demolishes reason at many levels. It did not end there. Once the real scientific community started asking questions of the NIST report, led by the 1700-strong group of architect and engineering professionals, Architects & Engineers for 9-11 Truth, NIST further blocked against disclosing any of the features of controlled demolition exhibited by the collapses. Then it altered its website findings to prevent direct access to the evidence. The final 2005 report on the WTC Towers then completed the cover-up. It changed the topic away from the WTC building collapses altogether to “improving building and occupant safety” in “disaster prevention”. If one did not follow all the steps, one would not believe the systemic fraud driven in one direction at every level.

When logic and scientific method are themselves suspended by the U.S. National Institute of Technology and Standards, we may observe a derangement deeper than 9-11 itself – the collapse of U.S. scientific civilization at its official core. And it is, as demonstrated, for no interests in the end but the less than 1%. One cannot help but think of the medieval Church refusing to look through Galileo’s telescope before the scientific revolution had occurred.

The Invisible Value Program Behind All: Who is Responsible in the End?

On a wider system level, displacing responsibility onto victims is the defining reversal operation, and pseudo-science is the highest authority of public relations.

Throughout, institutional agency remains the ultimate anomaly of moral thought. The deciding “institutional agency” at work here consists of (1) the transnational money sequence system lying behind all that is happy-masked as “the global market” and “the Free World”, and (2) the covert U.S. state and allies in enforcing and extending its rule as their pre-emptively organizing mission. These are the macro organising and coercive forms of the larger rule system that is responsible along with the planner and executive deciders of 9-11, the 9-11 Wars, the police state laws, and the criminal U.S. state in motion. As with Nazism, the morally responsible are the builders and beneficiaries of the institutionalized criminal system and state and its executive agents which all could have chosen otherwise. They are guilty as in any crime to the extent of their deciding agency in life-destructive acts and evil to the extent of their profit or power from them.

Yet moral philosophies themselves are locked into the roles and functions of this global system as in other domains. They blinker out a priori all that is inconsistent with its surrounding rule byfocusing on anything else but the life-destructive disorder of this rule. This is why you will not find in any mainstream moral or even political philosophy any critical engagement with the organizing money-sequence principle itself. Direct censorship or terror, however, does not perform the silencing function in the developed West. Modern atomic-agency method does it beneath anyone’s notice. In modern ethics, economics, and law there are only individual agents of acts and their consequences – “agent-relative ethics”, “market consumer theory”, “investors”, and so on. Institutionalized moral agency is thus a terra nullius of second-order thought.

We have seen the consequences of this atomic-individual understanding of ruling systems. It blinkers them out of view in principle. It is because of these built-in blinkers that corporate and state institutions can represent the private interests of limitlessly self-maximizing money sequences and wars to advance them as the highest good with no-one able to define or even see the systemevil. It is also why strategic plans to construct new crises and scenarios to advance this “supranational sovereignty” on the ground with “noble lies” and millions of victims can go on endlessly without recognition of the criminal disorder that has been constructed.

This is the utmost evil that occurs in the human condition, but is not yet drawn out. Many heroic thinkers have tried over 3000 years, and all have succeeded up to a point. Victims always includechildren and innocent people horribly dying or suffering in large numbers. The ruling group and self identity issues may ultimately be as Freud recognised “the narcissism of small differences” in private passions and conceptions. On the life-ground, however, they are about whether the greedy get more and the people less – the ever mutating form of evil in the world at the system level. The exceptions make human history.

Unhappily the proven nature of the covert U.S. state has ever increasingly been to serve the ruling transnational bank and corporate system as “America’s fundamental interests and freedom”. 9-11 has been the system’s track-switch turn to more and faster without limit of law, and all peoples within its imperium, including its own, grow poorer in life and life means. The covert U.S. system’s powers in particular become an effective reign of terror against all resistant societies and life to enforce and extend transnational money-sequence rule. 9-11 re-sets the parameters of rule to imprison, kidnap, kill and invade other countries at will where they cannot fight back. All the constituents of the 9-11 criminal action itself are there without the dots joined – supreme moral goal, ultimately compelling motives, sufficient means and logistic places required for the action, established character and behaviours to perpetrate it as maximally rational for U.S. interests, declared necessity for a crisis-initiating action to defend and advance lawless regime expansion, continuous public cover-up, lies and alibis to avoid detection of the meaning, and most self-evident the unprecedented magnitude of payoffs at every level reversing prior disadvantageous positions.

At the level of institutional payoffs to the ruling transnational private money sequences of the U.S. as global system, the payoffs have not only been reaped, but have continued the dispossession of the world for money-party gains within and across borders. All of this can only occur if the underlying goal, motives, strategic methods, life costs and ruling value system joining across them are blocked from logical, economic, legal and moral examination. A methodological prison has been so built around 9-11 to repel rational examination that even the Left itself has become largely gagged. This certainly abets the 9-11 myth and its consequences, and may be their necessary condition. But it is not enough to sustain them. There must also be strategic construction of the story to sell across the masses as public relations experts know. This is why we can observe the consistent drive to block, to mislead, to cover up, to destroy evidence, to falsify reports – already known tactics in the corporate public relations world to defend the saleability of harmful products. For the truth in this system is what sells.

Yet despite the ruling group-mind that has been constructed across Left and Right on 9-11, the truth still exists and the rational and scientific question still insists. What fact of 9-11 disconfirms any step of the diagnosis here? I have long looked for one and asked others to join me on all sides, but none has found anything reliable to disconfirm the moral and causal analysis. Only diversion, rhetorical bombast and reverse projection contend against the evidence and design, but they remain rigorously consistent in meaning and value through every step. In fact, what showed the diagnosis as too severe would be welcome to me as to others. For example, one clearly disconfirming fact to the covert-state’s manufacture of 9-11 and the 9-11 Wars would be an independent and impartial inquiry to investigate the full crime with subpoena powers, legal and evidential staffs and critical judicial investigation not wired into the covert-state system – as with the far lesser crime of Watergate. This is the primary test as well of whether the U.S. can recover civilised bearings. But of course nothing has been more blocked, abused and falsified than such independent inquiry into 9-11.

What is most disturbing to a sense of justice in examination of the facts, reasons and moral goals of 9-11 is that not one power of money or command has been evidently lost instead of gained forthose who have benefitted from the crime. Lead Halliburton and Rockefeller interests, for example, are richer and fed more from the public purse than ever before. The morally incensed might respond: “But the U.S. as a nation has never recovered. Its economy has continued downhill, and it has become loathed across the world. The 9-11 culture of 1% grab with impunity has gone onto Wall Street-9-11 with America hollowed out and its youth without a future.” Yet none at the top of the transnational money-sequence-and war feeding cycle has evidently lost out. The criminal U.S. state and its ruling constituency of the corporate rich has only gained and gained spectacularly in their value terms.

Understanding the Criminal U.S. State and its Agents in Principle and Bearing

As long as demonstrable schemes of war, mass murder, terror, big lies, and dispossession of people’s livelihoods and means of life evade examination as an absolutist value program, the life-devouring system grows on undecoded. Moral and intellectual superiority remains assumed so long as it succeeds – the pathological closed circle. A clue was long ago given to me by Allen Bloom in the Closing of the American Mind, a work I then defined as Bloom’s “best-selling sycophancy to the rich” with its coded argument that only the rich are entitled to a higher education. This diagnosis was not answered and Bloom soon left this world. Yet the bluff of the “intellectual elite” of this system is worth unpacking because the disorder depends on its highborn appearance to others. The neo-con “philosopher king” of the criminal U.S. state, so-called by his disciples and the press, is Leo Strauss. Yet in fact Strauss is a German 1930’s U.S. import, sought post-doctoral candidature with the great Paul Tillich, but was rejected and saved by Rockefeller funds to come to America. (He also earlier tried to correspond with the Nazi theorist Carl Schmitt without success). Dick Cheney is lionized as a great if dark strategic mind, but in fact he failed out of Yale.

The “classical philosophical foundations” of the neo-conservative school are made much of, but there is no evidence that any of them today know anything about philosophy. Strauss taughtpolitical science in America as do his disciples, falsifying their claim to “philosophy” as another cloak to hide their ambition and incoherent thinking. The “brilliant Chicago School” led by Milton Friedman propounds the absurd doctrine that government spending creates inflation, while government in fact now creates only 3% of the money supply – the root of America’s economic sickness since the Friedman-led economic counter-revolution. In even more overblown conceit, the Wall Street money sequencers are called the “masters of the universe”. But they in fact produce nothing, and now only bleed and ruin governments and individuals by perpetual servitude to their debt-servicing demands, manufacture fraudulent securities with impunity to metastasize around the world, lead endless mergers and takeovers for huge fees and profits from stripping them, and casino-bet on stock futures with no function but raising prices (e.g., on basic foods and water to come). Where does it end, the fatuous bluff masking the most globally life-destructive value program in history of which Wall Street, Big Oil and the military-industrial complex are the greatest beneficiaries as well as drivers?56

In this moral universe of the very rich and their academic suits, “noble lies” are the pervasive method twisted out of Plato, and lording it over the poor with no limit are the natural right of themasters and capital accumulation – decoded, private money sequences multiplying in transnational corporate aliases, stock vehicles and tax-evasion sites. Yet the pathogenic code does not come from nowhere. It follows from a deep axiomatic equation at the heart of the ruling thought system. It reigns across even the academy as the money-sequence paradigm beneath examination, and overrides all life and life needs as I have formally shown elsewhere.57 The ultimate equation behind it all is merely presupposed a priori: Rationality = Self-Maximizing Choice. This equation is the underlying first premise of every U.S. economic textbook and corporate ledger, but it does not stop there. Moral and political philosophy themselves have adopted it as their gold standard of rational deduction.

The way you go from rationality to market freedom and justice in this thought mechanism is by a single homogenous route of atomically self-maximizing calculation. In this ruling meta programsubstituting for life-coherent thinking, it is assumed that self-maximizing preference necessarily produces by the market’s invisible hand the best possible world or “optimum” for all. This metaprogram is the moral DNA of market modernity. It becomes ever more twisted and life-blind – and dyseconomic – once the ruling turn is made in which “society does not exist”. 9-11 is thegiant step of the third millennium to institute its rule as absolute.

U.S.-led moral and justice theory, game theory, and economic and strategic systems of calculation are all locked into this ultimate axiom and sequencing of rational-moral-political-strategic choice prior to 9-11– self-maximizing preference in private money-value terms as automatic, absolute and unlimited. It is no more called into question within these dominant domains of thinking than the fish calls into question the sea. But on the dark side of the ultimate equation are the ruling private interests of the U.S. criminal state which are driven by a leap-frog inner logic to the supreme value program of which 9-11 is a mutant expression:

Rationality = Self-Maximizing Choice = U.S. State Seeks to Rule in All Matters of U.S. Interests = U.S. Corporations and Executive State Maximize Control of World Oil Supplies, Strategic Armed Force Positions, Land for Industrial Agriculture, Mass Media Projection, and Scientific and Political Assets = Plan Full Spectrum Dominance through Africa, Middle East and Asia = Freedom and the Good for the World.

No step of this run-on inner logic follows as life-coherent or even sane. Yet seek to find any exception to its throughline value program in the behaviours of the post-9-11 U.S. state and you will find none. This is its moral DNA and includes the destruction of the lives of the rising majority of the American people as “unable to compete”. Not even a tax of .01% on currency speculators or 2% on the multiplied incomes of the rich is tolerated if the money-sequences can keep multiplying at the expense of fellow citizens’ lives and life bases. On the global level, the same innermost carcinogenic dynamic relentlessly erases the boundaries of evolved social and ecological life systems to control all that others have and depend on as “U.S. interests” – that is, more exactly, as instrumental means to grow transnational corporate money-sequences in life-blind self multiplication. 9-11 was the strategically essential step to turn back the world-wide popular forces reacting against this reversal of democratic history and social life evolution.

As all institutions and vocations of countervailing thought and power become increasingly overwhelmed by the multiplying money tides, armed force, media monopoly and privatizing/detaxing governments, ever larger majorities of people and their social and natural life support systems decline and collapse so long as they are dispossessed and kept down by armed force and bought elections at the same time. This underlying disorder is propelled every step by the ultimately regulating series of equations by which the world is increasingly bound after 9-11. Once the 9-11 explosions occur, not even constitutional guarantees for America’s citizens are secure. Ever diminishing life security and function progresses further for the 99%. Continuous serial murders and lawless assassinations by killer “drones” – unacceptable before 9-11 – are now reported as “technical violations” by the Western press. In a schoolhouse within the U.S. as I write, a “wicked smart” 20-year-old shoots and kills 20 young children – one for every year – from a household terrified of the life insecurity to come. None seem to notice the connections. At the bottom “I kill therefore I am” rules from video to real. “We kill therefore we rule” rules at the system top. In the background, the supranational private money-sequences leave more and more young without lives or futures, and strip the planet of its life ground and support systems.58

After 9-11, the moral sanctification becomes cosmic with impunity. “Opponents envy us and hate our freedom”. “You are poor because you do not compete”. “The richer we are, the more we do for society”. The reigning value system is a devouring circle with no committed life function, and it moves by ideological validations that are not exposed. As the British are dispossessed of their social life supports by the City-led money-sequence system, for tell-tale example, the Guardian sports-page smirks that the greatest batsman in Britain exemplifies “greed is good”. Where does the moral rot end? Could it have kept advancing without the 9-11 turn towards world police state coincident with a monopoly corporate press and media to sell it? Could the rootlessly rapacious money-sequence system have so metastasised across domains without all the public attention and funds diverted onto “war against terrorism”? People rise against it everywhere. But the more material opposition there is, the more attacks and police state regimes are justified to “stop the terrorists”, and the more the private money sequence system to monopoly is fed with public funds bled out of the people.

But who is guilty if the U.S. criminal state is accountable to no moral or legal authority but itself, and the private money-sequence system itself is presupposed as law of nature? Systematicviolation of the most basic national and international criminal laws, even “the supreme crime” of planning war invasion, now runs free with ever more payoffs to the ruling money party. (As Henry Ford famously said, “Show me who makes a profit from war, and I’ll show you how to stop the war”.) But no accountability to life standards exists at the transnational money-sequence level in waror peace – not even to humanity’s food and water carrying capacities which are increasingly adulterated, polluted and drawn down. All life and life bases are maximally converted into multiplying private money demand at the top as “market competition”. It may seem normatively chaotic, but the responsible agents are identifiable in principle. They always qualify as guilty in proportion to their private money profit from human and planetary life destruction to which their decisions and rules lead.

In the 9-11 crime itself, the intent, the plan, the means, the statements before, the compartmentalized enablements, directives and blocks, the exact execution down to the cover-up erasures, the rolling out of special forces and wars of plunder, the torture, kidnap, repression and murder over 10 years – – all point back to the same responsible agency and plan which no counter-evidence disconfirms. But how are people to hold the responsible agents to account if even forensic questions are themselves taboo? How can this “supranational sovereignty” of limitless private corporate money sequence invasion as “freedom” and “right” be arrested if its value program remains unexamined by even moral philosophers and scholars? If all relevant evidence of the 9-11 crime itself is removed, confiscated, refused, denied, destroyed, anathematized and framed out without connective understanding, the cover-up works? The torture, killing, renditions, and greatest of all, “the supreme crime” under law that “contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole”, continue. After Afghanistan on pretext and after Iraq on exposed lie, the wars go into Libya, Syria, Somalia, Iran on false pretenses recycled again and again. Social and natural life systems meanwhile degrade everywhere including the U.S. and the E.U. to feed the global money-sequence program to self-multiplication.

Yet ruling principles of a system-specific rationality and supreme moral goal govern every moment. The ruling transnational money-sequences have been all de-regulated and publicly subsidized in every possible way. The criminal U.S. state has all the “national security” laws, secret presidential directives and post-9-11 police state legislation to validate every step to execution, including murder. These together form the direct institutional agency responsible for the endless crimes, including 9-11 by covert complex mechanism. The problem is that this institutional agency is legally covert while executive-director actions are armoured by offices and evasive lines of command so that even 9-11 could be planned and executed without anyone knowing it but an innermost figure/cabal habituated to all the channels of need-to-know communication, departmentalized division of tasks, and outsource connections to complete the technically advanced and bureaucratically complicated strategic plan. Here too the evidence points to who it could be, Cheney-Rumsfeld-Wolfowitz, for example. But all this diagnosis here depends on are known facts and design. The ultimate issue here is the supreme value program which they express, and the covert state mechanism that enables known official lies, limitless sabotage, torture, kidnapping, murder and war-criminal campaigns by ruling executive decision as legal with no accountability to the rule of criminal law at any level. In fact, no international obligation to comply with the criminal law is recognised by the U.S. state.

What 9-11 showed is that the covert state can be murderously lawless within the U.S. as well. Not only was there no criminal investigation of the act, method, and payoffs of the mass murder on U.S. soil. No principles of criminal forensic justice were allowed even to be raised. Even an aging philosopher from Canada was heaped with abuse from the American and Canadian corporate media and mobbing denunciations for dismissal for merely raising preliminary questions of law and factual anomalies inside a university auditorium. Meanwhile in comparison, from the tragic to the bathetic, private and consensual sexual behavior of anyone in power who opens the most self-evident issues inconvenient to U.S. state policies and the rich transnational money sequences they serve is soon pilloried out of office. The one who stands for the common life interests of the American people against the criminal state and its dominant special interests, however circumspectly, becomes a spectacle of public disgrace for sex-dalliances as the continuous murders, war crimes and fraud continue on unquestioned.59

This mutant money-sequence system is mindless in its principled grounds, and the cultural syntax of US-versus-the-Enemy is a comic-strip reduction to Good versus Evil, US-versus-Them. But the same time, more deeply, understanding of only individual agency (called “agent relative method”) rules out institutional agency a-priori. Law, economics, moral philosophy see only atomic agents and their choices. Institutional agency is blinkered out in principle. Together these two structures of thought – mindless US-Them moral syntax and blind atomic method – blinker out the global reign of terror by the covert U.S state and the monopolist money interests it serves and expresses. Corporate media conglomerates – in which all major money-sequence participate as stock and advertising space owners – then manage the public presentation. The institutionalized criminal agency thus cannot be seen at any of its levels.

A concrete example assists understanding. The “anthrax attacks on the U.S.” after the collapsed WTC buildings were immediately conceived and categorized as more “war on the U.S.” by “foreign terrorists”. The anthrax attacks exactly coincided with the U.S. Senate refusal to pass the Patriot Act, legislation granting full police-state powers. The anthrax-letters came afterwards, and their notes were stereotypes of the U.S. propaganda machine – “Death To America. Death To Israel. Allah Is Great” in capital letters. To ensure it was from “the terrorists”, the opening letter said “You cannot stop us. We have the anthrax. You die now.” (Five people did die). Are you afraid now?” (Again in capital letters). Notable recipients of the anthrax letters were two Senate leaders, the editor of the New York Post, and the NBC news anchor. The Patriot Act was then passed with modifications.60

Six months later when citizens were assured of the “War on America”, it was discovered that the anthrax was from the U.S. government’s own biological weapons labs – a manufacture of illegalweaponry that was itself denied for years.61 This made no difference to the plan. Not only were the anti-terrorist legislation and permanent police-state measures thus legitimated, but all themarkings of the criminal U.S. state were again there, covered up, and as usual blamed on a “lone nut” as the major business proceeded – mass-murderous wars on oil-central countries without any mediating requirement of forensic inquiry or due process of finding guilt or questions of the U.S. war crimes under law. Only the instituted evil of the Enemy could exist.62 This is the mind-boxwithin which America is held for the criminal U.S. state and the rapacious and rootless money sequences it serves to succeed.

Citizen Action Required: To Expose and Shame the U.S. Criminal State

U.S. citizens do not vote for a criminal state. It is reviled by thinking citizens and is the disgrace of their country around the world. It is in principle as odious as the earlier transnational monopolist corporate criminal conspiracy that financed and built the Nazi war machine. Its supreme objective and strategic logic are analogous in moral framing and organised terror, and wars of aggression to enact the supranational plan are its signature evil.

It could have gone another way. In the midst of the worst fascist period, Roosevelt’s Chairman of the Federal Reserve from 1936 on was Marriner Stoddard Eccles, a wealthy banker, who fought for the indebted majority against the “giant suction pump [which] had by 1929-30 drawn into a few hands an increasing portion of currently produced wealth”.63 Eccles was driven out by the American money party in 1951 though he had years more to serve. Roosevelt chose as his Vice President Henry Wallace as a condition of his accepting nomination. All three stood against “Wall Street fascism and U.S. corporate imperialism”.64 But as Roosevelt died Wallace was blocked from the presidency by the inside money-party powers of the Democrat machine just as Eccles was isolated and attacked by them.

In short, the inside battle for the United States goes very deep, and it is between the very rich corporate powers that both Lincoln and Eisenhower warned of and “the common man” whoRoosevelt, Wallace and Eccles stood for at the top. Today no such democratic vision and accountability is permitted in through the revolving doors of big-money control. Obama was sold as the brand for such a change, but he is the greatest serial murderer in contemporary history, and his entry into office is due to Wall Street support. “I am the one standing between you and thepitchforks”, he said after 2008 to a Wall Street elite while presiding over a flood of over $16 trillion dollars of public money to enable it to keep hollowing out the world.65 What drove 9-11 before and after in principle and fact is this same corporate money party: or, more exactly and institutionally by objective criterion, the principals of private transnational money-sequence banks, corporations, syndicates and equity funds distinguished by (1) their repudiation in practice of all life standards, common-interest agencies and requirements which stand in the way of (2) their multiplying private money sequences through all life and life support systems on Earth.

The crisis of Western and world civilisation is laid bare in the undeclared war of life-versus money codes of value.66 9-11 is its signature event in the third millennium. It enables new police staterights at home and right to assassination and armed-force invasion abroad, while overriding life and life support systems into ever greater crises to feed and multiply the money-party system. Not one step in this slow-motion end-game does not protect and advance dominant private U.S. corporate money sequences to more control of the world to grow more. Yet there is one great barrier codified into the laws of nations which cannot be overridden if seen – the essential social immune system of human civilisation, the rule of life-protective criminal law. It is already codified in binding covenants among nations and is instituted within the U.S. itself as what governs all except the covert state.

It is this evolved criminal law that has been usurped and reversed most profoundly since 2001. Yet this criminalization of the U.S. state remains unflagged. As we have seen, all the primaryforensic questions of criminal investigation of 9-11 have been repressed. Due process of establishing guilt has been overthrown. One U.S. crime after another has been perpetrated with impunity and with no public report of the gravest crimes. The “supreme crime” under law of planning a war of aggression that “contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole” is repeatedly committed and never prosecuted or even identified. The worst crimes against humanity under law are perpetrated without respite – murder, deprivation of access to food, water and medicine, forcible transfers of population, torture, persecution, false imprisonment, enforced disappearances, plunder of public property, wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages. These are all crimes against humanity under law. They are, to cite the Criminal Code of Canada and the Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes Act “recognized by the community of nations, whether or not any constitutes a contravention of the law in force at the time and in the place of its commission.”

The first requirement for stopping “international terrorism”, “crimes against humanity”, “extreme and systematic violations of human rights” and all the acts of “despotism” of which the U.S. is always accusing others – in particular “terrorist activities” against which it above all claims to prevent and punish – is for the U.S. to comply with the known criminal law. Its satraps like Israel will have to follow. In the primary instance, U.S. offices, agents and institutions are required to comply with national and international criminal law as the sworn duty of office and of institutional legitimacy itself. Criminal activities of murder, torture, kidnapping, and the supreme crime of war invasion must be ruled out, as they are not now, and the U.S. and its criminal axis of mass terrorism and killing be named. Not even the 9-11 truth movement yet does this as published criminal charge.67 In fact who does recognise the undeniable criminal agents and institutions now ruling? The ultimate moral, legal and political issue is almost nowhere raised. This is the more basic issue than independent investigation of the 9-11 crime inside the U.S. It is the recognition of the instituted criminal agency behind 9-11 which is still plotting supreme crimes of which 9-11 is the striking new homeland version.

Just as citizens of the criminal state of Nazi Germany have not been forgiven by excuses that “we did not know what was going on”, is there any more reason U.S. citizens be forgiven for thecontinuous war crimes and crimes against humanity by their government with which they have been silently complicit? The same question applies to citizens of allied governments that haveparticipated in or – in Israel’s case – led the crimes. There is far more evidence of these crimes now than there was in the Third Reich. Silence is, of course, how the criminal state continues with moral and legal impunity.68 Once clear identification of the lead individuals and institutions as proven mass murderers and oppressors for power and gain, they lose their face and legitimacy. The worst tyrants on earth – who also drape themselves in flag and country – fear this exposure so much they seal the lips of their citizens by terror. Eventually they collapse as they are increasingly recognised as what they are – the vilest criminals, serial murderers, liars, torturers, looters of others’ lives and resources. Why is this invincible moral conclusion under law not publicly spoken?

Independent inquiry into the major crime of the criminal U.S. state within the U.S. is self-evidently required. But it is not the incineration of the iconic Rockefeller-child towers and the business personnel inside them that is the crime of the whole. It is the war crimes and crimes against humanity that the covert criminal U.S. state proceeded to from there and continues with morally posturing impunity as it murders by rockets, special forces, covert criminal directions, arming and financing civil wars, and bombing invasions. In the past, one could say that the American people were at least prosperous. But now the transnational U.S. money-sequence system simultaneously hollows out its own citizens’ lives, the future of its youth and its social infrastructures.

Can the reader think of any significant countervailing behaviour of the post-9-11 system? The only exception is where real democratic governments stand against the private transnational money-sequence system at state and popular levels – as in Norway to Brazil today. This stand against the cancerous system is defined by democratic self-organisation, reclamation of public and financial resources, massive public investment, higher taxes on the rich, and peaceful methods.69 Yet for over a decade Latin America’s peaceful revolution has been unnamed, ignored and attacked in the corporate media while the only movements on the ground that are publicized – the Arab Spring and the Occupy Wall Street movement – have no policies at all.

Meanwhile the covert U.S. state leads coups d’etat against the dramatically successful economies which have exited the sick system – 2002 in Venezuela (failed), 2004 in Haiti before it could getuntracked, 2009 in Honduras, 2010 in Ecuador (failed), and 2012 in Paraguay. Direct murder of heads of state is another method. Are the cancers of President Chavez of Venezuela and President Cristina Fernandez of Argentina by the same radiation-poisoning technology as Yasser Arafat, apparently murdered by polonium-210? Who is behind the foreign hit squad that tried to murder President Evo Morales of Bolivia in 2010?70 In short, the ruling transnational money sequence system is not only supremely criminal in its covert-state operations, but attacks all public life bases and means that successfully overcome its disorder.

Since 2001 in particular, the transnational money-sequence power stemming from Wall Street and its global corporate partners wages war against life systems in mutating ways of which 9-11 is a turning point in impunity and global totalization. Human rights have been overridden, social programs stripped, taxes on the rich reduced, financial fraud multiplied, wars of aggression andbombings increased, public revenues turned over to the private banking system, and every lifesystem on the planet pushed into further destabilization and decline with no evident action but more “war against the terrorists”. Yet the entire system is financed by the public. Rising trillions go to its war machine enforcement and recapitalization of Wall Street to debt-enslave the poor and foreign societies while the homeland paying for it becomes increasingly impoverished in life bases and means. This is the unseen meaning of the 9-11 turn to all-fronts war to totalize the transnational money-sequence system beneath consciousness of it.

But conscious it must become. British people have publicly named former P.M. Tony Blair a war criminal, and there is a price on his head for arrest from even journalist George Monbiot, believer in the official 9/11 conspiracy theory. Kissinger dares not travel unless assured he will not be arrested as a war criminal. Conrad Black, a major presence in the Bilderberg Group, has gone to prison for far lesser crimes. In revealing microcosm of the invisible forces at work, I charged the PNAC organiser Thomas Donnelly with “advocating a war crime” a few days before the bombing of Baghdad in 2003, and added, “you should be arrested at an airport”. That so upset him and the media managers presiding over the debate that the words were erased from the “live” broadcast 30 minutes later. True naming goes deep, and cannot be borne by the criminal class and those who support them. But the sweep since 9-11 has gone from Iraq and Afghanistan to Libya to Syria, three of them distinguished by developed social infrastructures for their peoples. Still the perpetual trumpeting of the necessity for invasion of Iran drumbeats on – who next? – and the value program driving every war crime and transnational money-sequence takeover remains undecoded.

The institutional evil of the U.S. covert state is rooted in “national security” justifications as in the prototype Nazi case, and post 9-11 laws have resembled the Nazi Enabling Act after the Reichstag Fire of 1933 with revealing differences.71 Yet compliance with national and international criminal law is hardly too much to expect from agents and institutions of states forever demanding that others respect “the international community”, “norms of law”, and repudiation of “terrorism”. There are deep precedents for life beyond a criminal U.S. state. Roosevelt, Wallace and Eccles almost won against “the fascism within” and achieved the New Deal. The independent Watergate investigation provides a sovereign democratic model to emulate. Even Philip Zelikow wrote a distinguished memorandum against torture. The long established and now operational International Criminal Court provides the international laws and procedures already long evolved and applied to others.

Yet behind and sustaining the criminal U.S. state is the ruling assumption that the U.S. is above the law other nations must obey. This is why the U.S. refuses to ratify the International CriminalCourt although deploying its rhetoric, legal investigations, procedures and judgements non-stop against others. It is also why even some in the 9-11 truth movement fail to call for prosecution ofthe covert U.S. state under international law. Many Americans appear to assume that the U.S. state can commit its crimes outside the U.S. but not to its citizens within. The problem here goesvery deep. The U.S. state not only subverts the law, but performatively declares it is not bound by it, and one hears few political representatives object – with noble exceptions like Kucinich and McKinney since 9-11 (the latter hounded out of office). When a state effectively declares it is above the criminal law and its people go along, the lawless assumption undermines the very grounds of civilisation – the very grounds the U.S. stood for in 1945 and the rule of human rights and criminal law which its president and people formerly led. One wonders whether the 9-11 attack sacrificing citizens to advance private U.S. corporate control of foreign treasure in blood oil, markets and banks was not the mutant incubus of a corrupt money-sequence culture that no longer recognises its moral ground.

The remedy begins with the rule of life-protective law that has been usurped, and can be restored as in any developed court of law.72 The 9-11 crime re-sets the transnational rule of terror into theMiddle East and the U.S. itself. Unnamed, the criminal global state and its supranational sovereignty of private corporate money sequencing continue to cumulatively destroy societies and the planetary life-host with 9-11 as the twenty-first century’s launch-pad of entitlement.

Notes

37. Andrew Kolin, State Power and Democracy (New York: St. Martin’s Press/Palgrave Macmillan, 2011) provides

an able political science analysis of the U.S. police state as an objective phenomenon.

38. See Note 65.

39 My argument in this regard “9/11: The Undeniable Unifying Framework” is available at:

http://www.snowshoefilms.com/mcmurtry.html

40. The “Regulating Group-Mind” is a concept I explain in depth in the Sage Encyclopedia of Case Study Research. The regulating group-mind is logically explained as the instituted grammar of the corporate media in my “The Unspeakable: Understanding the System of Fallacy in the Mass Media” (1988), Informal Logic 3, 133-150.

41. The global system disorder of which 9-11 is an integrated part is spelled out step by step in The Cancer Stage, ibid.

42. This analysis does not take up the Mossad link to the destruction of the NYTC buildings. It sticks to known facts

and follows their consistently directive meaning. But it is worthwhile pointing out to those who disapprove of seeking links to Mossad – which was, with the Israel-Likud government, triumphal after the apparent “Arab terrorist” attack on the towers, their flag for war criminal attacks on the Palestinian people – that Arabs are themselves Semitic people — the vast majority of Semitic people. If there is anti-Semitism, it is provable against the Arab people, and as full of hatred as Nazi dehumanization of Jews – “bug-splats” the CIA operatives call them when

drone murdered, and “two-legged animals” and “insects” say Israel-Likud leaders.

43. See note 1.

44. http://209.68.44.112/mcmurtry.html

45. This is the underling ultimate issue spelled out by the texts of Unequal Freedoms, Cancer Stage (1999 and 2013), and Value Wars referenced above, and by What is Good? What is Bad? The Value of All Values Across Time, Place and Theories. Oxford: Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS) Under the Auspices of UNESCO, 2004-2010.

46. At the time of the first Iraq invasion by the US armed forces CBS was owned by Westinghouse and NBC by

General Electric, which made most of many weapons in the military commodities show on peak-hour TV.

47. http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/visions/publication/terrorism.htm, retrieved from

http://rense.com/general78/rapestory.htm , poed (1998, retrieved November 10, 2012). Needless to say, the original Harvard-posted paper has been erased from the internet along with the PNAC’s follow-up statement of need for “some catalyzing and catastrophic event”.

48. System worship is explained in its principles of governance in “Understanding Market Theology” in (ed.) Bernard Hodgson, The Invisible Hand and the Common Good: Heidelberg and New York: Springer Studies in Economic Ethics and Philosophy, 2004, p.151-83.

49. Details not separately sourced in end-note are from a prior source, here Note 2.

50. http://www.disclose.tv/forum/betting-against-airlines-1-day-before-9-11-t24453.html

51. This account does not restrict itself to a nanothermite method of controlled demolition in a narrow technical sense. “Planned demolition” by advanced U.S. weaponry/technology of any kind is consistent with this analysis. The point is that the evidence overwhelmingly points to the fact the buildings were destroyed by covert U.S. state means, whatever these were.

52. This quotation from Zelikow is indebted to a review of Paul W. Rea PhD., “Mounting Evidence: Why We Need a New Investigation Into 9/11”, PhD

http://books.google.ca/books?id=Dc1VEiCpFfUC&pg=PA81&lpg=PA81&dq=zelikow+% 2B+academic+specialty&source=bl&ots=35L5p7mynY&sig=TMERopVrbK2m1uruhoYdPXg0lU&hl=en&sa=X&e

i=fyqlUIqcDYrbyAHt9oHIAQ&sqi=2&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=zelikow%20%2B%20academic%20specialty&f=false

53. The general theory of life value is spelled out in John McMurtry, What is Good? What is Bad? The Value of All

Values Across Time, Place and Theories, Oxford: Eolss Publishers under the auspices of Unesco, 2010.

54. The scientific investigation of the NIST report by Architects & Engineers for 9-11 Truth is useful here.

55. See Note 1.

56. But countless others prosper as propagandists and norm enforcers. For a micro example again, Allen Bloom was an academy front man of the neo-con enterprise when, obviously enraged, he attacked a paper titled “Structures of Domination and Liberation” at a public symposium, charging it with falsehood, specifically a line from Plato’s The Republic of which he is the best-known American translator. He was famous in a three-piece suit, I was in a twodollar shirt and untenured. It was meat-eating time for “the elite”, the room seemed to say. When I produced the more authoritative F.M. Cornford Oxford translation from which the line came, he pretended it, he and I were not there. The contested line ironically revealed the real issue. Plato revealingly referred to “hired labourers” as “hardly worth including in our society” (Republic, II, 371). The exchange was a kind of synecdoche of the posturing supremacism and lies of the “intellectual elite and bankers” asserting “supranational sovereignty” over fact and life with bullying falsification its epigenetic code.

57. “Behind Global System Collapse: The Life-Blind Structure of Economic Rationality”, Journal of Business Ethics (2012), ibid.

58. Cancer Stage spells out the system-wide disorder in depth in which 9-11 has provided the free movement for

arms-led invasive metastases across former internal and external borders of life organization and defence at all

levels.

59 Clinton and Lewinski’s extra-marital liaison became news only after Clinton said to international traders that “we

must level up not down”, and Elliot Spitzer’s only did so after he went after Wall-Street driven financial fraud and loan sharking. The latest moral reversal occurred to David Petraeus after he warned the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee about the U.S.-Israel relationship. Petraeus defined the “root causes of instability” as follows: “Perceived U.S. favoritism for Israel. Arab anger over the Palestinian question limits the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples in the AOR and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world”.

http://mondoweiss.net/2010/03/sometimes-the-news-takes-9-years-petraeus-says-lack-of-progress-for-palestiniansis-root-cause-of-arab-anger.html. “From the lips of a celebrated general, regarded by many as a potential future president, these words come as a bombshell” reports Paul Woodward on the occasion. “Others, who earlier said what Petraeus now says, have been – – branded as anti-Israeli or by insinuation, anti-Semitic.” But he adds confidently, “No such charge will stick to Petraeus”.

60. http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/frameup.html.

This source is useful for its concision and documentation of sources. It also reports that White House Staff were on powerful antibiotic pills in the period.

61. As I write, the U.S. government is accusing Syria of planning to use “chemical weapons against its own people”

with no evidence as Patriot missiles are shipped to launch against the government.

62. As Graeme MacQueen writes in correspondence on this point: “I have sometimes pointed out in talks that as long as the anthrax attacks were taken as carried out by external enemies, institutional agency (though I haven’t called it that) was strongly affirmed. It was claimed, for example, to have been an act of the Iraqi state. As soon as it was shown that the anthrax came from highly secure military labs in the U.S. the FBI [as usual] started looking for a lone nut, ruling out from the outset a [home-side] institutional agent.”

63. Sydney Hyman, Marriner S. Eccles: Private Entrepreneur and Public Servant . Palo Alto, CA: Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, 1976.

64. Academic historian Peter Kuznets explains this with Oliver Stone in their new book, The Untold History of the

United States, discussed at http://www.democracynow.org/2012/11/16/oliver_stone_on_the_untold_us .

65. “As a result of this audit, we now know that the Federal Reserve provided more than $16 trillion in total financial

assistance to some of the largest financial institutions and corporations in the United States and throughout the

world,” reported Senator Bernie Sanders 21 Jul 2011. www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=9e2a4ea8-6e73 ….. Before Senator Sanders demanded the information through Congressional right, the staggering outpour of public money to the private bank system – ten times more than what is called “a fiscal cliff” when it involves a 2%

tax on the rich in exchange for eliminating meagre benefits to the poor – was, as all great dispossessions by this

ruling money-sequence system, covered up and remains unspoken in the corporate press.

66. The Global Market as an Ethical System, Cancer Stage, and Value Wars, ibid, spell out the value-system meaning in depth at theoretical, historical and policy levels.

67. As Chair of Jurists of the War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity Tribunal in 1989 at the Toronto World Summit, I observed that although there were tens of thousands of people in the streets for arrest of the charged criminals at the Summit with all charges legally drawn and attended and eyewitnesses from around the world testifying over days, not one media of record except francophone TV would report one word of the tribunal. The extent of the silencing, I found here and elsewhere, is in proportion to the exposure and de-legitimization of the criminal U.S. state.

68 To provide a sense of the global terrorist network that has been constructed by the U.S. covert state since 9-11

and on its pretext, fifty-four states have allied with the U.S. in criminal kidnapping, caging, and torture euphemized

as “renditions” www.opensocietyfoundations.org/…/globalizing-torture-cia-secret-de…Feb 5, 2013). At the same time, there have been many states assisting in thousands of serial murders and capital crimes against humanity by

presidential drone missiles multiplied to increasing thousands of strikes killing legally innocent victims under Obama. A once-unthinkable culture of official violence and murder from the top has become normalized.

69. Exactly how this has been done is systematically explained in The Cancer Stage of Capitalism: From Crisis to

Cure, ibid. In general, exactly planned policies of productive life capital development based in democratic participation have led the peaceful revolution.

70. Meanwhile formerly social-democratic Canada discloses the non-murder method by a corporately funded and directed prime minister – essentially a branch-plant reflex owned by Big Oil Money who, inter alia, commands erasure of government statistics at every level, closes down environmental reviews and monitoring stations across domains, winds down tax money for public healthcare, the country’s civil identity, defunds all NGO’s not serving transnational corporations in the field, runs toxic sludge rated as dirty oil by the European Union in wide mouth supranational pipes without any developed society processing, overrides union rights at every turn while exporting jobs , gags MP’s from public statements while refusing questions from the press, overrides Parliamentary laws and

rights to know, leads war propaganda and trebles claimed spending on war jets, and directs public pension funds to investments in arms for Israel’s criminal occupation of Palestinian lands. “Canada and U.S. values”, he publicly declares on the occasion of a visit by “war president” Bush Jr., “are exactly the same”.

