US strike kills 4 on Pak-Afghan border

0

[unable to retrieve full-text content]A US killer drone strike has killed at least four people and injured several others in an area on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

US Marines deployed near Syria border

0

[unable to retrieve full-text content]US Marines have been deployed along Jordan’s border with Syria as the Syrian army inflicts heavy losses on foreign-backed militants, Israeli media reports say .

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Senate defeats bills to keep student loan rates low

0

John Burfisher
USA Today
June 7, 2013

The Senate on Thursday failed to pass two bills that would have blocked increases in federal student loan rates, which are set to double July 1.

The Democrats’ bill would have kept interest rates where they are for the next two years to give Congress more time to negotiate student loans. Total student loan debt in the U.S. is about $1 trillion.

“What we put forward today was a perfectly sensible solution to help address the problem,” said Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash. According to Murray, the Democratic bill would have protected 7 million college students from rate increases. “It seems like a no-brainer to me, but apparently not to Republicans.”

Read full article

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Friday, June 7, 2013 at 8:43 am

Tags: ,






<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Coral Fights Back Slowly from Ocean Heating

0

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

By Tim Radford, Climate News Network

The good news is that some coral can recover from periodic warming of the oceans. The bad news is it might take too long.

Related Entries

This article originally appeared on: TruthDig

Cenk Uygur on NSA Scandal: ‘Barack Obama is a liar.’

0

<!–

MailChimp RSS-Email Widget

–>

What happened to not spying on innocent civilians?

June 7, 2013
 |

Like this article?

Join our email list:

Stay up to date with the latest headlines via email.

In light of the reports that the National Security Administration has been collecting information from American citizens’ cell phones, Cenk calls out President Obama for false campaign promises to fight terrorism while protecting our privacy and civil liberties. “I will provide our intelligence and law enforcement agencies with the tools they need to track and take out the terrorists without undermining our Constitution and our freedom,” Obama promised in 2008. “That means no more illegal wiretapping of American citizens…that’s not who we are.”

“Well, that’s not who we’re supposed to be, but that’s exactly who Barack Obama is,” Cenk says. “He lied. It’s not subtle. He said ‘there will be no spying on citizens who are not suspected of a crime.’ He lied. There is spying on all of us, and we are not suspected of a crime. Barack Obama is a liar.”

Cenk Uygur is co-host of The Young Turks, the first liberal radio show to air nationwide.

Liked this article? Join our email list
Stay up to date with the latest headlines via email

Like Alternet on Facebook

‘;
jQuery(‘#root_subfooter’).before( html );

var slide_top_offset = calculate_slide_div_top_offset();
var slide_left_offset = calculate_slide_div_left_offset();

jQuery(‘#like_alternet_on_fb’)
.css(‘position’,’fixed’)
.css(‘top’,’-100px’)
.css(‘width’,’450px’)
.css(‘height’,’105px’)
.css(‘background’,’#E8E8FB’)
.css(‘border’,’10px solid #223BBE’)
.css(‘border-right’,’0px’);

toggle();

}

function resize_slide_div(){

var slide_top_offset = calculate_slide_div_top_offset();
var slide_left_offset = calculate_slide_div_left_offset();

jQuery(‘#like_alternet_on_fb’)
.css(‘top’,slide_top_offset)
.css(‘left’,slide_left_offset);

}

/* HOOK SCRIPT INTO EVENTS */

var paging = String( getUrlVars()[“page”] );

if( paging == ‘off’ ){
var is_paging_off = true;
} else {
var is_paging_off = false;
}

//console.log( ‘Is paging off ? [‘ + is_paging_off + ‘] ‘ + getUrlVars()[“paging”] );

var page = String( getUrlVars()[“page”] );

if( page == ‘undefined’ ){
var is_first_page = true;
} else {
var is_first_page = false;
}