71. The Nazi Enabling Act permitted all the “anti-terrorist” rights of arrest, detention, and overriding of law and due process as the Patriot Act and other legislation permitted the Bush Jr. administration, but fell short of claiming it an “act of war” permitting war on other countries. In another parallel little noticed, September 11 was also the date of the coup d’etat against the elected government of Chile in 1973 directed by Henry Kissinger and Milton Friedman and financially and militarily assisted by the U.S. to begin the long line of death-squad dictatorships across LatinAmerica which were U.S.-supported throughout their reigns of terror. The 9-11 attack is woven through with massmurderous precedent, but is distinguished by three simultaneous features from the U.S. past: (1) its direct assault on the U.S. and its justification of direct wars on other societies against the defining criminal laws of the international community (not instituted while the Nazis ruled); (2) its justification for overriding the constitutional rights of American citizens themselves (not before formally instituted in the U.S.); and, driving all, (3) the maximum pay-off matrix to transnational U.S. money-sequences in new hundreds of billions of dollars to private military contractors, new control over world premier oilfields worth more in long-term seized assets, new agricultural lands under U.S. transnational corporate control and forced GMO and oil-derivative inputs, and perhaps most overall by Wall Street extractions from the vast new private money-sequences put in motion that its private banks and bankers profitably finance at every step across the world (largely new developments by corporately dictated transnational treaties).

72. The criminals themselves can be democratically stopped most directly at the appointment level where open Congressional hearings on all national security advisers, members of relevant Senate committees, and candidates for President are directly asked under oath and penalty for perjury whether they would advocate or be complicit in capital crime under existing U.S. or international criminal law. Such elementary screening against high crimes with disqualification powers for failure of assurance is as self-evident as an oath in court, and far more is at stake. Oneresult would be to restore the U.S. state to the legitimacy it has lost. Another would be to have a real moral ground for the Free World. Another, most of all, would be to allow the vast majority of the world seeking peace and justice to achieve what 9-11 has derailed for over a decade.

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Moral Decoding of 9-11. The Official Conspiracy Theory, the Free Press, and the 9-11 Turn

The Trident ‘deterrent’ is a £100 billion bad joke when Israel now has a nuclear­-armed, state­-of­-the­-art, fleet of submarines that could already blow Britain out of the water with its dangerous second -strike capability.

Secretary Michael Fallon, with his plan that could only materialise in 20 years, knows full well that Britain must now rely on the United States for its nuclear defence, ­ only no Conservative government will admit it.

Britain is a NATO signatory to the nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and subject to inspection by the IAEA, whilst Israel is one of the only UN members that refuses to sign either and is, (together with North Korea and Pakistan), a global nuclear threat that Britain is completely powerless to confront.

A plan to expend £100 billion for a replacement nuclear deterrent that will not be available until 2035, is £100 billion thrown down the drain. Mr Cameron knows it. The SNP know it and the much-maligned Mr Corbyn has the guts to say that to expend £1600 for every man, woman and child in Britain on a deterrent that is no such thing, is political misjudgement.

It is public money that should be spent on modern hospitals, cancer treatment and Britain’s road, rail and communications infrastructure – not thrown away on a discredited political doctrine.

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Corbyn Is Correct. Trident Deterrent is £100 Billion, £1600 for Every Man, Woman and Child in Britain…

The Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant No. 2 nuclear reactor fuel is missing from the core containment vessel.1

Where did it go? Nobody knows.

Not only that but the “learning curve” for a nuclear meltdown is as fresh as the event itself because “the world has never seen anything like this,”  Never.

Utilizing cosmic ray muon radiography with nuclear emulsion, researchers from Nagoya University peered inside the reactors at Fukushima. The nuclear fuel in reactor core No. 5 was clearly visible via the muon process. However, at No. 2 reactor, which released a very large amount of radioactive substances coincident with the 2011 explosion, little, if any, signs of nuclear fuel appear in the containment vessel. A serious meltdown is underway.

“The researchers say further analyses are needed to determine whether molten fuel penetrated the reactor and fell down.”2 In short, researchers do not yet know if the molten hot stuff has penetrated the steel/concrete base beyond the containment vessel, thus entering Mother Earth.

The Nagoya University research team, in coordination with Toshiba Corporation, reported their findings at a meeting of the Physical Society of Japan on September 26th.

Thus, therefore, and furthermore, it is advisable to review what’s at stake:

High-level nuclear waste is almost unimaginably poisonous. Take for example cesium-137, with a half-life of 30 years, which makes up the largest fraction of long-lived radionuclides residing in spent nuclear fuel. One gram of radioactive cesium-137 (about half the size of a dime) contains 88 Curies of radioactivity. 104 Curies of radioactive cesium-137, spread evenly over one square mile of land, will make it uninhabitable for more than a century.3

As, for example, there are 1,090 square miles of land surrounding the destroyed Chernobyl reactor that Ukraine classifies as an uninhabitable radioactive exclusion zone because radioactive fallout left more than 104 Curies of cesium- 137 per square mile on the land that makes up the zone. Scientists believe it will be 180 to 320 years before Cesium-137 around Chernobyl disappears from the environment.

Here’s the big, or rather biggest, problem: Cesium is water-soluble and makes its way into soils and waters as it quickly becomes ubiquitous in a contaminated ecosystem.

Chernobyl, on the other hand, is a different animal than Fukushima because its explosion was much more widespread and more dense than Fukushima, where 80% of initial radiation was blown out to the Pacific Ocean. Hmm.

Whereas, during the Three Mile Island incident, a partial core meltdown occurred but the reactor vessel was not breached, so there was no major radiation release.

Categorically,

“Long-lived radionuclides such as Cesium-137 are something new to us as a species. They did not exist on Earth in any appreciable quantities during the entire evolution of complex life. Although they are invisible to our senses they are millions of times more poisonous than most of the common poisons we are familiar with. They cause cancer, leukemia, genetic mutations, birth defects, malformations, and abortions at concentrations almost below human recognition and comprehension. They are lethal at the atomic or molecular level.”4

Still, a true understanding of the dangers of the Fukushima disaster may never be fully known by the general public because of difficulties accessing solid information.  Indeed, the Japanese government has made it nearly impossible to obtain information which is not indiscriminately labeled “secret,” and a journalist may face up to 10 years in prison based upon which side of the bed a government employee gets up on any given morning; it’s absolutely true!

The independent organization Reporters without Borders has downgraded Japan in its World Press Freedom Index from 22nd place in 2012, to 53rd in 2013 and to 59th in 2014, following the enactment of the state secrets bill. Reporters without Borders says that “Japan has been affected by a lack of transparency and almost zero respect for access to information on subjects directly or indirectly related to Fukushima.”5

Meanwhile, there is another angle to the nuclear issue. On the opposite side of the anti-nuke crowd it is instructive to note that a sizeable pro-nuke coterie claim nuclear power is safe and also claim that few, if any, serious human health problems have arisen, or will arise, from radiation exposure. In fact, some nuke addicts even claim a “little radiation exposure” is good.

That, however, has been debunked via a recent (July 2015) landmark study concluded by an international consortium under the umbrella of the International Agency for Research on Cancer/Lyon, France where a long-term study for low radiation impact was conducted on 300,000 nuclear-industry workers. The study proves, beyond a doubt, there is “no threshold dose below which radiation is harmless.” Any amount is harmful, period.

Nevertheless, here’s one example of the pro-side:

The Fukushima incident will continue to attract media attention for some time to come, I imagine. It has become such a good story to roll with that it will not just go away. However, in sober reflection and retrospection one has to come to the conclusion that far from being a nuclear disaster the Fukushima incident was actually a wonderful illustration of the safety of nuclear power.6

Back to Fukushima, depending upon whom is the source, radiation exposure is (a) extremely harmful and deadly as levels of radioactivity are widespread throughout the greater region, including Tokyo, or contrarily, (b) radioactivity is at such nominal levels that people do not need to worry, or (c) the worst is yet to come. Thereupon the rubber meets the road, meaning the credibility issue encountered by outsiders looking inside Fukushima remains “who to believe.”

Meanwhile, the “world information system aka: Internet” is crowded with stories about melting starfish in the Pacific Ocean, dumbfounded whales, and massive animal deaths, enough so that people start connecting the dots in expectation that Fukushima radiation is omnipresent; however, to date, most of the evidence is labeled conjecture by various mainstream parties. Again, the problem is who to trust.

Regardless of whom to believe, it is now known for a fact, a hard fact, that Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant No. 2 is missing its fuel within its core containment vessel. This leads to a world of unknowns, and the biggest question is: What can be done about a full meltdown should it occur (maybe it’s already occurred)? Then what?

A full meltdown would involve all of the fuel in the nuclear plant core melting and a mass of very hot molten material falling and settling at the bottom of the reactor vessel. If the vessel is ruptured, the material could flow into the larger containment building surrounding it, which is shielded by protective layers of steel and concrete.7

But if that containment is ruptured, then potentially a lot of material could go into the environment.8

What does a lot of material going into the environment really mean?

Sources claim deadly Cesiun-137, which is only one of many dangerous isotopes, is water-soluble and makes its way into soils and waters, as it quickly becomes ubiquitous in the ecosystem. The question thus becomes would a full meltdown turn lose this deadly isotope, as well as others, on the surrounding environment? Frankly, it kinda seems like it would.

Nobody knows whether Fukushima morphs full meltdown into Mother Earth, although the signposts are not good, and not only that but nobody knows what to do about it. Nobody knows what to do. They really don’t.

The only thing for certain is that it’s not good. Going forward, it becomes a matter of how bad things get.

Notes

  1. Up to 100% of No. 2 Reactor Fuel May Have Melted, NHK World News, September 25, 2015.
  2. Ibid.
  3. Comments on Draft of Nuclear Waste Administration Act of 2013, Physicians for Social Responsibility, May 23, 2013.
  4. Steven Starr, senior scientist, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Director, Univ. of Missouri, Clinical Laboratory Science Program, The Implications of the Massive Contamination of Japan With Radioactive Cesium, Speech to NY Academy of Medicine, March 11, 2013.
  5. Reporters without Borders (2013). Press Freedom Index 2013: “Dashed Hopes After Spring}, August 2014.
  6. Dr. Kelvin Kemm, CEO of Nuclear Africa, “Physicist: There was no Fukushima Nuclear Disaster: The Terrible Toll From Japan’s Tsunami Came From the Wave, not Radiation”, Cfact, October 12, 2013.
  7. Charles Ferguson, president of the Federation of American Scientists
  8. Charles Ferguson, president of the Federation of American Scientists, “Mechanics of a Nuclear Meltdown Explained”, PBS Newshour, Science, March 15, 2011.

Robert Hunziker (MA, economic history, DePaul University) is a freelance writer and environmental journalist whose articles have been translated into several foreign languages, published in over 50 journals, magazines, and sites worldwide.

He can be contacted at:[email protected]Read other articles by Robert.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on A Serious Meltdown is Underway? The Fukushima Daiichi Plant No. 2 Nuclear Reactor Fuel is Missing

The Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant No. 2 nuclear reactor fuel is missing from the core containment vessel.1

Where did it go? Nobody knows.

Not only that but the “learning curve” for a nuclear meltdown is as fresh as the event itself because “the world has never seen anything like this,”  Never.

Utilizing cosmic ray muon radiography with nuclear emulsion, researchers from Nagoya University peered inside the reactors at Fukushima. The nuclear fuel in reactor core No. 5 was clearly visible via the muon process. However, at No. 2 reactor, which released a very large amount of radioactive substances coincident with the 2011 explosion, little, if any, signs of nuclear fuel appear in the containment vessel. A serious meltdown is underway.

“The researchers say further analyses are needed to determine whether molten fuel penetrated the reactor and fell down.”2 In short, researchers do not yet know if the molten hot stuff has penetrated the steel/concrete base beyond the containment vessel, thus entering Mother Earth.

The Nagoya University research team, in coordination with Toshiba Corporation, reported their findings at a meeting of the Physical Society of Japan on September 26th.

Thus, therefore, and furthermore, it is advisable to review what’s at stake:

High-level nuclear waste is almost unimaginably poisonous. Take for example cesium-137, with a half-life of 30 years, which makes up the largest fraction of long-lived radionuclides residing in spent nuclear fuel. One gram of radioactive cesium-137 (about half the size of a dime) contains 88 Curies of radioactivity. 104 Curies of radioactive cesium-137, spread evenly over one square mile of land, will make it uninhabitable for more than a century.3

As, for example, there are 1,090 square miles of land surrounding the destroyed Chernobyl reactor that Ukraine classifies as an uninhabitable radioactive exclusion zone because radioactive fallout left more than 104 Curies of cesium- 137 per square mile on the land that makes up the zone. Scientists believe it will be 180 to 320 years before Cesium-137 around Chernobyl disappears from the environment.

Here’s the big, or rather biggest, problem: Cesium is water-soluble and makes its way into soils and waters as it quickly becomes ubiquitous in a contaminated ecosystem.

Chernobyl, on the other hand, is a different animal than Fukushima because its explosion was much more widespread and more dense than Fukushima, where 80% of initial radiation was blown out to the Pacific Ocean. Hmm.

Whereas, during the Three Mile Island incident, a partial core meltdown occurred but the reactor vessel was not breached, so there was no major radiation release.

Categorically,

“Long-lived radionuclides such as Cesium-137 are something new to us as a species. They did not exist on Earth in any appreciable quantities during the entire evolution of complex life. Although they are invisible to our senses they are millions of times more poisonous than most of the common poisons we are familiar with. They cause cancer, leukemia, genetic mutations, birth defects, malformations, and abortions at concentrations almost below human recognition and comprehension. They are lethal at the atomic or molecular level.”4

Still, a true understanding of the dangers of the Fukushima disaster may never be fully known by the general public because of difficulties accessing solid information.  Indeed, the Japanese government has made it nearly impossible to obtain information which is not indiscriminately labeled “secret,” and a journalist may face up to 10 years in prison based upon which side of the bed a government employee gets up on any given morning; it’s absolutely true!

The independent organization Reporters without Borders has downgraded Japan in its World Press Freedom Index from 22nd place in 2012, to 53rd in 2013 and to 59th in 2014, following the enactment of the state secrets bill. Reporters without Borders says that “Japan has been affected by a lack of transparency and almost zero respect for access to information on subjects directly or indirectly related to Fukushima.”5

Meanwhile, there is another angle to the nuclear issue. On the opposite side of the anti-nuke crowd it is instructive to note that a sizeable pro-nuke coterie claim nuclear power is safe and also claim that few, if any, serious human health problems have arisen, or will arise, from radiation exposure. In fact, some nuke addicts even claim a “little radiation exposure” is good.

That, however, has been debunked via a recent (July 2015) landmark study concluded by an international consortium under the umbrella of the International Agency for Research on Cancer/Lyon, France where a long-term study for low radiation impact was conducted on 300,000 nuclear-industry workers. The study proves, beyond a doubt, there is “no threshold dose below which radiation is harmless.” Any amount is harmful, period.

Nevertheless, here’s one example of the pro-side:

The Fukushima incident will continue to attract media attention for some time to come, I imagine. It has become such a good story to roll with that it will not just go away. However, in sober reflection and retrospection one has to come to the conclusion that far from being a nuclear disaster the Fukushima incident was actually a wonderful illustration of the safety of nuclear power.6

Back to Fukushima, depending upon whom is the source, radiation exposure is (a) extremely harmful and deadly as levels of radioactivity are widespread throughout the greater region, including Tokyo, or contrarily, (b) radioactivity is at such nominal levels that people do not need to worry, or (c) the worst is yet to come. Thereupon the rubber meets the road, meaning the credibility issue encountered by outsiders looking inside Fukushima remains “who to believe.”

Meanwhile, the “world information system aka: Internet” is crowded with stories about melting starfish in the Pacific Ocean, dumbfounded whales, and massive animal deaths, enough so that people start connecting the dots in expectation that Fukushima radiation is omnipresent; however, to date, most of the evidence is labeled conjecture by various mainstream parties. Again, the problem is who to trust.

Regardless of whom to believe, it is now known for a fact, a hard fact, that Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant No. 2 is missing its fuel within its core containment vessel. This leads to a world of unknowns, and the biggest question is: What can be done about a full meltdown should it occur (maybe it’s already occurred)? Then what?

A full meltdown would involve all of the fuel in the nuclear plant core melting and a mass of very hot molten material falling and settling at the bottom of the reactor vessel. If the vessel is ruptured, the material could flow into the larger containment building surrounding it, which is shielded by protective layers of steel and concrete.7

But if that containment is ruptured, then potentially a lot of material could go into the environment.8

What does a lot of material going into the environment really mean?

Sources claim deadly Cesiun-137, which is only one of many dangerous isotopes, is water-soluble and makes its way into soils and waters, as it quickly becomes ubiquitous in the ecosystem. The question thus becomes would a full meltdown turn lose this deadly isotope, as well as others, on the surrounding environment? Frankly, it kinda seems like it would.

Nobody knows whether Fukushima morphs full meltdown into Mother Earth, although the signposts are not good, and not only that but nobody knows what to do about it. Nobody knows what to do. They really don’t.

The only thing for certain is that it’s not good. Going forward, it becomes a matter of how bad things get.

Notes

  1. Up to 100% of No. 2 Reactor Fuel May Have Melted, NHK World News, September 25, 2015.
  2. Ibid.
  3. Comments on Draft of Nuclear Waste Administration Act of 2013, Physicians for Social Responsibility, May 23, 2013.
  4. Steven Starr, senior scientist, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Director, Univ. of Missouri, Clinical Laboratory Science Program, The Implications of the Massive Contamination of Japan With Radioactive Cesium, Speech to NY Academy of Medicine, March 11, 2013.
  5. Reporters without Borders (2013). Press Freedom Index 2013: “Dashed Hopes After Spring}, August 2014.
  6. Dr. Kelvin Kemm, CEO of Nuclear Africa, “Physicist: There was no Fukushima Nuclear Disaster: The Terrible Toll From Japan’s Tsunami Came From the Wave, not Radiation”, Cfact, October 12, 2013.
  7. Charles Ferguson, president of the Federation of American Scientists
  8. Charles Ferguson, president of the Federation of American Scientists, “Mechanics of a Nuclear Meltdown Explained”, PBS Newshour, Science, March 15, 2011.

Robert Hunziker (MA, economic history, DePaul University) is a freelance writer and environmental journalist whose articles have been translated into several foreign languages, published in over 50 journals, magazines, and sites worldwide.

He can be contacted at:[email protected]Read other articles by Robert.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on A Serious Meltdown is Underway? The Fukushima Daiichi Plant No. 2 Nuclear Reactor Fuel is Missing

Jeremy Corbyn’s Speech at the Labour Conference

October 1st, 2015 by Lesley Docksey

How the British right-wing media (that’s almost all of it these days) must have anticipated Jeremy Corbyn’s speech to Labour’s Annual Conference. After all the sniping and sneering, the attempts at character assassination, the dredging up of something he said 30 years ago and the universal hands held up in horror because he didn’t sing ‘God Save the Queen’ (nor, if you study photos of the event, did some others), here was their chance to really put the boot in.

Since Corbyn was so convincingly elected Labour’s leader, the press has been full of articles saying he was ‘unelectable’ as a Prime Minster, and running polls to prove people didn’t think he looked like a Prime Minister. Do we seriously choose a Prime Minister because he/she looks the part, wears the right suit/dress?

Things looked good after the Financial Times printed an article by Janan Ganesh the day before. Tweeters were full of praise for this ‘wonderful, incisive political commentator’, including arch Tony Blair lover John Rentoul. Ganesh displayed some thoughtful analytical rubbish, as in:

The electors who were decisive in giving him the run of the Labour party are public-sector professionals or students on their way to becoming the same.

The media had hopefully prepared the public by claiming it would be a short speech, some 35 minutes long, mostly just focussing on wanting kinder, compassionate politics. The knives were out and hands hovering over Tablets and I phones, ready to pick holes big enough to bury him in. I was also keen to see how Corbyn would fare, being of course not a public-sector professional or a student, but an ageing self-employed Corbyn supporter.

It is worth remembering that the Conference delegates had booked their places before Corbyn was elected. Would they be for or against him? They managed a standing ovation for Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell’s speech a day earlier so perhaps all would be well.

How wrong the media was. Walking on to a standing ovation and having to beg, “Please, can I start speaking now?” Corbyn spoke for more than an hour. He had some notes, very occasionally glanced at and pages turned over, and if there was an autocue it wasn’t that apparent. He stumbled over words once or twice, but no matter.

This was Corbyn, speaking as he has been speaking to the country for the last three and a half months, but this time reaching out as Leader to the Conference, to all those who voted for him, all those who had their doubts and all those who feared him and the changes that might come. There was passion, anger at the state of the country and the world, and there was hope.

His leadership election campaign had proved that people are hungry for a different form of politics. Labour now has the chance to create those politics; by accepting that even within the Party there would be disagreement, something that should not split the Party; by honest debate not just among MPs but among all Party members; by consulting with and working with the public. A far better version of David Cameron’s ‘boots on the ground’ was being offered.

Sitting in the front row were his Shadow Cabinet. Tom Watson, who doesn’t necessarily agree with Corbyn, but was voted in as Deputy Leader because he is a popular, dependable and dogged campaigner for those things he cares about, displayed a happy smile and clapped a lot. John McDonnell appeared well satisfied with his ‘hard-left firebrand’ comrade in arms.

The surprise was the Shadow Foreign Secretary Hilary Benn, son of the famous (or notorious) left-winger Tony Benn. He had served under both Tony Blair (voting for the Iraq invasion, which must have upset his father) and Gordon Brown. He was part of Ed Miliband’s Shadow Cabinet. For some people, that’s a lot of dodgy history. But there he was, applauding like mad and grinning with joy, looking like a ‘born-again’ convert. Has father Tony been tapping his shoulder?

Yes, there were a few who didn’t respond, whose faces were glum, MPs who sat like sad little yesterdays while the hall erupted around them. Gone was the hype and razzmatazz they were used to, the ‘leader’ standing on the stage, one hand raised in triumph while the other clutched the wife.

To a standing ovation Corbyn said, “No, I won’t say any more. I’ve spoken at 37 meetings since Saturday evening – isn’t that enough?” With which he went onto the floor and through the scrum of photographers to hug and shake hands with as many as he could reach, while the applause went on – and on.

Such was the speech that it took some time for the political journalists or ‘Commentariat’ as Corbyn called them, to fight back. Their initial efforts failed. While some of their comments on Twitter were vaguely favourable some were sour and very dismissive:

“The worst leader’s speech I have ever heard.” “… but heavens, that was grim.” “Just amazed anyone can think that was anything but terrible.”  Guardian readers disagreed, as did  many others.

The Telegraph focussed on “He didn’t mention the deficit!” Could that possibly be because McDonnell had dealt with it in his speech a day earlier? But no – brains don’t work when hatchet jobs are being done.

Another complaint was that he didn’t speak about why Labour lost the last election. Had he done so, they would of course have accused Labour of navel gazing. But he didn’t, being far more focussed on the future. And some said his speech was devoid of policies. Had they already prepared their comments before they heard the speech? Did they even listen?

But how diligent are the diggers of disinformation. Speaking of the inequality that has existed throughout history a key line of Corbyn’s speech was “You don’t have to take what you are given”. Critics were jubilant. They had found something that proved Corbyn had ‘stolen’ part of his speech!

He was accused of using words apparently written for Ed Miliband by Richard Heller. Heller himself says that he wrote these words some time ago and had offered them to every Labour leader since. Having posted them on his blog after Miliband failed to make use of them, he offered them again, to Corbyn. Heller thought what he had written was what Labour should be about. Corbyn obviously agreed and made good use of them. Heller’s comment was: “Jeremy is the first reader who liked it and used it. I’m very glad he’s used it… to say it was stolen or plagiarised is nonsense.” And why, when too many politicians employ speech writers, should Corbyn be castigated for using someone else’s words?

By the following morning even the BBC had to admit Corbyn mentioned several policies, but his ‘failure’ to mention the deficit or the reasons for Labour’s poor election result featured in their news headlines, as did the business of ‘stolen words’.

And inevitably there was widespread ridicule from the press but Gary Younge of the Guardian summed it up well:

The trouble for his most venomous critics is twofold. First, they have demonised and caricatured him so relentlessly that expectations are so low that he can’t but get over them. The other is that he became leader by giving speeches like this up and down the country. This is who he is. This is how he won.

The politicos still don’t get it. The public do. After his speech a snap poll by Sky News found that 53 per cent of people said they could imagine him as Prime Minister.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Jeremy Corbyn’s Speech at the Labour Conference

US and NATO technocrats found themselves bewildered again today upon news that the Taliban has overtaken a strategic hub of Kunduz in northern Afghanistan. 

It’s the Taliban’s biggest military gain since they lost power in 2001.

Something doesn’t add up. After 15 years, thousands of dead western soldiers and hundreds of thousands of dead Afghan civilians – and a total financial cost of over half a trillion dollars – the US-led NATO experiment in Afghanistan has chalked up another embarrassing failure against an enemy with no money and military equipment aside from Toyota pick-up trucks, various and sundry IED’s and an aging arsenal of Soviet-era Kalashnikov rifles.

Taliban fighters with a captured Afghan Army Humvee in Kunduz province, Afghanistan (Image Source: The Long War)

US and NATO technocrats found themselves bewildered again today upon news that the Taliban has overtaken a strategic hub of Kunduz in northern Afghanistan.

It’s the Taliban’s biggest military gain since they lost power in 2001.

Something doesn’t add up. After 15 years, thousands of dead western soldiers and hundreds of thousands of dead Afghan civilians – and a total financial cost of over half a trillion dollars – the US-led NATO experiment in Afghanistan has chalked up another embarrassing failure against an enemy with no money and military equipment aside from Toyota pick-up trucks, various and sundry IED’s and an aging arsenal of Soviet-era Kalashnikov rifles.

Taliban fighters with a captured Afghan Army Humvee in Kunduz province, Afghanistan (Image Source: The Long War)

It started over the weekend with the Taliban capturing a modest earthen and stone fort named ‘Bala Hisar’. After 200 US-trained and managed Afghan government forces failed to hold the line – before eventually cutting and running away after running out of food and ammunition – Taliban forces moved in with almost no resistance. Even NATO airstrikes and special forces could not stop the rag-tag Taliban regulars from retaking the city. Is it that NATO are really that bad, or is this simply an unwinnable combat environment for a foreign occupying military force?

Last night, the Taliban tried to capture the airport, but US air strikes stopped their advance. It’s unknown how long the remaining forces at the airport will be able to hold off the Taliban fighters, but Afghan officials maintain that they will be able to retake the city once reinforcements arrive later today.

According to Afghanistan’s department of health more than 40 people had been killed and some 330 injured so far in the fighting – with most of them being civilians. Afghan forces

Western media are keen to frame this inside their own prepackaged propaganda lines, claiming that this Taliban victory all part of a “competition with the Islamic State group for control of the region.”

Coincidentally (or not) the Taliban win coincided with the first anniversary of formation of the National Unity Government in Kabul.

TERROR: MADE IN AMERICA

Most Americans are still mostly unaware that it was the United States which first created and developed the Islamicist insurgency in Afghanistan through Operation Cyclone back in 1979. Those ‘Mujaheddin’ fighters went on to form ‘al Qaeda’ [supported by the CIA], before laying the foundation of today’s ISIS militant army currently running amok in Syria and Iraq.

Americans have also forgotten that despite claims to the contrary in 2001, the country Afghanistan did not attack the US on September 11, 2001. Still, this did not stop the US and NATO from bombing, occupying and causing further chaos and instability in both Afghanistan and its neighbor Pakistan. In fact, there is still no actual proof that Osama bin Laden carried out the infamous attacks of 9/11, even though this was the sole pretext for America’s “Authorization of Force” for Afghanistan in the first place.

EXPORT BUSINESS: US Soldiers guarding poppy fields in Afghanistan (Image Source: Public Intelligence)

NARCO-WARS

21WIRE readers might also be interested to know that the city of Kunduz is also a key distribution point for Afghanistan and NATO’s number one export out of this region: DRUGS.

Kunduz is a gateway to the country’s north along a very porous Tajikistan border. Thousands of tons of  smuggling of Afghan opium and heroin are smuggled through this route under the watchful eye of the US-led military force there, before crossing Central Asia and into Europe were the real profits are made.

Aside from becoming the world’s  top heroin exporter after the US arrived on the scene, Afghanistan is also now the planet’s number one producer of cannabis.

21WIRE was one of the first alternative media outlets to illustrate exactly how the War on Terror meets the War on Drugs back in 2010.

How long before the citizens of the US and its European allies wise-up when it comes to the 15 year fraud in Afghanistan?

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on NATO’s Epic Fail: Taliban Retake Major Hub of Kunduz in Afghanistan

Russia Bombs ISIS

October 1st, 2015 by Stephen Lendman

After announcing it would conduct aerial operations in Syria, Russian warplanes struck Islamic State targets straightaway – in contrast to Washington’s campaign, attacking Syrian and Iraqi infrastructure targets, supporting its Islamic State foot soldiers on the ground.

Russian Aerospace Forces Major-General Igor Konashenkov said:

In accordance with a decision by the Supreme Commander-in-Chief Vladimir Putin, Russian Aerospace Forces planes on Wednesday started an operation to deal pinpoint strikes against ground targets of the IS terrorist group in the territory of the Syrian Arab Republic.

The Russian Defense Minister, General of the Army Sergey Shoigu, has told his counterparts in the Collective Security Treaty Organization that in the course of the military operation in Syria, Russian warplanes have been attacking military equipment, communication centers, motor vehicles, and munitions and fuel and lubricants depots of the Islamic State terrorists.

Russia’s upper house Federation Council authorized the operation, acting on Putin’s request – after Syrian President Bashar al-Assad asked him for help.

Admiral Vladimir Komoyedov said “ground attack aircraft, reconnaissance aircraft…fighter-bomber planes (and attack) helicopters” may be used.

The “Islamic State does not have an air defense system, maybe just portable Stingers. (I)f aircraft are used correctly, it is an efficient means of destruction, especially on desert-like terrain.”

Russian armed forces are also being used to protect its Tartus naval facility and Syrian airbases used for strikes on ISIS.

Putin sent the US-led anti-Assad coalition a message. He respects Syrian sovereignty. Assad is a legitimate leader, overwhelmingly supported by his people.

They alone have the right to decide who’ll lead them, no one else, for sure no foreign powers for their own self-interest.

Russian upper house Federation Council deputy International Affairs Committee chairman, Andrey Klimov expects mixed Western reactions to the latest development.

“In the European Union there are many politicians who are unhappy about US activities in the Middle East, which have caused a heavy influx of refugees to the Old World countries,” he said.

These politicians share Russia’s stance regarding the Syrian settlement. I will be meeting with some of them within hours.

“But in the West, there are some other personalities, who will be critical of Moscow regardless of what we may be doing in the Middle East” – especially Washington.

Putin expressed great concern about the terrorist threat to Russia. He’s acting for national security reasons and to aid his Syrian ally from US aggression. Presidential aide Vladimir Kozhin said “(a)ll the necessary Russian armaments will be supplied to Syria.”

Washington for the first time in many years is on the back foot. Its policies virtually always go unchallenged, no matter how outrageous.

Putin acting responsibly changes things. Washington fosters terrorism, uses it to advance its imperium. Putin and the entire free world want it eliminated. Attacking ISIS targets in Syria is a good start.

A Final Comment

Sputnik News reported Putin telling cabinet ministers Russian military operations in Syria are “temporary.” He’s not “planning to go headfirst into the Syrian conflict.”

The only true way to combat international terrorism – and those fighting in Syria and its neighboring countries are just that, international terrorists – is through pre-emption, and fighting and destroying insurgents in territories that are already occupied, instead of waiting for them to come to our house.

Russia’s direct involvement changes the equation on the ground. Washington had things its way unchallenged so far. No longer.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at[email protected].

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.

It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Russia Bombs ISIS

Russia’s Federation Council gave its consent to President Putin for the use of the Russian Armed Forces outside the territory of the Russian Federation – in Syria, chairwoman of the Upper House of the Russian Parliament, Valentina Matviyenko, told TASS, Pravda.Ru reports.

Sergei Ivanov, the head of the presidential administration, said that the Federation Council has unanimously endorsed the President’s appeal. “All social and financial issues related to the maintenance of Russia’s Air Force servicemen, who will be involved in this operation, will be observed and all adequate decisions regarding the matter have been made,” said Ivanov.

According to the official, Russia will use only aviation in Syria. “As our President has already said, the use of the armed forces on the ground theater of operations is excluded. The military purpose of the operation is the aviation support of Syrian government forces in their counteraction to ISIS,” Ivanov said.

Russia to use Air Force in Syria at President Assad's request to combat ISIS. Russian Air Force to be used in Syria

Source: Pravda.Ru photo archive

The operation of the Russian Air Force in Syria will have a specific time frame, the head of the Kremlin administration said. “This operation of the Russian Air Force, of course, can not last indefinitely and has a well-defined time frame. Yet, I can not announce either the dates or the amount of aircraft and the types of weapons that our Air Force will use in the operation,” said Ivanov.

According to Ivanov, it does not go about the question of reaching either foreign policy goals or satisfying ambitions. It goes about national interests of the Russian Federation, he said.

Representatives of the Kremlin administration said that Russia was the only legitimate party in the special operation in Syria. “The use of the armed forces is possible either under the UN Security Council resolution or at the request from the legitimate leadership of the country. In this case, Russia will be the only country that will be conducting the operation on a legitimate basis – at the request from the legitimate president of Syria,”Putin’ official spokesman Dmitry Peskov said.

Noteworthy, during the talks with his US counterpart Barack Obama at 70th session of the UN General Assembly in New York, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that Russia did not have any plans to deploy ground troops in Syria.

According to leading expert at the Center for Military and Political Studies of MGIMO, Mikhail Alexandrov, the United States intends to expand its influence in the world, especially in post-Soviet space. Pursuing this goal, the USA ousts Russia from everywhere, including from Syria.

“Syria is our friendly state, and Russia has an army base there, so why should Russia leave? Is it just because Gen. Breedlove wants so? Is the US ready for war with Russia? Does America have the guts for it? If he asks himself this question seriously, he will understand that the USA is not ready for the war with Russia – the US is not strong enough for that,” the export told Pravda.Ru.

Therefore, the expert continued, the US military should agree on a political settlement in Syria, on the basis of a compromise with Russia. At least, one needs to agree on a model of conduct in the areas where Russian and American aircraft will operate.

Answering a question about the prospects of using Russian Armed Forces in Syria, the expert said that the news was expected, as the Russian administration had previously decided to increase Russian military presence in Syria. Russia is not likely to use strategic bombers in Syria, though. According to the expert, Russia may use extra powerful vacuum air bombs to attack the positions of Islamic State militants. An explosion of such a bomb can destroy a whole quarter.

It would be enough for Russia to use Solntsepek volley fire systems to target ISIS terrorists in Syria. Any actions in Syria should be legitimized. All the panic rumors about the power of the Islamic State are nothing but mere declamation to mislead Russia and the Russian administration  and convince them of the invincibility of the terrorists.

“German Nazis had used the same propaganda techniques. One should pay no mind to all this media hype. Russia is capable of destroying any terrorists. Why should Russia lose to the Islamic State? We need to help Syria at this point – to destroy the military infrastructure of the Islamic State,” the expert said.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Russia to Use Air Force in Syria at President Assad’s Request to Destroy ISIS

You may, or may not, have noticed the growing body of evidence over the past year or two that strongly suggests that the U.S. government and its European “allies” are not really serious about destroying “ISIS”. 

The first hint came early last year when the jihadi mercenaries took large swathes of Iraq and Syria, and the West did nothing but wring its collective hands and fret, and resolve to bolster the fighting capability of the wonderful “rebels”.

The second hint came this year when the U.S. and their partners began piecemeal airstrikes against “ISIS” that appeared to merely spur the head-choppers on to more success.

Image

Check-mate. Putin outfoxes U.S. warmongers

The third hint came with reports that weapons supplies being sent to “Syrian rebels” were ‘accidentally’ ending up in the hands of the head-choppers.

The most recent confirmation that Western politicians and military types effectively view “ISIS” as ‘their guys’ came in the last few weeks when the Pentagon reacted to news that Russia was in the process of establishing an air base in western Syria, from which to attack all foreign forces in Syria involved in the four-year-long attempted coup against the Syrian government.

Putin’s speech at the UN two days ago appears to have been the signal (one that was apparently missed by the Pentagon, perhaps because it was couched in clear, honest language) that Russia was about to ‘get real’ and make good on its intention to prevent the overthrow of Assad, defend the civilian population of Syria against ISIS, and solve the European ‘refugee crisis’ in the process.

On the same day as Putin’s speech, the Russian government revealed that Iraq had decided to sign an intelligence-sharing accord with Syria, Iran and Russia as part of the mission to wipe ISIS from the pages of history. They even set up a center in Baghdad to facilitate this information-sharing and have invited other nations interested in joining the counterterrorism effort in Syria to sign up.

Today, with a speed that indicates the result of the vote was a foregone conclusion, the Russian parliament unanimously agreed to allow the Russian military to engage in Syria. The decision was rubber-stamped by the Duma on the basis that the Syrian government had invited the Russian military to help in their fight against terrorists, and with the rationale that ISIS terrorists and the 2,000 (give or take) Russian nationals that have joined them “must be defeated there and not allowed to return to their home countries [e.g. Russia] with battle experience and ideology adopted in the war zone.” Russian involvement in Syria is, therefore, very much in keeping with international law, a quaint notion long since dispensed with by the “international community” of Washington, London and a few EU capitals.

But just in case anyone was still in doubt, Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov today pointed out at the UN Security Council debate that “ISIS” possesses “elements of Weapons of Mass Destruction”, a claim which is decidedly more plausible than the U.S. claim that Saddam had WMDs back in 2003.

With a consistency between word and action that exposes Western governments for the liars they are, the Russian military, on the orders of Putin, today began carrying out air strikes against Jihadi targets in Syria:

“In accordance with the decision of the Supreme Commander of the Russian Federation Armed Forces, Vladimir Putin, Russian airforce planes today began air operations with surgical strikes against identified ground targets of the terrorist group ISIL in the Syrian Arab Republic.”

By all accounts, the Pentagon appears to have been caught with its pants down, which is not surprising given that so many of its employees spend their time watching child porn on their computers.

Image

‘Russia did WHAT?!’ – Deputy Defense Secretary Bob Work

‘Russia did WHAT?!’ – Deputy Defense Secretary Bob Work

Yesterday, Deputy Defense Secretary Bob Work told a Senate Armed Services Committeehearing that he was “surprised” at the decision by Iraq’s Joint Operations Command to share intelligence with Syria, Iran and Russia in an effort to coordinate action against the Islamic State. The problem for the Pentagon here is twofold: 1) Iraq, Syria, Iran and Russia combining their resources to defeat “ISIS” puts the US and NATO firmly out of the picture. 2) The Pentagon had, in its hubris, believed that the Iraqi government was sufficiently ‘owned’ that it could share sensitive US military intelligence about US military activities (and US proxy forces) with the Iraqis. There is now a risk that that intelligence may be made available to the Russians, allowing for the better targeting of US and Saudi proxy forces in Syria, and even Iraq.

The next surprise came this morning, when Russia effectively told the U.S. it had one hour to leave Syria:

“A Russian official in Baghdad this morning informed US Embassy personnel that Russian military aircraft would begin flying anti-ISIL missions today over Syria.

“He further requested that US aircraft avoid Syrian airspace during these missions,” U.S. State Department spokesman John Kirby said.

Despite the fact that Russia, Iran and Syria are targeting terrorist groups in Syria, Deputy Work said: “Obviously, we are not going to share intelligence with either Syria, or Russia, or Iran, so we are in the process of working to try and find out exactly what Iraq has said.”

In further evidence that things have gone a little ‘pear-shaped’ for the Pentagon, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia, Evelyn Farkas, has been fired has resigned and will leave at the end of October, according to a senior U.S. defense official. Ms Farkas’s responsibilities included dealing with Russia on Syria and Ukraine. Oops.

By carefully choosing which type of military aid to give to Syria, Russia has effectively created a ‘no-fly’ zone for NATO war planes above large swathes of Syria, unless of course pilots more accustomed to engaging in turkey shoots want to risk being blown out of the sky.

It is almost certain that the Russian S-300 anti-aircraft missile system is now operational in Syria“ISIS” has no air force, so this system was clearly intended to protect against a NATO bombing campaign aimed at the Syrian army. This is, perhaps, one of the reasons that Western military attacks on “ISIS” have been so ineffective. Not that Russia or Syria ever wanted to stop Western bombs falling on “ISIS” positions; they just wanted to stop NATO using the excuse of attacking “ISIS” to target the Syrian military.

Image

Russia’s S300 missile system. Now protecting the Syrian people from NATO bombs

With the recently enhanced Russian air base at Latakia, Russian air force planes stationed there can freely engage U.S. proxy mercenary (ISIS) targets and (hopefully) close the book on this latest monstrosity created by the psychopaths in Washington and their misogynistic, head-chopping “royal” friends in the Gulf.

There is, however, one down side to this new development; Europe is already dealing with a large influx of refugees from Syria. It’s really unreasonable of the Russians to risk adding about 30,000 more “ISIS” jihadis into the mix, most of whom, as I speak, are frantically shaving off their terrorist beards and heading for Turkey and ‘safe passage’ to Germany.

Born, bred and fled from the last outpost of the British empire, Joe Quinn is a researcher, editor and writer for Sott.net
  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Russia Establishes ‘No Fly’ Zone for NATO Planes over Syria, Moves to Destroy “ISIS”. Pentagon Freaks Out

US Complains As Russia Bombs its Terrorists

October 1st, 2015 by Tony Cartalucci

The New York Times in its recent article, “Russians Strike Targets in Syria, but Not ISIS Areas,” attempts to frame Russia’s recent actions in Syria as dishonest and dangerous. It reports:

Russian aircraft carried out a bombing attack against Syrian opposition fighters on Wednesday, including at least one group trained by the C.I.A., eliciting angry protests from American officials and plunging the complex sectarian war there into dangerous new territory.

This of course would only make Russia’s actions dishonest or dangerous if groups trained by the US CIA were in fact the “moderates” the US claims they are. However, they are not, and thus Russia’s actions are duly justified as is the expansion of their current policy.

There Are no Moderates, and There Never Were

560453454For months now, after years of headlines confirming the US has been covertly arming militants in Syria for the purpose of overthrowing the government in Damascus, a narrative revolving around tens of thousands of these militants “defecting” to Al Nusra and the so-called “Islamic State” (ISIS/ISIL) has been peddled to the public by the Western media and US politicians to account for the apparent failure of America’s alleged policy of creating an army of “moderates” to both fight ISIS/Al Qaeda and the Syrian government.

In reality, from the beginning, there were never any moderates. Starting as early as 2007, years before the war in Syria began, the US as a matter of policy had long since decided to intentionally fund and support the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood – for all intents and purposes the political wing of Al Qaeda – and begin arming militants affiliated with Al Qaeda itself.

This was revealed in Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh’s 2007 New Yorker article titled, “The Redirection Is the Administration’s new policy benefitting our enemies in the war on terrorism?,” which stated explicitly (emphasis added):

To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. 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.

Hersh’s prophetic 9-page report would also reveal that even then, the extremist Syrian Muslim Brotherhood was already receiving funding and support from the United States via Saudi Arabia.  His report revealed (emphasis added):

There is evidence that the Administration’s redirection strategy has already benefitted the Brotherhood. The Syrian National Salvation Front is a coalition of opposition groups whose principal members are a faction led by Abdul Halim Khaddam, a former Syrian Vice-President who defected in 2005, and the Brotherhood. A former high-ranking C.I.A. officer told me, “The Americans have provided both political and financial support. The Saudis are taking the lead with financial support, but there is American involvement.” He said that Khaddam, who now lives in Paris, was getting money from Saudi Arabia, with the knowledge of the White House. (In 2005, a delegation of the Front’s members met with officials from the National Security Council, according to press reports.) A former White House official told me that the Saudis had provided members of the Front with travel documents.

By 2011, Al Qaeda’s affiliates in Syria, most notably the Al Nusra Front, began operating nation-wide, taking the lead in the US-backed fight against Damascus. By 2012, when the US State Department listed Al Nusra as a foreign terrorist organization, it was clear even then, that the largest contingent of anti-government forces on the battlefield was Al Qaeda.

The US State Department’s official statement regarding Al Nusra reported that:

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.

It is clear that Al Qaeda was not only involved in the conflict since its beginning, but also led it. This betrays current US rhetoric that Al Qaeda had only entered the fight later on, seizing on the chaos created by “moderates” and their fight with Damascus. It is clear that it was Al Qaeda itself that drove that chaos from the beginning, and is still driving this chaos to this day.

The Rhetorical Pipeline 

922021105To explain how America’s fictional “moderate” army has been displaced on the battlefield in Syria by Al Qaeda and ISIS, the US claims that its multi-billion dollar nearly 5-year operation has suffered from massive defections.

The Guardian would report in its article, “Free Syrian Army rebels defect to Islamist group Jabhat al-Nusra,” that:

Syria’s main armed opposition group, the Free Syrian Army (FSA), is losing fighters and capabilities to Jabhat al-Nusra, an Islamist organisation with links to al-Qaida that is emerging as the best-equipped, financed and motivated force fighting Bashar al-Assad’s regime.

The International Business Times would report in its article, “Four Years Later, The Free Syrian Army Has Collapsed,” that:

The Nusra Front, aka Jabhat al-Nusra, has picked up thousands of men who once fought under the umbrella of the FSA during the past three years. It offers its soldiers hundreds of dollars a month in salary and food installments. The soldiers in the FSA did not receive any monthly stipend. When extremist groups such as the Nusra Front gained ground in Syria and received millions of dollars in cash and weapons from wealthy businessmen in the Gulf states and Libya, the moderate rebels “had no other choice,” Jarrah said. “They feel like they are cheated, so they join ISIS.”

The Daily Beast would report in its article, “Main U.S.-Backed Syrian Rebel Group Disbanding, Joining Islamists,” that:

The Syrian rebel group Harakat al-Hazm, one of the White House’s most trusted militias fighting President Bashar al-Assad, collapsed Sunday, with activists posting a statement online from frontline commanders saying they are disbanding their units and folding them into brigades aligned with a larger Islamist insurgent alliance distrusted by Washington.

Harakat al-Hazm would take with them to Al Qaeda and ISIS, millions of dollars worth of sophisticated US weapons, including US-made anti-tank TOW missiles.

The most recent US supported group,  the fabled “Division 30,” has also allegedly defected to Al Qaeda – assuming they weren’t Al Qaeda militants from the beginning. The Telegraph in its article, “US-trained Division 30 rebels ‘betray US and hand weapons over to al-Qaeda’s affiliate in Syria’,” reported that:

 Pentagon-trained rebels in Syria are reported to have betrayed their American backers and handed their weapons over to al-Qaeda in Syria immediately after re-entering the country. 

Fighters with Division 30, the “moderate” rebel division favoured by the United States, surrendered to the al-Qaeda-affiliated Jabhat al-Nusra, a raft of sources claimed on Monday night.

What this news, admitted to by the West itself, of these US-backed “moderates” joining Al Qaeda’s ranks by the thousands proves is that at the very least America’s policy of building up a moderate opposition has failed entirely. What documented evidence stretching back as far as 2007 proves is that the US had no intention of building up a moderate opposition in the first place, and news of “defections” are simply cover for the direct funding and arming of Al Qaeda and ISIS in Syria.

At the very least, Russia bombing these groups either having already defected to Al Qaeda, or inevitably going to defect to Al Qaeda, is doing the Pentagon a favor.

Russia is Bombing Al Qaeda 

This leads back to the most recent New York Times article. Russia is not arbitrarily bombing “moderates” backed by the US in Syria to stave off allegedly “legitimate” opposition to the government in Damascus – Russia is bombing terrorists who are either operating under the banner of Al Qaeda but are portrayed as otherwise by the US, or will inevitably end up turning their fighters and weapons over to Al Qaeda. Russia is bombing Al Qaeda.

The New York Times article would also claim:

“By supporting Assad and seemingly taking on everybody fighting Assad,” Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter said Wednesday, Russia is “taking on the whole rest of the country that’s fighting Assad.” Some of those groups, he added, are supported by the United States and need to be part of a political resolution in Syria.

Indeed, Russia is undoubtedly bombing militants supported by the United States, but that is only because the United States has intentionally supported Al Qaeda and ISIS in Syria. At any time if the United States truly wanted to strike an irreparable blow at ISIS forces, it could simply seal off the Turkish border across which the summation of ISIS’ supplies, fighters, weapons, and vehicles flow. By securing the Turkish-Syrian border to the north, and the Jordanian-Syrian border in the south, the United States could strangle ISIS out of existence in a month, if not sooner.

That it has intentionally allowed ISIS supplies to flow out from under the nose of its allies and its own military forces stationed both in Jordan and in Turkey, indicates the the US at the very least is tacitly perpetuating the existence of ISIS – but most likely is actively involved in filling the trucks bound for ISIS in Syria as well.

US Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter claims that the Russian position is “doomed,” in what appears to be a pledge by the United States to resist Moscow’s attempts to stamp out Al Qaeda groups in addition to taking on and eliminating ISIS.

Some might consider doubling down on a policy of backing terrorists that will inevitably be revealed to the world, and a policy that has thus far failed to topple the Syrian government which is now being bolstered by Russian, Iranian, and possibly Chinese forces, is a policy that is ultimately doomed.

And finally, it must be noted, for those still doubting ISIS is in fact an intentional creation of US foreign policy, that ISIS is now fighting the combined military forces of Syria, Hezbollah, Iran, Iraq, and now Russia. One must ask themselves who has the material resources, finances, and operational capacity to support a single army capable of taking on a multinational coalition of this size. Where, if not from the US and its regional allies, is ISIS deriving the source of its fighting capacity?

Claiming to fight ISIS, while so transparently supporting them, is indeed a doomed position, one doomed to fail today, and one doomed to eternal condemnation in the future.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazineNew Eastern Outlook”.
  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on US Complains As Russia Bombs its Terrorists

Most are protected by the NATO/ US nuclear umbrella. Britain has no need to possess its own nuclear deterrent. It is not Pakistan, North Korea or Israel with an agenda for territorial expansion or colonisation or illegal settlements.

Unlike the three states above, Britain is a NATO signatory to the nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of the United Nations.

Whilst the primary duty of any government is the protection of the state – that does not require a nuclear arsenal of weapons of mass destruction.

The answer is to conform to the principle objectives of the NPT and to work to rid the world of nuclear weapons of mass destruction as agreed by all of its signatories.

The first step would be to declare the Middle East a Nuclear Weapons Free Zone to include both Israel and Iran.

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Britain Does not Need Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). Declare the Middle East a Nuclear Weapons Free Zone

Press Statement by “Save the Tigris and Iraqi Marshes Campaign”, attending the Iraqi review by the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

Geneva – October 28, 2015

Successive Iraqi governments have not used all available legal means and negotiation tools (in accordance with the international law) to protect Iraqi’s right to water.

Since the start of the GAP project in Turkey, Iraq has been deprived of approximately half of the water volume received from Turkey and Syria. Turkey continues with this project and is currently on its way to accomplish the first and largest dam on the Tigris River, Ilisu Dam.

Ilisu Dam is only the tip of the iceberg. It will be followed by a series of other dams to be constructed on the Turkish side of the Tigris River. These dams constitute a threat to the water flows of the Tigris River, both in terms of quantity and quality, to human living conditions and to environment in Iraq.

The quality of the water of the Euphrates already evolved to be unsuitable for human use. Should the government of Iraq not act urgently, the same fate will await the Tigris water. The marshes of Iraq, with its human, natural and environmental diversity are threatened because the water flows from the Euphrates and Tigris rivers are in a steady decrease.

Despite  demands by Iraqi civil society to act in order to stop Ilisu dam, through negotiations and involving the UN Security Council and international organizations concerned, the Iraqi government neglects the issue. Some attribute the negligence of the government to internal weakness and political instability of the Iraqi government.

Neighboring country Iran has further contributed to Iraq’s water scarcity and increasing levels of salinity, since it has altered the streams of rivers shared with Iraq, hereby flowing water with high salinity levels towards Iraqi territories. In its relations with neighboring countries the government of Iraq has neglected the water issues, and it does not take into account demands and recommendations of civil society and local communities who demand urgent actions to be taken by the Iraqi government.

Today, the Save the Tigris River and Iraqi Marshes Campaign sent a representative to Geneva, where the UN Expert’s Committee Members on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights will listen to the position of the campaign as they review the report of the State of Iraq. Members are expected to submit observations and recommendations to the Iraqi government.

20150928_110149

The Save the Tigris and Iraqi Marshes Campaign submitted a Shadow Report today as part of the review-process of Iraq’s compliance with the International Covenant on Cultural, Economic and Social Rights.  Through this report the campaign highlights the duties of the Iraqi government to protect Iraqi’s right to water. The campaign urges the Iraqi government to respond to civil society and the campaign’s calls for the protection of the Tigris River, and to take immediate action regarding Iraq’s water flows.

For a copy of the shadow report, click here

For more information, write us an email: [email protected]

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on “Save the Tigris and Iraqi Marshes”: The Threat of Ilisu Dam

NEW CITIZEN CHALLENGE TO UK’S NUCLEAR WEAPONS

Campaigners aim to prosecute British state

On 1st October campaigners will begin a new and ambitious project to institute a citizen’s prosecution of the Government and specifically the Secretary of State for Defence for breaching international law by its active deployment of the Trident nuclear weapon system.

PICAT is co-ordinated by Trident Ploughshares and will involve groups across England and Wales in a series of steps which will hopefully lead to the Attorney General’s consent for the case to go before the courts.

Groups will begin by seeking an assurance from the Secretary of State for Defence that the UK’s nuclear weapons will not be used, or their use threatened, in such a way as to cause wholesale loss of civilian life and damage to the environment.

In the case of no response or an unsatisfactory one groups will then approach their local magistrates to lay a Criminal Information (1). If consent for the case is not forthcoming from the Attorney General the campaign will then consider approaching the International Criminal Court.

Veteran peace campaigner Angie Zelter (2), who has developed the project along with international lawyer Robbie Manson (3), said:

The government has consistently refused to give evidence to prove how Trident or any replacement could ever be used lawfully. This campaign is an attempt to find a court willing to examine objectively if the threat to use Trident
is in fact criminal as so many of us think it is. It is a matter of vital public interest.

The UK, along with the other nuclear weapon states, is becoming increasingly isolated from the growing global momentum to outlaw nuclear weapons, as expressed in the Humanitarian Pledge, which has already attracted the signatures of 117 nations.(4)

Robbie Manson said:

I remain very firmly of the view that it is both an immensely worthy and worthwhile cause to pursue these matters, even in court, and with vigour given the enormity of the humanitarian need, political significance and the scale of the diplomatic hypocrisy upon which our political masters rely for the achievement of their designs.

The project is supported by an impressive list of expert witnesses (5), including Phil Webber, Chair of Scientists for Global Responsibility, Professor Paul Rogers, Department of Peace Studies at the University of Bradford, and John Ainslie of Scottish CND.

Contacts:

General queries: Angie Zelter 01547 520929   07456 588943  [email protected]

Legal queries: Robbie Manson       01239 615921       [email protected]

Campaign webpages: http://tridentploughshares.org/picat-a-public-interest-case-against-trident-co-ordinated-by-trident-ploughshares/

Notes

The campaigners highlight  the provisions of Articles 51 of the First Additional Protocol 1977 to the four original Geneva Conventions of 1949  – Protection of the civilian population and Article 55 — Protection of the natural environment, and Article 8(2)(b)(iv) of the Rome Statute for an International Criminal Court 1998, which together set out clear and essential limitations on the rights of belligerents and others to launch attacks which may be foreseen to cause disproportionate, unnecessary or excessive harm to civilian lives and property, or the natural environment, not justified by the anticipated military advantage alone.

Angie Zelter is a peace and environmental activist. In 1996 she was part of a group that was acquitted after disarming a BAE Hawk Jet bound for Indonesia where it would have beenused to attack East Timor. More recently she foundedTrident Ploughshares, encouraging people’s disarmament based on international humanitarian law and was famously acquitted as one of three women who disarmed a Trident-related barge in Loch Goil in 1999.. She is the author of several books including ‘Trident on Trial – the case for People’s Disarmament”. (Luath -2001)

Robbie Manson was instrumental in setting up the UK branch of the World Court Project, contributing to obtaining the 1996 ICJ Advisory Opinion on the Threat & Use of Nuclear Weapons and established the Institute for Law, Accountability & Peace (INLAP) in the early 1990s. In 2003 he became involved as adviser and then as solicitor to a group of 5 peace activists who at different times had entered RAF Fairford before the start of the last Iraq War, in efforts to sabotage US bombers waiting there to attack Baghdad. He argued that their actions were justified in a reasonable attempt to prevent a greater crime, namely that of international aggression. The case was appealed as a preliminary point all the way to the House of Lords as R v Jones in 2006.

See http://www.icanw.org/pledge/
See http://tridentploughshares.org/picat-documents-index-2/

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Citizen Challenge to UK’s Nuclear Weapons. Campaigners Aim to Prosecute British State

The German automobile giant, Volkswagen, has produced a few gems of history. Volkswagen’s Beetle, to take a classic, dominated German roads, and made a permanent impression on the international automobile market. While 1.3 million Morris Minors struggled to be sold over the decades, the Beetle stormed through the million unit mark each year in the 1960s and early 1970s. As Richard J. Evans notes, by 1972, the Beetle’s gross sales had passed that of Henry Ford’s Model T.[1]

Then comes the dark side, an inescapable fact of German industry in its ingenious creations for the Volk. The Beetle was a Nazi creation, and was meant to be a flagship symbol of robust, even merciless modernity. Foreign car producers had to have a rival, and they duly got one. This all helped given the Nazi establishment’s enjoyment of technological fetishes, nursing a deep seated machine love, oiled by nationalist mania.

The role of Volkswagen in German industry, to that end, was such that the Allies were seriously considering dismantling the company after the Second World War. An industrialised Germany tended to make European states nervous. Among the dark dot points on the company’s resume, one shared with other German companies, was its extensive use of slave labour.

Voices came out against moves to consign the company to oblivion, including the determined British army major, Ivan Hirst. After all, the occupation forces needed their own vehicles, and manufacturing them locally served a useful purpose. An automobile giant had been reincarnated.

Overtime, the company has managed to push up into being the largest car maker after Toyota, with 590,000 employees engaged in the production of 41,000 vehicles a day. Its influence, and by virtue of that any associated technical problems, is multiplied through a range of subsidiaries, among them Seat, Skoda, Audi, Bentley, Bugatti, Lamborghini, Porsche, Ducati, Scania and Man.

This brings us to Volkswagen’s recent foray into the world of regulatory scandal. The fuss? The company’s sly efforts to frustrate accurate diesel emissions standards on testing via software, a point picked up by the US Environmental Protection Authority. Irregularities (the polite term might be anomalies) in the workings of Volkswagen’s 4-cylinder diesel cars from 2009 to 2015 were identified.

The culprit here lay in the software engaging emissions controls for nitrous oxide during the testing phase, a system that disengages them once the vehicle becomes operational.

The unmasking has several implications. It suggests a level of success based on unscrupulous practice in the deceptive world of going green, though to that should be added a degree of recklessness. Critics are bound to snort that this is a standard pattern, repeated throughout technology companies who continue to make the use of fossil fuels imperative. The eco-drive has made companies desperate to get on board the greening of automobile technology, while still finding ways to fudge the figures of fuel consumption.

The environmental group Transport & Environment has gone to far as to suggest that Mercedes and BMW should be added to Volkswagen as companies which have engaged in the practice of under-reporting gasoline usage from actual performance results. Gaps between 40 to 50 percent between laboratory testing on the economic use of fuel and actual performance have emerged.

While very muddied former CEO Martin Winterkorn has departed, the level of knowledge about attempts to systematically conceal diesel car emissions seems to have been extensive. Bild suggests that the important supplier Bosch told the highest levels in the company about the emissions concerns stretching back to 2007 while the Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagzeitungputs 2011 as the year when technicians were concerned about such emission practices.

The question of criminal intent in such corporate behaviour can be a problematic affair. A criminal prosecution investigation is being mounted in Germany, but prosecutions elsewhere may be more complicated, if not impossible to mount.

The US Justice Department, for instance, has noted that the Clean Air Act does envisage criminal prosecutions against auto companies or their executives. Congress deemed it fitting to place the automobile manufacturers in an exceptional category when drafting the 1970 legislation. To prosecute them for criminal behaviour would be costly and ineffective.

Olaf Lies, a Volkswagen board member and also economy minister of the German province of Lower Saxony, has no such illusions: there were acts of criminality perpetrated by staff in installing the relevant devices.

“Those people who allowed this to happen, or who made the decision to install this software – they acted criminally. They must take personal responsibility.” This analysis is all too neat, suggesting that there was no culture present, and that any such acts took place because of individual initiative. Nothing of such nature ever occurs without a broader sense of collusion.

The technology outlets are wondering how the company will go about dealing with the “test-cheating cars”. In a structural sense, the adjustment is probably going to come in the form of a software correction, though this remains a speculative point. Volkswagen remains reticent on this point.

Then looms the issue of diesel and gasoline, those grand fossil fuel sources that remain staples in automobile technology. Tesla Motors CEO, Elon Musk, suggests that the Volkswagen scandal serves to show that the time to give up the ghost on such fuels. “What Volkswagen is really showing is that we’ve reached the limit of what’s possible with diesel and gasoline.”[2] The point is hardly surprising, given Tesla manufacturing’s base of electric cars, which run on rechargeable lithium-ion batteries. For all that optimism, the electricity power grid needed behind the recharging still uses fossil fuels.

Costs vary on the proposed correction, though the $7.3 billion figure has been put forth by the company. Up to 11 million cars will have to be recalled. There will be more than a loss of good faith. The lawyers will certainly be kept busy in the forthcoming months, as will the investigators seeking to find other perpetrators. Volkswagen is hardly likely to be the only one.

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: [email protected]

 

Notes

[1] http://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n17/richard-j-evans/autoerotisch

[2] http://www.rt.com/usa/316846-elon-musk-fossil-fuels-dead/

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on False Greening in the Auto Industry: Volkswagen and Tricking Emissions

The Revolutionary Act of Telling the Truth

October 1st, 2015 by John Pilger

George Orwell said, “In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”

These are dark times, in which the propaganda of deceit touches all our lives. It is as if political reality has been privatised and illusion legitimised. The information age is a media age. We have politics by media; censorship by media; war by media; retribution by media; diversion by media – a surreal assembly line of clichés and false assumptions.

Wondrous technology has become both our friend and our enemy. Every time we turn on a computer or pick up a digital device – our secular rosary beads — we are subjected to control: to surveillance of our habits and routines, and to lies and manipulation.

Edward Bernays, who invented the term, “public relations” as a euphemism for “propaganda”, predicted this more than 80 years ago. He called it, “the invisible government”.

He wrote,

“Those who manipulate this unseen element of [modern democracy] constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country …We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of …”

The aim of this invisible government is the conquest of us: of our political consciousness, our sense of the world, our ability to think independently, to separate truth from lies.

This is a form of fascism, a word we are rightly cautious about using, preferring to leave it in the flickering past.  But an insidious modern fascism is now an accelerating danger. As in the 1930s, big lies are delivered with the regularity of a metronome. Muslims are bad. Saudi bigots are good. ISIS bigots are bad. Russia is always bad. China is getting bad. Bombing Syria is good. Corrupt banks are good. Corrupt debt is good. Poverty is good. War is normal.

Those who question these official truths, this extremism, are deemed in need of a lobotomy – until they are diagnosed on-message.  The BBC provides this service free of charge. Failure to submit is to be tagged a “radical” – whatever that means.

Real dissent has become exotic; yet those who dissent have never

been more important. The book I am launching tonight, The WikiLeaks Files, is an antidote to a fascism that never speaks its name.

It’s a revolutionary book, just as WikiLeaks itself is revolutionary – exactly as Orwell meant in the quote I used at the beginning.  For it says that we need not accept these the daily lies. We need not remain silent. Or as Bob Marley once sang: “Emancipate yourself from mental slavery.”

In the introduction, Julian Assange explains that it is never enough to publish the secret messages of great power: that making sense of them is crucial, as well as placing them in the context of today and historical memory.

That is the remarkable achievement of this anthology, which reclaims our memory. It connects the reasons and the crimes that have caused so much human turmoil, from Vietnam and Central America, to the Middle East and Eastern Europe, with the matrix of rapacious power, the United States.

There is currently an American and European attempt to destroy the government of Syria. Prime Minister David Cameron is especially keen. This is the same David Cameron I remember as an unctuous PR man employed by an asset stripper of Britain’s independent commercial television.

Cameron, Obama and the ever obsequious Francois Hollande want to destroy the last remaining multi-cultural authority in Syria, an action that will surely make way for the fanatics of ISIS.

This is insane, of course, and the big lie justifying this insanity is that it is in support of Syrians who rose against Bashar al-Assad in the Arab Spring. As The WikiLeaks Files reveals, the destruction of Syria has long been a cynical imperial project that pre-dates the Arab Spring uprising against Assad.

To the rulers of the world in Washington and Europe, Syria’s true crime is not the oppressive nature of its government but its independence from American and Israeli power – just as Iran’s true crime is its independence, and Russia’s true crime is its independence, and China’s true crime is its independence.  In an American-owned world, independence is intolerable.

This book reveals these truths, one after the other.  The truth about a war on terror that was always a war of terror; the truth about Guantanamo, the truth about Iraq, Afghanistan, Latin America.

Never has such truth-telling been so urgently needed. With honourable exceptions, those in the media paid ostensibly to keep the record straight are now absorbed into a system of propaganda that is no longer journalism, but anti-journalism. This is true of the liberal and respectable as it is of Murdoch. Unless you are prepared to monitor and deconstruct every specious assertion, so-called news has become unwatchable and unreadable.

Reading The WikiLeaks Files, I remembered the words of the late Howard Zinn, who often referred to “a power that governments can’t suppress”.  That describes WikiLeaks, and it describes true whistleblowers who share their courage.

On a personal note, I have known the people of WikiLeaks for some time now. That they have achieved what they have in circumstances not of their choosing is a source of constant admiration. Their rescue of Edward Snowden comes to mind. Like him, they are heroic: nothing less.

Sarah Harrison’s chapter, ‘Indexing the Empire’, describes how she and her comrades set up an entire Public Library of US Diplomacy. There are more than two million documents, now available to all.  “Our work,” she writes, “is dedicated to making sure history belongs to everyone.”  How thrilling it is to read those words, which also stand as a tribute to her own courage.

From the confinement of a room in the Ecuadorean embassy in London, the courage of Julian Assange is an eloquent response to the cowards who have smeared him and the rogue power seeking revenge on him and waging a war on democracy.

None of this has deterred Julian and his comrades at WikiLeaks: not one bit. Isn’t that something?

The WikiLeaks Files: the World According to the US Empire is published by Verso

www.johnpilger.com

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Revolutionary Act of Telling the Truth

“For human beings to degrade the integrity of the earth by causing changes in its climate, by stripping the earth of its natural forests or destroying its wetlands; for human beings to contaminate the earth’s waters, its land, its air, and its life – these are sins”. For “to commit a crime against the natural world is a sin against ourselves and a sin against God” -Pope Francis, ENCYCLICAL LETTER LAUDATO SI’ ON CARE FOR OUR COMMON HOME

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Play

Length (59:01)

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

The warning signs of abrupt climate disruption are evident to anyone willing to look.

Business Day Online reported last August that climate change is threatening food production in Nigeria.

A giant toxic algae bloom possibly linked to climate change now spans the West Coast of North America from Southern California to the Aleutian Islands.

A study has linked California’s drought to climate change.

Satellites registered in August that Greenland’s Jakobshavn Isbrae Glacier lost 12.5 square kilometres of sea ice in a two day period.

Given the gravity of the situation, and the stakes for humanity, Canada’s policy on addressing the climate catastrophe warrants serious attention in the country’s federal election.

Sadly, none of the major political parties appear to do much more than offer lip service in the face of a global dilemma that threatens the future of humanity.

But in the midst of the campaign, an ambitious call to arms has gone out from prominent Canadian authors, artists, national leaders, and activists. The Leap Manifesto: A Call for a Canada Based on Caring for the Earth and One Another, demands respect for Indigenous rights, transition off of fossil fuels to renewables within a couple of decades, and the introduction of a basic annual income, a progressive carbon tax, higher income taxes on the wealthy and corporations, a program of new energy efficient home construction and retrofits, high speed rail, and affordable transit, as well as cuts to military spending among other initiatives. It also calls for “an end to all trade deals that interfere with our attempts to rebuild local economies, regulate corporations and stop damaging extractive projects.”

The manifesto has largely been dismissed by politicians and pundits in Canada. Even Canada’s NDP, a left-leaning, social democratic party, has apparently distanced itself from the document.

Given the research of individuals like Guy McPherson, it is conceivable that even this supposedly “pie in the sky” proposal does not go far enough to stop our world from careening off the climate cliff.

 The Leap Manifesto was announced about the same time one of its authors, Avi Lewis, was debuting his film This Changes Everything, based on the book of the same name. The film shifts the frame of normal discourse around climate change, and profiles communities making the necessary changes.

Mr. Lewis joins us in the first half hour to talk about his film and the manifesto in the context of the current election.

In the second half hour, a past guest, Dahr Jamail returns. Jamail writes a monthly dispatch on climate change based on the most recent scientific discoveries. In this interview he comments on the severity of the climate threat, evaluates the aforementioned Leap Manifesto, and candidly discusses the form real solutions will have to take.

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Play

Length (59:01)

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

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.

Amply documented but rarely mentioned in news reports, the ISIS is a creation of US intelligence, recruited, trained and financed by the US and its allies including Britain, France, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, Israel and Jordan.  

Until recently, the ISIS was known as Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI). In 2014, it was renamed the Islamic State (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant).

Russia is Now Involved in the War on Terrorism

A major turning point in the dynamics of the Syria-Iraq war is unfolding. Russia is now directly involved in the counter-terrorism campaign in coordination with the Syrian and Iraqi governments.

While Washington has acknowledged Moscow’s resolve, Obama is now complaining that the Russians are targeting the “good guy terrorists” who are supported by Washington.

From the Horse’s Mouth

According to the Wall Street Journal:

Russian Airstrike in Syria Targeted CIA-Backed Rebels, U.S. Officials Say

One area hit was location primarily held by rebels receiving funding, arms, training from CIA and allies

 

One important piece of unspoken information conveyed in this WSJ report is that the CIA is supporting terrorists as a means to triggering “regime change” in Syria, implying the conduct of covert intelligence operations within Syrian territory:

“The U.S. spy agency has been arming and training rebels in Syria since 2013 to fight the Assad regime  (WSJ, September 30, 2015 emphasis added, author’s note: covert support to the terrorists was provided from the outset of the war in March 2011)

The above statement is something which is known and documented but which has barely been acknowledged by the mainstream media.

Al Nusra: “Good Guy Terrorists”

While the Pentagon now candidly acknowledges that the CIA is supporting Al Qaeda affiliated groups inside Syria, including Al Nusra, it nonetheless deplores the fact that Russia is allegedly targeting the “good guy terrorists”, who are supported by Washington:

One of the [Russian] airstrikes hit an area primarily held by rebels backed by the Central Intelligence Agency and allied spy services, U.S. officials said, …

Among seven areas that Syrian state media listed as targets of Russian strikes, only one—an area east of the town of Salamiyah in Hama province—has a known presence of Islamic State fighters. The other areas listed are largely dominated by moderate rebel factions or Islamist groups such as Ahrar al-Sham and the al Qaeda-affiliated Nusra Front.  (WSJ, September 30, 2015 emphasis added)

Affiliated to Al Qaeda, Al Nusra is a US sponsored  “jihadist” terrorist organization which has been responsible for countless atrocities. Since 2012, AQI and Al Nusra — both supported by US intelligence– have been working hand in glove in various terrorist undertakings within Syria.

In recent developments, the Syrian government has identified its own priority areas for the Russian counter-terrorism air campaign, which consists essentially in targeting Al Nusra.  Al Nusra is described as the terrorist arm of the Free Syrian Army (FSA).

While Washington has categorized Al Nusra as a terrorist organization (early 2012), it nonetheless provides support to both Al Nusra and it’s so-called “moderate rebels” in the form of weapons, training, logistical support, recruitment, etc. This support is channeled by America’s Persian Gulf allies, including Qatar and Saudi Arabia as well as through Turkey and Israel.

Ironically, The UN Security Council in a May 2012 decision “blacklisted Syria’s al-Nusra Front as an alias of al-Qaeda in Iraq”, namely the ISIL:

a decision that will subject the group to sanctions including an arms embargo, travel ban and assets freeze, diplomats said.

The US mission to the United Nations said none of the 15 council members objected to adding al-Nusra as an alias of al-Qaeda in Iraq on Thursday.

Al-Nusra, one of the most effective forces fighting President Bashar al-Assad, last month pledged allegiance to al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahri. (Al Jazeera, May 2012)

And now Russia is being blamed for targeting a terrorist entity which is not only on the UN Security Council blacklist but which has ties to the Islamic State (ISIS).

What is the significance of these accusations?

While the media narrative acknowledges that Russia has endorsed the counter-terrorism campaign, in practice Russia is (indirectly) fighting the US-NATO coalition  by supporting the Syrian government against the terrorists, who happen to be the foot soldiers of the Western military alliance, with Western mercenaries and military advisers within their ranks. In practice, what Russia is doing is fighting terrorists who are supported by the US.

The forbidden truth is that by providing military aid to both Syria and Iraq, Russia is (indirectly) confronting America. 

Moscow will be supporting both countries in their proxy war against the ISIL which is supported by the US and its allies.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Obama Accuses Russia of Going After America’s “Good Guy Terrorists”

The statement was to be adopted at the ministerial meeting on September 30. Vitaly Churkin, Russia’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, said “the statement was blocked. The Americans said they will not work on our statement“. The Americans claimed that there are too many disagreements, as the diplomat explained.

The talks on the maintenance of international peace and security, settlement of the conflicts in the Middle East and the North of Africa, as well as fight against the terror threat in the region are the key events under the Russian presidency in the UN Security Council.

US blocks Russian draft on Middle East conflict settlement. UNO

AP Photo

Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs Sheba Crocker used to claim that the document proposed by Moscow “could be perceived as endorsing an approach that could set back efforts to reach a negotiated political transition in Syria”.

From the US’ point of view, the UN Security Council president’s draft statement differs significantly from the Washington’s coalition efforts to oppose the Islamic State.

See also Putin speaks as key UN peacemaker, blasts US exceptionalism

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on US Blocks Russian Draft on Middle East Conflict Settlement

Selected Articles: Saudi Arabia, China, Syria, & Orwellian Governance

September 30th, 2015 by Global Research News

Bin Laden Family Members Evacuated from US in Wake of the 9/11 AttacksWhy Saudi Ties to 9/11 Mean U.S. Ties to 9/11

By Kevin Ryan, September 30 2015

Media interest in Saudi Arabian connections to the crimes of 9/11 has centered on calls for the release of the 28 missing pages from the Joint Congressional Inquiry’s report. However, those calls focus on the question of hijacker financing and omit the most interesting links between the 9/11 attacks and Saudi Arabia—links that implicate powerful people in the United States. Here are twenty examples.

chinamapChina – Ghost Cities. 64 Million Empty Apartments in China

By Global Research News, September 30 2015

“Vast new cities are being built across China at a rate of ten a year, but they remain almost completely uninhabited ghost towns. Racing to stay ahead of the world economy, is the superpower about to implode?

Pivot-to-AsiaObama’s “Pivot to Asia” NATO-Like Project

By Andrew Korybko, September 30 2015

As apocalyptic as the US’ end game scenario may be for regional multipolarity, it’s not at all assured to succeed, as there are quite a few contingencies that could develop between all of its assorted partners in preventing them from linking up in the Philippines and actualizing the Asian NATO.

obama-putin-betterJousting Over Syria: Obama and Putin at the UN

By Binoy Kampmark, September 30 2015

President Barack Obama of the United States and President Vladimir Putin of Russia displayed, in various shades, facets of world power when they did battle at the United Nations yesterday. At the 70th annual session of the United Nations General Assembly, Syria loomed like an ominous hulk of concern.

barak-obamaOrwell at the UN: Obama Re-Defines Democracy as a Country That Supports U.S. Policy

By Michael Hudson, September 30 2015

In his Orwellian September 28, 2015 speech to the United Nations, President Obama said that if democracy had existed in Syria, there never would have been a revolt against Assad. By that, he meant ISIL. Where there is democracy, he said, there is no violence or revolution.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: Saudi Arabia, China, Syria, & Orwellian Governance

BDS-Quebec interpela a los políticos en campaña electoral

September 30th, 2015 by Jorge Zegarra

En Quebec, Canadá, el movimiento de Boicot, Desinversión y Sanciones (BDS) contra el régimen de Tel Aviv realiza una campaña de carteles para interpelar a los políticos actualmente en campaña electoral sobre el conflicto palestino-israelí.

En el marco de la actual campaña electoral en Canadá, la coalición BDS-Quebec denuncia la ocupación ilegal y apartheid israelí en territorio palestino a través de afiches instalados en las calles de la ciudad de Montreal. Esta coalición exige a los partidos políticos poner fin a la impunidad israelí.

Para BDS-Quebec, los políticos deben adoptar una posición justa y apoyar toda acción pacífica para hacer respetar el derecho de autodeterminación del pueblo palestino como lo hizo anteriormente Canadá al oponerse al apartheid en Sudáfrica.

La campaña BDS es una acción ciudadana no violenta cuyo objetivo es presionar a Israel para que respete el derecho internacional y los derechos y libertades fundamentales del pueblo palestino.

Jorge Zegarra, Montreal

¡Suscríbete a HispanTV!
https://www.youtube.com/user/hispantv…

El grupo de HispanTV les recuerda a los seguidores de nuestra página en Youtube de que en el caso de que no se suban nuevos vídeos, en 48 horas, esto significa que han bloqueado el acceso de este canal a su cuenta en YouTube. De ser así, haga Clic en el siguiente enlace para obtener nuestra nueva dirección en YouTube:

http://93.190.24.12/detail.aspx?id=24…

  • Posted in Español
  • Comments Off on BDS-Quebec interpela a los políticos en campaña electoral

La polveriera nucleare dell’«arsenale Europa»

September 30th, 2015 by Manlio Dinucci

Stati uniti. 200 le ogive americane in Italia, Germania, Belgio, Olanda e Turchia. Più di 500 quelle francesi e britanniche

Oltre alle circa 200 bombe nucleari Usa schie­rate in Ita­lia, Ger­ma­nia, Bel­gio, Olanda e Tur­chia (che potreb­bero essere molte di più di quelle sti­mate), e oltre a quelle a bordo delle unità navali sta­tu­ni­tensi nei porti e nelle acque ter­ri­to­riali dell’Europa (il cui numero è impre­ci­sato), l’Alleanza atlan­tica dispone in Europa, secondo le stime della Fede­ra­zione degli scien­ziati ame­ri­cani, di 300 testate nucleari fran­cesi, 290 delle quali schie­rate (pronte al lan­cio), e di 215 bri­tan­ni­che, 150 delle quali schierate.

Secondo le stesse stime, gli Usa dispon­gono com­ples­si­va­mente di 4700 testate nucleari, di cui 1900 schie­rate. La Rus­sia, di 4500, 1780 delle quali schie­rate. Ciò signi­fica che la Nato man­tiene 2340 testate nucleari pronte al lan­cio ventiquattr’ore su ven­ti­quat­tro, a fronte delle 1780 russe.

Il van­tag­gio dello schie­ra­mento Usa/Nato con­si­ste nel fatto che cen­ti­naia di testate (oltre 600) sono schie­rate sul ter­ri­to­rio euro­peo in pros­si­mità di quello della Rus­sia euro­pea. È come se la Rus­sia avesse schie­rato in Mes­sico cen­ti­naia di testate nucleari pun­tate sugli Usa. Avvi­ci­nate agli obiet­tivi, armi nucleari tat­ti­che (come la bomba B61 che sta per essere sosti­tuita dalla B61-12) otten­gono lo stesso effetto di quelle stra­te­gi­che. E i mis­sili bali­stici fran­cesi e bri­tan­nici pos­sono col­pire obiet­tivi in ter­ri­to­rio russo pochi minuti dopo il lan­cio, men­tre un mis­sile bali­stico lan­ciato dal ter­ri­to­rio sta­tu­ni­tense impiega circa mezzora.

Ciò spinge la Rus­sia a schie­rare nella sua parte euro­pea armi tat­ti­che, come il mis­sile Iskan­der a duplice capa­cità con­ven­zio­nale e nucleare, con git­tata fino a 400 km.

Un uso anche par­ziale di que­sto arse­nale can­cel­le­rebbe l’Europa dalla fac­cia della Terra.

Basti pen­sare che una bomba nucleare da 1 mega­ton vapo­rizza per­sone e cose, scio­glie l’acciaio e il vetro, fa scop­piare il cemento. In un rag­gio di 3 km, tutte le per­sone muo­iono all’istante e la distru­zione è totale. A circa 7 km il calore scio­glie l’asfalto delle strade, incen­dia legno e stoffe all’interno delle abi­ta­zioni. Tutte le per­sone all’aperto subi­scono ustioni mor­tali; molte restano acce­cate dal lampo e per­dono l’udito per la rot­tura dei tim­pani. A circa 14 km il calore è ancora abba­stanza forte da pro­vo­care ustioni di terzo grado.

Il mag­gior numero di vit­time viene pro­vo­cato dalla suc­ces­siva rica­duta radioat­tiva, in un’area di circa 10mila km2. A seconda dell’esposizione, le radia­zioni ucci­dono nel giro di giorni, set­ti­mane, mesi od anni, e dan­neg­giano le gene­ra­zioni successive.