//console.log( ‘Is first page ? [‘ + is_first_page + ‘] ‘ + page );

jQuery(window).scroll(function() {

var scrollYpos = jQuery(document).scrollTop();

if( scrollYpos >= pop_in_yPos && on_off_toggle == ‘off’ ){
toggle();
}

if( scrollYpos

‘;
jQuery(‘div.media-image’).each( function(index){
src = String(jQuery(this).children(‘img.media-image’).attr(‘src’));
if( src != ” && src != ‘undefined’ ){
parts = src.split(‘/’);
if( parts[parts.length-2] == ‘slideshow’ ){ new_src = ‘/files/slideshow/’+parts[parts.length-1]; }
else if( parts[parts.length-2] == ‘AFP’ ){ new_src = ‘/files/images/AFP/’+parts[parts.length-1]; }
else if( parts[parts.length-2] == ‘public’ ){ new_src = ‘/files/’+parts[parts.length-1]; }
else if( parts[parts.length-3] == ‘public’ ){ new_src = ‘/files/’+parts[parts.length-2]+’/’+parts[parts.length-1]; }
else { new_src = false; }
if( new_src ){ jQuery(this).html(‘‘+jQuery(this).html()+enlarge_html+’‘); }
}
});

var slideshowdiv; var new_html; var img_obj; var sourcediv; var titlediv; var captiondiv; var title; var caption;

jQuery(‘div.slideshow-body div.slideshow div.field-item’).each( function(index){

slideshowdiv = jQuery(this).find(‘div.altslideshow-embedded-gallery’);
img_obj = slideshowdiv.find(‘img’);
src = img_obj.attr(‘src’);

title = slideshowdiv.children(‘div.altslideshow-title’).html();
if( title == null ){ title = ”; }

caption = slideshowdiv.children(‘div.altslideshow-caption’).html();
if( caption == null ){ caption = ”; }

if( src != ” && src != ‘undefined’ ){
// alert( ‘SRC: ‘+src );
parts = src.split(‘/’);
if( parts[parts.length-2] == ‘slideshow’ ){ new_src = ‘/files/slideshow/’+parts[parts.length-1]; }
else if( parts[parts.length-2] == ‘AFP’ ){ new_src = ‘/files/images/AFP/’+parts[parts.length-1]; }
else if( parts[parts.length-2] == ‘public’ ){ new_src = ‘/files/’+parts[parts.length-1]; }
else if( parts[parts.length-3] == ‘public’ ){ new_src = ‘/files/’+parts[parts.length-2]+’/’+parts[parts.length-1]; }
else { new_src = false; }
// alert( ‘New SRC: ‘+new_src );
if( new_src ){
img_obj.parent().attr(‘href’,new_src).attr(‘rel’,’lightbox[slides]’).attr(‘title’,title+’
‘+caption).append(‘

Click to enlarge.

‘);
}
}

//sourcediv = jQuery(this).find(‘div.altslideshow-source’);
//titlediv = jQuery(this).find(‘div.altslideshow-title’);
//captiondiv = jQuery(this).find(‘div.altslideshow-caption’);
//sourcediv.after( titlediv ).after( captiondiv );

});


This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

One-quarter of Gitmo prisoners now being force-fed

0

Guantanamo Bay’s medical team is now force-feeding 41 of the 166 prisoners at the US detention facility. With four detainees in hospital, the strike shows no signs of abating a month after President Obama again pledged to close the base.

The latest press release from
the facility reported the rise in the number of inmates receiving
enteral feeds, up from the previous 39. The report also claims
that the four prisoners currently undergoing treatment in a
detainee hospital are not in critical condition.

The practice of force-feeding
the prisoners as a way of avoiding the political ramifications of
their death has been condemned as
“cruel, inhuman, and degrading
treatment,”
which is
illegal under international law.

Human Rights Watch (HRW)
brought the issue to the attention of the US government back in
May in a joint letter to Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel. The
rights group detailed the demeaning process by which a detainee
is
“strapped into a chair
with restraints on his legs, arms, body, and sometimes head,
immobilizing him.”