Manlio Dinucci

  • Posted in Italiano
  • Comments Off on La polveriera nucleare dell’«arsenale Europa»

Putin Trumps Obama at the U.N.

September 30th, 2015 by Margaret Kimberley

If the peevish expression on Barack Obama’s face was any indication, Vladimir Putin is a force in the world who cannot be ignored. Ever since Russia annexed Crimea in response to the United States- and NATO-backed coup in Ukraine, Obama and the corporate media have falsely declared that Putin is isolated from the rest of the world. They claim he is a monster, a despot and an irrelevance on the world stage.While the G8 member nations turned themselves into the G7 in order to snub Russia, president Putin was making friends elsewhere. He may have been isolated from the United States and its clique, but not from China and the other BRICS nations or Syria or Iran or Iraq.

While western nations use the Islamic State (ISIS) as a ruse to exact regime change in Syria, Putin has formed an alliance to carry out the task of eradicating that danger which was created by western intervention.Presidents Obama [3] and Putin [4] both made their respective cases before the United Nations General Assembly at its annual meeting. Obama’s speech was an apologia for imperialism and American aggressions. He repeated the lies which no one except uninformed Americans believe. If he calls a leader a tyrant he claims the right to destroy a nation and kill and displace its people. Despite the living hell that the United States made out of Libya, Obama continues to defend his crime. He blandly adds that “our coalition could have and should have done more to fill a vacuum left behind.” Apparently he hopes that no one is paying attention to the horrors inflicted on Libya or the ripple effect which created numerous other humanitarian crises

Not content to defend the indefensible, the president made it clear that the Obama doctrine of regime change and terror is alive and well. “I lead the strongest military that the world has ever known, and I will never hesitate to protect my country or our allies, unilaterally and by force where necessary.”

In contrast, the man labeled a dictator acknowledged the importance of respecting every nation’s sovereignty. “Rather than bringing about reforms, an aggressive foreign interference has resulted in a brazen destruction of national institutions and life itself. Instead of the triumph of democracy and progress, we got violence, poverty and social disaster. Nobody cares a bit about human rights, including the right to life.”

Making good use of his time in the spotlight, he made clear that he wasn’t fooled or cowed by the United States. “I cannot help asking those who have caused the situation, do you realize now what you’ve done? But I am afraid no one is going to answer that. Indeed, policies based on self-conceit and belief in one’s exceptionality and impunity have never been abandoned.”

Obviously Putin has self-interest in supporting his allies in Syria and for fighting ISIS. He acknowledged that his country is at risk from some of its own citizens who have sworn an allegiance to that group. Nonetheless, it is important that at least one nation in the world is capable of standing up to American state sponsored destruction and is willing to take action in that effort. Before the United Nations proceedings took place, Russia announced that it would share intelligence with Iran, Iraq and Syria in order to combat ISIS. If the United States were true to its word, that alliance would be welcomed instead of scorned.

Not since the late Hugo Chavez declared that George W. Bush left a “smell of sulfur” has an American president been so openly confronted at the United Nations. Putin’s presence makes it clear that Obama can no longer expect to carry out his international dirty work without effective opposition.

While the corporate media noted the tense photo opportunity between the two presidents they neglected to mention the real issues behind the bad feelings. At a press conference after his address Putin was asked about French president Hollande’s insistence that Assad leave [5] the Syrian presidency. “I relate to my colleagues the American and French presidents with great respect but they aren’t citizens of Syria and so should not be involved in choosing the leadership of another country.”

That simple statement explains the totality of American enmity towards Russia. The NATO nations claim a right to choose leaders, create and support their own terrorist groups and destroy anyone who doesn’t do what they want. Putin is making a case for non-interference and that makes him persona non grata in the eyes of the supposedly more democratic West.

The world ought to fear pax Americana, not a Russian military presence in Syria. There cannot be true peace and stability unless nations and peoples are left to their own devices. The helping hand of United States democracy is anything but. It is a recipe for disaster and requires forceful opposition. If Russia can be a reliable counterforce the whole world will benefit, even if Barack Obama frowns before the cameras.

Margaret Kimberley‘s Freedom Rider column appears weekly in BAR, and is widely reprinted elsewhere. She maintains a frequently updated blog as well as at http://freedomrider.blogspot.com. [6]Ms. Kimberley lives in New York City, and can be reached via e-Mail at Margaret.Kimberley(at)BlackAgendaReport.com.

Notes:
[1] http://www.blackagendareport.com/freedom_rider_putin_trumps_obama_at_un
[2] http://www.blackagendareport.com/category/department-war/us-imperial-wars
[3] https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/09/28/remarks-president-obama-united-nations-general-assembly
[4] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/09/28/read-putins-u-n-general-assembly-speech/
[5] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7jqjGTkyXc
[6] http://freedomrider.blogspot.com/

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Putin Trumps Obama at the U.N.

Verso l’Italia le nuove atomiche Usa

September 30th, 2015 by Manlio Dinucci

Guerra. Stanno per arrivare sul territorio italiano le nuove bombe nucleari statunitensi B61-12, che sostituiscono le precedenti B61. La B61-12, ha una potenza media di 50 kiloton (circa il quadruplo della bomba di Hiroshima). Lo conferma da Washington l’autorevole Federazione degli scienziati americani

Stanno per arri­vare in Ita­lia le nuove bombe nucleari sta­tu­ni­tensi B61-12, che sosti­tui­scono le pre­ce­denti B61. Lo con­ferma auto­re­vol­mente da Washing­ton, con prove docu­men­tate, la Fede­ra­zione degli scien­ziati ame­ri­cani (Fas). Lo scien­ziato nucleare Hans Kri­sten­sen, diret­tore del Nuclear Infor­ma­tion Pro­jectalla Fas, scrive che è in corso a tale scopo l’upgrade della base della U.S. Air Force ad Aviano (Por­de­none) e di quella di Ghedi Torre (Brescia).

Lo prova una foto satel­li­tare, che mostra la costru­zione ad Aviano di una dop­pia bar­riera attorno a 12 bun­ker con coper­tura a volta, dove gli F-16C/Ds della 31stFighter Wing Usa sono pronti al decollo con le bombe nucleari.

Foto satellitare dell’upgrade della base di Aviano, 12 luglio 2015 © Federazione degli scienziati americani

Ana­lo­ghi pre­pa­ra­tivi sono in corso nella base aerea tede­sca di Buchel, dove si stanno ristrut­tu­rando le piste, dotan­dole di nuove stru­men­ta­zioni: docu­menti del Pen­ta­gono, citati dalla tele­vi­sione pub­blica tede­sca Zdf, mostrano che la base sta per rice­vere le nuove bombe nucleari B61-12. Lo stesso – docu­menta la Fas – avviene nella base aerea turca di Incir­lic, dove sono in corso lavori per raf­for­zare «l’area Nato» dotata di 21 bun­ker, che acco­glierà le nuove bombe nucleari. Si stanno raf­for­zando anche le basi nucleari in Bel­gio e Olanda, in attesa della B61-12, testata lo scorso luglio nel poli­gono di Tono­pah in Nevada, dove si svol­ge­ranno entro l’anno gli altri due test neces­sari per la messa a punto della bomba.

Non si sa quante B61-12 sarannno schie­rate in Europa e Turchia.

Secondo le ultime stime della Fas, gli Usa man­ten­gono oggi 70 bombe nucleari B61 in Ita­lia (50 ad Aviano e 20 a Ghedi), 50 in Tur­chia, 20 rispet­ti­va­mente in Ger­ma­nia, Bel­gio e Olanda, per un totale di 180. Nes­suno sa però con esat­tezza quante effet­ti­va­mente siano: ad Aviano, ad esem­pio, ci sono 18 bun­ker in grado di stoc­carne oltre 70.

Tan­to­meno si sa quante bombe nucleari si tro­vino a bordo delle por­tae­rei Usa nei porti e nelle acque ter­ri­to­riali euro­pee. Il pro­gramma del Pen­ta­gono pre­vede la costru­zione di 400–500 B61-12, con un costo di 8–12 miliardi di dol­lari. Impor­tante non è però solo l’aspetto quantitativo.

Inter­vi­stato dalla Zdf, Hans Kri­sten­sen con­ferma quanto scri­viamo da anni (vedi il mani­fe­sto, 23 aprile 2013): quella che arri­verà tra non molto in Ita­lia e in altri paesi euro­pei, non è una sem­plice ver­sione ammo­der­nata della B61, ma una nuova arma nucleare poli­va­lente, che sosti­tuirà le bombe B61-3, –4, –7, –10 nell’attuale arse­nale nucleare Usa.

La B61-12, con una potenza media di 50 kilo­ton (circa il qua­dru­plo della bomba di Hiro­shima), svol­gerà quindi la fun­zione di più bombe, com­prese quelle pene­tranti pro­get­tate per «deca­pi­tare» il paese nemico, distrug­gendo i bun­ker dei cen­tri di comando e altre strut­ture sot­ter­ra­nee in un first strike nucleare. A dif­fe­renza delle B61 sgan­ciate in ver­ti­cale sull’obiettivo, le B61-12 ven­gono sgan­ciate a grande distanza (circa 100 km) e si diri­gono verso l’obiettivo gui­date da un sistema satel­li­tare. Si can­cella così, in gran parte, la dif­fe­renza tra armi nucleari stra­te­gi­che a lungo rag­gio e armi tat­ti­che a corto raggio.

Nell’intervista alla Zdf, il diret­tore del Nuclear Infor­ma­tion Pro­ject della Fas dichiara che gli alleati euro­pei (Ita­lia com­presa), con­sul­tati da Washing­ton, hanno appro­vato lo schie­ra­mento in Europa delle bombe nucleari Usa B61-12. Anche la Ger­ma­nia, nono­stante che il Bun­de­stag avesse deciso nel 2009 che gli Usa riti­ras­sero tutte le loro armi nucleari dal ter­ri­to­rio tedesco.

L’ex sot­to­se­gre­ta­rio di Stato tede­sco Willy Wim­mer (già por­ta­voce per la Difesa nella Cdu, lo stesso par­tito della can­cel­liera Mer­kel, la quale ha igno­rato la deci­sione del Bun­de­stag), ha dichia­rato che lo schie­ra­mento delle nuove bombe nucleari Usa in Ger­ma­nia costi­tui­sce «una con­sa­pe­vole pro­vo­ca­zione con­tro il nostro vicino russo». Non c’è quindi da stu­pirsi che la Rus­sia prenda delle contromisure.

Ale­xan­der Neu, par­la­men­tare di Die Linke, ha denun­ciato che la pre­senza dell’arsenale nucleare Usa in Ger­ma­nia viola il Trat­tato di non-proliferazione delle armi nucleari. Ciò vale anche per l’Italia.

Gli Stati uniti, quale Stato in pos­sesso di armi nucleari, sono obbli­gati dal Trat­tato a non tra­sfe­rirle ad altri (Art. 1). Ita­lia, Ger­ma­nia, Bel­gio, Olanda e Tur­chia, quali stati non-nucleari, hanno l’obbligo di non rice­verle da chic­ches­sia (Art. 2). Per di più, nel 1999, gli alleati euro­pei fir­ma­rono un accordo (sot­to­scritto dal pre­mier D’Alema senza sot­to­porlo al Par­la­mento) sulla «pia­ni­fi­ca­zione nucleare col­let­tiva» della Nato, in cui si sta­bi­li­sce che «l’Alleanza con­ser­verà forze nucleari ade­guate in Europa».

Hans Kri­sten­sen con­ferma, inol­tre, che a Ghedi Torre sono stoc­cate le bombe nucleari Usa «per i Tor­nado ita­liani». Piloti ita­liani, ana­lo­ga­mente a quelli degli altri paesi che ospi­tano tali bombe, ven­gono adde­strati all’attacco nucleare sotto comando Usa. Non a caso l’esercitazione Nato di guerra nucleare, la Stea­d­fast Noon, si è svolta nel 2013 ad Aviano e nel 2014 a Ghedi-Torre. A quest’ultima hanno par­te­ci­pato anche cac­cia­bom­bar­dieri F-16 polacchi.

Poi­ché a for­nire le bombe nucleari ci pen­sano gli Usa, i paesi che le ospi­tano si accol­lano (per i due terzi o total­mente) le spese per il man­te­ni­mento e l’upgrade delle basi. Paghiamo così, anche eco­no­mi­ca­mente, la «sicu­rezza» che ci foni­scono gli Usa schie­rando in Europa le loro armi nucleari.

Manlio Dinucci

  • Posted in Italiano
  • Comments Off on Verso l’Italia le nuove atomiche Usa

Once upon a time, federal regulatory agencies charged with approving fully tested and verified safe products for the U.S. market and pulling those that were found to be dangerous or cause sickness made decisions based on the best interests of the public. But sadly, those days are gone – long gone – and it’s hard to imagine that we will ever see integrity reintroduced into our country’s regulatory process.

Today, regulatory decisions are too often based on the wants, needs and desires of large mega-corporations – firms whose top officials serve on government panels with obvious conflicts of interest, firms that provide billions a year in financial “contributions” to politicians from both major parties (and the president), and firms that the government allows to hide or override scientific findings indicating that their products either don’t perform as advertised or are harming the public with dangerous side effects.

Some of the most offensive and subjugated U.S. agencies are the Food and Drug Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Agriculture and the Centers for Disease Control (the latter is not really a federal bureaucracy, but the CDC is looked upon by the mainstream scientific community and the federal government as a Christian would look upon the Bible – the final word on all matters).

The EPA

Back in the 1970s, the EPA was not a very good ally of agri- and biotech giant Monsanto. The agency – along with other federal bureaucracies – banned the chemical dioxin ( apersistent organic pollutant that takes a very long time to break down in the environment), safety concerns arose over its artificial sweetener saccharin (the first of its kind; it was thought to contribute to cancer), and cyclamate (another artificial sweetener) had been banned over dangerous side effects. And the FDA was putting up roadblocks as Monsanto attempted to get another sweetener, aspartame, approved, because independent research showed that it caused brain tumors in mammals.

Furthermore, the company’s best-selling herbicide at the time, Lasso, was also showing signs it may be carcinogenic. As sales fell and the company was facing an uncertain future, Monsanto put huge amounts of effort into gaining approval for its (then) new herbicide compound, glyphosate – what would become the main ingredient of its Roundup brand.

It worked, though the effort took some time. And along the way, a vast amount of research showing that glyphosate has detrimental effects of animals, humans and the environment has been ignored. In fact, Monsanto has never been held liable for any of it.

The USDA

And, as Natural News reported Sept. 15, Monsanto’s efforts to flood agriculture with harmful genetically modified organisms (GMOs) bore fruit in the late 1980s after the company convinced then-Vice President George H. W. Bush that they were “safe” enough for approval.

His boss, President Ronald Reagan, became known for many accomplishments: improving the economy, strengthening the military, and dealing decisively with a Soviet Union whose power and influence was waning. However, Reagan was also a deregulator; if there was red tape he could cut in Washington in order to benefit business, industry and the economy in general, he would gladly do it.

Enter Monsanto – and the agricultural world was forever changed. As we reported in 2012, the newest GMOs – engineered with “stacked traits” – are even more harmful than earlier versions, according to a study published at the time in the Journal of Applied Toxicology.

The FDA

While the FDA has levied fines and other sanctions against Big Pharma, there have also been lapses in enforcement, as well the failure to recognize that entire classes of some medications are literally killing us. One of them is the antidepressant class of drugs.

This is unforgivable, considering that – as reported in 2004 by Natural News editor Mike Adams, the Health Ranger – the agency admitted that children who are prescribed antidepressants are 180 times more likely to have suicidal tendencies than those who don’t take them.

“This is after the agency stalled for months by requesting an independent investigation of the research data, during which antidepressant drugs continued to be prescribed in huge numbers to children around the country and around the world — all at great profit to pharmaceutical companies,”

Adams wrote.

And yet, today, that class of medications remains unchallenged by the FDA and little-regulated, with the agency even colluding with Big Pharma to cover up antidepressant-related deaths.

The CDC

Once hailed as the gold standard of medical science and research, the CDC has lost much of its luster in recent years – and a health portion of its reputation.

The agency repeatedly botched handling the spread of Ebola in the U.S. – after its director essentially said the disease would never spread to the country.

But the CDC has been particularly forgiving to the vaccine industry, even to the point of covering up scientific data regarding the risks associated with some of Big Pharma’s most popular vaccines, like the MMR.

Again, as Adams reported Aug. 27, CDC whistleblower William Thompson recently went public with charges that he and some colleagues hid data indicating that African American male children developed autism at significantly higher rates than others after receiving the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine.

With so many billions of dollars at their disposal – and a U.S. government filled with politicians and bureaucrats for sale – it is little wonder that the regulatory processes once designed to protect the general public have largely been co-opted by Corporate America.

Sources:

PRN.fm

EPA.gov

HealthyEating.SFGate.com

NaturalNews.com

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Regulators’ War on Americans: FDA Covers Up Crimes for Big Pharma; EPA for Chemical Companies; USDA for Biotech; and CDC for Vaccine Industry

The US Gazes Into the Islamophobic Abyss

September 30th, 2015 by Christian Christensen

Both leading Republican candidates, Ben Carson and Donald Trump, have made political hay by engaging in the kind of vitriolic Islamophobia usually reserved for the European far-right. However, the responsibility for this hatred and bigotry belongs to all of us. (Photo: AFP/Getty)

“When we think of Islam we think of a faith that brings comfort to a billion people around the world.  Billions of people find comfort and solace and peace.  And that’s made brothers and sisters out of every race — out of every race. America counts millions of Muslims amongst our citizens, and Muslims make an incredibly valuable contribution to our country.  Muslims are doctors, lawyers, law professors, members of the military, entrepreneurs, shopkeepers, moms and dads.  And they need to be treated with respect.”

These are eloquent words. Words of justice and understanding. Words of reconciliation. They are the words of President George W. Bush – spoken at the Islamic Center of Washington, D.C. on September 17, 2001 – a mere 6 days after the Al Qaeda attacks that killed almost 3,000 in New York, Virginia and Pennsylvania. They are also the words of a President who said that Jesus Christ was the political philosopher who had influenced him the most. And, they are the words of a President who, using falsehoods on Iraqi WMD and links between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda as moral and legal justifications, would green light a military invasion and occupation of Iraq that would leave hundreds of thousands of civilians dead and an entire region destabilized.

Fast-forward 14 years to the candidacies of Donald Trump and Ben Carson. Would either man utter the words uttered by Bush, let alone only days after the 9/11 attacks?

Trump and Carson have made political hay by engaging in the kind of vitriolic Islamophobia usually reserved for the European far-right. Trump proved his credentials by not only refusing to correct a questioner who said that the US should get rid of Muslimsand that President Obama is a Muslim, but by actually answering the question as if it were legitimate. Ben Carson, on the other hand, took the more direct route by stating that aMuslim should not be President because the Muslim faith is inconsistent with the US Constitution. When challenged on his claim, and when it was pointed out that denying the right of a US citizen to become President on the basis of religious affiliation is itself a violation of the Constitution, Carson refused to back down.

While it would be very easy to speak of a change to a more aggressive form of US Islamophobia, it would be more accurate to say that we are witnessing a change in how a long-standing anti-Muslim bias is expressed. Islamophobia is well-entrenched in the US, fuelled by a combination of popular culture, two-dimensional news coverage and foreign policy where Muslim lives are clearly valued less than others. Bush may have spoken some fine, scripted words about Muslims after 9/11, but it would be hard to imagine the initial levels of national support given for the invasion of Iraq had Bush pushed for invading, say, a predominantly white, Christian nation. Bush simply kept his rhetoric in check while letting US bombs do the talking.

At the time, of course, Bush was considered a human gaffe machine. But now, in retrospect, he seems positively stoic. Trump and Carson are the new id of the US political right: not only unafraid to express what many in the US think (no matter how offensive or inaccurate), but they appear to revel in their own ignorance and the pain that ignorance generates. This is certainly the case in relation to Muslims and Islam, with Ben Carson tapping into the most ill-informed prejudices against the US Muslim community. And, even when they try to offer a modicum of decency, they reveal themselves. When Donald Trump was challenged on his perceived Islamophobia, for example, he offered the line: “I love the Muslims. I think they’re great people.” This is what Trump understands of racism and discrimination: they are mere PR glitches to be remedied with vacuous platitudes worthy of a late-night TV ad for one of his Atlantic City casinos.

There are always glimmers of hope, but context matters. Collectively patting ourselves on the back because President Obama invited 14-year-old Ahmed Mohamed to the White House might feel good, but it doesn’t address the fact that the boy was detained and handcuffed in large part because of the anti-Muslim atmosphere generated by media, politicians and US foreign policy (for which Obama must take a fair degree of responsibility).

This was (and is) an atmosphere decades in the making, and one that has been deadly. The failure of the US media in the lead-up to Iraq was not simply a failure to question the existence of imaginary WMD, it was a failure to make note of the chasm between Bush’s words on September 17, 2001 and his later actions. It was the failure to even approach the question of the extent to which the occupation and destruction of Iraq was made possible by the very Islamophobia Bush claimed was un-American. The questions we really needed to ask were about ourselves. That would have been real balance that questioned and disturbed, and not the fluffy faux-balance of pundit-driven TV.

And that time has come again. But Trump and Carson now pose a dilemma for US journalists: what do you do within the near religious frameworks of “neutrality” and “balance” when candidates come out with blatantly Islamophobic positions? Yes, their opinions have been criticized, but criticism is not condemnation, and we should ask ourselves not only what we want from politics, but from our media. Is it really forced neutrality and balance, even in the face of vulgar bigotry? Is it media that infantilizes us by suggesting that the merits of even the blatantly idiotic and offensive are worthy of debate and analysis? Or, do we want deeper introspection about our politics and our society, and a more painful-but-beneficial discussion?

Just as we gazed into the abyss a decade ago, so we gaze into it today. Let’s cover that story before it’s too late.

Christian Christensen, American in Sweden, is Professor of Journalism at Stockholm University. Follow him on Twitter: @ChrChristensen

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The US Gazes Into the Islamophobic Abyss

Image: Artwork inside the burned-out Dawabshe home blames the Israeli government for the firebombing. (Photo: Dan Cohen)

Stabbing at the Gay Pride Parade in Jerusalem. Death of 16-year-old Shira BankiArson attack on a family home in the West Bank. Deaths of 18-month old Ali Saad Dawabsheh, his father Saad Dawabsheh’s, and mother Reham Dawabsheh.

It is time to look inwards at a rising culture of violence rather than facile explanations about individual bad seeds. Something is growing insidiously among us: racismintolerance and hate. With attacks occurring more frequently, these seeds are no longer limited to one crazy individual, one extremist; instead they are indicative of widespread cultural seeds of racism, intolerance, and hate. These seeds have been cultivating for some time.

These brazen hate crimes immediately sparked responses and outrage from Israel’s religious leaders and government officials such as Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem Aryeh Stern, Knesset Member Yair Lapid, former President and Prime Minister Shimon Peres, current President Reuven Rivlin and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. A series of marches condemning these attacks occurred throughout Israel, the largest was in Tel Aviv that drew a crowd of nearly 2,000 people.

The reaction is all a farce, an illusion at best. Israelis, including agents of the government, pretend to be morally outraged that these acts occur; however, everything in Israel has simply been a direct build up to this moment. When are we as Israelis, Jewish Americans, and Jews throughout the world going to accept that this is all part of the same cyclical violence and rampant hate speech that has been taking place for years? When will we start taking ownership that something has been eating away at us for years? These attacks finally brought about some speech admonishing it, but their outrage in the public rhetoric is disingenuous. Only acceptance that this is cultural and widespread and therefore religious and government institutions alike are complicit will bring about lasting change.

The hypocrisy is overwhelming. Israel condemns violence and hate speech, but allows settlers to continue to reign terror virtually unchecked against Palestinians in the West Bank. Israel condemns hate speech but allows Ayelet Shaked, who openly called for the genocide of Palestinians, to be the Minister of Justice.

A recent act exemplifying the difference between a few bad seeds and widespread cultural seeds is the death of 16-year old Mohammed Abu Khdeir. Rather than wait to hear the true cause of death, the Israeli media was quick to jump and claim that it was an honor killing—so quick to deflect, defend, and, ultimately, rationalize. Once it was revealed that the perpetrators were in fact three Jewish terrorists, they were not labeled as such. Instead, they were regarded as fanatics, extremists, a few bad seeds, and a gag order was issued. To this day, only one of the three names of the assailants has been released. Instead of focusing on the horror of this crime and reacting with outrage that something like this could be committed by members of the Jewish community, instead of turning inwards for processing and introspective analysis, the narrative of this story focused on the bravery of these terrorists to turn themselves in, how truly apologetic they felt and how they regret their actions.

The attention and treatment Jewish terrorists receive compared to their Palestinian counterparts is befuddling. Palestinian terrorists have their names released to the public, no fair or open trial, and their family homes bulldozed and demolished. Why is there such a discrepancy between Jewish terrorists and Palestinian terrorists?

How can the Jewish people, stand for this when we are supposedly morally superior, God’s chosen people? One option is to start listening to Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon’s idea that Israeli authorities should treat and detain Israeli terrorists in the same manner as the Palestinian ones. However, I argue that though that would be the fairer route to take, it is still not the most just. While there are many issues at hand, first and foremost, we must stop labeling Jewish terrorists as ‘extremists.’ To label them as such diminishes how widespread this phenomenon is and ultimately reduces their impact and culpability. It’s not individual bad seeds but rather it is sanctioned and legitimated ideologies.

We as a nation, as a tribe, as a people, better check ourselves, before we wreck ourselves. Refuse to accept that these are but a few bad seeds. Start treating Jewish terror as just terror. Stop letting these terrorists reign over the country. Start bearing more responsibility and culpability.

Organizing marches and preparing public statements is easy, but it is only one part of the solution. Israel needs to start creating mechanisms and platforms where these crimes go punished and treated. Anyone can pay lip service to the issues at hand, but until mechanisms are put in place to appropriately bring about justice, the words of Lapid, Peres, Stern, Rivlin, and Netanyahu remain empty and hollow.

There is much to do in the long journey of resolving the issues between Israel and Palestine, but one step is to realize that Jewish terrorism is no longer limited to a select few seeds, but is in fact a growing problem and deserves to be labeled as what it truly is: terrorism.

Karin Attia was born in Haifa, Israel raised in Los Angeles, California and is currently living in New York City studying as a Master’s student at New York University (NYU). Her studies are focused on peacebuilding, gender and the Middle East.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Facing Reality: Jewish Terrorism is No Longer Limited to Just a Few Bad Seeds

What will it take to shut down Monsanto’s doors irrevocably? Likely it will be the same type of lawsuit that finally pulled the shades on the tobacco industry. If Big Tobacco eventually had to pay a $206 billion settlement over 25 years for lying about the health impacts of cigarettes, what do you think Monsanto will have to pay for lying about glyphosate’s carcinogenic nature for almost 40 years?

Some well-respected researchers are now saying that Monsanto demanded incriminating data and reports be sealed and locked away from public scrutiny as proprietary trade secrets, though they knew these documents would reveal glyphosate’s carcinogenic nature.

Monsanto has yet to be caught red-handed lying about research, but the corp has been caught twice when they utilized outside laboratories that were later found to have been criminal. In 1978, the EPA busted Industrial Biotest Laboratories for rigging laboratory results; the company’s executives were found guilty for submitting fabricated data supporting glyphosate in positive light to the government. In 1991, another firm, Craven Labs, was found guilty on similar charges with 20 felony counts. Monsanto’s timeline of crime is undeniable. [1]

The EPA continually colludes with Monsanto to present glyphosate as ‘safe’ to the public, but during an exclusive interview on the Progressive Radio Network on September 4, Anthony Samsel stated that Monsanto used an industry trick to dismiss evidence about glyphosate’s risks in its own research.  “Monsanto misrepresented the data,” says Samsel, “and deliberately covered up data to bring the product [glyphosate] to market.”

Samsel, an independent research scientist and a member of the Union of Concerned Scientists, explains, along with Dr. Stephanie Seneff, that in order to minimize and cancel out its adverse findings:

“Monsanto had relied upon earlier historical animal control data, toxicological research with lab animals afflicted with cancer and organ failures, and completely unrelated to glyphosate. In some cases the control animals displayed kidney, liver and pancreatic diseases.

Many of Monsanto’s own studies required the inclusion of extraneous studies in order to cancel out damaging results.  This is not an uncommon industry habit, particularly in toxicological science. It enables corporations to mask undesirable outcomes and make claims that observable illnesses and disease are spontaneous occurrences without known causal factors.

Frequently, Monsanto would have to rely on three external control studies to negate the adverse effects of a single one of its own. Samsel found other incidences in Monsanto’s data where 5, 7 and in one case 11 unrelated studies were necessary to diminish the severity of its own findings.  In effect, glyphosate received licensure based upon a platform of junk tobacco science.”

The researchers go on to explain that Monsanto covered up the fact that glyphosate was equally toxic in both low and high range doses. These findings are corroborated by a recent study from France published in the August issue of the Environmental Health Journal by scientists at Kings College London and the University of Caen in France.

The two year study found that glyphosate administered at an ultra-low dose of 0.1 ppb (the EU’s safety limit) in drinking water altered over 4000 gene clusters in the livers and kidneys of rats, though the biotech industry has been trying to debunk its findings.

So what information is hiding in Monsanto’s sealed documents?

Among the many cancers and diseases associated with glyphosate are:

  • Adenoma cancer in the pituitary gland
  • Glioma tumors in the brain
  • Reticular cell sarcomas in the heart
  • Malignant tumors in the lungs
  • Salivary mandibular reticular cell carcinoma
  • Metastatic sarcomas of the lymph gland
  • Prostate carcinoma
  • Cancer of the bladder
  • Thyroid carcinoma
  • Adrenal reticulum cell sarcomas
  • Cortical adenomas
  • Basal cell squamous skin tumors

Yet these were all hidden from public view. I think that hundreds of billions of dollars won’t come close to account for the 40 years of health damage Monsanto has potentially caused by hiding this information. But one thing is certain, just like the Tobacco industry – Monsanto will pay.

Want to learn more? Watch these videos:

Lobbyist who says you can drink glyphosate:

Documentary on the Monsanto Company:

Seeds of Death:

Monsanto has gotten away with murder for long enough. The world is starting to wake up, and hold them accountable. Our efforts are working; just don’t let up the pressure. Keep educating yourself and others and we will protect the food supply.

Additional Sources:

[1] GlobalResearch

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Monsanto ‘Deliberately Covered Up Data’ Proving Glyphosate is Cancerous for Four Decades

The U.S. government has dropped hundreds of thousands of tons of bombs on Iraq alone in the last dozen years – and even hailed the start of the bombing campaign in 2003 as “shock and awe” – but now has coyly and repeatedly decried the Syrian government’s supposed use of crude “barrel bombs.”

This hyper-hypocritical propaganda theme was given voice in President Barack Obama’s Sept. 28 speech to the United Nations General Assembly when he denounced anyone who doesn’t favor “regime change” in Syria as advocating “support [for] tyrants like Bashar al-Assad, who drops barrel bombs to massacre innocent children.”

At the start of the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, President George W. Bush ordered the U.S. military to conduct a devastating aerial assault on Baghdad, known as "shock and awe."

At the start of the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, President George W. Bush ordered the U.S. military to conduct a devastating aerial assault on Baghdad, known as “shock and awe.”

Yet, Obama offered no criticism of various U.S. administrations and American allies that have leveled whole cities, killing countless men, women and children. That slaughter has included two atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan in 1945 and the devastation of Indochina during the 1960s and 1970s with more bomb tonnage than was dropped in all of World War II. Millions, including countless children, were killed in these bombing campaigns.

More recently, Obama’s predecessor, President George W. Bush ordered the devastation of Fallujah and other Iraqi cities to suppress resistance to the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq. Obama himself has boasted of ordering military strikes in seven countries, mostly aerial bombardments with many confirmed civilian dead.

In 2014, Israel used American warplanes and armaments to blast apart Gaza killing some 2,100 people – the vast majority civilians and many of them children, including four little boys playing on a beach. President Obama not only refrains from criticizing Israel’s indiscriminate use of these devastating weapons but stays silent on Israel’s rogue nuclear arsenal and today ponders which giant “bunker buster” bombs should be added to Israel’s bristling arsenal.

Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia is dropping U.S.-supplied ordnance, reportedly including cluster bombs, on the helpless population of Yemen with Obama’s tacit approval and reportedly with U.S. intelligence assistance.

On Monday, the Saudi air force apparently bombed a wedding party on Yemen’s Red Sea coast killing more than 130 people, including women who had taken refuge in a tent, according to various news reports.

One surviving relative said it was difficult to determine the exact number of dead because the bodies were blasted into so many bloody pieces. “I saw no body intact,” said Ahmed Altabozi, the uncle of one of the victims.

Yet, while President Obama has avoided any direct public rebukes of U.S. or allied militaries for their slaughter of civilians, he singled out Syria’s embattled government for using a homemade weapon in its desperate fight against terrorists of the Islamic State and Al Qaeda’s Nusra Front.

Further, Obama claimed that President Assad dropped the “barrel bombs to massacre innocent children” when there is no evidence that Assad had any such intent. Obama’s comment amounted to crude and deceptive propaganda.

By contrast, when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu launches one of his periodic “lawn mowing” operations against the people of Gaza and many children are cut down in the process, Obama stands mute, apparently judging that the exercise in recurring butchery is just one of those “price is worth it” moments.

Obviously, any killing of civilians in wartime is to be deplored – whoever is dropping the bombs and whatever the weapon’s degree of lethality – but it was still stunning to watch Obama apply such selective outrage. Indeed, much of the UN General Assembly seemed genuinely shocked by Obama’s blatant double standards.

Propaganda Buzz Phrase

But it’s really all par for the course. Whenever propagandists develop their “themes” for a conflict, they look for certain “hot button” phrases that make the behavior of a “black-hatted enemy” appear particularly venal. “Barrel bomb” has become the propaganda buzz phrase of choice associated with the Syrian conflict.

Yet, it seems likely this clumsy, improvised weapon – supposedly dropped from helicopters – would be far less lethal than rocket-propelled bombs delivered from afar by jet planes or drones, the approach favored by the U.S. government and its “allies.”

Civilians would have a much better chance to seek safety in a bomb shelter before some “barrel bomb” is shoved out the door of a helicopter than when a sophisticated U.S.-made bomb arrives with little or no warning, as apparently happened to the victims of that wedding in Yemen.

And that is not to mention the U.S. bombs that involve depleted uranium, napalm, phosphorous and cluster munitions, which present other humanitarian concerns. However, while U.S.-assisted or U.S.-directed slaughters of civilians attract little attention in the mainstream U.S. media, there are endless denunciations of the Syrian government’s “barrel bombs.”

The propaganda drumbeat is such that the American people are told that they must support “regime change” in Syria even if it risks opening the gates of Damascus to a victory by the Islamic State and Al Qaeda terrorists.

This odd “humanitarian” equation, tallied up by the State Department and “human-rights” NGOs, holds that to secure revenge for Syria’s alleged use of “barrel bombs,” the world must accept the possibility of the black flag of Sunni terrorism flying over a major Mideast capital while its streets would run red with the blood of Christians, Alawites, Shiites and other “heretics.”

Then, apparently, the United States would have little choice but to lead a massive expeditionary force into Syria to oust the Islamic State and Al Qaeda, ensuring the deaths of hundreds of thousands more innocents and sending millions more fleeing into a destabilized Europe.

But such is the power of propaganda in managing public perceptions. Use a phrase like “barrel bomb” over and over again as if it is a uniquely evil weapon when, in fact, it is far less lethal and destructive than the ordnance that the United States routinely deploys or hands out to its “allies” like candy on Halloween. Soon the people lose all perspective and are open to manipulation. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “The Power of False Narrative.”]

Once the U.S. public is softened up with the propaganda and psy-ops – also known as “strategic communications” or Stratcom – the only acceptable option is “regime change” in Syria even if that prospect holds the likelihood of a far worse human catastrophe.

By hearin “barrel bomb” enough times, the judgment of American citizens is clouded and any practical suggestion for a realistic political settlement of Syria’s conflict is deemed “appeasement” of a tyrant, which was the clear message of President Obama’s UN tirade on Monday.

And, thus, the killing continues; the chaos grows worse.

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). You also can order Robert Parry’s trilogy on the Bush Family and its connections to various right-wing operatives for only $34. The trilogy includes America’s Stolen Narrative. For details on this offer, click here.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Obama’s Ludicrous ‘Barrel Bomb’ Theme: Singling Out Assad

“Exxons of agriculture” should be kept out of Paris COP21

Fertiliser companies are among the world’s top climate villains, a new report from GRAIN asserts. Their products could be responsible for up to 10% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, not to mention the damage wreaked on waterways, soils and the ozone layer. But policies to transition agriculture out of its current dependence on chemical fertilisers are being undermined by the fertiliser industry’s lobby efforts.

GRAIN’s report shows how fertiliser companies have infiltrated the main policy processes on agriculture and climate to position chemical fertilisers as a solution to climate change and to weaken support for non-chemical farming. Under the banner of “climate smart agriculture”, fertiliser companies work in alliance with other food and agribusiness corporations to lobby for voluntary, company-led programmes that promote the use of fertilisers, such as Wal-Mart’s climate smart agriculture programme or the World Economic Forum’s New Vision for Agriculture.

Fertiliser companies even hold sway within the only intergovernmental initiative to so far have emerged on climate change and agriculture. The founding membership and steering committee of the Global Alliance for Climate Smart Agriculture, launched last year at the United Nations Summit on Climate Change, are stacked with fertiliser companies, their front groups and organisations that partner with them.

“Fertiliser companies, like Yara of Norway, are the Exxons of agriculture,” says Henk Hobbelink, the Coordinator of GRAIN. “They fuel a model of agriculture that is destroying the planet and they are doing everything in their power to block action on climate change that would injure their profits.”

According to GRAIN’s report, recent studies show that the overall contribution of chemical fertilisers to climate change has been drastically underestimated. Calculations made by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) of nitrous oxide emissions from the use of chemical fertilisers are 3-5 times below what these studies suggest. The outdated IPCC figures also do not account for global increases in fertiliser production, the increasing reliance on shale gas as a raw material or the destructive impacts of chemical fertilisers on organic matter, the world’s most important carbon sink.

“We now can say that the use of chemical fertilisers this year will generate more GHG emissions than the total GHG emissions from all of the cars and trucks driven in the US,” says Devlin Kuyek, a researcher with GRAIN. “The good news is that there is a quick fix for this problem: a worldwide switch to agroecological practices that can achieve the same yields without chemicals.”

Research shows that farmers can stop using chemical fertilisers without reducing yields by adopting agroecological practices. This was also the conclusion supported by the 2008 International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development, a three-year intergovernmental process involving over 400 scientists that was sponsored by the World Bank and all of the relevant UN agencies.

“We can easily kick our food system’s toxic fertiliser habit once we remove the fertiliser industry’s chock hold on policy makers,” says Hobbelink. “This should start with shutting down the Global Alliance for Climate Smart Agriculture and keeping the fertiliser lobby out of the COP21 talks in Paris.”

GRAIN’s report, “The Exxons of agriculture”, is available online a thttps://www.grain.org/e/5270.

For more information, please contact:

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Fertiliser Companies Dominate Talks on Climate Change and Agriculture, Report

The Standing Committee on Health of the House of Commons in the Canadian Parliament issued a report on radio frequency electromagnetic radiation and health in June, 2015.  

The  Committee held public hearings regarding Health Canada’s Safety Code 6 recommended limits on safe human exposure to radio frequency (RF) radiation.

Witnesses testified to the Committee or submitted briefs that raised concerns about the adequacy of Safety Code 6 to protect the population from health risks due to RF radiation.

Concerns were raised that the Royal Society of Canada’s review of Safety Code 6 for Health Canada was biased. That the review excluded 140 key research studies was of concern to Canadians for Safe Technology (C4ST). Health Canada admitted that 36 of these studies which demonstrated health risks from exposures below the safety limit “were considered to be in scope and of sufficient quality for risk assessment.”

The witnesses discussed possible links between RF exposure and cancer, reproductive issues and autism. Concerns were raised about RF exposure in schools due to use of Wi-Fi; the need for RF exposure limits to protect vulnerable populations such as pregnant women, infants and children, and persons with electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS).

Most submissions recommended lowering the RF exposure limits in Safety Code 6. Russia, China, Italy and Switzerland were cited as examples of nations with lower exposure limits than Canada (or the U.S.). C4ST recommended “precautionary approaches regarding exposures to electromagnetic radiation from wireless communications devices that are as Low as Reasonably Achievable (ALARA).”

The Standing Committee on Health made the following recommendations in their report to the Parliament (pp. 25-26):

“Recommendation 1: That the Government of Canada, in collaboration with the health departments of the provinces and territories, examine existing cancer data collection methods to improve the collection of information relating to wireless device use and cancer.

Recommendation 2: That Statistics Canada consider including questions related to electromagnetic hypersensitivity in the Canadian Community Health Survey.

Recommendation 3: That the Government of Canada, through the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, consider funding research into electromagnetic hypersensitivity testing, diagnosis and treatment, and its possible impacts on health in the workplace.

Recommendation 4: That the Canadian Medical Association, the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons, the College of Family Physicians of Canada and the World Health Organization consider updating their guidelines and continuing education materials regarding the diagnosis and treatment of electromagnetic hypersensitivity to ensure they are based on the latest scientific evidence and reflect the symptoms of affected Canadians.

Recommendation 5: That the Government of Canada continue to provide reasonable accommodations for environmental sensitivities, including electromagnetic hypersensitivity, as required under the Canadian Human Rights Act.

Recommendation 6: That Health Canada ensure the openness and transparency of its processes for the review of Safety Code 6, so that all Canadians have an opportunity to be informed about the evidence considered or excluded in such reviews, that outside experts are provided full information when doing independent reviews, and that the scientific rationale for any change is clearly communicated.

Recommendation 7: That the Government of Canada establish a system for Canadians to report potential adverse reactions to radiofrequency fields.

Recommendation 8: That an independent scientific body recognized by Health Canada examine whether measures taken and guidelines provided in other countries, such as France and Israel, to limit the exposure of vulnerable populations, including infants, and young children in the school environment, to radiofrequencies should be adopted in Canada.

Recommendation 9: That the Government of Canada develop an awareness campaign relating to the safe use of wireless technologies, such as cell phones and Wi-Fi, in key environments such as the school and home to ensure that Canadian families and children are reducing risks related to radiofrequency exposure.

Recommendation 10: That Health Canada conduct a comprehensive review of all existing literature relating to radiofrequency fields and carcinogenicity based on international best practices.

Recommendation 11: That the Government of Canada, through the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, consider funding research into the link between radiofrequency fields and potential health effects such as cancer, genetic damage, infertility, impairment to development and behaviour, harmful effects to eyes and on the brain, cardiovascular, biological and biochemical effects.

Recommendation 12: That the Government of Canada and manufacturers consider policy measures regarding the marketing of radiation emitting devices to children under the age of 14, in order to ensure they are aware of the health risks and how they can be avoided.”

“Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Radiation and the Health of Canadians.” Report of the Standing Committee on Health, 41st Parliament, Second Session. House of Commons, Canada. June 2015. http://bit.ly/RF-EMR-Report-Canada-2015

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Wireless Radiation Exposure: Canada Parliament Committee Calls for “Protection of Vulnerable Groups”

China – Ghost Cities. 64 Million Empty Apartments in China

September 30th, 2015 by Global Research News

“Vast new cities are being built across China at a rate of ten a year, but they remain almost completely uninhabited ghost towns.

Racing to stay ahead of the world economy, is the superpower about to implode?

There are around 64 million empty apartments in China”, claims analyst Gillem Tulloch. It’s all part of the Chinese government’s efforts to keep its economy booming and there are plenty of people who would love to move in but the properties are priced out of the market.”

GR Editor’s Note

What these figures signify is that there are enough empty apartments to house close to 15 percent of China’s population, assuming an occupancy rate of 3-4 persons per apartment unit. Bear in mind, the urban population for China as a whole is of the order of 800 million and these empty apartments could potentially house approximately one quarter of the urban population. Corporate capitalism prevails in the PRC, which claims to be a Communist country: Under a real socialist or democratic government, these empty apartments would be nationalized and made available to those in need of housing.

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, December 22,2014, updated September 30, 2015

There are around 64 million empty apartments in China”, claims analyst Gillem Tulloch. It’s all part of the Chinese government’s efforts to keep its economy booming and there are plenty of people who would love to move in but the properties are priced out of the market.

It’s after 2pm and in the new city of Dongguan shop owner Tian Yu Gao is yet to serve a single customer.It’s a bit boring”, he sighs. His open shop is a rare sight in the Great Mall: once heralded by the New York Times as proof of China’s astonishing consumer culture. Today it is an eerie vista of emptiness. “It can’t stay this way”, insists Tulloch”. When the bubble bursts, it will impoverish vast numbers of people”.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on China – Ghost Cities. 64 Million Empty Apartments in China

Why Saudi Ties to 9/11 Mean U.S. Ties to 9/11

September 30th, 2015 by Kevin Ryan

Media interest in Saudi Arabian connections to the crimes of 9/11 has centered on calls for the release of the 28 missing pages from the Joint Congressional Inquiry’s report.

However, those calls focus on the question of hijacker financing and omit the most interesting links between the 9/11 attacks and Saudi Arabia—links that implicate powerful people in the United States. Here are twenty examples.

  1. When two of the alleged 9/11 hijackers, Khalid Al-Mihdhar and Nawaf Al-Hazmi, came to the U.S. in January 2000, they immediately met with Omar Al-Bayoumi, a suspected Saudi spy and an employee of a Saudi aviation company. Al-Bayoumi, who was the target of FBI investigations in the two years before 9/11, became a good friend to the two 9/11 suspects, setting them up in an apartment and paying their rent.
  2. Al-Mihdhar and Al-Hazmi then moved in with a long-time FBI asset, Abdussattar Shaikh, who was said to be a teacher of the Saudi language. Shaikh allowed them to live in his home for at least seven months, later saying that he thought they were only Saudi students. In an unlikely coincidence, both Al-Bayoumi and Shaikh also knew Hani Hanjour, the alleged pilot of Flight 77. Although Shaikh was reported to be a retired professor at San Diego State University, the university had no records of him. He was then said to be a professor at American Commonwealth University but that turned out to be a phony institution. During the 9/11 investigations, the FBI refused to allow Shaikh to be interviewed or deposed. The FBI also tried to prevent the testimony of Shaikh’s FBI handler, which occurred only secretly at a later date. Despite having a very suspicious background, the FBI gave Shaikh $100,000 and closed his contract.
  3. Journalist Joseph Trento claimed that an unnamed former CIA officer, who worked in Saudi Arabia, told him that Alhazmi and Almihdhar were Saudi spies protected by U.S. authorities.
  4. After being appointed CIA Director in 1997, George Tenet began to cultivate close personal relationships with officials in Saudi Arabia. Tenet grew especially close to Prince Bandar, the Saudi ambassador to the United States. Bandar and Tenet often met at Bandar’s home near Washington. Tenet did not share information from those meetings with his own CIA officers who were handling Saudi issues at the agency. These facts are among the reasons to suspect that Tenet facilitated the crimes of 9/11.
  5. Bernard Kerik, the New York City police commissioner at the time of 9/11, spent three years working in Saudi Arabia in the 1970s. He then spent another three years in Saudi Arabia in the 1980s as the “chief investigator for the royal family.” It was Kerik who first told the public that explosives were not used at the World Trade Center (WTC) in a news conference. It was also his police department that was said to have discovered a passport that fell from one of the burning towers, providing dubious evidence identifying one of the alleged hijackers.
  6. After 9/11, former FBI director Louis Freeh, whose agency failed to stop Al Qaeda-attributed terrorism from 1993 to 2001, became the personal attorney for Tenet’s dubious cohort, Prince Bandar. Sometimes called “Bandar Bush” for his close relationship to the Bush family, Bandar was the Saudi intelligence director from 2005 to 2015.
  7. The company that designed the security system for the WTC complex, Kroll Associates, had strong connections to Saudi Arabia. For example, Kroll board member Raymond Mabus, now Secretary of the Navy, was the U.S. Ambassador to Saudi Arabia in the 1990s. Control of WTC security speaks to the question of how explosives could have been placed in the three tall buildings that weredemolished on 9/11.
  8. All four of the contractors that were involved in implementing Kroll’s security design for the WTC had done significant business in the Saudi kingdom. Stratesec, the company that installed the overall electronic security system at the WTC complex, had also managed security for Dulles airport, where Flight 77 took off, and for United Airlines, which owned two of the three other planes. For many reasons, the company’s managers should be primary suspects in the crimes of 9/11. Stratesec was in partnership with a large Saudi engineering and construction company to develop and conduct business in Saudi Arabia.
  9. Another interesting connection between Stratesec and Saudi Arabia was that, in the years leading up to 9/11, Stratesec held its annual shareholders’ meetings in an office that was leased by Saudi Arabia. This was an office in the Watergate Hotel occupied by the Saudi Embassy (run by Prince Bandar).
  10. The Bush and Bin Laden-financed Carlyle Group owned, through BDM International, the Vinnell Corporation, a mercenary operation that had extensive contracts and trained the Saudi Arabian National Guard. Several of Stratesec’s key employees, including its operating manager Barry McDaniel, came from BDM. In 1995, BDM’s Vinnell was one of the first targets of Al Qaeda, in Saudi Arabia.
  11. One of the two major contractors hired to manage the cleanup of debris at Ground Zero—Bovis Lend Lease—had previously built the Riyadh Olympic stadium in Saudi Arabia.
  12. The other primary cleanup company at Ground Zero—AMEC Construction—had just completed a $258 million refurbishment of Wedge 1 of the Pentagon, which is exactly where Flight 77 was said to impact that building. AMEC had a significant presence in Saudi Arabia for decades, working for the national oil company, Saudi Aramco.
  13. In the 1990s, Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), run by Dick Cheney’s protégé Duane Andrews, trained the Saudi Navy and instructed Saudi military personnel at its company headquarters in San Diego. SAIC had a greater impact on counterterrorism programs in the United States than any other non-government entity and it profited greatly from 9/11.
  14. While SAIC was training the Saudi Navy, the Carlyle/BDM subsidiary Vinnell Corporation was training the Saudi Arabian National Guard. Simultaneously, Booz Allen Hamilton was managing the Saudi Marine Corps and running the Saudi Armed Forces Staff College.
  15. Salomon Smith Barney (SSB), the company that occupied all but ten floors of WTC building 7, was taken over by Citigroup in 1998 after Citigroup was taken over by Saudi Prince Alwaleed, in a deal brokered by The Carlyle Group. Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney joined the advisory board for SSB just after Citigroup’s takeover and they only resigned in January 2001 to join the Bush Administration.
  16. The Saudi government was sued by thousands of 9/11 victim’s family members due to the suspicion that Saudi Arabia helped to finance Al Qaeda. The Saudis hired the law firm of Bush Administration insider James Baker to defend them in that lawsuit.
  17. The 9/11 families’ lawsuit against Saudi royals was thrown out on a technicality related to the ability to sue a foreign government and, later, the Obama Administration backed the Saudis during the appeal.
  18. The world’s leading insurance provider, Lloyd’s of London, filed a lawsuit alleging Saudi involvement in the 9/11 attacks. Lloyd’s dropped the lawsuit just days later without explanation.
  19. After 9/11, it became clear that Saudi officials were supporting terrorism. For example, in the case of a would-be “underwear bomber,” it was revealed that the suspect was working for the CIA and Saudi intelligence.
  20. Saudi Prince Bandar has been accused of coordinating an international ring of terrorism in his role as Saudi intelligence chief. From Egypt to Libya, and now in Syria, evidence suggests that Bandar Bush has led a network of terrorists around the globe, with U.S. support.

BandarTherefore it is not surprising that people who hear claims of Saudi involvement in 9/11 wonder why the discussion remains so limited and always avoids the glaring implications those claims should entail.

Now that the U.S. and Saudi Arabia have “reset” their rocky relationship, calls by U.S. leaders to release the “28 pages” may very well die down. Since the new Saudi King came to the U.S. a few weeks ago, the two governments have rediscovered that they are “close allies” and many new deals are in the works. It remains to be seen what cards U.S. and Saudi leaders will play in the ongoing game of terror and deception but discussions of hijacker financing will probably be left behind.

Kevin Ryan blogs at Dig Within.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Why Saudi Ties to 9/11 Mean U.S. Ties to 9/11

Putin Offers the US a Route to Sanity in the Middle East

September 30th, 2015 by Alexander Mercouris

As the UN General Assembly meets, and the world awaits anxiously Russia’s proposals for a solution to the Syrian conflict, it is important to keep in mind how we got into this position in the first place.

Before 2003 the Arab world was politically stable. The regimes that ruled the Arab world had all been in power for many years. Without exception they were repressive to varying degrees, were deeply conservative, and had a history of being allied to the US.

The progressive forces that in the 1950s and 1960s had been very strong in this region had — with US support — been repressed by the Arab regimes out of existence. This left Islam in its many manifestations as the only alternative to the regimes.

Press conference by President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin
© Sputnik/ Alexei Druzhinin

The crisis we now see in the Arab world is the result of the US’s deliberate policy of destabilising the Arab political system it had itself created in the 1960s and 1970s to destroy the progressive forces which because of their alignment with the USSR the US at that time considered the major threat to its control of the region.

This began in Iraq in 2003 when the US and Britain invaded and overthrew its government.

The US simultaneously announced its plan to overthrow the governments of Iran (which is not an Arab country) and Syria (the so-called “Axis of Evil”).

Following Israel’s defeat in a war in Lebanon in 2006, plans to overthrow the government of Syria began in earnest.

In 2009 the US supported protests in Iran aimed at overturning an election result in that country.

In the winter of 2011 protests caused two Arab leaders previously allied to the US, Ben Ali in Tunisia and Mubarak in Egypt, to fall in quick succession. In both cases, the US signalled its withdrawal of support, which was instrumental in causing them to fall.

Over the course of 2011 the US and its allies Britain and France exploited protests against the Libyan government, and misrepresented two UN Security Council Resolutions, to attack Libya and overthrow its government.

Over the course of 2011 the US also engineered the removal of the President of Yemen.

Lastly, during 2011 the US, following protests against the Syrian government, declared that government “illegitimate”, demanding the resignation of the country’s President.

Together with its allies the US repeatedly proposed to the Security Council Resolutions that would have cleared the way for a US attack on Syria. When these were blocked by Russian and Chinese vetoes, the US together with its allies and in cooperation with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Jordan and Turkey, supported a violent insurgency that sought the violent overthrow of the Syrian government by other means.

The consequence of these policies is that the entire region is now destabilised, Syria, Libya, Iraq and Yemen have collapsed into civil war, Egypt has experienced a military coup, and violent Islamic jihadists are on the rampage everywhere.

The US was not the sole agent in these events. In every case there were genuine popular grievances against the regimes. No one looking at the Arab world before 2003 would say its condition was satisfactory. It is wholly understandable and entirely legitimate that local people would want to change it.

The disaster is that the US manipulated this process to try to achieve a reordering of the Arab World in its own interests.

It appears to have convinced itself that the only thing that stood in the way of broader Arab recognition of its ally Israel was the same Arab dictatorships that in the 1960s and 1970s it had itself created.

Beyond that there seems to have been a kind of ideological messianism — a belief that Western style liberal democracy would everywhere prevail because it is “the future”, and that it is both the right and the duty of the US to facilitate this process.

US involvement however had the disastrous effect of militarising the whole process.

The governments of Egypt, Libya, Syria and Yemen were all open to negotiating with their opponents. Over the course of the wars in their countries the Libyan and Syrian governments repeatedly reached out to their opponents to look for a compromise.

That in both cases that failed is due to the US.

Having declared the governments of those countries “illegitimate” it rejected negotiations with them, insisting absurdly that they both go before negotiations could begin.

To have negotiated with governments the US had declared “illegitimate” would of course have been an admission that their removal was not inevitable, which was ideologically impossible.

The result was that negotiations were spurned, leading disastrously to war.

What made the consequences of this particularly toxic was that in the ideological vacuum created by the destruction in the Arab world of the progressive forces the US had itself sponsored, the only ones left to carry on the struggle against the regimes the US had declared “illegitimate” were the violent Islamic jihadists the US was supposed to be opposed to.

Since the survival of the Libyan and Syrian governments was for the US “a crime against history” — and an unforgivable act of lese-majeste against the “hyperpower” — the US however showed no hesitation in allying itself with these people, despite evidence of their unpopularity, their quite exceptional brutality, their pathological hostility to the West, their continuous recourse to terrorism, their physical destruction of ancient monuments, and the psychotic behaviour of many of their members — with undisputed evidence of cannibalismon the part of some of them.

In the ideological world view held by some people in the US, this was all forgivable as advancing the goal of the eventual “inevitable” pre-determined outcome: a liberal order in the Arab world.

The result is the rise of the Islamic State, civil wars across the Arab world, massive refugee flows to Europe, and more threats of terrorism.

It has fallen to Russia to try to restore sanity by calling for the blindingly obvious: genuine negotiations without pre-conditions between the Syrian parties to end the conflict, and a united front by the entire world community to fight terrorism and the Islamic State.

There is no doubt this call commands overwhelming support — including from the US public, which has no interest in the utopian obsessions of the US’s own ideologues.

The churlish reaction to this call of the US government shows however what powerful sway these ideologues still have.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Putin Offers the US a Route to Sanity in the Middle East

The word genocide comes to mind. (Weapons expert Dai Williams, letter to Tony Blair warning of consequences of Iraq action, 13th October 2002.)

On Saturday, 26th September 2015 Ahmed Mahdi Al Faqi was arrested and delivered to the International Criminal Court at The Hague. He is charged with war crimes, the deliberate destruction of religious or historical monuments in Mali and especially the irreplaceable ancient shrines of Timbuktu, in 2012.

The ICC’s Chief Prosecutor, Fatou Nesouda described the destruction in Timbuktu as: “a callous assault on the dignity and identity of entire populations and their religious and historical roots.” (1) Timbuktu city is a UNESCO World Heritage Site. During the 16th and 17th Centuries this academic and cultural beacon boasted one hundred and eighty schools and universities, drawing students and scholars from across the Muslim world. “The people of Mali deserve justice for the attacks against their cities, their beliefs and their communities”, states Nesouda. ICC Double Standards? On the same day as Al Faqi’s arrest a petition to the British Parliament (2) was released to: “Arrest Tony Blair for war crimes in the Middle East and for misleading the public.”

British Citizens and British Residents can sign the petition (click the above image)

Britain is a signatory to the one hundred and twenty three nation-backed ICC thus the petition’s aims are possible. Blair indeed blatantly misled the public and the Parliament he headed. The disinformation was breathtaking and the result also: “a callous assault on the dignity and identity of entire populations and their religious and historical roots.” The people of Iraq too deserve: “justice for the attacks against their cities, their beliefs and their communities.” On 24thSeptember 2002 Blair addressed Parliament. He began:

“Today we published a 50-page dossier detailing the history of Iraq’s WMD, its breach of UN resolutions and the current attempts to rebuild the illegal WMD programme.”(3)

It was, broadly, fifty pages of obfuscations, untruths and economies with the truth.For instance he stated that the UN weapons Inspectors met with “obstruction” e.g:

“ … finally in late 1998, the UN team were forced to withdraw. As the dossier sets out, we estimate on the basis of the UN’s work that there were: up to 360 tonnes of bulk chemical warfare agents, including one and a half tonnes of VX nerve agent; up to 3,000 tonnes of precursor chemicals; growth media sufficient to produce 26,000 litres of anthrax spores; and over 30,000 special munitions for delivery of chemical and biological agents … All of this was missing or unaccounted for.”

Of course no such chemical and biological agents existed – and in 1998 the UN Inspectors had fled to the safety of Bahrain on the orders of Richard Butler, who then headed the team, having been tipped off that the US and UK were to bomb Iraq again, illegally, in time for Christmas. To clarify “obstruction.” As one who was in Iraq numerous times during the UN weapons inspectors tenures and who witnessed their arrogant, discourteous, uncivil behavior towards Iraqis staggering financially under the weight of the crippling embargo. Iraq was however charged for their accommodation, vehicles, living expenses, salaries. “Obstruction” became a sick game.

Obstructions” were noted and reported to the UN as non-co-operation on behalf of the Iraqi authorities, building a case for further bombing or invasion. These almost invariably occured when the weapons inspectors turned up unannounced, out of hours so the facility to be inspected was, naturally, deserted. They would drive away and note it as an obstruction – or if they called the owner or manager and he had to get dressed and drive for an hour to get there to let them in, that too was an “obstruction.

Other “obstructions” would be to turn up on Friday, the Sabbath, or on public holidays, when only security guards were there. They needed the permission of their boss to allow any one in to the facility. As they made the telephone call for that permission, it was noted as an “obstruction.” There are uncounted other examples of the devious wickedness perpetrated in the name of the UN. The fifty page dossier, Blair assured, confirmed:

“ (Saddam Hussein’s) WMD programme is active, detailed and growing. The policy of containment is not working. The WMD programme is not shut down. It is up and running.” It was: “ … important we explain our concerns over Saddam to the British people …”

Moreover:

“ … he has existing and active military plans for the use of chemical and biological weapons, which could be activated within 45 minutes …”

Destroyed munitions plants had been rebuilt and:

“ … In addition, we know Saddam has been trying to buy significant quantities of uranium from Africa …”

The all was a pack of lies, the latter claim comprehensively trashed by Ambassador Joseph Wilson. (4) Iraq has vast amounts of uranium, discovered, marked and mapped by the British in the 1950s and had they been developing a weapons programme, had no need to buy it from anywhere. Saddam Hussein had in fact closed down his nuclear programme shortly after the 1991 attack. (5) As for the rebuilt munitions plants, a number of them were visited by former UN Under Secretary General, Hans von Sponeck and myself as these stories circulated, they remained in ruins or trashed, devoured by overgrown undergrowth and deserted. Saddam Hussein, said Blair, could: “could begin a conflict” of which: “ the consequences” could: “engulf the whole world.” What an irony that the consequences of US and UK actions in Iraq and throughout the region in their demented “Crusade” indeed now endangers all the Middle East, North Africa and drawn in to combat the madness are countries as far away as Australia, Canada and Europe. Much of the world. Three weeks after Blair’s fantasy assurances to Parliament, weapons research expert Dai Williams wrote to him (6) warning of the illegalities of the weapons the UK and US coalition would use: They would be:

“ … directly in contravention of Articles 35 and 55 of the 1st Protocol additional to the Geneva Conventions. They are, put simply, weapons of indiscriminate effect.”

The letter, headed:

“Use of Uranium weapons in Afghanistan and Iraq: 
Hazards for civilians and ground forces”, begins: “In recent weeks I have been alarmed by your support for US plans to launch another major military offensive on Iraq, ostensibly to destroy Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.”

Williams makes clear it will be the UK and US who will be using weapons of mass and indiscriminate destruction: “These weapons are large radiological bombs.” “Last week I was advised of US Patent Number 6,389,977 (1997) for a ‘shrouded aerial bomb.’ This is the patent for a series of guided weapons using the upgraded BLU-109/B warhead. Claim 5 of this patent states:

The shrouded aerial bomb as claimed in Claim 1, wherein the penetrating body is formed of depleted uranium. This and 6 other US patents verify the development of guided weapons and sub-munitions with Uranium warheads … An additional problem is emerging from my recent investigations. It seems likely that US arms manufacturers may be using standard, not depleted uranium in new weapons i.e. Uranium metal with the same isotopic mix as natural uranium (99.3% U238, 0.7% U235). “ The full Report was attached to the letter. This would explain why researchers in Hungary and Greece detected increased airborne Uranium dust soon after the Balkans bombing began, but that it appeared to be natural, not depleted uranium … Independent researchers are now alert to this possibility. I hope Ministry of Defence staff are also considering it. Unfortunately standard uranium is more radioactive than depleted uranium.

Depleted uranium has a cancer inducing, birth deforming “half-life” of 4.5 Billion years. Crimes against humanity do not come bigger. In context, in 1991, the UK Atomic Energy Authority warned the government of the day regarding the Iraq attack that: “If fifty tonnes” of the residual radioactive dust remained “in the region” from the bombing there would be “half a million extra cancer deaths by the end of the century” ie 2000. Their prediction was an understatement. Williams issued a stark warning:

I guess that the UK Storm Shadow cruise missile, also suspected of using Uranium components, has been tested in Afghanistan and will be operational in a new attack on Iraq. Other known or suspected Uranium weapons not needed in Afghanistan (e.g. anti-tank systems) will also be used in large quantities in Iraq. The implication is that at least 1,500 tons of Uranium weapons will be used to prosecute US war plans in Iraq, greatly increasing existing Uranium contamination from 1991 and jeopordising allied troops and Iraqi civilians alike. Can you justify using known weapons of indiscriminate effect to defeat supposed weapons of mass destruction? The US has scant regard for international law in its military operations. What is your Government’s view on knowingly using weapons of indiscriminate effect in Iraq? This letter puts you on notice of that issue. UK forces are accountable to you. The use of such weapons contravening international law must be a political, not military decision, preferably decided by Parliament.

The letter warns:

Regardless of your obligations under international law … I suggest you have moral obligations in this matter. How will you justify risking the slow death of tens of thousands of people whose lives will be irreversibly affected by Uranium contamination? The word genocide comes to mind. This may not concern President Bush. I hope it will concern you, your Cabinet and all MPs asked to support your plans now you are alerted to the latest evidence about Uranium weapons.

Williams concludes:

With respect Prime Minister I suggest you need a lot more facts before you commit more UK troops to a new war in Iraq. At this time you face being drawn by the Pentagon and US Government into the greatest military scandal since Agent Orange in Vietnam.

Since Williams prophetic words former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has declared the Iraq decimation illegal stating: “I have indicated it is not in conformity with the UN Charter, from our point of view, and from the Charter point of view it was illegal.” (7) The UN’s former Chief weapons Inspector, Hans Blix has echoed this view, telling the UK Iraq Inquiry: “I am of the firm view that it was an illegal war. There can be cases where it is doubtful, maybe it was permissible to go to war, but Iraq was, in my view, not one of those.” (8) Numerous international law experts concur, as have many legally led public Inquiries as the 2011 Kuala Lumpur War Crime Tribunal, a seven Member panel chaired by former Malaysian Federal Court Judge, Abdul Kadir Sulaiman.

The five panel tribunal unanimously decided that the former US and British leaders had committed crimes against peace and humanity, and also violated international law when they ordered the invasion of Iraq in March 2003. (9)

UNESCO has described the destruction and pillage of Iraq “cultural cleansing.” If a man is deemed a war criminal for the terrible destruction of history in Mali is and delivered to the ICC, Bush and Blair – whose actions destroyed virtually the whole of Iraq, a swathe of it’s history and set in train the ongoing destruction, indeed genocide, should be treated no differently. Tony Blair’s assertions in Parliament in 2002 were integral in the excuse for the illegal invasion and ongoing bloodbath now also engulfing Syria. If you care for the law, for humanity, if eligible, please sign the petition.

Notes

  1. http://www.mail.com/int/news/europe/3846872-suspect-destruction-timbuktu-mausoleums-to-icc.html#.1258-stage-hero1-1
  2. https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/108495
  3. http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2002/sep/24/foreignpolicy.houseofcommons
  4. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/06/opinion/what-i-didn-t-find-in-africa.html?pagewanted=all
  5. http://www.iraqsnuclearmirage.com/index_en.php
  6. http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/JohnJudge/linkscopy/DUuseInIraq.html
  7. http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=11953&#.VgermUtgw1h
  8. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-10770239
  9. http://www.globalresearch.ca/war-crimes-tribunal-finds-bush-and-blair-guilty/5478367
  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Arrest Tony Blair for War Crimes and Genocide, Britain is A Signatory of the ICC

Obama’s “Pivot to Asia” NATO-Like Project

September 30th, 2015 by Andrew Korybko

The US’ Pivot to Asia (P2A) is obviously aimed against China, and Washington’s ultimate plan has always been to assemble a coalition of countries that can contain the global supergiant. As the Pivot enters into its fourth year soon, the contours of the Chinese Containment Coalition (CCC) are beginning to take shape, and it’s become evident that it’s going to be centered on the Philippines.

The island chain’s geopolitical connectivity potential can easily be harnessed to link together the CCC’s various players, and it’s also subservient enough to the US to the degree that it has ignored the exceptionally dangerous consequences of potentially hosting multilateral forward operating bases against China. As apocalyptic as the US’ end game scenario may be for regional multipolarity, it’s not at all assured to succeed, as there are quite a few contingencies that could develop between all of its assorted partners in preventing them from linking up in the Philippines and actualizing the Asian NATO. The article is thus divided into two parts; the first one describes the forecasted composition of the Asian NATO and explains the bilateral relationships that make it possible, while the second one investigates the multitude of factors that could impede its formation and/or lead to its eventual unravelling.

The Asian NATO

Prior to commencing the study, one must first understand exactly what is meant by the “Asian NATO”. The author explored the genesis of this concept in his earlier work on how The US Is Juggling Chaos And Coordination To Contain China, and it boils down to formalizing the CCC in order to simultaneously split ASEAN between anti-Chinese states (like the Philippines) and those that behave pragmatically towards it (like Cambodia), and create a formalized mechanism for the US to coordinate further anti-Chinese moves in the region. The Philippines are the logical staging ground for this endeavor owing to its de-facto mutual defense guarantee with the US and the overlapping strategic partnerships that it has with Japan and soon Vietnam (which are its first and second respectively, not counting the ‘special relationship’ with its former American colonizer).

Baits and Lures

The overall idea is for the island chain to act as a geographic facilitator in linking together both of its strategic partners under American guidance in order to enhance their combined ability to coordinate anti-Chinese actions in the East and South China island disputes. Additionally, because of the Philippines own spat with China, it could also be used as a ‘sacrificial lamb’ in provoking a small-scale military engagement with China (one in which the US would purposely refrain from participating in) in order to test the People’s Liberation Army-Navy’s responses and assist with the crafting of more effective anti-Chinese tactical maneuvers by the Asian NATO. Or, in a variation of this scenario, it could become the Asian application of the Reverse Brzezinski policy of luring China into a strategic military trap by using its small and provocative neighboring maritime state as bait. Unlike Ukraine, which has no formalized mutual defense relationship with the US, the Philippines could call upon the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement in order to turn even the tiniest exchange of fire into a global hot spot of brinksmanship between the US and China, thus giving it a freakishly disproportionate weight in international affairs.

The ‘Backwards L’

Japan:

The function of a Japan-Philippines-Vietnam axis is to create a ‘backwards L’ of military containment in order to ‘box’ China inside mainland Asia, with the Philippines being the fulcrum of this entity. Japan is the most active Lead From Behind proponent of this policy, taking the initiative (under American instruction) to authorize both the sales of weapons and the deployment of troops abroad. Considering the strategic partnership between them and how each has their own island disputes with China, it’s logical to conclude that Japan will seek to make the Philippines the central focus of both anti-Chinese policy manifestations. The Diplomat reported at the end of June that this certainly seems to be in the cards, with Tokyo preparing to sell Manilla a slew of naval and air units in exchange for a “Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA)” that could allow it to deploy its first foreign forces since World War II. One should also be reminded that both sides held their second-ever naval drills this summer together with the US, showing that there’s actual substance to their strategic partnership and that it’s not just rhetorically based.

Vietnam:

paracel_islands_spratly_islands_disputed_claims_by_china_philippines_vietnam_malaysia_bruneiThe other end of the ‘backwards L’, Vietnam, is also increasing its interactions with the Philippines, as the slated strategic partnership attests. Last May, military units from the two sides symbolically enjoyed a game of football together on one of the South China Sea’s disputed islands (the second time they have done so), showing that each of them is serious about working together to confront China in this region. The aforecited article also details some of the bilateral military cooperation between both sides, with each country’s navy calling port at the other and even holding informal discussions on setting up joint patrols in the area. It’s highly predicted that the signing of a strategic partnership between them will lead to an acceleration of military cooperation, and furthermore, will even put Vietnam and Japan’s militaries into direct contact with the other via the Philippines’ geographic intermediary function, which also accomplishes a contingent goal of the US’ P2A by having both CCC anchors enhance their full spectrum bilateral relations (especially in the military field).

Incorporating South Korea

In essence, there are actually two CCC axes that the US is building and wants to unite, and these are the ones between Vietnam-The Philippines (already discussed) and Japan-South Korea. To say a few words about the latter, it’s still not entirely certain that Seoul will commit to joining the CCC. For example, even though it’s part of a trilateral information sharing mechanism between it, Japan, and the US ostensibly against North Korea (which could realistically be turned against China in the future), it’s also being wooed by China through the recently inked Free Trade Agreement and has been ambivalent about hosting the US’ THAAD “missile defense” units (potentially even going it alone to produce its own domestic version instead).

Still, this hasn’t halted the country’s interest in cooperating with the Philippines, the magnetic center of geopolitical attraction to all members of the CCC community. The country’s Defense Minister visitedthe island nation earlier this month to discuss future military collaboration (as of now, just weapons sales and technical assistance), but such a big step could also help further last year’s proposal for the two countries to enter into a strategic partnership with one another. While South Korea doesn’t have any island disputes with China and behaves moderately friendly towards it in a military sense (not counting the anti-Chinese agenda of the thousands of US troops that are based there), if it got caught up in the CCC’s intrigue inside the Philippines, bilateral relations could certainly suffer as a result of the heightened and warranted suspicions that China would inevitably have towards its maritime neighbor.

With or without South Korea’s incorporation (which is still questionable), however, the central axis of Japan-Philippines-Vietnam still represents a formidable threat to China, but the auxiliary participation of the peninsular state would definitely contribute to its enhanced effectiveness, and it’s worthy to monitor any forthcoming decisions that its leadership takes in this regard.

The Greater CCC

India:

On the topic of auxiliary members in the CCC, one must inevitably consider India’s inclusion and the anticipated role that Australia will also play. Looking at the first, New Delhi under Prime Minister Modi has been increasingly assertive of its foreign interests, and this includes the evolution of its “Look East” policy to one of “Act East”. One of the highlights of the US’ new National Security Strategy is to assist India in the application of this new policy, with the understood overtone that it’ll be directed against China in Southeast Asia and the South China Sea. As India finally grows out of its South Asian neighborhood and begins exploring its role in the global context, it’s entirely possible that it could take on the role of anti-Chinese vanguard if certain American-hoped-for conditions are met, specifically the intensification of Indian-Filipino military relations that seem to be directed against China. If the Philippines go as far as establishing a strategic partnership with India that draws the country into contact with the nascent Asian NATO that’s forming there, then it would confirm Beijing’s suspicions that India does in fact intend to challenge it in the region, likely on the US’ Lead From Behind behalf.

Australia:

The second auxiliary anchor, Australia, has an entirely self-interested reason to get involved, and this is to counter its regional Indonesian rival and open up a second front of pressure that could possibly be applied against it in the future. The two countries have been competing with one another for some time, and Australia bases all of its regional policies around the issue of how they relate to this rivalry. Thus, the twin military exercises that it plans to hold with the Philippines this year (built on the basis of a 1995 defense cooperation memorandum) aren’t so much directed against China as they are against Indonesia, at least in Australia’s strategic calculations. The island-continent just signed a free trade agreement with China earlier this summer, so it would be entirely schizophrenic for it to totally turn against its largest economic partner at this moment. Rather, it’s paying superficial homage to the US’ CCC in order to please its ‘big brother’ while simultaneously maneuvering itself into a more beneficial position vis-à-vis Indonesia, which incidentally, also satisfies another American goal pertaining to the P2A.

US marines take part in a military exercise with Philippines troops in north Manila, April 2014

US marines take part in a military exercise with Philippines troops in north Manila, April 2014

To explain, the US wants to ensure that Indonesia does not become too pragmatically friendly in its relations with China, preferring instead for the country to remain the ‘Asian Yugoslavia’ as long as possible in the context of this New Cold War. To prevent Indonesia from acting out of line with American grand strategic interests, the US is using Australia to ‘box’ the country in, following the ‘backwards L’ template that it’s directed against China.

Australian-Filipino military cooperation is the northern point of this construction, with the fulcrum being Australia’s political influence over former colony and LNG-rich Papua New Guinea and the de-facto protectorate that it’ll likely form over Bougainville Island after the mineral-rich province predictably votes for independence sometime before the referendum scheduled by 2020. Pertaining to Papua New Guinea’s LNG potential, between Total and Exxon’s investments, it has the capability of producing 13 million tons of LNG per year, or about 1/6 the output of Qatar, and about Bougainville, if it restarts operation of the world’s largest copper mine in Panguna and returnsoperating rights to Australian mining giant Rio Tinto, then Canberra would inevitably gain a strategic foothold over its government.

Concurrent to its influence on the eastern part of the New Guinea island and its surroundings, Australia could also become a de-facto state sponsor of the West Papua independence movement (“Indonesia’s Katanga” in terms of its mineral wealth), which while havingstrong arguments in its favor and a lengthy list of documented and legitimate grievances, could see its cause hijacked by abroad for geopolitical ends and marketed as an “Asian Darfur”.

Rounding out the ‘backwards L’ of Indonesian containment, over 1,000 US Marines are now routinely rotated out of the North Australian city of Darwin, thus adding a third lever of external pressure against the archipelago’s authorities. If one adds in the US’ regime change attempt in Malaysia (meticulouslyexposed by Tony Cartalucci), then an actual containment square emerges, whereby the country is faced with potentially hostile elements in its northwest (a Color Revolution government in Malaysia), northeast (the CCC/Asian NATO that could also turn against Indonesia), southeast (foreign influence over the Papuas), and southwest (American Marines in Darwin, Australian control over Christmas and Cocos Islands and American military interest there). Therefore, it’s becoming apparent that the containment of Indonesia is inseparable from the containment of China, as the former is entering into effect via moves euphemistically made in advancement of the latter, and this underreported element of the P2A certainly deserves further analytical attention from other researchers.

To be continued…

Andrew Korybko is the American political commentator currently working for the Sputnik agency.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Obama’s “Pivot to Asia” NATO-Like Project

Obama’s “Pivot to Asia” NATO-Like Project

September 30th, 2015 by Andrew Korybko

The US’ Pivot to Asia (P2A) is obviously aimed against China, and Washington’s ultimate plan has always been to assemble a coalition of countries that can contain the global supergiant. As the Pivot enters into its fourth year soon, the contours of the Chinese Containment Coalition (CCC) are beginning to take shape, and it’s become evident that it’s going to be centered on the Philippines.

The island chain’s geopolitical connectivity potential can easily be harnessed to link together the CCC’s various players, and it’s also subservient enough to the US to the degree that it has ignored the exceptionally dangerous consequences of potentially hosting multilateral forward operating bases against China. As apocalyptic as the US’ end game scenario may be for regional multipolarity, it’s not at all assured to succeed, as there are quite a few contingencies that could develop between all of its assorted partners in preventing them from linking up in the Philippines and actualizing the Asian NATO. The article is thus divided into two parts; the first one describes the forecasted composition of the Asian NATO and explains the bilateral relationships that make it possible, while the second one investigates the multitude of factors that could impede its formation and/or lead to its eventual unravelling.

The Asian NATO

Prior to commencing the study, one must first understand exactly what is meant by the “Asian NATO”. The author explored the genesis of this concept in his earlier work on how The US Is Juggling Chaos And Coordination To Contain China, and it boils down to formalizing the CCC in order to simultaneously split ASEAN between anti-Chinese states (like the Philippines) and those that behave pragmatically towards it (like Cambodia), and create a formalized mechanism for the US to coordinate further anti-Chinese moves in the region. The Philippines are the logical staging ground for this endeavor owing to its de-facto mutual defense guarantee with the US and the overlapping strategic partnerships that it has with Japan and soon Vietnam (which are its first and second respectively, not counting the ‘special relationship’ with its former American colonizer).

Baits and Lures

The overall idea is for the island chain to act as a geographic facilitator in linking together both of its strategic partners under American guidance in order to enhance their combined ability to coordinate anti-Chinese actions in the East and South China island disputes. Additionally, because of the Philippines own spat with China, it could also be used as a ‘sacrificial lamb’ in provoking a small-scale military engagement with China (one in which the US would purposely refrain from participating in) in order to test the People’s Liberation Army-Navy’s responses and assist with the crafting of more effective anti-Chinese tactical maneuvers by the Asian NATO. Or, in a variation of this scenario, it could become the Asian application of the Reverse Brzezinski policy of luring China into a strategic military trap by using its small and provocative neighboring maritime state as bait. Unlike Ukraine, which has no formalized mutual defense relationship with the US, the Philippines could call upon the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement in order to turn even the tiniest exchange of fire into a global hot spot of brinksmanship between the US and China, thus giving it a freakishly disproportionate weight in international affairs.

The ‘Backwards L’

Japan:

The function of a Japan-Philippines-Vietnam axis is to create a ‘backwards L’ of military containment in order to ‘box’ China inside mainland Asia, with the Philippines being the fulcrum of this entity. Japan is the most active Lead From Behind proponent of this policy, taking the initiative (under American instruction) to authorize both the sales of weapons and the deployment of troops abroad. Considering the strategic partnership between them and how each has their own island disputes with China, it’s logical to conclude that Japan will seek to make the Philippines the central focus of both anti-Chinese policy manifestations. The Diplomat reported at the end of June that this certainly seems to be in the cards, with Tokyo preparing to sell Manilla a slew of naval and air units in exchange for a “Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA)” that could allow it to deploy its first foreign forces since World War II. One should also be reminded that both sides held their second-ever naval drills this summer together with the US, showing that there’s actual substance to their strategic partnership and that it’s not just rhetorically based.

Vietnam:

paracel_islands_spratly_islands_disputed_claims_by_china_philippines_vietnam_malaysia_bruneiThe other end of the ‘backwards L’, Vietnam, is also increasing its interactions with the Philippines, as the slated strategic partnership attests. Last May, military units from the two sides symbolically enjoyed a game of football together on one of the South China Sea’s disputed islands (the second time they have done so), showing that each of them is serious about working together to confront China in this region. The aforecited article also details some of the bilateral military cooperation between both sides, with each country’s navy calling port at the other and even holding informal discussions on setting up joint patrols in the area. It’s highly predicted that the signing of a strategic partnership between them will lead to an acceleration of military cooperation, and furthermore, will even put Vietnam and Japan’s militaries into direct contact with the other via the Philippines’ geographic intermediary function, which also accomplishes a contingent goal of the US’ P2A by having both CCC anchors enhance their full spectrum bilateral relations (especially in the military field).

Incorporating South Korea

In essence, there are actually two CCC axes that the US is building and wants to unite, and these are the ones between Vietnam-The Philippines (already discussed) and Japan-South Korea. To say a few words about the latter, it’s still not entirely certain that Seoul will commit to joining the CCC. For example, even though it’s part of a trilateral information sharing mechanism between it, Japan, and the US ostensibly against North Korea (which could realistically be turned against China in the future), it’s also being wooed by China through the recently inked Free Trade Agreement and has been ambivalent about hosting the US’ THAAD “missile defense” units (potentially even going it alone to produce its own domestic version instead).

Still, this hasn’t halted the country’s interest in cooperating with the Philippines, the magnetic center of geopolitical attraction to all members of the CCC community. The country’s Defense Minister visitedthe island nation earlier this month to discuss future military collaboration (as of now, just weapons sales and technical assistance), but such a big step could also help further last year’s proposal for the two countries to enter into a strategic partnership with one another. While South Korea doesn’t have any island disputes with China and behaves moderately friendly towards it in a military sense (not counting the anti-Chinese agenda of the thousands of US troops that are based there), if it got caught up in the CCC’s intrigue inside the Philippines, bilateral relations could certainly suffer as a result of the heightened and warranted suspicions that China would inevitably have towards its maritime neighbor.

With or without South Korea’s incorporation (which is still questionable), however, the central axis of Japan-Philippines-Vietnam still represents a formidable threat to China, but the auxiliary participation of the peninsular state would definitely contribute to its enhanced effectiveness, and it’s worthy to monitor any forthcoming decisions that its leadership takes in this regard.

The Greater CCC

India:

On the topic of auxiliary members in the CCC, one must inevitably consider India’s inclusion and the anticipated role that Australia will also play. Looking at the first, New Delhi under Prime Minister Modi has been increasingly assertive of its foreign interests, and this includes the evolution of its “Look East” policy to one of “Act East”. One of the highlights of the US’ new National Security Strategy is to assist India in the application of this new policy, with the understood overtone that it’ll be directed against China in Southeast Asia and the South China Sea. As India finally grows out of its South Asian neighborhood and begins exploring its role in the global context, it’s entirely possible that it could take on the role of anti-Chinese vanguard if certain American-hoped-for conditions are met, specifically the intensification of Indian-Filipino military relations that seem to be directed against China. If the Philippines go as far as establishing a strategic partnership with India that draws the country into contact with the nascent Asian NATO that’s forming there, then it would confirm Beijing’s suspicions that India does in fact intend to challenge it in the region, likely on the US’ Lead From Behind behalf.

Australia:

The second auxiliary anchor, Australia, has an entirely self-interested reason to get involved, and this is to counter its regional Indonesian rival and open up a second front of pressure that could possibly be applied against it in the future. The two countries have been competing with one another for some time, and Australia bases all of its regional policies around the issue of how they relate to this rivalry. Thus, the twin military exercises that it plans to hold with the Philippines this year (built on the basis of a 1995 defense cooperation memorandum) aren’t so much directed against China as they are against Indonesia, at least in Australia’s strategic calculations. The island-continent just signed a free trade agreement with China earlier this summer, so it would be entirely schizophrenic for it to totally turn against its largest economic partner at this moment. Rather, it’s paying superficial homage to the US’ CCC in order to please its ‘big brother’ while simultaneously maneuvering itself into a more beneficial position vis-à-vis Indonesia, which incidentally, also satisfies another American goal pertaining to the P2A.

US marines take part in a military exercise with Philippines troops in north Manila, April 2014

US marines take part in a military exercise with Philippines troops in north Manila, April 2014

To explain, the US wants to ensure that Indonesia does not become too pragmatically friendly in its relations with China, preferring instead for the country to remain the ‘Asian Yugoslavia’ as long as possible in the context of this New Cold War. To prevent Indonesia from acting out of line with American grand strategic interests, the US is using Australia to ‘box’ the country in, following the ‘backwards L’ template that it’s directed against China.

Australian-Filipino military cooperation is the northern point of this construction, with the fulcrum being Australia’s political influence over former colony and LNG-rich Papua New Guinea and the de-facto protectorate that it’ll likely form over Bougainville Island after the mineral-rich province predictably votes for independence sometime before the referendum scheduled by 2020. Pertaining to Papua New Guinea’s LNG potential, between Total and Exxon’s investments, it has the capability of producing 13 million tons of LNG per year, or about 1/6 the output of Qatar, and about Bougainville, if it restarts operation of the world’s largest copper mine in Panguna and returnsoperating rights to Australian mining giant Rio Tinto, then Canberra would inevitably gain a strategic foothold over its government.

Concurrent to its influence on the eastern part of the New Guinea island and its surroundings, Australia could also become a de-facto state sponsor of the West Papua independence movement (“Indonesia’s Katanga” in terms of its mineral wealth), which while havingstrong arguments in its favor and a lengthy list of documented and legitimate grievances, could see its cause hijacked by abroad for geopolitical ends and marketed as an “Asian Darfur”.

Rounding out the ‘backwards L’ of Indonesian containment, over 1,000 US Marines are now routinely rotated out of the North Australian city of Darwin, thus adding a third lever of external pressure against the archipelago’s authorities. If one adds in the US’ regime change attempt in Malaysia (meticulouslyexposed by Tony Cartalucci), then an actual containment square emerges, whereby the country is faced with potentially hostile elements in its northwest (a Color Revolution government in Malaysia), northeast (the CCC/Asian NATO that could also turn against Indonesia), southeast (foreign influence over the Papuas), and southwest (American Marines in Darwin, Australian control over Christmas and Cocos Islands and American military interest there). Therefore, it’s becoming apparent that the containment of Indonesia is inseparable from the containment of China, as the former is entering into effect via moves euphemistically made in advancement of the latter, and this underreported element of the P2A certainly deserves further analytical attention from other researchers.

To be continued…

Andrew Korybko is the American political commentator currently working for the Sputnik agency.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Obama’s “Pivot to Asia” NATO-Like Project

Jousting Over Syria: Obama and Putin at the UN

September 30th, 2015 by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

President Barack Obama of the United States and President Vladimir Putin of Russia displayed, in various shades, facets of world power when they did battle at the United Nations yesterday. At the 70th annual session of the United Nations General Assembly, Syria loomed like an ominous hulk of concern.

It had to, radiating as it does regional and now international security concerns. The EU is in retreat, imposing controls on refugee flows, raising the fence and placing razor wire.

States outside the EU are themselves under domestic pressure to receive refugees, and have done so with varying degrees of constipated reluctance. Having cited the need for a comprehensive, global effort to deal with the largest refugee crisis since the Second World War, Obama avoided noting that his own administration had baulked at the subject of leading the way. To date, there is the smallest of commitments to resettle 10,000 Syrians refugees. Organisations such as Human Rights First advocate an increase of this number by ten times.[1]

Obama’s address was a sanctimonious revelation of US intent and power. The mask of decency was off. The US president decided to describe his evident distaste of Putin’s Ukrainian approach, citing the annexation of Crimea as a violation of the “international order”. This should have been far better described as disorder with a persistently stubborn hegemon using liberalism in the manner of a sexually transmitted disease.

Having thrown some dirt at the Putin train of thought, he then suggested that, “The United States is prepared to work with any nation, including Russia and Iran, to resolve the conflict.” Then came the imperialist punch line. “But we must recognise that there cannot be, after so much bloodshed, so much carnage, a return to the prewar status quo.” There would be a “transition” phase in Syrian politics, one that would entail the eventual removal of Assad. (Does US foreign policy ever “ease” leaders out, as opposed to pushing them?)

The not so ugly secret here is that the Obama administration has no choice in the matter, needing to involve Russia and Iran in any lasting security arrangement in the matter. The playground of Realpolitik demands it. The stumbling block here is one of regime change, which in Washington’s pathological tendency: remove what supposedly does not conform to the US laundry list of rampant markets, corporate elites and compliant technocrats.

Obama’s suggestions are also a recipe for chaos, an invitation to further mayhem cloaked by the veil of democratic reform and social change. Cynics of the effects of American policy would themselves suggest that, be it through design or stumbling, such efforts are, in fact, beneficial to the efforts of ISIS. The last thing the latter wish is for an Assad-governed Syria to continue.

Creating a vicious vacuum, one that would happen in any regime replacement, would invariably be a boon for the Islamic State, allowing them to further consolidate its pompously vicious caliphate. There would be an even more dramatic disequilibrium of violence. Hence the insistence by Putin in his address, and talks with Obama, that Assad is an indispensable feature to prevent any Islamist advance. “We think it is an enormous mistake to refuse to cooperate with the Syrian government and its armed forces, who are valiantly fighting terrorism face to face.”

This gave Putin room to remind Obama what US policy had actually achieved in the Middle East since 2003. There was that largest of black spots, Iraq, and the removal of Saddam Hussein which ruptured the Sunni-Shiite divide. Then came the overthrow of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi in Libya, releasing the fundamentalist drive in North Africa. The latter case has proven particularly relevant now, given the migration routes that sprung up from a porous, semi-anarchic state run by an assortment of radical groups.

Such publications as the New York Times have decided to read the Kremlin’s ambitions in the area as pseudo-imperial, a standard reflex that bores as much as it irritates. “For the Kremlin [a broad coalition against the Islamic State] means restoring enough stability in Syria to win acceptance of an expanded role for Russia in the Middle East – not to speak of its expanded military presence.”[2] The only basis for this reading is the recent Russian effort to move military assets to an airfield near Latakia in Syria.

Putin’s suggestions for a united front utilising the Syrian government have also been fobbed off by the Western commentariat. Andrew S. Weiss, vice president for studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, is dismissive over the Putin “road map” on Syria, comprising what he sees as “a fuzzy concept of a grand coalition to fight terrorism arm in arm with Bashar al-Assad, the very man the Americans say is the source of the problem.”

Weiss’s reading is typically in search of clarity where there is none to be had. His historical reading on coalitions when made for the purpose of defence seems sketchy – most, except those initiated in pseudo-vassalage and deepest insecurity, tend to be fuzzy, tactical combines. They shift, transform and crumble when needed.With all that background scuffling taking place, some common ground could be found. Putin placed the prospect of bombing ISIS targets on the table. But importantly, he has never shied away from his understanding that Assad, like him or loathe him, stabilises. Tyrannies serve historical purposes in that sense, cruel as they may be. Eventual peaceful change will have to come from within.

The hegemomic, self-allocated mandate for Washington, on the other hand, is muscular, indecent and ultimately riddled with miscalculation. Discounting Syrian sovereignty through a collective loosely described as the free world is hardly a recipe for righting the wrongs in Syria.

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: [email protected]

Notes

[1] http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/press-release/president-obama-highlights-refugee-crisis-government-repression-during-un-address#.Vglu6o2lTnY.twitter

[2] http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/29/world/middleeast/obama-and-putin-clash-at-un-over-syria-crisis.html?_r=0

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Jousting Over Syria: Obama and Putin at the UN

In his Orwellian September 28, 2015 speech to the United Nations, President Obama said that if democracy had existed in Syria, there never would have been a revolt against Assad. By that, he meant ISIL. Where there is democracy, he said, there is no violence or revolution.

This was his threat to promote revolution, coups and violence against any country not deemed a “democracy.” In making this hardly-veiled threat, he redefined the word in the vocabulary of international politics. Democracy is the CIA’s overthrow of Mossedegh in Iran to install the Shah. Democracy is the overthrow of Afghanistan’s secular government by the Taliban against Russia. Democracy is the Ukrainian coup behind Yats and Poroshenko. Democracy is Pinochet. It is “our bastards,” as Lyndon Johnson said, with regard to the Latin American dictators installed by U.S. foreign policy.

A century ago the word “democracy” referred to a nation whose policies were formed by elected representatives. Ever since ancient Athens, democracy was contrasted to oligarchy and aristocracy. But since the Cold War and its aftermath, that is not how U.S. politicians have used the term. When an American president uses the word “democracy,” he means a pro-American country following U.S. neoliberal policies, no matter if the country is a military dictatorship or its government was brought in by a coup(euphemized as a Color Revolution) as in Georgia or Ukraine. A “democratic” government has been re-defined simply as one supporting the Washington Consensus, NATO and the IMF. It is a government that shifts policy-making out of the hands of elected representatives to an “independent” central bank, whose policies are dictated by the oligarchy centered in Wall Street, the City of London and Frankfurt.

2KillingTheHost_Cover_rule

Given this American re-definition of the political vocabulary, when President Obama says that such countries will not suffer coups, violent revolution or terrorism, he means that countries safely within the U.S. diplomatic orbit will be free of destabilization sponsored by the U.S. State Department, Defense Department and Treasury. Countries whose voters democratically elect a government or regime that acts independently (or even simply seeks the power to act independently of U.S. directives) will be destabilized, Syria- style, Ukraine-style or Chile-style under General Pinochet. As Henry Kissinger said, just because a country votes in communists doesn’t mean that we have to accept it. This is the style of the “color revolutions” sponsored by the National Endowment for Democracy.

In his United Nations reply, Russian President Putin warned against the “export of democratic revolution,” meaning by the United States in support of its local factotums. ISIL is armed with U.S. weapons and its soldiers were trained by U.S. armed forces. In case there was any doubt, President Obama reiterated before the United Nations that until Syrian President Assad was removed in favor of one more submissive to U.S. oil and military policy, Assad was the major enemy, not ISIL.

“It is impossible to tolerate the present situation any longer,” President Putin responded. Likewise in Ukraine: “What I believe is absolutely unacceptable,” he said in his CBS interview on 60 Minutes, “is the resolution of internal political issues in the former USSR Republics, through “color revolutions,” through coup d’états, through unconstitutional removal of power. That is totally unacceptable. Our partners in the United States have supported those who ousted Yanukovych. … We know who and where, when, who exactly met with someone and worked with those who ousted Yanukovych, how they were supported, how much they were paid, how they were trained, where, in which countries, and who those instructors were. We know everything.”[1]

Where does this leave U.S.-Russian relations? I hoped for a moment that perhaps Obama’s harsh anti-Russian talk was to provide protective coloration for an agreement with Putin in their 5 o’clock meeting. Speaking one way so as to enable oneself to act in another has always been his modus operandi, as it is for many politicians. But Obama remains in the hands of the neocons.

Where will this lead? There are many ways to think outside the box. What if Putin proposes to air-lift or ship Syrian refugees – up to a third of the population – to Europe, landing them in Holland and England, who are obliged under the Shengen rules to accept them?

Or what if he brings to Russia the best computer specialists and other skilled labor for which Syria is renowned, supplementing the flood of immigration from “democratic” Ukraine?

What if the joint plans announced on Sunday between Iraq, Iran, Syria and Russia to jointly fight ISIS – a coalition that US/NATO has refrained from joining – comes up against U.S. troops or even the main funder of ISIL, Saudi Arabia?

The game is out of America’s hands now. All it is able to do is wield the threat of “democracy” as a weapon of coups to turn recalcitrant countries into Libyas, Iraqs and Syrias.

 

Michael Hudson’s new book, Killing the Host is published in e-format by CounterPunch Books and in print by Islet. He can be reached via his website, [email protected]

Note

[1] “All eyes on Putin,” CBSNews.com, September 27, 2015

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Orwell at the UN: Obama Re-Defines Democracy as a Country That Supports U.S. Policy

Selected Articles: ISIS, Fukushima, TPP, Burkina Faso

September 29th, 2015 by Global Research News

Screen Shot 2015-09-29 at 19.04.39The Russia-Iran-Iraq-Syria Joint “Information Center” against America’s ISIS Foot Soldiers

By Global Research News, September 29 2015

Russia has taken the initiative in the Middle East. Russia, Iran, Iraq and Syria have made an agreement to set a joint information center to coordinate their operations against ISIS. The center will be based in Baghdad. The main goal of the center will be gathering, processing and analyzing current information about the situation in the Middle East – primarily for fighting IS. The Iraqi army’s joint operations command confirmed the agreement on Saturday.

terror jihad mi5 copsChina Joins the Fight Against ISIS?

By Stephen Lendman, September 29 2015

A Russian, Chinese, Iranian, Iraqi, Syrian alliance against ISIS perhaps may encourage other countries to join it – a possibility likely terrifying Obama officials and their war-mongering partners.

fukushima-radiationThe Human Consequences of the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant Accidents

By Eiichiro Ochiai, September 29 2015

When a very strong earthquake (magnitude 9.0) hit the Pacific ocean side of the northeastern part of the main island of Japan on March 11th (3.11) 2011, the accompanying huge tsunami wiped out many communities along the coast. Close to 20,000 people lost their lives, mainly due to the tsunami. Many who were stripped of their homes and livelihood continue to struggle to recover their ways of life.

tppThe TPP and Canada: Playing the Fool

By Binoy Kampmark, September 29 2015

Fundamentally, the TPP is an American dominated program which, paradoxically, hollows out the partners it seeks to bring along, even as it hopes to retain ascendancy. It is a form of plunder by stealth, featuring an imposition of controls, be it internet access or the use of patents and generic drugs. Free it may well be, but that will be primarily a matter for US corporate elites.

Flag_of_Burkina_FasoBurkina Faso Coup Makers Refusing to Disarm

By Abayomi Azikiwe, September 29 2015

Can the popular movement push ahead with the Sankaraist revolutionary program? Gen. Gilbert Diendere, a former intelligence chief for the President Security Regiment (RSP), was forced to release interim President Michel Kafando and Prime Minister Isaac Zida by the last full week of September.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: ISIS, Fukushima, TPP, Burkina Faso

So ‘socialist’ Jeremy Corbyn, after pressure from the trade union boys agreed not to make Trident an issue. After all, making nuclear weapons and the submarines that carry them, are jobs for the boys.

Earlier Mr McCluskey said [the] Unite [trade union] was sympathetic to the argument that Trident nuclear weapons were expensive but added that not renewing the multi-billion pound system would cost some workers their jobs.

He told a fringe meeting in Brighton: “We won’t be voting in favour of any anti-Trident resolution.The unions who were opposed to Trident are likely to carry the day and that is the way it is, that is the reality.” – ‘Jeremy Corbyn loses the battle on Trident after trade unionists side with Labour MPs to block the move‘, the Independent, 27 September 2015

Corbyn has done the same ‘deal’ over bombing Syria. And note that it was his ‘fellow’ Labour MPs wot done it.

A yet more significant concession is his promise of a free vote on whether to back air strikes against Syria if the Conservatives call one. Given his appointment of a shadow cabinet dominated by pro-war figures such as Hilary Benn, this would all but guarantee a “yes” vote. – ‘UK Labour Party conference begins under leadership of Corbyn‘, WSWS, 28 September 2015

So, just how socialist is Jeremy Corbyn?

OK, he’s anti-austerity, he’s against the privatisation of the NHS, key issues that got him elected and importantly, especially on the NHS and renationalisng the railways, he knows he has widespread support and these are not issues that are likely to split the Labour Party (especially ironic as how it was a Labour government under Blair/Brown that began the gutting of the NHS in the first place).

Tellingly, well at least as far as I’m concerned, his capitulation over Trident and Syria, indicate that he is yet another imperialist-socialist, that is to say, some aspects of socialism for us but imperialism for the exploited and downtrodden of the world. For proof of this look to his resignation as chair of the Stop the War coalition and,

…[h]e also announced that he will not be speaking at a conference fringe meeting alongside representatives of Sinn Fein, but will be speaking at a Labour Friends of Israel event.  (ibid)

Gulp! This, in spite of the fact that Constituency Labour Party members (as opposed to Corbyn’s useless fellow Labour MPS) are opposed to us bombing Syria,

Jeremy Corbyn has a huge mandate from Labour members to oppose British bombing in the Middle East, a new poll showed yesterday.

Results of a Labour List survey of 2,453 supporters found that 63 per cent support the party leader’s opposition to air strikes in Syria.

– ‘Labour Party Backs Jeremy Corbyn against British Air Strikes in the Middle East‘, The Morning Star, 26 September 2015.

I suppose it just shows how desperate we are for an alternative to the sociopaths in power that we pin our hope on a single individual who, on the surface at least, is closer to our progressive ideals than most. But just how close is he in reality and just how realistic is it to pin our hopes not so much on Corbyn per se but on a revitalized Labour Party as an alternative?

Already, on several of his key election promises, he has had to back down. Won’t the lefties here get real and accept the fact that more than 90% of the Parliamentary Labour Party are opposed to Corbyn’s policies? He leads but by and large, in name only.

By the time he has finished negotiating his way through the minefield that is Labour Party politics, he’s going to look like that cat in the MGM cartoons after the Road Runner has finished with him, with very little of his campaign promises, or his hide, left.

On reading those lefty/liberal commentators who have jumped to Corbyn’s defence, or rather defence of their misty-eyed view of the Labour Party as a vehicle for change, it strikes me that there is an awful lot of wishful thinking going on judging by the central issue that crops up again and again, namely returning the Labour Party to its allegedly socialist roots by one means or another.

Here’s an example of this kind of thinking from the progressive journalist Anthony Barnett,

If Labour is to challenge the individualism, corporatism and privatisation of society overseen by today’s monstrous elite it has to do so with a different political culture: with intelligent, deliberative democracy, not collectivism; through voice, liberty and collaboration based on human rights, citizenship and self-determination. There can be no return to public values unless they are grounded in such active participation of the public. Now that the traditional establishment has abandoned conservative patriotism for global profiteering we need to see elite sovereignty replaced by popular sovereignty.” – ‘Open Labour: the only way for Corbyn to replace Blatcherism‘, By Anthony Barnett, Our Kingdom, 28 September 2015

Now no doubt Barnett is a decent individual as well as being an excellent journalist but does he really believe that the Labour Party can be redirected to “challenge the individualism, corporatism and privatisation of society overseen by today’s monstrous elite”? Is it any more likely to happen than it is to try and recreate the Labour Party of the 1940s?

This is wishful thinking on a grand scale and hinges on the central issue; can the kind of society Barnett, Corbyn, that many of us want to see, be achieved through our Parliament and specifically, through a Labour government?

Our current Tory government is more accurately described as a regime as it governs with only 24% of the vote, less than a quarter of the electorate due to our rigged voting system. What is the likelihood of Parliament restructuring itself, by itself? Look at how it handled the exposure of the many MPs’ criminal activities in defrauding the public by fiddling their expenses. Yes, some reforms were enacted, a couple of MPs even did some time but the whole farce is still overseen by Parliament. The fox is still in charge of the henhouse. The British state has been around so long, even if most of its history is fake eg, being the ‘first democracy’, that genuine reform is impossible, and more importantly, irrelevant.

‘Changing the conversation’?

Barnett talks about ‘digital democracy’ and embracing all those single issue, grassroots activities and in some way, changing the conversation and folding it all into a revitalized and reconstructed Labour Party or Open Labour Party (‘we’re all invited’). He talks of ‘forks’ or choices we need to make in order to achieve this,

The first fork points towards a classic attempt to capture the British state by electoral means and use it to carry through his programme, with him and his team as a kind of elitist anti-elite boosted into orbit by the enlarged Labour membership. This is what the mainstream media expects, as it is a form of politics which however extreme they can understand, it being full of splits and purges. The other fork points to building and encouraging the British public to democratize the state and take it away from elite control as we have known it; a form of politics beyond the ken of mediacrats whose idea of ‘the people’ is a focus group not a force. (my emph. WB) (ibid)

So, what he seems to be saying here that the way to ‘democratize the state’ is through extra-Parliamentary means which if true, means that the Labour Party is pretty much surplus to requirement anyway. What Barnett and many like him refuse to accept is that the Labour Party is part of the state and essentially, has been so since it accepted the Parliamentary road to- well whatever, socialism if you like, back in 1910 or whenever it was. But why spend all that energy on trying to ‘reform’ the Labour Party when such vital energies would be better spent creating this new ‘Open Party’ that he talks of. Let Corbyn resign and head up this new party, he has such overwhelming support. Or does he?

Thus there’s a fundamental contradiction at the heart of Barnett’s argument, namely that it sees the state, in the guise of a Labour Party or indeed a Labour government, reforming itself in order to abolish capitalism? It’s a fantasy. Any future Labour government, just like Syriza in Greece or Podomos in Spain, will have to contend with an all powerful international capitalist elite, that thinks nothing of destroying entire economies let alone entire countries. How many, do you think, of Corbyn’s ‘reforms’ can survive into this mythical future?

At best, it’s just a rehash of the old ‘lesser of two evils’ position that many on the left have been conned into supporting, including myself. At worst, and this I think is crucial, it could well lead to an even more cynical public when they see that this new Emperor too has no clothes.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Corbyn’s “Jobs for the Boys”. Anti-Trident Resolution Opposed by Britain’s Trade Unions

An excerpt from, “Saudis Behead 87 In 2014, Head UN Human Rights Panel In 2015” by Shane Dixon Kavanaugh, Vocativ, September 22, 2015:

The United Nations is facing intense criticism following the revelation that it chose Saudi Arabia as the head of an influential human rights panel. The kingdom was quietly selected in June to chair the UN Human Rights Council’s five-nation Consultative Group, which appoints applicants for 75 key human rights monitors around the world. The Saudis lost a bid earlier this year to chair the 47-nation UN Human Rights Council itself.

With its penchant for executing non-violent criminals, torturing suspects and suppressing women and religious minorities, the Saudis are considered by many to have one of the world’s worst human rights record. UN Watch, a non-governmental monitoring group that first reported the appointment, called the move “scandalous,” alleging that “the UN chose a country that has beheaded more people this year than ISIS to be head of a key human rights panel.” Alexandra El Khazen, a representative from Reporters Without Borders, said the appointment was “outrageous” and “grotesque.”

Photo: President Barack Obama and Saudi King Salman sharing a laugh about their Syria strategy at the expense of the victims of ISIS in Iraq and Syria at the White House earlier this month. Photo Source: AP Photo/Evan Vucci.

Photo: President Barack Obama and Saudi King Salman sharing a laugh about their Syria strategy at the expense of the victims of ISIS in Iraq and Syria at the White House earlier this month. Photo Source: AP Photo/Evan Vucci.

An excerpt from, “United Nations Farce: Saudi Arabia to Head UN Human Rights Council” by Felicity Arbuthnot, Global Research, September 24, 2015:

The “crown jewels” have been handed to a country with one of the worst human rights records in the world. Saudi Arabia will head a Consultative Group of five Ambassadors empowered to select applicants globally for more than seventy seven positions to deal with human rights violations and mandates.

In a spectacular new low for even a UN whose former Secretary General, Kofi Annan, took eighteen months to admit publicly that the 2003 invasion of, bombardment and near destruction of Iraq was illegal, UN Watch points out that the UN has chosen: “a country that has beheaded more people this year than ISIS to be head of a key Human Rights panel …” (2)

In May, just prior to the appointment, the Saudi government advertised for eight extra executioners to: “ … carry out an increasing number of death sentences, which are usually beheadings, carried out in public” (3.)

Has the United Nations lost its mind?

Saudi Arabia is the spiritual fountainhead of ISIS, so by choosing it to head a global human rights panel the U.N. is giving a big fuck you to the victims of ISIS terrorists in Iraq, Syria, Libya, and other countries.

And we have to ask ourselves, what’s next? A Grand Ayatollah serving as the Secretary General of the UN? This is absurdity. The U.N. is a sick joke of an institution. It has no legitimacy or respectability whatsoever.

And this isn’t the end of the UN’s monstrous actions. Just watch. In 2020 they’ll probably invite al-Baghdadi to the General Assembly in New York to give a religious speech alongside Pope Francis and whatever idiot is occupying the White House at that time, and thereby legitimize the barbaric and genocidal Caliphate that is coming into being thanks to the active military support of Washington, Tel Aviv, Ankara, and Riyadh.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on UN Disregard for Victims of Saudi-Supported ISIS by Appointing Saudi Arabia Head of UN Human Rights Panel

Russia is fast becoming our latest bogyman with neocons, war hawks, and a complicit corporate media, all beating the preliminary war drums, rapidly convincing a duped public that the Russian threat is real.  The record shows the Russian threat is nonsense, but the record also shows there is a threat, not from Russia, but from the US.

A couple of years ago the US was foaming at the mouth anticipating being able to bomb Syria into oblivion, claiming as pretext Assad was using chemical weapons.  Once again the US was using the tired argument that it was necessary to save the people by bombing them.  Ask the “people” of Libya, and Iraq, and Yemen, if they felt saved by being bombed?  We laid waste to Libya with 77 days of bombing and devastated that country, along with the complete destruction of Iraq, and now, with our invaluable assistance and weapons, we are doing likewise to “save” the people of Yemen.

Our thirst to bomb Syria a few years ago was foiled by those evil Russians, who stepped in diplomatically and got Assad to get rid of all Syria’s chemical weapons.  Those nasty Russians would not let us have our bombing and prevented it by using diplomacy. Is that why they now are our enemy?

Naturally we would not be stopped, and found the pretext to bomb Syria anyway.  Using ISIS as an excuse, we are currently bombing Syria trying to usher in the same kind of anarchy we brought to Iraq and Libya. Corporate media, shill mouthpiece of the US government, would have you believe that the US is part of a world coalition that is bombing Syria, when the fact is 99% of the bombing is done by the US alone. In any case the end game is to reduce Syria to chaos, death, destruction, and violence, which is well under way.  Those nasty Russians are again interfering by sending weapons to support the Assad regime.  It appears that our thirst to bomb, has forced the nasty Russians to draw a line in the sand.  They will support Assad and not tolerate his overthrow by the US.

We now know, thanks to the Guardian and other UK news outlets, but relatively unreported in the US, that apparently the Russians had negotiated a deal in 2012, in which Assad would either share power or would step down, but the deal was ignored and brushed aside by the US.  Why?  Because we wanted to rain down anarchy on Syria by bombing it to oblivion. We did not want a diplomatic solution, we wanted to bomb and cause pure anarchy, which is what we are currently doing. Those nasty Russians were diplomatically trying to prevent this from happening for the second time. They could not stop our desire to bomb.

The US orchestrated a coup of a democratically elected leader of the Ukraine and installed a US puppet, but blamed the next door neighbor Russia for the troubles in the Ukraine. We also inflamed the US public by accusing Russia of expanding by taking the Crimea by force, even though 99% of Crimeans wanted to belong to Russia, and this was achieved not by invasion, and not one single death in the Crimea.  Corporate media convinced the US public that Russia had invaded militarily, and taken over the Crimea.  Not so; there was no invasion and not one person died in a popular turn to Russia by the people of Crimea.

There are now various news reports that have the US planning to place nuclear weapons to Germany. That’s right, nuclear weapons on Russia’s front doorstep! First, how would you like it as a German citizen, and then how you like it as a Russian living next door?  This is a provocative, foolish, dangerous, militarily aggressive act by the US, but the media shills will depict the Russians as the bad guys.

So who is the aggressor nation? How many nations has Russia bombed in the past 25 years?  How many nations has the US bombed in the past 25 years? Russia has 2 military bases outside its borders, while the US has over 700. So which nation is the most aggressive? The US has killed approximately 4-5 million people since 1963. How many innocents has Russia killed during that time? The annual US military budget is 10 times higher than Russia’s, so who is the aggressor nation? There are US Special Forces operating in 81 foreign nations. Special Forces budget has increased fivefold since 2001 and their numbers have doubled.  So who is the aggressor nation? The US is planning to deploy nuclear weapons to Germany, and since 1776 the US has been at war for 93% of its history. The US with its bombings of 14 nations in the Middle East, has unleashed one of the biggest refugee crises in human history as people flee from US bombs and destruction.  So who is the aggressor; the US or Russia? Pay no attention to corporate media, get your own facts.

Joe Clifford lives in Rhode Island and writes for two online sites and regularly submits articles to Rhode Island newspapers. He writes mostly about US foreign policy but occasionally will venture into other venues.

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Russia and Putin, the Nonexistent Threat. Who is the Aggressor; the US or Russia?

They know exactly what they have done. Time will tell if they actually do anything about it.

Watch a video of this report here:

In his speech at today’s United Nations General Assembly, Russia’s President Putin took the time to absolutely pulverize Western actions in Syria.

Putin decried the continued “export” of democratic revolutions and when referring to the Middle East he asked: “how did that turn out?

He said such actions have led to “violence and social disaster“, where democracy and human rights are absolutely no where to be found.

Putin invoked the potential for international order itself to collapse if such actions are allowed to continue, saying:

Russia is ready to work on the basis of broad consensus on the further development of the United Nations with all partners. But we believe that attempts to undermine the authority and legitimacy of the United Nations are extremely dangerous. This can lead to the collapse of the entire architecture of international relations.

Putin the Peacemaker. (Photo Credit: Russian Presidential Office)

Putin the Peacemaker. (Photo Credit: Russian Presidential Office)

This situation, Putin warned, would lead to the “rule of force” controlling the world, where “selfishness rather than collective work” would dominate relations upon a system of “dictate rather than equality.

In particular regard to Syria, Putin said: “We think it is an enormous mistake to refuse to cooperate with the Syrian government and its armed forces who are valiantly fighting terrorism face to face.”

Such praise for the Syrian Government and Syrian Army is wholly deserved, as Putin added “We should finally acknowledge that no one but President Assad’s armed forces and [Kurdish] militia are truly fighting Islamic State and other terrorist organizations in Syria.”

Others in the Russian government have recently called the West’s actions ‘social engineering‘, and now Russian cooperation with Damascus is looking to solve the crisis.

Watch Putin’s full speech here:

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on ‘Do You Realise What You’ve Done?’ – Putin Pulverizes Western Actions in Syria at UNGA

Burkina Faso Coup Makers Refusing to Disarm

September 29th, 2015 by Abayomi Azikiwe

Can the popular movement push ahead with the Sankaraist revolutionary program?

Gen. Gilbert Diendere, a former intelligence chief for the President Security Regiment (RSP), was forced to release interim President Michel Kafando and Prime Minister Isaac Zida by the last full week of September.

These developments were in response to the public rejection of the coup which was led by Diendere designed to derail the elections that grew out of the rebellion in late October 2014.

The rebellion stemmed from the desire of ousted military-turned-civilian President Blaise Compoare’s efforts to extend his tenure 27-year tenure in office.

A division within the military based upon the allegiance to the presidential guard and the broader military forces proved to also be a key element in the resolving the crisis that unfolded in September. The presidential guard was founded by Compaore during the period after the coup staged against the revolution between 1983-87.

Nonetheless, the presidential regiment was accused of refusing to disarm on September 28.

The Reuters press agency reported that “Burkina Faso’s government on Monday (September 28) accused the military general who was the leader of this month’s failed coup of derailing the disarmament of his supporters. For his part, Gen. Gilbert Diendere said his soldiers are under threat and need their arms for protection.”

This same article goes to say “The setback for reconciliation in this West African nation comes just days after the international community applauded the reversal of the coup when Diendere agreed under heavy pressure to return power to the civilian president he had overthrown.”

Public opposition to the coup was represented through demonstrations and other forms of resistance. During the course of the NCD brief reign, 11 people were killed and more than 270 injured.

African Union (AU) sanctions and Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) mediation efforts resulted in the release of Kafando, with a tentative agreement on Sunday September 20 and the subsequent freeing of Zida. Leading up to the putative agreement, units of the Burkinabe military threatened to march on the capital of Ouagadougou and overthrow the NCD junta.

A Legacy of Right-Wing Coups in Burkina Faso

Diendere was close to Compaore during the period of 1987-2014. Despite the ostensible relieving of the former intelligence director of his duties after the uprising of October 2014, he reportedly participated in a leading manner in Pentagon military maneuvers with other West African defense forces in early 2014, known as Operation Flint Rock.

Compaore, the leader of the counter-revolution which toppled and assassinated revolutionary Socialist and Pan-Africanist leader Capt. Thomas Sanakara, has never been compelled to account for his actions. His supporters within the RSP are concerned that he and others may be forced to stand trial for their crimes against the Burkinabe people.

Sankara also came to power through force of arms but from a left-wing perspective. He had become introduced to Marxist thought while undergoing military training in France during the 1970s.

During the course of the Sankara government, emphasis was placed on breaking links with the transnational corporations and the neo-colonial legacy of economic dependency on the former imperialist powers and the dominant western regime in the United States. Although Burkina Faso has become the fourth largest producer of gold in Africa, the masses of workers, farmers and youth remain impoverished decades after the Sankara government was overthrown.

This latest coup beginning on September 17 led by National Council for Democracy (NCD) was announced over national radio and television saying that the new regime was committed to elections but not under the conditions of the upcoming October 11 poll. Millions were looking forward to the elections where several parties claiming the legacy of Sankara are contesting for parliamentary and administrative positions.

In the early hours of the coup the Interim President Michel Kafando and Prime Minister Isaac Zida were held under house arrest. Obviously they were taken captive in an attempt to derail the elections that were scheduled for Oct. 11 in this West African state.

Elections Designed to Derail Popular Political Will

The elections grew out of a mass uprising in late October 2014 when longtime neo-colonial puppet leader Blaise Compaore, who had ruled the underdeveloped country for 27 years, was for over 27 years.

The masses rejected the coup prompting action from the regional Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the continental African Union (AU). After several days a section of the broader army threatened to remove the junta headed by Diendere by force.

Burkina Faso underwent a socialist-oriented revolutionary process between 1983-87 under Capt. Thomas Sankara, a proponent of African unity, social justice, women’s equality and youth empowerment. Sankara was assassinated in October 1987 by Compaore and Deindere at the aegis of France and other imperialist-allied leaders in West Africa.

However, the movement of October-November 2014 was not capable of seizing power in the name of the workers and farmers in Burkina Faso. The interim regime was a compromise with neo-colonialism in the sense that a figure such as Isaac Zida was appointed as prime minister.

Zida, like Diendere, had developed close ties with U.S. and French intelligence agencies and military commands. Burkina Faso has been a base for the so-called “war on terrorism.”

These coordinated efforts between the imperialist military forces and African governments have not led to any genuine economic stability and growth on the continent. Inside Burkina Faso the majority of people remain in poverty and unemployed.

Military Coups and African Development

Army and police units in colonial Africa were of course established by the European imperialist states in an effort to maintain the economic interests of the ruling classes. African military forces were geared towards repressive measures against the masses in any rebellious or revolutionary movement towards independence and socialism.

Nearly 50 years ago, on February 24, 1966, renegade police and military forces coordinated by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the U.S. State Department overthrew the revolutionary First Republic of Ghana led by President Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, the founder of the Convention People’s Party (CPP) which took transitional power during 1951-57 leading the independence government after 1957 to 1966. The revolutionary process in Africa suffered a tremendous blow after the coup against Nkrumah while the actual history of the Ghana Revolution became a source of contention even within the West African state itself.

Subsequent coups within Africa have largely maintained the same right-wing political character, although there have been some exceptions such as in Ethiopia under Mengistu Haile Mariam during the mid-to-late 1970s and in the 1980s under Sankara. The developments in Ethiopia and Burkina Faso were led by lower-ranking officers within the military and relied on the workers and youth for the maintenance of political power.

Both revolutionary movements in Burkina Faso and Ethiopia recognized the necessity of creating a Marxist-Leninist Party. In Ethiopia, the Workers’ Party was formed during the 1980s.

However, in Burkina Faso the process was reversed after the assassination of Sankara in 1987.

Even in Ethiopia, with the demise of the Soviet Union and the socialist states in Eastern Europe, material and diplomatic support for the Mengistu government was withdrawn leading in part to its dissolution under imperialist pressure. Mengistu took refuge in Zimbabwe in Southern Africa which is still under the leadership of the national liberation movement turned political party, the Zimbabwe African National Union Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF).

These historical lessons must be studied by the current generation of revolutionaries in Africa and around the world. The total political and economic bankruptcy of imperialism illustrates that socialism and anti-imperialism is the only viable solution to the periodic crises of underdevelopment and economic exploitation

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Burkina Faso Coup Makers Refusing to Disarm

When a very strong earthquake (magnitude 9.0) hit the Pacific ocean side of the northeastern part of the main island of Japan on March 11th (3.11) 2011, the accompanying huge tsunami wiped out many communities along the coast. Close to 20,000 people lost their lives, mainly due to the tsunami. Many who were stripped of their homes and livelihood continue to struggle to recover their ways of life.

One of the most disastrous results of the quake/tsunami was the devastation at the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant (Fk-1) of the Tokyo Electric Power Co (TEPCO). The plant is known in Japan as Fk-1 (Fuku-ichi. It released an enormous amount of radioactive material. Its effects on living organisms have already begun to be felt in many ways, though it’s been only four and a half year[s]. It may, however, be premature to make a judgment as to the degree of disaster, in light of the fact that the after-effects of the Chernobyl accident of 1986 are still unfolding.

This article discusses some prominent features of the current situation (as of August 2015) in the aftermath of the Fk-1 accident.

The Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Accident

Four of the six reactors (units 1~4) on the premises of the Fk-1 plant experienced serious accidents including explosion, while the other two reactors (5 and 6) were not in operation and remained intact, as they are located slightly apart from the others.

Units 1~3 were operating at the time, but shut down automatically when the quake hit. The shutdown reactors need to be continuously cooled, because the fuel rods, though out of fission reaction, release great heat due to the nuclear decaying process of radioactive fission products. The quake caused substantial damage to the reactors, and the cooling systems of units 1~3 did not function properly due to both physical damage and human errors. As a result, the fuel rods in units 1~3 “melted down”.

Water added from outside for cooling purposes reacted with the hot rods to form hydrogen gas. The resulting hydrogen explosion in unit 1 stripped the roof on March 12th. Unit 2 showed no apparent damage, but released an enormous amount of radioactive material through holes created by the quake, mostly on March 15 and thereafter. The explosion at unit 3 on March 14 was most damaging. TEPCO insists that it was also a hydrogen explosion, but many observers offered different opinions, including one that it a small-scale nuclear fission explosion occurred. Unit 4 had no nuclear fuel rod in the reactor, though a large number of spent as well as new fuel rods were in its storage pool. It exploded also, its cause unknown, though TEPCO speculated that hydrogen gas entered from the adjacent unit 3, and exploded.

Release of Radioactive Material from Fk-1

A large amount of radioactive material was released as a result of the accidents. How did it happen? Leakage through cracks and holes made by the quake on some reactors, explosions, intentional vents to relieve pressure, and leakage of cooling water which is contaminated as a result of contact with the melt fuel rod debris.

The amount of radioactive material cannot be determined accurately, and can only be estimated by various means. TEPCO made an estimate of the released amounts of several tens of radioactive nuclides based on the readings of several monitoring posts placed on the premise 1. The initial governmental data 2 were based on these estimates. Some of the official data are presented in Table 1. The government’s assessment of the scale of the release from Fukushima, based on these data, was that the radiation release was relatively small compared to that of Chernobyl (April, 1986 in Ukraine), about one tenth to at most one third.

But these data accounted for only the release into the atmosphere. Radioactive materials were also released into the water systems surrounding the facilities, as well as directly into the ocean. When the amounts released into the water and the ocean were estimated 3, the total amounts released were re-calculated 4. They are shown in Table 1 along with the official data. The ratio of the amount released from Fukushima to that from Chernobyl ranges from 1.2 to 3.1 for the major nuclides, suggesting that the extent of radiation release from Fukushima was very likely more than that from Chernobyl; perhaps more than twice if all were taken account of.

Table 1. The amount of radioactive nuclides released from the Fk-1 accident (2011) compared with those released from the Chernobyl accident (1986)

nuclide Quantity in reactors at Fukushimaat the time of accidenta The official released amount from Fukushimaa Total amount released fromFukushimab Total amountreleased from

Chernobylc

Fukushimabover

Chernobylc

Kr-85 8.37E+16 8.37E+16
Xe-133 1.20E+19 1.1E+19 1.20E+19 6.5E+18 1.85
I-131 6.01E+18 5.0E+17 2.08E+18 1.76E+18 1.18
Cs-134 7.19E+17 1.8E+16 1.65E+17 5.4E+16 3.06
Cs-137 7.00E+17 1.5E+16 1.59E+17 8.5E+16 1.87
Sr-89 5.93E+18 2.0E+15 7.31E+16 1.15E+17 0.636
Sr-90 5.22E+17 1.4E+14 8.49E+15 1.0E+16 0.849
Pu-238 1.47E+16 1.9E+9 1.91E+10 3.5E+13 0.00055
Pu-239 2.62E+15 3.2E+9 3.14E+9 3.0E+13 0.00011
H-3 3.40E+15

E+18 means 1018; a. ref 3, b. ref 4, c. ref. 5

Radioactive materials are still continuously coming out; and the data shown in the table do not take account of them. For example, Fig. 1 shows the radiation levels (Bq/L) of Cs-134, Cs-137, Sr-90, H-3 and all beta sources found in one of the drainage systems in the facility, which drained out into the ocean between April 2014 and Feb 2015 6. The amounts leaked out through drainage systems are given in Table 2 6. Substantial amounts continue to leak out. The main reason is that 300 tons of cooling water is being added daily to keep the fuel rod debris cold. That cooling water is immediately contaminated, and leaks out as a number of gaps/holes were created by the quake, though an effort has been made to contain and store it in tanks. Eventually TEPCO hopes to decontaminate the water collected, and return it to nature. How successfully decontamination procedures are being carried out is not known. There are other sources of water. One is subterranean water, which flows through the premises, particularly under the contaminated buildings. This has not yet been halted.

Fig. 1. Radioactivity of K-drain system in Fk-1 premises

Table 2 Leaked amount of radioactive material through drainage systems in Fk-1 premises

Are radioactive materials still leaking out into the atmosphere as well? No obvious phenomena, such as explosions, have been observed since March 2011, though sudden rises in temperature of the reactors have occurred occasionally. However, some signs of plumes are still often observed visually (as dense fog) as well as on the monitoring posts placed all over Fukushima prefecture and throughout Japan. Monitoring post data are daily posted on the internet 7. Occasionally sudden peaks (spikes) appear on a number of posts, near and far. If time sequences are carefully taken account of, it seems, they could show the flow of a plume. Such a plume flow was seen throughout Japan on April 14, 2015. Spike phenomena occurred on April 8/9 and May 16, 2015, as well. Fig. 2 shows an example of a spike phenomenon on April 9 in Iidate-mura 30 km northwest of Fk-1. This is not a complete record; it is only what this writer observed in periodic checks.

Fig. 2. Spikes observed in a monitoring post in Iidate-mura, Fukushima

Each time there are spikes on monitors, the government attributes such a phenomenon to a “malfunctioning monitor”, and shuts down such posts, until the readings return to normal (regular) levels. It is rather strange that a number of monitoring posts (all across Japan) go out of order simultaneously or rather in sequence. This phenomenon indicates that sudden releases of radiation are still happening occasionally, but how often, on what scale, and their causes are not known.

All these events suggest that the accidents are “far from contained”, and radioactive materials are still leaking out. In sum, the overall radioactive materials released from the Fk-1 accidents are already larger than that of Chernobyl and will increase further unless measures are taken to stop these leakages.

Distribution of Radiation Levels

How far and how widely the radioactive materials are dispersed, i.e., the radiation levels at various locations, are constantly monitored not only by officials as mentioned above, but also by civil activists. Unfortunately the official data may not be reliable, as many observers have noticed. Civil activists have compared the monitoring values with their own readings and found the monitor readings lower by as much as 50% at many locations. The structure of the monitor itself often prevents the true reading of radiation. It has been pointed out, for example, that a metal plate placed just under the measuring device shields radiation coming from below 8.

A monitor placed by the government reads the so-called spatial dose; i.e., the supposed external exposure dose at 1 meter above the ground. The radioactivity is measured in terms of Bq and, if equipped, the energy value of the radiation measures is combined to indicate the spatial dose value, expressed often in terms of mSv/hr. Most monitors can measure only g-radiation, and many monitors as well as Geiger counter type instruments measure only cpm (counts per minute), convert it to Bq values, which are converted to Sv values assuming that radiation is due to cesium (Cs-137). Cs-137 has a relatively long half-life of 30 years and is produced in a significant quantity in the fission reaction. The spatial dose is due to many other nuclides such as strontium (Sr)-89/90, tritium (H-3) and iodine (I)-129/131, but the contribution from these and other nuclides is not taken account of, or rather is counted as Cs-137. It is a sort of measure of radiation level, but does not represent the true exposure dose. However, this value is commonly used in assessing the danger level due to radiation.

A few readings will be cited here to illustrate the typical radiation levels given by the government. Some readings at monitoring posts on March 31, 2015 were: 6~10.5 mSv/hr in Hutaba-cho where Fk-1 is located, 4~17 mSv/h in Okuma-cho, just south of Hutaba (several km from Fk-1) and 1.7~3.6 mSv/hr in Tomioka-cho, south of Okuma (i.e, 10 km south of Fk-1). These are readings in highly contaminated areas.

On April 14, 2015 when a plume seemed to have been released, several readings (except the spike, which was a sudden rise to twice or higher level) were: 0.03~0.04 mSv/hr in Hokkaido (northernmost island); 0.02~0.05 mSv/hr in Aomori; 0.02~0.05 mSv/hr in Iwate; 0.04~0.12 mSv/hr in Miyagi (just north of Fukushima); 0.14~0.30 mSv/hr in Soma city, Fukushima; 0.05~0.12 mSv/hr in Tochigi; 0.08~0.09 mSv/hr in Tokyo; 0.03~0.06 mSv/hr in Kyoto; 0.05~0.08 mSv/hr in Hiroshima; 0.04~0.06 mSv/hr in Fukuoka.

These are recorded on the monitoring posts, but many places are not covered by monitoring posts, where much higher radiation levels have been recorded; i.e., “hot spots”. Recently reported examples were: 1.23 mSv/hr in western Tokyo on July 23, 2.92 mSv/hr in Saitama on July 25, 4.8 mSv/hr in Iwaki (30 km south of Fk-1) on Aug. 2 9.

Let’s assume that you are standing on a location where the monitoring post showed 0.1 mSv/hr throughout a whole year. Then, you will be exposed to 0.9 mSv/year (0.1 mSv/hr x 24 hrs x 365 days=876 mSv/year=0.9 mSv/y). The Japanese government calculates the dose per year by assuming that one would stay in open areas for 8 hrs and for the rest of the day in buildings, where the radiation level is assumed to be about 40% of the outside. This calculation would make the exposure dose significantly lower than the real value; in the example above, it would be 0.54 mSv/year. This assumption is arbitrary, indeed, the inside of a building has often been found to have radiation levels as high as that of the immediate outside.

The official exposure dose allowed is currently set as 1 mSv/year (see note at the end). This corresponds to a dose rate of 0.18 mSv/hr according to the governmental way of calculation. It is further degraded to 0.23 mSv/hr with some other arbitrary assumptions, and this value is regarded as the permissible level of dose rate. So dose rate below this value is supposed to be OK. If you are exposed directly to this level for a year, then your accumulated dose will be 2 mSv/year. In other words, the government limit of 1 mSv/year is actually close to 2 mSv/year in reality. The government is currently trying to raise the 1mSv/year limit to 20 mSv/year. If 20 mSv/year is approved and people are forced to return to their previous homes under this condition, they will be exposed to dangerously high levels of radiation. It must be pointed out, though, that there is no safe level.

Radioactive iodine affects the thyroid immediately. Iodine-131 is short-lived with a half-life of 8 days, and I-129 has a very long half-life of 15.7 million years. Both would be readily absorbed into the thyroid gland, as iodine is used to make thyroid hormones. In the nuclear reactor, both are produced in comparable amounts, but I-131 affects the thyroid more seriously. An entity with a shorter half-life emits radiation more often than that with a longer half-life in the same chemical quantity. The distribution of I-131 in the environment is difficult to determine accurately, as it is short-lived.

In Dec. 2014, the official nuclear regulatory committee (Japan) published a report to indicate that Fk-1 is still emitting I-131 and other I-radioisotopes 10. According to their report, trans-uranium Cm-242 and other such nuclides were formed in the fuel rods during the operation, and they fission spontaneously, as a result producing radioactive nuclides including I-131. The possible maximum amount of I-radioisotopes released from this source has been estimated as 28 mSv/week (=170 mSv/hr) in terms of equivalent dose for child thyroid at the border of the premises of Fk-1 10.

An alternative expression of contamination is the radioactivity of soil, typically Bq value per kg of soil, which often is converted to Bq/m2. It is assumed that the density of soil is 1.3 g/cm3 and that the radioactive material exists in the uppermost 5 cm of the soil, so that Bq/m2 value is 65 x the value in Bq/kg. This value (Bq/kg) is real, measured directly by an instrument on a sample of soil. Hence this may be more reliable in expressing the level of contamination than the spatial exposure dose. Besides, the source of radiation (from a soil sample) can be readily identified. This is not sufficient, however, as minute radioactive particles can be floating above the soil, which can be measured as spatial radiation.

In all these expressions, a fundamental uncertainty is that radiation levels may not be constant over time. Radioactive material decays over time and can move due to water flow or wind. Therefore, radiation levels have to be monitored continuously.

It must be pointed out that the external exposure dose level obtained from measurements of this kind (i.e., spatial dose and soil contamination) is less important than the internal exposure dose, which is not necessarily related to the external dose. The significance of internal exposure will be outlined below. The only thing that can be said here is that people living in a place of higher spatial dose level and/or higher soil contamination would have a higher risk of being exposed internally; but there is no proven direct correlation, and cannot be.

The more serious factor, internal exposure, is supposed to be measured by the whole body counter. But it can measure only g-radiation, and cannot measure the more serious a- and b-radiation. Besides, it measures only the radiation coming out of a body at the time of the test, and cannot determine the more meaningful accumulated exposure dose. Hence whole body counter results can only be used to give a tested person mental relief in cases where the reading is low or non-detectable. But, even that could be dangerous, if the source inside is emitting a and/or b radiation.

Reality of Internal Exposure

The effects of radioactive fallout from an accident of a nuclear power reactor as well as a nuclear bomb explosion are caused mostly by “internal exposure”, yet no adequate attention has been given to this aspect by the authorities and the associated scientists. The sources of the internal exposure are minute radioactive particles floating in the air, which can be inhaled, and contaminated food and drinks consumed. Radioactivity of foods and drinks produced in the contaminated area is monitored, and those with activity higher than the regulation values cannot legally be marketed.

One cannot well safeguard against ingesting radioactive material, unless one measures the radioactivity of everything one takes in, which is not possible. The issue of “internal exposure” is complicated, and would require another detailed article. For now, three photographs are shown below to illustrate the reality of internal exposure.

Figs. 3 and 4 are the trace of a-particles in the preserved tissues of victims of the atomic bomb explosions in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It is not easy technically to take this kind of photo, and scientists succeeded in doing so only recently (11, 12). The source of the first trace is plutonium from the Nagasaki bomb, and that of the second is uranium from the Hiroshima bomb. The plutonium and uranium embedded in the tissues of atomic bomb victims are still emitting a-radiation after 70 years. This says that the fallout of the atomic bomb explosions, which included uranium in the Hiroshima bomb and plutonium in the Nagasaki bomb, somehow got into the body of the victims and stuck in those tissues, and emitted and destroyed the surrounding tissues for 70 years. Both plutonium and uranium have a long half-life, millions of years or more.

Fig. 3. a-Particles travel straight even in tissues. The linear traces are those emitted by plutonium in the preserved kidney tissues of an A-bomb victim in Nagasaki (70 years ago) 11 Fig. 4. A trace of a-particle of uranium in the lung tissue of a Hiroshima victim 12 Fig. 5. The heart muscle fibers are broken in the heart of a man (43 years old) who died of heart disease in the most contaminated area (Belarus) of the Chernobyl accident 13

Fig. 5 shows the heart muscle fibers of a victim of the Chernobyl accident 13. They are broken at many places. Likely the b and g radiation from Cs-137 (and others) damaged the fibers by breaking the chemical bonds. The traces of b and g cannot be visualized in such samples.

Thyroid Cancers among Children in Fukushima

The authorities, such as ICRP and IAEA, have acknowledged that thyroid cancers in children can be caused by radiation, likely due to I-131. They have also recognized the causal relationship between leukemia and radiation. But they deny a causal relationship in the case of other cancers and other diseases, despite the fact that many studies and reports have shown that all sorts of disease including cancers can be caused by radiation.

The rate of thyroid cancer is very low among children (those under 18 years) under normal circumstances; 1 or 2 per million children per year. Fukushima prefecture started to investigate abnormalities in the thyroid gland in children (under 18 years old) in 2011. Soon they found high rates of abnormalities: nodules, cysts, and then tumors mostly malignant. By the spring of 2015 they have counted 126 thyroid cancer cases (mostly papillary) among 370,000 children in Fukushima 14. This rate amounts to 340/1,000,000 over 4 years, i.e., 85/1,000,000/year. This is abnormally high, approximately 60 times the normal rate, even much higher than that reported in Chernobyl.

Yet, the authorities and the committee in charge of this investigation have denied causality to radiation from Fk-1 accidents. They argued against causality thus:

(a) Screening effects, that is, they used sophisticated techniques to show that cancers that are ordinarily non-detectable were detected. However, officials admitted recently that screening effects would not be able to explain such a high rate 15.

(b) In the case of Chernobyl thyroid cancers in children appeared only 4 years after the accident. It is too early for Fukushima children to get thyroid cancers. This argument has been rebutted by an article published in the Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus 16.

(c) They checked a few other places in Japan, and say that the thyroid cancer rate in Fukushima is similar to that found in Aomori, Nagasaki and Yamanashi 17. They imply that Fukushima is not abnormal. This study is based on a very small sample in which only one cancer was found; hence the result is not statistically meaningful.

(d) It is too soon for thyroid cancers to appear. It usually takes four to five years. This is in addition to the argument of comparison with Chernobyl (b) above. Hence the cancers found here should have started before the accidents.

(e) The amount of radioactive material released was far lower than that of Chernobyl, and hence would not have such effects as those found in Chernobyl.

A recent report 18 indicates that the latent period for thyroid cancer can be as short as one year in children. The amount of radioactive material released (e) has been discussed earlier, and has been shown to be at least as high as, or even higher than, that of Chernobyl. All of these arguments by the authorities are based on weak or incorrect information.

Careful studies of the relationship between the locations where children who got thyroid cancer live and the radiation distribution have revealed correlations, though these are not perfect. A correlation obtained by an analysis is shown in Fig. 6 19. This indicates a likely causality; i.e., radiation caused the thyroid cancers, though the dose used here does not necessarily represent an accurate value of I-131 but rather a general radiation level. Thyroid cancers are increasing among adults, too. As seen in Table 4, the increase over 2010-2013 was more than 200 % in Fukushima as well as in adjacent prefectures: Ibaragi, Gunma and Tochigi.

Fig. 6. Pediatric thyroid cancer rate vs spatial exposure rate for different areas in Fukushima prefecture. The line is the linear regression line. R2 implies that the line accounts for 54% of the variance in thyroid cancer rate due to radiation.

Other Diseases are also Increasing in Fukushima since the Accident

No systematic investigation has been published officially on the health effects of radiation as a result of the Fukushima accident. However, some statistical data may be indicative of significant trends. All indications are that incidence of many diseases is increasing not only in Fukushima but also all over Japan.

Table 3 shows the number of diagnosed cases recorded at Fukushima (prefectural) Medical School Hospital (latest published data based on ref. 20). Cancer of the small intestine, which is normally rare, increased by 400% in two years. Eye disease (cataract), brain, heart disease (angina) and all kinds of cancer have increased. Many diseases other than those listed in the table have also increased since the Fk-1 event.

Table 3. Increase in diseases since the accidents: records at the Hospital of Fukushima (prefectural) Medical School

Disease 2010 2011 2012
cataract 150 (100%) 344 (229%) 340 (227%)
angina 222 (100%) 323 (145%) 349 (157%)
bleeding in brain 13 (100%) 33 (253%) 39 (300%)
lung cancer 293 (100%) 504 (172%) 478 (163%)
esophagus cancer 114 (100%) 153 (134%) 139 (122%)
stomach cancer 146 (100%) 182 (125%) 188 (129%)
cancer in small intestine 13 (100%) 36 (277%) 52 (400%)
colon cancer 31 (100%) 60 (194%) 92 (297%)
prostate cancer 77 (100%) 156 (203%) 231 (300%)
shortened pregnancy period + low birth weight 44 (100%) 49 (114%) 73 (166%)

The Problem is Not Confined to Fukushima; Diseases are Increasing All over Japan

Radioactive materials do not stop at the border of Fukushima prefecture. They have spread beyond Fukushima as noted earlier. Accordingly, health effects could be observed in other prefectures, as well. Indeed this turned out to be the case. Unfortunately, no systematic studies of cities or prefectures have been published yet. However, every hospital publishes its activities listing the number of patients with different diseases, the number of surgeries, etc. These data may be indicative of larger patterns in Japan.

The following tables are based on such accounts; collecting data for all hospitals that reported data. They include published data from all prefectures 21. The tables list such data for Fukushima and the surrounding prefectures (Tochigi, Gunma, Ibaragi, Yamagata, Miyagi), the next nearest prefectures (Saitama, Chiba, Tokyo, Kanagawa), and several major prefectures further away (Aichi, Osaka, Fukuoka, Hokkaido and Okinawa).

In three years since the accident, many diseases increased by 40-50% as shown in tables 4-6. These tables were constructed on the basis of collections of data from hospitals across Japan 21. The incidence of thyroid cancer, which is the most sensitive indicator, more than doubled in the three years 2010 to 2013 not only in Fukushima but in neighboring Gunma, Tochigi and Ibaragi to the south of Fukushima. It increased by amounts ranging from 26 to 61 percent in all other prefectures listed below, as well. The national total rose by 42%.

Table 4. Thyroid cancers increased everywhere since the 11 March 2011 accident 21

prefecture 2010 2011 2012 2013 2013/2010
Fukushima 119 187 199 271 228%
Tochigi 116 218 211 235 203%
Gunma 108 124 185 350 217%
Ibaragi 61 115 136 138 226%
Yamagata 95 128 146 139 146%
Miyagi 248 343 378 399 161%
Saitama 203 226 306 301 148%
Chiba 260 340 410 352 135%
Tokyo 1833 2819 2874 2884 157%
Kanagawa 469 664 656 749 160%
Aichi 525 632 819 949 120%
Osaka 650 938 1048 1039 160%
Fukuoka 583 736 629 587 101%
Hokkaido 855 1083 1151 1227 144%
Okinawa 82 104 117 103 126%
Japan 10816 14909 15635 16023 148%

It is known that Cs-137 (as well as Cs-134) affects the myocardial muscles, causing heart diseases, myocardial infarction and other diseases. Table 5 shows increases in myocardial infarction. Not only neighboring prefectures but also Tokyo and as far away as Okinawa showed significant increases.

Table 5. Increase of myocardial infarction 21

prefecture 2010 2011 2012 2013 2013/2010
Fukushima 507 622 668 675 133%
Tochigi 722 878 1014 977 135%
Gunma 538 710 797 821 153%
Ibaragi 700 948 1077 1212 173%
Miyagi 598 718 831 901 151%
Saitama 1873 2465 2733 2752 147%
Chiba 1447 2008 2558 2604 135%
Tokyo 3680 4849 5581 5605 180%
Kanagawa 2361 2871 3421 3657 155%
Aichi 2212 2877 3158 3287 149%
Osaka 2335 3224 3648 3652 156%
Fukuoka 1533 1996 2326 2285 149%
Okinawa 437 572 537 669 153%
Japan 35411 46109 51947 53400 151%

Leukemia is another specific indicator of radiation effect. The data shown in Table 6 indicate that it increased over 2010-2013 by as much as three times in neighboring Gunma while the total for Japan increased by 142%.

Table 6. Acute leukemia is also increasing 21

Prefecture 2010 2011 2012 2013 2013/2010
Fukushima 108 97 79 230 213%
Tochigi 363 418 340 322 89%
Gunma 113 178 267 350 310%
Ibaragi 251 309 351 324 129%
Yamagata 121 117 172 135 112%
Miyagi 191 236 199 241 126%
Saitama 266 336 590 757 285%
Chiba 449 430 529 576 128%
Tokyo 1770 2135 2366 2342 132%
Kanagawa 686 1024 964 1062 155%
Aichi 895 1138 1208 1178 132%
Osaka 869 1210 1393 1623 187%
Fukuoka 686 755 722 767 112%
Hokkaido 449 628 728 830 185%
Okinawa 101 111 111 110 109%
Japan 12820 15498 17015 18167 142%

These are only the tip of the iceberg. Diseases that may not be caused by radiation itself can also be attributable indirectly to radiation effects. Radiation affects lymphatic and also blood producing systems and weakens the immune system. This makes such people more vulnerable to infectious diseases. It is noteworthy in this regard that death from pneumonia seems to have increased significantly since the Fukushima accident. This is only one example.

This could be only the beginning of further serious developments in time. The radiation effects are likely to increase with time. In particular, various solid cancers have relatively long latent periods. They increase after 10 years or later as seen among atomic bomb survivors in Hiroshima and Nagasaki 22.

Concluding Remarks

The Japanese government under Democratic Party rule, declared that the Fukushima accident was over at the end of 2011, and the prime minister in Sept 2013 under the Liberal-Democratic Party at the IOC meeting to select the next Olympic site pronounced that the Fukushima accident had been contained and Tokyo was well prepared for the Olympics.

The real situation is far different, as documented above. Leakage of radioactive materials through various routes continues. The locations and states of the melted fuel rods in the reactors at Fk-1 have yet to be determined. It was found only recently (by use of muon radiation/absorption technique) that the nuclear reactors of units 1 and 2 are indeed devoid of nuclear fuel rods in the core 23, but the technique was insufficient to locate the melted fuel rod debris.

Serious health effects of radiation in general have already been widely observed. It is best to refer to better studied examples of the past: Chernobyl 24 and down-winders of Nevada tests 25. The reality of health effects at Chernobyl due to fallout from the explosive accident as detailed in 26 and summarized in 27 may indicate the future of Fukushima and Japan.

The health effects of radiation are often slow in manifesting, particularly in the case of cancers, though cancer rates have already started to increase in Fukushima and elsewhere, as discussed above. Therefore, more people will be affected by radiation in the years to come, not only in Fukushima, but across Japan.

The health effects have been investigated by the Japanese national and local governments only with respect to Fukushima children’s thyroid abnormalities, as mentioned above. The Fukushima prefectural medical school is reportedly collecting data from all hospitals in Japan, but it has not published the data. Although still in denial of the causal relationship between children’s thyroid cancers and radiation, they finally admitted recently that the cancer rate is indeed abnormally high 15.

Radiation effects are seen not only on human health, but also on many living organisms. A butterfly species has been observed to be affected by radiation, and the effects seem to be inherited from one generation to another 27. Reproductive success of goshawks has decreased in response to higher levels of radiation 28. Many bird species are rapidly decreasing in number 29. Deserted cows have been found to be highly contaminated with cesium-137 and other nuclides 30. Deformed vegetables and fruits have been observed at many locations. These are but a few examples of radiation effects on plants and animals.

The government may be attempting to cover up the negative data it gathers. If it admits the causal relationship between serious health effects and radiation, it would be obliged to abolish the nuclear power plants or at least delay re-opening closed plants. The truth that “radiation (of high energy) is incompatible with life” 31 directly confronts humankind, yet many refuse to recognize it because the government and the nuclear industry and associated scientists in Japan and many other countries continue to suppress the data.

No single nuclear power plant has operated in Japan in the last two years, yet there has been no shortage of electricity. The Japanese government, along with the nuclear industry, has now restarted one of the fifty nuclear power reactors, despite strong opposition by the majority of Japanese and despite the high risk in Japan of further geological activity, both volcanic and earth quakes.

Note: The limit 1 mSv/year was set by the department of science and education of the Japanese government, based on a law (protection against radiation effects due to radioactive isotopes) and a recommendation by ICRP (international commission of radiological protection)

Acknowledgement: Comments and suggestions made by Drs. Anders Moller, Leonard Angles, and Mark Selden are gratefully acknowledged.

Eiichiro Ochiai was born in Japan, and educated up to the PhD in Japan. He taught and conducted research in chemistry at college/universities in Japan, the United States, Canada and Sweden. Publications include “Bioinorganic Chemistry, an Introduction” (Allyn and Bacon, 1977), “Bioinorganic Chemistry, a Survey” (Elsevier, 2008), “Chemicals for Life and Living” (Springer Verlag, 2011), and “A Sustainable Human Civilization Beyond ‘Occupy’ Movements” (Kindle, 2011).

Recommended citation: Eiichiro Ochiai, “The Human Consequences of the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant Accidents”, The Asia-Pacific Journal, Vol. 13, Issue 38, No. 2, September 28, 2015.

Related articles

• Eiichiro Ochiai, The Manga “Oishinbo” Controversy: Radiation and Nose Bleeding in the Wake of 3.11

• Nakasatomi Hiroshi, After Nuclear Disaster: The decision-making of Fukushima University authorities, the threat to democratic governance and countermovement actions

• Kyle Cleveland, Mobilizing Nuclear Bias: The Fukushima Nuclear Crisis and the Politics of Uncertainty

• David McNeill, Japanese Government Squelching Efforts to Measure Fukushima Meltdown

• Yasuhito Abe, Safecastor the Production of Collective Intelligence on Radiation Risks after 3.11

• Adam Broinowski, Fukushima: Life and the Transnationality of Radioactive Contamination

• Paul Jobin, The Roadmap for Fukushima Daiichi and the Sacrifice of Japan’s Clean-up Workers

• Anders Pape Møller and Timothy A. Mousseau, Uncomfortable Questions in the Wake of Nuclear Accidents at Fukushima and Chernobyl

References

Asterisked references (*) are available only in Japanese.

Estimate of the quantities of radioactive material released to the atmosphere from the accident of Fk-1, TEPCO, May, 2012*.

The state of the nuclear reactor cores of units 1~3, June 6, 2011, Nuclear safety/protection agency (Japan)*.

3 Pavel P. Povinec, Katsumi Hirose, Michio Aoyama, “Fukushima Accident ― Radioactivity Impact on the Environment,” pp. 125~127, (Elsevier (2013))

4 Yamada, K., Watanabe E., Re-evaluation of released amounts of radioactive material from Fk-1 accident: Comparison with data of Chernobyl, May, 2014*.

5 Chernobyl data are cited from ref 3, but based on several estimates including UNSCEAR; ANNEX J Exposures and effects of Chernobyl accident; see here.

6 See here*.

7 See here*.

8 See here*.

9 This kind of data is regularly reported by activists/organizations on the internet; its accuracy cannot be ascertained. It can be said only that such high spots likely exist.

10 See here*.

11 Shichijo, K., Nagasaki University*

12 Kamata, N., et al, Hiroshima University and Nagasaki University, published inJune 8th edition of Mainichi newspaper*

13 Bandazhevsky, Y., “The Effects of Radioactive Cesium on the Population and its Physiological Effects”, (Japanese ed., translated from Russian by Kubota, M.), p. 65, (Godo Publ. Co. (Tokyo), 2015)

14 See here*

15 See here*; also here.

16 See here.

17 See here*.

18 See here.

19 Based on https://www.facebook.com/pages/放射能と健康被害/499769473505463(放射能と健康被害=radiation and health effects)

20 See here.

21 See here*, here*, and here*.

22 Ozasa, K., Shimizu, Y., Suyama, A., Kasagi, F., Soda, M., Grant, E. J., Sakata, R., Sugiyama, H., Kodama, K., Studies of the mortality of atomic bomb survivors, Report 14, 1950-2003: An overview of cancer and noncancer Diseases (LSS-14),Rad. Res., 177 (2012), pp. 229-243

23 Press release of Nagoya University, March 19, 2015*; Kyodo Press, March 19, 2015*

24 Yablokov, A. V., Nestrenko, V. B, Nestrenko, A. V., ”Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment” (Ann. New York Acad. Sci., Vol1181, 2009)

25 Johnson, C. J., Cancer Incidence in an Area of Radioactive Fallout Downwind From the Nevada Test Site, J. Am. Med. Assoc., 251 (1984), pp. 230-236

26 Pflugbeil, S., Claussen, A., Schimitz-Feuerhake, I., “Health Effects of Chernobyl: 25 years after the reactor catastrophe”, (IPPNW Germany (IPPNW=International Physicians for Prevention of Nuclear War), 2011)

27 Hiyama, A., Nohara, C., Kinjo, S., Taira, W., Gima, S., Tanahara, A., Otaki, M.,Biological impacts of the Fukushima nuclear accident on the pale grass blue butterflyScientific Rept., 2 (2012), article #570

28 K. Murase, J. Murase, R. Horie & K. Endo, Effects of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident on goshawk reproduction, Sci. Rep. 5:9405

29 Bonisoll-Alquati, A., Koyama, K., Tedeshci, D. J., Kitamuara, W., Suzuki, H., Ostermiller, S., Arai, E., Moeller, A. P., Mousseau, T. A., Abundance and genetic damage of barn swallows from FukushimaScientific Rept5 (2015), article # 9432.

30 See here*.

31 Ochiai, E., “Hiroshima to Fukushima: Biohazards of Radiation” (Springer Verlag (Heidelberg), 2013)

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Human Consequences of the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant Accidents

A recently released census report indicates that white populations are starting to increase in United States urban areas.

Although showing signs of a slight growth in white persons living in cities where many fled decades ago, does not necessarily translate into the improvement of the social conditions of the African American and Latino communities inhabiting municipalities, the numbers in fact reflect a further lessening of commitment to the maintenance and well-being of people of color communities which are being forced to re-locate.

This phenomenon was played up in the Detroit News daily publication which has been a major proponent of the restructuring of the city based upon the interests of the banks and multi-national corporations. Detroit and other large urban areas fell-victim to decades of job losses, predatory lending and hostile racist public policies which have closed schools and forced greater numbers of people into poverty and political marginalization.

Since Detroit was railroaded into the largest municipal bankruptcy in U.S. history during 2013-2014, the “re-building” of the city which is championed by the ruling class press is based upon the notion in part of a reverse migration of whites coupled with measures forcing African Americans, Latinos and poor people in general out.

Even the Washington Post took notice of the corporate media articles related to the growth in whites living in cities. In collaboration with William Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution, the census data was analyzed in light of migration patterns over the last sixty plus years in major urban areas.

The International Business Times said of this shift that “The media has covered white populations moving to cities individually in the past, often writing about the trends on an individual basis as certain neighborhoods change due to gentrification. Especially with the 10-year anniversary of Hurricane Katrina in August, many outlets wrote about the changing demographics in New Orleans.” (September 25)

The reports goes on saying “But now that this looks like a broader trend, Frey told the Washington Post he doesn’t believe that means it will be a long term pattern in the same way white flight was in the 1950s. ‘It’s not something to say we’re going to move 180 degrees in the other direction,’ Frey said. And the white population isn’t growing as rapidly as it used to anyway. But it is an indicator that whatever kind of city revival — whether it’s short-term or long-term that we’re seeing – is involving whites.’”

The Poorest City Being “Revitalized”

The city of Detroit was cited as an example where it was said that 8,000 more whites have moved into the municipality. However, just the week before another report was issued noting that the city, which has an African American population of over 80 percent, is also the most economically underdeveloped and deprived through impoverishment of the people.

The same Detroit News which cheers and advocates on a daily basis the disempowerment and exploitation of the majority population in the city, was forced to report on September 16 that despite all of the ruling class propaganda of a revival, that Detroit remains the poorest large city in the country. This is the case despite the bankruptcies of two of the automakers in 2009 and the city itself over the last two years.

An article published in the News said “Michigan is among 12 states that saw a decline in the percentage of people living in poverty in 2014 though the state’s poverty rate remained higher than the national average, according to a U.S. Census Bureau report released Wednesday.

Detroit was the most impoverished major city in America with 39.3 percent living below a poverty line of $24,008 for a family of four. But Flint topped the list of Michigan’s poorest cities with 40.1 percent of residents living in poverty.”

Both Detroit and Flint were hubs of the automotive industry during the 20th century where the UAW and various labor unions fought battles to win recognition for bargaining rights and other concessions granted by the corporate owners and bosses. During the latter decades of the 20th century hundreds of thousands of jobs within the industry were lost to automation and capital flight. Other sectors of the economy related and non-related to auto shed millions of jobs as well creating ongoing instability within the labor market and a drastic decline in household income and wealth among the working class, particularly among African Americans and other oppressed communities.

Making matters even worse during the last years of the 1990s a deliberate program of predatory lending by the banks targeted African Americans and Latinos draining their limited wealth obtained through home equity and meaningful employment. Working people were forced to bail out the banks and insurance magnates in 2008. Nonetheless, the world capitalist system remains unstable as evidenced by the precipitous decline in oil and commodity prices along with the volatility of the various stock markets internationally.

The rebuilding of the cities on a sound basis will take much more than the migration of thousands of whites from the suburbs. Infrastructural improvements in power systems, bridges, roads, streets, public transportation, senior services, healthcare, public education, housing, water services and other areas are required and these developments would necessitate the investments by the federal government and the corporate community to the tune of trillions of dollars.

Political Impact of Demographic Shift Towards Urban Migration and Mass Poverty

The question is what are the social, racial and class implications of this emerging demographic shift? Corporate media interests suggest that the whites moving back into the cities are from higher socio-economic stratums and this is necessary for redevelopment.

Whereas in Detroit and in other cities, African American and Latino populations have been systematically disempowered by the banks and corporations through job losses, predatory mortgage and municipal lending, tax increases, water shutoffs, utility terminations, property tax foreclosures, state repression, attacks on public education and other services. Access to bourgeois democratic reforms is being rapidly eroded in favor of corporate and bank-led municipal governments which routinely ignore the needs and aspirations of the workers and the poor.

In order to reverse this trend of coercive removals and impoverishment there must be an alliance of popular forces led by the working class among the oppressed to reclaim their rights to the cities. The banks must be compelled along with the federal government to rebuild the cities based on the interests of the people who live there.

Under capitalism the system of profit maximization fueled the outmigration of whites from the urban areas during the post-World War II period. Government funding and insuring of mortgage lending, so-called “slum demolitions programs”, and massive highway construction ripped apart African American and oppressed neighborhoods taking away housing, schools, small businesses, churches, community centers and burgeoning political bases.

Ultimately the construction of socialism provides the only sustainable solution to the crisis of the cities. Resources which are wasted on prestige projects built largely through the expropriation of public funding can be utilized for the purpose of genuine revitalization where youth, workers, seniors, people living with disabilities and others are given priority over banks and real estate investors.

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on What’s Behind the “Growth” of Whites in United States Cities?

The TPP and Canada: Playing the Fool

September 29th, 2015 by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

They have not heeded our calls to be transparent about what the negotiating framework is and what they are prepared to sacrifice. Andrew Thompson, NDP candidate, Toronto, Sep 26, 2015

The very fact that Stephen Harper is still in with a chance come the Canadian election is a summary of political survival and grand deception. The recent debates have seen him come back from the dead and showing signs of considerable life. His treatment of the Syrian refugee situation has proven miserly and calculating. Like his counterparts in the Commonwealth (Australia, and the UK), taking in refugees is a matter of a few spaces rather to satisfy temporary moral outrage. The hope is that consciences will be salved, allowing for the general business of government to go on.

Military action against the “source problem”, however, is far more valued, despite the obvious consequence that any military measure, rather than solving a refugee crisis, actually boosts it. Not that Harper is willing to answer too many questions about that fact, having stipulated to journalists that he will only take four a day on the campaign trail.

Then comes the issue of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement which is being sold by various trade ministers within the group of 12 negotiating delegations as reaching the final stages for the September 30 meeting in Atlanta.

Fundamentally, the TPP is an American dominated program which, paradoxically, hollows out the partners it seeks to bring along, even as it hopes to retain ascendancy. It is a form of plunder by stealth, featuring an imposition of controls, be it internet access or the use of patents and generic drugs. Free it may well be, but that will be primarily a matter for US corporate elites.

Nor can there be an equality of negotiating power when countries like Japan and the United States happily conclude their own side agreements on specific industries without consulting other partners. Leverage is still allowed outside the remit of the TPP for the powers to conduct their own affairs, leaving the smaller states in the lurch.

Harper has found himself wanting in that department but has made concluding the TPP prior to the October 19 election a matter of priority. This is “economism” in its purest form: a vast ideologically self-justified aversion to the consequences of such arrangements in favour of unflinching dogma. Naturally, he keeps insisting on the virtues of magical consumption, reducing Canadian citizens to purchasing units in data sets. The TPP was never a creation of citizenry for citizenry and resembles the deadened language of boardroom economics and number crunching. Never mind that these numbers themselves do not show a desirable picture.

Resistance has, however, evolved in some quarters, even if it could be more adamant and ferocious. The dairy farmers, for one, are up in arms, notably in Quebec, which accounts for half of the country’s dairy farms. Canadian negotiators are willing to allow a swamping of milk from their southern neighbour, while no such concession is being made for Canadian dairy farmers for access to the US market.

Given the clandestine nature of the TPP proceedings, speculation abounds whether the figures of access are accurate at all. Isabelle Bouchard, director of communications at Dairy Farmers of Canada, is doubtful about rumours that a 10 percent access to US dairy products would be granted without a reciprocal access for Canadian products to the US. “The deal is still being negotiated. The 10 percent is the ask of the US and that, so far, the Canadian government has not agreed to.”[1]

Not that one should necessarily take her word for it, given the leaked chapters available via WikiLeaks showing Canadian capitulation in areas such as copyright. Bouchard’s misplaced reasoning is based on the notion that, as New Zealand and Australia are also seeking access, this is unlikely to take place.

The message is also taking centre stage in campaign platforms, with contenders always suggesting that they will be firm about protecting Canada’s sacred industries against the corporate incursions of their mighty neighbour.

Conservative candidates have put up the rather feeble position that the final document will not compromise the industry. Trade Minister Ed Fast continues to insist that such proposed concessions are “absolutely false”, the rumour factory gone wild. “Our government remains committed to defending our system of supply management.”[2]

The Fast statement is an apt illustration of one political mode of operation: Never trust an official who has to openly state that he is defending a system that is actually being negotiated for abolition or reform. The very fact that it is there to begin with casts doubt on the position.

The negotiating patterns show time and again that overall capitulation will take place if, in the broader assessment, it is deemed appropriate, however erroneous that assessment is. Ex post facto justifications will be provided, suggesting that the negotiators were being realistic, when, in truth, they were bulldozed without a prayer. Bouchard does herself concede that any such access, on such a scale, without appropriate trade-offs, will be “catastrophic” for the Canadian dairy industry. Belief will have to be the not so worthy substitute.

Such behaviour resembles, in all too haunting a manner, the “Silent Surrender” thesis of the distinguished economist Kari Polanyi Levitt, whose devastating examination of foreign direct investment in Canada through the 1960s never lost its long, echoing appeal. This is a model writ large for TPP US domination, a broader code for multinational bullying within TPP economies, even as it is directed against Chinese interests.

Effectively, such concessions imply acts of negotiated suicide. This is the grand act of hegemonic victory, and should it succeed, the vassalised states will only have themselves to blame. Accommodation, in such cases, tends to be a form of mild economic servitude.

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: [email protected]

 

Notes

[1] http://www.producer.com/2015/09/farmer-group-disputes-reports-that-canada-set-to-welcome-more-u-s-dairy-products/

[2] http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/canada-election-2015-trans-pacific-partnership-dairy-1.3245455

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The TPP and Canada: Playing the Fool

Northern Ireland Bans GM Crops to Keep Clean and Green Image

September 29th, 2015 by Sustainable Pulse

Northern Ireland has joined Scotland, France, Greece and Latvia in announcing a full ban on GM crops under the new EU opt-out regulations. Environment Minister, Mark H Durkan announced Monday that he is prohibiting the cultivation of genetically modified (GM) crops in Northern Ireland.

The Minister’s announcement follows an EU decision earlier in 2015 to permit Member States to opt out of growing approved GM crops within their territories.

Making the announcement at the launch of Environment Week in Parliament Buildings, Mark H Durkan said: “I remain unconvinced of the advantages of GM crops, and I consider it prudent to prohibit their cultivation here for the foreseeable future.

northern ireland

The pattern of land use here and the relatively small size of many agricultural holdings creates potential difficulties if we were to seek to keep GM and non-GM crops separate. I consider that the costs of doing so could potentially be significant and, in many cases, totally impractical.

Further, we are rightly proud of our natural environment and rich biodiversity. We are perceived internationally to have a clean and green image. I am concerned that the growing of GM crops, which I acknowledge is controversial, could potentially damage that image.

Northern Ireland has now joined France, who announced their decision last week, and also Greece and Latvia in asking for an opt-out from growing GM crops. Germany and Scotland have also made it clear that they will follow the same path.

German Agriculture Minister Christian Schmidt informed German states in August of his intention to use a new EU law, passed in March, to ban the use of GM crops. This followed the Scottish Government’s announcement earlier in the same month that they will take similar action to protect Scotland’s clean, green status.

The German announcement also came as Professor Carlo Leifert, Professor of Ecological Agriculture at Newcastle University, said that he strongly believes the Scottish Government ban on GM crops is right and that “there are likely to be significant commercial benefits from Scotland being clearly recognized as a GM-free region”.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Northern Ireland Bans GM Crops to Keep Clean and Green Image

The leaders of Russia and the United States have held a bilateral meeting on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York, shortly after they both addressed the international community on the world’s most pressing geopolitical issues.

The meeting between the two leaders lasted for approximately an hour and a half – surpassing the limit of 55 minutes. After the talks, President Putin walked out to meet the press and answer questions about the meeting and the speech he had delivered to UNGA.

“Today’s meeting was very constructive, practical and surprisingly frank,” the Russian President told the press. “We found a lot of common ground, but there are differences as well. In fact they are known, so there is no need to repeat them.”

While Obama did not talk to the press following the meeting, a US official confirmed to Reuters that the presidents agreed to explore options for a political solution in Syria, with disagreements remaining over the future of President Bashar Assad. Political talks will continue between US and Russian foreign ministers, while the Pentagon would arrange the military-to-military talks, the official added. READ MORE: Putin to UN: Export of so-called democratic revolutions continues globally In his address to the General Assembly, Putin reiterated that Damascus’ government remains a legitimate power in Syria while the national army is the only armed force legally fighting terrorism in Syria. Russia’s president again proposed the joining of efforts and the creation of a broad international coalition against terrorism, which would coordinate its efforts with Damascus. “We do not rule out anything. But if we do something, we will do it in full accordance with the norms of international law,”Putin said, answering the question as to whether the Russian military is planning to conduct anti-ISIS airstrikes in Syria. “We talked about this today: Military jets from Australia, France, the US, are carrying out airstrikes not only in Iraq – where it is justified under international law, since there had been a request from the Iraqi government – in the case of Syrian territory it is illegal, and we spoke about it too.”

While the participation of the Russian military in a ground operation in Syria is absolutely out of question, Putin said that Moscow is considering other options in supporting those fighting terrorists on the ground in Syria, such as the Kurdish militia and, first of all, the Syrian national army. The joint information center that was created in Baghdad to coordinate the anti-terrorist efforts of regional powers is one example of such support, Putin noted, adding that this HQ is open for anyone who is interested in the fight against terrorism to join.

Commenting on some Western leaders’ adamant position that Assad is a figure to ‘deal with’ and who must go, Putin once again noted that it is only up to the Syrian people to decide and chose their leader.

“I have great respect for my colleagues – the US President, as well as the French – but they are, as far as I know, are not citizens of the Syrian Republic, and therefore [it is] unlikely [that they] should be involved in determining the fate of another state’s management,” Putin told the media. However he emphasized that anti-terrorist fighting in Syria must be conducted in accordance with political processes.

Putin admitted that relations between Moscow and Washington are at a rather low level at the moment, but stated that it was not on Russia’s initiative that ties with the US had been torn, but was instead the result of its “American partners’ position.”

Before going behind closed doors the two presidents shook hands in front of the cameras, but refused to answer any questions. Earlier in the day, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon hosted a state luncheon for the heads of delegations to the 70th Session of the UN General Assembly, with Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Barack Obama sitting either side of him. READ MORE: Putin to UN: Export of so-called democratic revolutions continues globally The informal lunch followed the high-profile addresses by the two leaders at the opening of the UNGA debate on Monday. READ MORE: Obama to UN: US ready to work with Russia and Iran on Syria The personal relationship between Putin and Obama has cooled off since Washington introduced sanctions against Moscow last year, accusing it of escalating the crisis in Ukraine.

One of the last times that the Russian and American leaders met was during the Belfast G8 Summit in June 2013. In September the same year, Obama and Putin also briefly met on the sidelines of the G20 summit in St. Petersburg, Russia.

Since then, most of their exchanges have taken place over the phone, during which both leaders focused on solving the Ukrainian and Syrian crises.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on ‘Constructive & Surprisingly Frank’: Putin Meets Obama on Sidelines of UN General Assembly

In a stratified society, the tiny fraction who comprise the ruling class must control perceptions of the much larger fraction under their control. To do so they must tightly manage the conduits of information and its interpretation through endlessly repeated story lines that alternately generate and relieve public anxiety. Driven by anxiety and reinforced by its reduction, we are herded along the path chosen by the rulers with only fleeting glimpses of reality. US news reports, invariably immersed in American mythology and disembodied from honest history, remain intentionally disinformative. 

There is no more glaring current example than the Iran nuclear issue, a red herring recognizable as such through examining our past and likely future relationships with Iran. Who should distrust whom?  Who are the aggressors, who deserves international sanctions, who holds which cards, and what are the real stakes?  For answers it helps to examine the historical trajectory within which today’s “news” about Iran is embedded.

In 1953 the US overthrew Iran’s elected Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadeq and destroyed Iranian democracy to maintain Western control of Iran’s oil industry, then installed Shah Pahlavi and his brutal Savak-enforced police state for a quarter century as a bastion of US power in Central Asia until overthrown by a popular revolution in 1979. Given US stakes in control of the region, holding US embassy hostages seemed sensible at that time to discourage US military intervention, but the Iranian people have been punished by sanctions ever since including billions of dollars in frozen Iranian assets and a 40% reduction in Iranian oil exports.

In 1980 the US encouraged and supported Iraq in launching and maintaining an 8-year war against Iran causing an estimated half-million Iranian deaths. Assuring sustained devastation to both sides, the US increased sanctions against Iran while duplicitously providing it secret arms using Israel as an intermediary with revenues diverted and laundered to support US atrocities in Central America. In 1988 shortly before a UN-brokered ceasefire, the USS Vincennes shot down Iran Air Flight 655 with two missiles, killing all 290 aboard including 66 children.  Rather than disciplinary consequences, its Captain received the Legion of Merit, a neck decoration reserved for flag rank officers and second only to the Congressional Medal of Honor.  Thus have we respected Iranian life.

Iran is not an aggressor nation, having invaded no other country for over 200 years. US and Israeli intelligence services – supported by the IAEA – acknowledge that NPT-signatory Iran has no nuclear weapons program, and moreover, would pose no military threat even with nukes.  They are neither crazy nor suicidal.  In contrast, NPT non-signatory Israel has repeatedly attacked and occupied territories of all its contiguous neighbors throughout its brief 67-year history and is the only nuclear threat in the region with both land- and sea-based missile delivery systems.  The US has completely destroyed two modern, advanced, secular, socialist Arab societies, has inflicted continuing chaos upon Afghanistan while restoring their opium production to assure continuing chaos in the West as well, and is covertly waging massive warfare against Syria and Yemen.

Having identified the real aggressors, real victims and real threats, what then is the real agenda behind Israel’s hysterical demands for attack and our insistent sanctions upon Iran, both violating the UN Charter prohibiting “the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state”?

Wahhabist Saudi Arabia bitterly opposes Shia Iran as a regional hegemonic rival. It has made common cause with Israel, which wants to eliminate Iran’s support of Hezbollah, the defensive force against Israel’s 1982 invasion and 18-year occupation of south Lebanon that remains Lebanon’s bulwark against Israeli aggression. The Saudis have provided much of the funding and the Israel lobby has provided vigorous political pressure behind our proxy war against Syria, the key “Shia crescent” bridge between Iran and Hezbollah.

But Israel and the Saudis aside, what independent US interests are involved? Russian and Chinese leaders seem to be implementing Brzezinski’s Grand Chessboard strategy more quietly and skillfully than the West. Sanctions against Iran have served a revitalized US cold war face-off against Russia, blocking Iran’s admission to the Shanghai Cooperation Organization which excludes membership to nations under UN sanctions. With India and Pakistan to become SCO members next year, inclusion of Iran would largely complete Russian-Asian dominance of central, southern and eastern Eurasia and encircle the resource-rich Caspian Basin.  Iran applied for SCO membership in 2008 and will be eligible to join when UN sanctions are lifted, and the US can no longer block this.

The SCO is a political, economic and military alliance that will soon represent about half the world’s population, intended to challenge the Bretton Woods financial institutions and reproduce the former Warsaw Pact’s counterweight to NATO.  Chinese, Indian and Russian troops marched together in Moscow’s WWII victory parade this year. The SCO overlaps the three-continent BRICS alliance, which including Brazil in turn overlaps Latin American alliances of Mercosur, ALBA and UNASUR with its new Banco del Sur for development lending free of neoliberal “structural adjustments” imposed by the World Bank and IMF.

Irrespective of congressional action on the agreement, the other P5+1 negotiating countries will not impose continuing sanctions. The EU is eager for Iranian natural gas.  Iran and Russia together hold a third of the world’s natural gas reserves, to which the EU wants access.  Force is not an option. Russia and Iran have already signed a major trade agreement and Russia will soon deliver them an S-300 surface-to-air anti-missile system, sufficient for effective defense against the US or Israel without needing to maintain ambiguity about a nuclear deterrent.

Iran will also provide essential strategic land and sea links in China’s far-reaching New Silk Roads projects and is a founding member of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank for financing these projects. Chinese companies have already begun pumping from Iran’s immense gas fields in the Persian Gulf and oil fields along its border with Iraq, purchased in yuan and other alternative currencies to bypass Western sanctions.

The Monroe Doctrine is finished and American power to control world resources is declining rapidly. Iran has refused to bend to our will, and the developing world is applauding. The 120-member Non-Aligned Movement chose Tehran for its 2015 conference and Iran is its current chair. We can either lose a decisive round or at least stay in the game. That, I believe, is what our acceptance of this accord will – at least for now – determine.

Jack Dresser, Ph.D., a US Army psychologist during the Vietnam War and currently a retired behavioral scientist, is national vice-chair of the Veterans for Peace working group on Palestine and the Middle East, a member of the International Society of Political Psychology, and co-director of the Al-Nakba Awareness Project in Oregon that focuses on the Israeli land seizure, ethnic cleansing and occupation of Palestine.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Iran Nuclear Agreement Within the “Grand Chessboard”. Decline of American Power

China Joins the Fight Against ISIS?

September 29th, 2015 by Stephen Lendman

A Russian, Chinese, Iranian, Iraqi, Syrian alliance against ISIS perhaps may encourage other countries to join it – a possibility likely terrifying Obama officials and their war-mongering partners.

On September 26, IDF-connected DEBKAfile (DF) said “the Chinese aircraft carrier Liaoning-CV-16 docked at the Syrian port of Tartus, accompanied by a guided missile cruiser.”

“Its arrival has upended the entire strategic situation surrounding the Syrian conflict, adding a new global dimension to Moscow and Tehran’s military support for Assad.”

The extent of China’s involvement remains unknown. DF calls it “highly detrimental (to) Israel’s strategic and military position” – code language for wanting nothing deterring its alliance with Washington from removing Assad, replacing him with a pro-Western puppet, in sinc with Washington’s regional objectives.

DF said its “military sources have evidence that (Beijing is) digging in for a prolonged stay in Syria.” Whether true remains to be seen. It claims China intends sending warplanes, anti-submarine helicopters, early warning helicopters and “at least 1,000 marines.”

The Lebanese-based Al-Masdar Al-‘Arabi (The Arab Source) news site reported “Chinese military advisors” heading for Syria. An unnamed Syrian army source was quoted saying “the Chinese will be arriving in the coming weeks.” They’ll join with their Russian counterparts, involved in training Syrian military personnel in weapons supplied.

RT International said initial Chinese military personnel “will reportedly be followed by troops.” It comes after Russia, Iran, Iraq and Syria established a Baghdad-based a joint information center to battle ISIS.

In September 2014, Iraqi Foreign Minister Ibrahim Jafari said his Chinese counterpart, Wang Yi, offered to help fight its scourge by launching airstrikes separate from US operations.

China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said Wang told Jafari that Beijing offered intelligence help and personnel training. He didn’t comment on whether direct involvement in combat would follow.

“China has been fighting terrorism and has been providing support and assistance to Iraq, including the Kurdish region, in our own way, and will continue to do so within the best of our capabilities,” Hong explained.

Beijing is Iraq’s largest oil industry investor. China National Petroleum Corporation (NPC) faces huge losses if Islamic State fighters control its operations. It abandoned its Syrian oil fields earlier. Iraq’s reserves are some of the world’s largest – a key reason for Beijing now apparently getting involved, to protect its regional interests.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at[email protected].

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.

It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.

 

  • Posted in Uncategorized
  • Comments Off on China Joins the Fight Against ISIS?

China Joins the Fight Against ISIS?

September 29th, 2015 by Stephen Lendman

A Russian, Chinese, Iranian, Iraqi, Syrian alliance against ISIS perhaps may encourage other countries to join it – a possibility likely terrifying Obama officials and their war-mongering partners.

On September 26, IDF-connected DEBKAfile (DF) said “the Chinese aircraft carrier Liaoning-CV-16 docked at the Syrian port of Tartus, accompanied by a guided missile cruiser.”

“Its arrival has upended the entire strategic situation surrounding the Syrian conflict, adding a new global dimension to Moscow and Tehran’s military support for Assad.”

The extent of China’s involvement remains unknown. DF calls it “highly detrimental (to) Israel’s strategic and military position” – code language for wanting nothing deterring its alliance with Washington from removing Assad, replacing him with a pro-Western puppet, in sinc with Washington’s regional objectives.

DF said its “military sources have evidence that (Beijing is) digging in for a prolonged stay in Syria.” Whether true remains to be seen. It claims China intends sending warplanes, anti-submarine helicopters, early warning helicopters and “at least 1,000 marines.”

The Lebanese-based Al-Masdar Al-‘Arabi (The Arab Source) news site reported “Chinese military advisors” heading for Syria. An unnamed Syrian army source was quoted saying “the Chinese will be arriving in the coming weeks.” They’ll join with their Russian counterparts, involved in training Syrian military personnel in weapons supplied.

RT International said initial Chinese military personnel “will reportedly be followed by troops.” It comes after Russia, Iran, Iraq and Syria established a Baghdad-based a joint information center to battle ISIS.

In September 2014, Iraqi Foreign Minister Ibrahim Jafari said his Chinese counterpart, Wang Yi, offered to help fight its scourge by launching airstrikes separate from US operations.

China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said Wang told Jafari that Beijing offered intelligence help and personnel training. He didn’t comment on whether direct involvement in combat would follow.

“China has been fighting terrorism and has been providing support and assistance to Iraq, including the Kurdish region, in our own way, and will continue to do so within the best of our capabilities,” Hong explained.

Beijing is Iraq’s largest oil industry investor. China National Petroleum Corporation (NPC) faces huge losses if Islamic State fighters control its operations. It abandoned its Syrian oil fields earlier. Iraq’s reserves are some of the world’s largest – a key reason for Beijing now apparently getting involved, to protect its regional interests.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at[email protected].

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.

It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on China Joins the Fight Against ISIS?

Occupied Guantanamo. US-Cuba Relations

September 29th, 2015 by Leonid Savin

A historic agreement has been signed recently between Cuba and the United States to restore diplomatic relations. On the Havana’s Malecon at the place of USA interests office the embassy was opened and the Cuban Mission appeared respectively in Washington, at the 16th Street.

There are different opinions about this event. The liberal interventionists in the United States count on the possibility for expansion in economics as well as through the other elements of “soft power”. The White House presented restoring of relations as a “renewal of USA leadership in North and South America, ending the outdated approach regards Cuba, promoting more effective changes that support Cuban people as well as the interests of national security.”

Michael Totten, one of the editors of liberal journal World Affairs was extremely excited during the negotiation process, noting that free enterprise and political liberalism will finally came to Cuba. Havana will become the jewel of the Caribbean and perhaps even of the hemisphere. It can experience an extraordinary boom in tourism industry, partly because of Florida and Mexico. The way forward for the Cuban prosperity is clear, Totten says: “To bring as many people as possible to the world economics and to US economics in particular.” However, Totten called Cubans terminally ill people if they are cut off from the large North American region they always belonged to before Castro.

The Cubans are more cautious in assessment of the economic freedoms and believe that USA will use tempting offers to establish a new form of dependence, at the same time depriving the Cuban people of their right and opportunity to participate in their own destiny.

Will the Cubans succeed to defend their independence while maintaining the achievements of previous years?

After all, in the bilateral relations if geopolitical players are unequal in size, military power and economy, there is always a temptation to label them as patron and client or as aggressor and victim. And Cuba has no more nuclear or other military umbrella of a friendly country like in the Soviet Union times.

The United States have their own distinct spatial and ideological imperatives. When Americans were just beginning their expansion, after the annexation of Texas and taking control over the Mississippi River basin, they continued conquering the South and seized a large part of Mexico. After that it became essential to establish control over key areas giving access to the Atlantic Ocean. According to the head of US intelligence and analytical center “Stratfor” George Friedman, Cuba was the fourth step in the US path to world domination. It was implemented in 1898 with the beginning of the first USA expeditionary war outside of its territory with the goal to seize Spanish colonies on the islands.

The last step was the manipulation before and during the Second World War which led to the creation of the bipolar world in 1945. However, after the Cuban Revolution the island got out of the direct control of the United States.  It caused inadequate reaction in Washington, where it was believed that lack of direct control over the island could be a threat to the US coast in the Gulf of Mexico area with the strategic ports country’s industry and trade depended on.

Because of that, the White House through the CIA and other agencies launched a number of campaigns against the Cuban Revolution: from organizing Fidel Castro assassinations to landing subversive groups and use of biological weapons. Part of the documents indicating the preparation of various provocations were declassified only recently.

And in the 90s when the opportunities for indirect actions appeared, the US Department of State initiated creating dissident movements in Cuba, including “Ladies in White”, the Union of Free Journalists of Cuba and various projects funded by the US Agency for International Development.

Therefore, looking at the restoration of diplomatic relations, Cuba is important for USA not only as a trading partner and supplier of the labor force and resources but also as the important geopolitical hub for its dominance in the Caribbean.

But there is one important point, which shows that the restoration of diplomatic relations was not equal. Moreover, the USA carefully avoided discussing this point during negotiations. This is the American naval base of Guantanamo, which is actually the evidence of occupation of the sovereign Cuban territory.

It’s well known that in Guantanamo were kept prisoners captured in Iraq and Afghanistan and suspected of connections to Al Qaeda. Numerous protests on this issue were held in many countries. They pointed out violation of the international law during detention, horrible conditions of confinement and use of various forms of torture.

However, the fact that all military and prison infrastructure was located directly on the territory of the island of Freedom, didn’t get much attention from international press. They were pretending not to hear Cuban position. As if it goes without saying that the United States have a right for such occupation.

And the 45 square land miles are still being trampled by the foot of foreign invaders who landed there already in June 1898. After that, the United States tried to enshrine in law its military presence in Cuba.

According to the so-called Platt Amendment adopted by the US Congress in 1901, Cuba was granted limited sovereignty with the right of intervention by the United States. And in 1903 the puppet government of Cuba and the United States have signed an agreement to establish there a naval base.  Note, that the US has used several times its right of intervention in Cuba: in 1906, 1912, 1917 and 1920 when there was a threat of the overthrow of the dictatorial regimes by people. And in 1934 during the administration of Franklin Delano Roosevelt a new treaty of friendship between the two countries was signed and the United States have been nicely using Cuban territory until 1958 when their military got disturbed by the revolutionary forces of the Castro brothers.

On January 1st, 1959 Batista’s government finally fell and whole territory of Cuba was declared free from foreign rule. On January 3rd, 1961 Cuba and the United States broke off diplomatic relations. But the troops remained in Guantanamo, partially serving as a gateway for dissidents and refugees from Haiti.

Status of the base has been changed by the events of September 11th, 2001, after which George Bush issued a law on the legality of the use of any power to search, seize and destroy those involved in the terrorist attack.

In January 2002, under the leadership of the US Marine Corps Command new infrastructure has been set up on the base to accommodate 2,000 prisoners. And almost immediately a plane from Kandahar, Afghanistan brought the first batch of three hundred people.

During the whole history of this dark place at least 800 prisoners were kept there. Known fact is that in June 2015 116 people were detained in Guantanamo prison and 655 were transferred to other countries.

Nevertheless, issue regarding the status of the base will inevitably be raised. That’s what American officials themselves are warning about.

Retired US Navy Admiral James Stavridis believes that after the warming of relations, the question of closing the biggest and the oldest military base in the Caribbean and Latin America will be immediately put on the agenda by Havana.

He sees an opportunity to shut down the prison, but only if USA retain control of the Navy base, since it is a major logistics hub for the Fourth Fleet. This fleet based in the South Atlantic has been recreated in the summer of 2008, by the way, despite the protests of the leaders of Brazil, Argentina and Venezuela.

Stavridis assumes that Cuba will use simple argument to justify the shut down of the base: the Panama Canal was returned to Panama and in other Latin American countries, at the request of their leaders, points of the military presence of Pentagon have also been closed. Therefore, for the normalization of relations the same should be done regarding Cuba.

Moreover, resistance of other countries on deployment of US military bases, such as Japan and South Korea will be an additional justification in the general campaign for the global demilitarization.

But for now Washington continues to be the invader, clear evidence to that is the example of Guantanamo. And the US Department of State officials are trying to throw dust in the eyes, coming up with new myths aimed against Russia, Iran, China, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela and other sovereign powers.

Sadly enough, the hypocrisy of American politicians knows no limit.

By the way, one day before signing the law of the economic blockade against Cuba, US President John F. Kennedy sent his secretary to buy 1200 Cuban cigars for his own needs.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Occupied Guantanamo. US-Cuba Relations

In this age of pervasive media, the primary method of social control is through the creation of narratives delivered to the public through newspapers, TV, radio, computers, cell phones and any other gadget that can convey information. This reality has given rise to an obsession among the power elite to control as much of this messaging as possible.

So, regarding U.S. relations toward the world, we see the State Department, the White House, Pentagon, NATO and other agencies pushing various narratives to sell the American people and other populations on how they should view U.S. policies, rivals and allies. The current hot phrase for this practice is “strategic communications” or Stratcom, which blends psychological operations, propaganda and P.R. into one mind-bending smoothie.

I have been following this process since the early 1980s when the Reagan administration sought to override “the Vietnam Syndrome,” a public aversion to foreign military interventions that followed the Vietnam War. To get Americans to “kick” this syndrome, Reagan’s team developed “themes”about overseas events that would push American “hot buttons.”

Tapping into the Central Intelligence Agency’s experience in psy-ops targeted at foreign audiences, President Ronald Reagan and CIA Director William J. Casey assembled a skilled team inside the White House led by CIA propaganda specialist Walter Raymond Jr.

From his new perch on the National Security Council staff, Raymond oversaw inter-agency task forces to sell interventionist policies in Central America and other trouble spots. The game, as Raymond explained it in numerous memos to his underlings, was to glue black hats on adversaries and white hats on allies, whatever the truth really was.

The fact that many of the U.S.-backed forces – from the Nicaraguan Contras to the Guatemalan military – were little more than corrupt death squads couldn’t be true, at least according to psy-ops doctrine. They had to be presented to the American public as wearing white hats. Thus, the Contras became the “moral equals of our Founding Fathers” and Guatemala’s murderous leader Efrain Rios Montt was getting a “bum rap” on human rights, according to the words scripted for President Reagan.

The scheme also required that anyone – say, a journalist, a human rights activist or a congressional investigator – who contradicted this white-hat mandate must be discredited, marginalized or destroyed, a routine of killing any honest messenger.

But it turned out that the most effective part of this propaganda strategy was to glue black hats on adversaries. Since nearly all foreign leaders have serious flaws, it proved much easier to demonize them – and work the American people into war frenzies – than it was to persuade the public that Washington’s favored foreign leaders were actually paragons of virtue.

An Unflattering Hat

Once the black hat was jammed on a foreign leader’s head, you could say whatever you wanted about him and disparage any American who questioned the extreme depiction as a “fill-in-the-blank apologist” or a “stooge” or some other ugly identifier that would either silence the dissenter or place him or her outside the bounds of acceptable debate.

Given the careerist conformity of Washington, nearly everyone fell into line, including news outlets and human rights groups. If you wanted to retain your “respectability” and “influence,” you agreed with the conventional wisdom. So, with every foreign controversy, we got a new “group think” about the new “enemy.” The permissible boundary of each debate was set mostly by the neoconservatives and their “liberal interventionist” sidekicks.

That this conformity has not served American national interests is obvious. Take, for example, the disastrous Iraq War, which has cost the U.S. taxpayers an estimated $1 trillion, led to the deaths of some 4,500 American soldiers, killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, and unleashed chaos across the strategic Middle East and now into Europe.

Most Americans now agree that the Iraq War “wasn’t worth it.” But it turns out that Official Washington’s catastrophic “group thinks” don’t just die well-deserved deaths. Like a mutating virus, they alter shape as the outside conditions change and survive in a new form.

So, when the public caught on to the Iraq War deceptions, the neocon/liberal-hawk pundits just came up with a new theme to justify their catastrophic Iraq strategy, i.e., “the successful surge,” the dispatch of 30,000 more U.S. troops to the war zone. This theme was as bogus as the WMD lies but the upbeat storyline was embraced as the new “group think” in 2007-2008.

The “successful surge” was a myth, in part, because many of its alleged “accomplishments” actually predated the “surge.” The program to pay off Sunnis to stop shooting at Americans and the killing of “Al Qaeda in Iraq” leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi both occurred in 2006, before the surge even began. And its principal goal of resolving sectarian grievances between Sunni and Shiite was never accomplished.

But Official Washington wrapped the “surge” in the bloody flag of “honoring the troops,” who were credited with eventually reducing the level of Iraqi violence by carrying out the “heroic” surge strategy as ordered by President Bush and devised by the neocons. Anyone who noted the holes in this story was dismissed as disrespecting “the troops.”

The cruel irony was that the neocon pundits, who had promoted the Iraq War and then covered their failure by hailing the “surge,” had little or no regard for “the troops” who mostly came for lower socio-economic classes and were largely abstractions to the well-dressed, well-schooled and well-paid talking heads who populate the think tanks and op-ed pages.

Safely ensconced behind the “successful surge” myth, the Iraq War devotees largely escaped any accountability for the chaos and bloodshed they helped cause. Thus, the same “smart people” were in place for the Obama presidency and just as ready to buy into new interventionist “group thinks” – gluing black hats on old and new adversaries, such as Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi, Syria’s Bashar al-Assad and, most significantly, Russia’s Vladimir Putin.

Causing Chaos

In 2011, led this time by the liberal interventionists – the likes of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and White House aide Samantha Power – the U.S. military and some NATO allies took aim at Libya, scoffing at Gaddafi’s claim that his country was threatened by Islamic terrorists. It was not until Gaddafi’s military was destroyed by Western airstrikes (and he was tortured and murdered) that it became clear that he wasn’t entirely wrong about the Islamic extremists.

The jihadists seized large swaths of Libyan territory, killed the U.S. ambassador and three other diplomatic personnel in Benghazi, and forced the closing of U.S. and other Western embassies in Tripoli. For good measure, Islamic State terrorists forced captured Coptic Christians to kneel on a Libyan beach before beheading them.

Amid this state of anarchy, Libya has been the source of hundreds of thousands of migrants trying to reach Europe by boat. Thousands have drowned in the Mediterranean. But, again, the leading U.S. interventionists faced no accountability. Clinton is the frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination, and Power is now U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations.

Also, in 2011, a similar uprising occurred in Syria against the secular regime headed by President Assad, with nearly identical one-sided reporting about the “white-hatted” opposition and the “black-hatted” government. Though many protesters indeed appear to have been well-meaning opponents of Assad, Sunni terrorists penetrated the opposition from the beginning.

This gray reality was almost completely ignored in the Western press, which almost universally denounced the government when it retaliated against opposition forces for killing police and soldiers. The West depicted the government response as unprovoked attacks on “peaceful protesters.” [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Hidden Origins of Syria’s Civil War.”]

This one-sided narrative nearly brought the U.S. military to the point of another intervention after Aug. 21, 2013, when a mysterious sarin gas attack killed hundreds in a suburb of Damascus. Official Washington’s neocons and the pro-interventionists in the State Department immediately blamed Assad’s forces for the atrocity and demanded a bombing campaign.

But some U.S. intelligence analysts suspected a “false-flag” provocation by Islamic terrorists seeking to get the U.S. air force to destroy Assad’s army for them. At the last minute, President Obama steered away from that cliff and – with the help of President Putin – got Assad to surrender Syria’s chemical arsenal, while Assad continued to deny a role in the sarin attack. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “The Collapsing Syria-Sarin Case.”]

Upset over Iran

Putin also assisted Obama on another front with another demonized “enemy,” Iran. In late 2013, the two leaders collaborated in getting Iran to make significant concessions on its nuclear program, clearing the way for negotiations that eventually led to stringent international controls.

These two diplomatic initiatives alarmed the neocons and their right-wing Israeli friends. Since the mid-1990s, the neocons had worked closely with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in plotting a “regime change” strategy for countries that were viewed as troublesome to Israel, with Iraq, Syria and Iran topping the list.

Putin’s interference with that agenda – by preventing U.S. bombing campaigns against Syria and Iran – was viewed as a threat to this longstanding Israeli/neocon strategy. There was also fear that the Obama-Putin teamwork could lead to renewed pressure on Israel to recognize a Palestinian state. So, that relationship had to be blown up.

The detonation occurred in early 2014 when a neocon-orchestrated coup overthrew elected Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych and replaced him with a fiercely anti-Russian regime which included neo-Nazi and other ultra-nationalist elements as well as free-market extremists.

Ukraine had been on the neocon radar at least since September 2013, just after Putin undercut plans for bombing Syria. Neocon Carl Gershman, president of the U.S.-government-funded National Endowment for Democracy, wrote a Washington Post op-ed deeming Ukraine “the biggest prize” and a key steppingstone toward another regime change in Moscow, removing the troublesome Putin.

Gershman’s op-ed was followed by prominent neocons, such as Sen. John McCain and Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland, urging on violent protests that involved firebombing the police. But the State Department and the mainstream media glued white hats on the Maidan protesters and black hats on the police and the government.

Then, on Feb. 20, 2014, a mysterious sniper attack killed both police and demonstrators, leading to more clashes and the deaths of scores of people. The U.S. government and press corps blamed Yanukovych and – despite his signing an agreement for early elections on Feb. 21 – the Maidan “self-defense forces,” spearheaded by neo-Nazi goons, overran government buildings on Feb. 22 and installed a coup regime, quickly recognized by the State Department as “legitimate.”

Though the fault for the Feb. 20 sniper attack was never resolved – the new Ukrainian regime showed little interest in getting to the bottom of it – other independent investigations pointed toward a provocation by right-wing gunmen who targeted police and protesters with the goal of deepening the crisis and blaming Yanukovych, which is exactly what happened.

These field reports, including one from the BBC, indicated that the snipers likely were associated with the Maidan uprising, not the Yanukovych government. [Another worthwhile documentary on this mystery is “Maidan Massacre.”]

One-Sided Reporting

Yet, during the Ukrainian coup, The New York Times and most other mainstream media outlets played a role similar to what they had done prior to the Iraq War when they hyped false and misleading stories about WMD. By 2014, the U.S. press corps no longer seemed to even pause before undertaking its expected propaganda role.

So, after Yanukovych’s ouster, when ethnic Russians in Crimea and eastern Ukraine rose up against the new anti-Russian order in Kiev, the only acceptable frame for the U.S. media was to blame the resistance on Putin. It must be “Russian aggression” or a “Russian invasion.”

When a referendum in Crimea overwhelmingly favored secession from Ukraine and rejoining Russia, the U.S. media denounced the 96 percent vote as a “sham” imposed by Russian guns. Similarly, resistance in eastern Ukraine could not have reflected popular sentiment unless it came from mass delusions induced by “Russian propaganda.”

Meanwhile, evidence of a U.S.-backed coup, such as the intercepted phone call of a pre-coup discussion between Assistant Secretary Nuland and U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt on how “to midwife this thing” and who to install in the new government (“Yats is the guy”), disappeared into the memory hole, not helpful for the desired narrative. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “NYT Still Pretends No Coup in Ukraine.”]

When Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 was shot down over eastern Ukraine on July 17, 2014, the blame machine immediately roared into gear again, accusing Putin and the ethnic Russian rebels. But some U.S. intelligence analysts reportedly saw the evidence going in a different direction, implicating a rogue element of the Ukrainian regime.

Again, the mainstream media showed little skepticism toward the official story blaming Putin, even though the U.S. government and other Western nations refused to make public any hard evidence supporting the Putin-did-it case, even now more than a year later. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “MH-17 Mystery: A New Tonkin Gulf Case.”]

The pattern that we have seen over and over is that once a propaganda point is scored against one of the neocon/liberal-hawk “enemies,” the failure to actually prove the allegation is not seen as suspicious, at least not inside the mainstream media, which usually just repeats the old narrative again and again, whether its casting blame on Putin for MH-17, or on Yanukovych for the sniper attack, or on Assad for the sarin gas attack.

Instead of skepticism, it’s always the same sort of “group think,” with nothing learned from the disaster of the Iraq War because there was virtually no accountability for those responsible.

Obama’s Repression

Yet, while the U.S. press corps deserves a great deal of blame for this failure to investigate important controversies independently, President Obama and his administration have been the driving force in this manipulation of public opinion over the past six-plus years. Instead of the transparent government that Obama promised, he has run one of the most opaque, if not the most secretive, administrations in American history.

Besides refusing to release the U.S. government’s evidence on pivotal events in these international crises, Obama has prosecuted more national security whistleblowers than all past presidents combined.

That repression, including a 35-year prison term for Pvt. Bradley/Chelsea Manning and the forced exile of indicted National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden, has intimidated current intelligence analysts who know about the manipulation of public opinion but don’t dare tell the truth to reporters for fear of imprisonment.

Most of the “leaked” information that you still see in the mainstream media is what’s approved by Obama or his top aides to serve their interests. In other words, the “leaks” are part of the propaganda, made to seem more trustworthy because they’re coming from an unidentified “source” rather than a named government spokesman.

At this late stage in Obama’s presidency, his administration seems drunk on the power of “perception management” with the new hot phrase, “strategic communications” which boils psychological operations, propaganda and P.R. into one intoxicating brew.

From NATO’s Gen. Philip Breedlove to the State Department’s Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy Richard Stengel, the manipulation of information is viewed as a potent “soft power” weapon. It’s a way to isolate and damage an “enemy,” especially Russia and Putin.

This demonization of Putin makes cooperation between him and Obama difficult, such as Russia’s recent military buildup in Syria as part of a commitment to prevent a victory by the Islamic State and Al Qaeda. Though one might think that Russian help in fighting terrorism would be welcomed, Nuland’s State Department office responded with a bizarre and futile attempt to build an aerial blockade of Russian aid flying to Syria across eastern Europe.

Nuland and other neocons apparently would prefer having the black flag of Sunni terrorism flying over Damascus than to work with Putin to block such a catastrophe. The hysteria over Russia’s assistance in Syria is a textbook example of how people can begin believing their own propaganda and letting it dictate misguided actions.

On Thursday, Obama’s White House sank to a new low by having Press Secretary Josh Earnest depict Putin as “desperate” to land a meeting with Obama. Earnest then demeaned Putin’s appearance during an earlier sit-down session with Netanyahu in Moscow. “President Putin was striking a now-familiar pose of less-than-perfect posture and unbuttoned jacket and, you know, knees spread far apart to convey a particular image,’ Earnest said.

But the meeting photos actually showed both men with their suit coats open and both sitting with their legs apart at least for part of the time. Responding to Earnest’s insults, the Russians denied that Putin was “desperate” for a meeting with Obama and added that the Obama administration had proposed the meeting to coincide with Putin’s appearance at the United Nations General Assembly in New York on Monday.

“We do not refuse contacts that are proposed,” said Yuri Ushakov, a top foreign policy adviser to Putin. “We support maintaining constant dialogue at the highest level.” The Kremlin also included no insults about Obama’s appearance in the statement.

However, inside Official Washington, there appears to be little thought that the endless spinning, lying and ridiculing might dangerously corrode American democracy and erode any remaining trust the world’s public has in the word of the U.S. government. Instead, there seems to be great confidence that skilled propagandists can discredit anyone who dares note that the naked empire has wrapped itself in the sheerest of see-through deceptions.

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). You also can order Robert Parry’s trilogy on the Bush Family and its connections to various right-wing operatives for only $34. The trilogy includes America’s Stolen Narrative. For details on this offer, click here.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Strategic Communications (Stratcom) and “Soft Power” Weapons: The Influence of False Narrative on the American People