 “I can’t describe how
painful it is to be force-fed this way. As it was thrust in, it
made me feel like throwing up. I wanted to vomit, but I couldn’t.
There was agony in my chest, throat and stomach. I had never
experienced such pain before,”
hunger-striker Samir Naji al Hasan Moqbel
told HRW, relating the horrors of Gitmo’s force-feeding
room.

President Barack Obama’s pledge last month to work to close
the facility has apparently fallen by the wayside, with no steps
taken thus far. He also promised to end the ban on sending
prisoners who had been cleared for transfer back to Yemen, one of
the main obstacles impeding the closure of the camp. 

On Monday, a Republican
representative proposed legislation that would effectively force
Obama to keep the facility open. The wording in the 2014 defense
authorization bill also prohibits the transfer of Guantanamo
inmates to the US or countries like Yemen, and would channel
$247.4 million of state funds to constructions costs.

The legislation was slammed by
Democrats as “a ridiculous waste of money” when the US
Military is making cuts to its budget. 

The
prisoners at Guantanamo published a plea at the end of May for
the physicians overseeing their detention at the camp to be
changed. They argued that the current personnel are not impartial
to the wishes of the US government. 

The letter was signed by nine of the Gitmo prisoners, as well as
the lawyers of several others.

Prisoners at Guantanamo began their hunger strike four months ago
as a desperate attempt to attract international attention to
their plight. Some of the inmates have been held without a trial
for over a decade, and many have expressed fears they will spend
the rest of their lives in their cells in Guantanamo.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Obama to receive visiting Chinese pres.

0

This file photo shows US President Barack Obama (R) meet with China’s then-Vice President Xi Jinping in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington.

Chinaâ„¢s President Xi Jinping is expected to meet with his American counterpart in the US state of California.

Xi, on a state visit to the United States, will hold talks with Barack Obama at Sunnylands, a 200-acre estate located in Rancho Mirage, California, at 0000 GMT on Friday. The two presidents will meet again on Saturday.

According to a May statement from the White House, the two presidents Å“will hold in-depth discussions on a wide range of bilateral, regional and global issues… They will review progress and challenges in US-China relations over the past four years and discuss ways to enhance cooperation, while constructively managing our differences, in the years ahead.”

Cyber attacks allegedly waged by Chinaâ„¢s government and military against the US government and corporate networks will reportedly top the agenda in Xiâ„¢s two-day visit.

Speaking at a security forum in Singapore attended by top Chinese military officials on June 1, US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said, Å“The United States has expressed our concerns about the growing threat of cyber intrusions, some of which appear to be tied to the Chinese government and military.”

Hagel also said that Washington is determined to work closely with China and other countries Å“to establish international norms of responsible behaviour in cyberspace.”

The remarks came after Chinaâ„¢s Defense Ministry denounced a recent US report that alleged Chinese hackers had gained access to designs of over two dozen major US weapons systems.

On May 28, the Washington Post cited a US Defense Science Board report that the compromised US designs contained those for combat aircraft and ships, as well as vital missile defenses.

On May 30, Chinese Defense Ministry spokesman Geng Yansheng told a monthly news briefing, Å“It [the report] both underestimates the Pentagonâ„¢s defensive security abilities and the Chinese peopleâ„¢s intelligence.”

Another report by the Pentagon in May accused China of trying to break into Washingtonâ„¢s defense computer network.

China issued a statement in reaction to the report and called Washington the real Å“hacking empire” that has Å“an extensive espionage network.”

On February 28, the Chinese Defense Ministry said US hackers had been the main culprits behind the massive wave of cyber attacks against two military websites in China.

MAM/KA

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

David Cameron to attend Bilderberg group meeting

0

Nicholas Watt
guardian.co.uk
June 7, 2013

David Cameron is to attend the secretive Bilderberg group at the luxury Grove hotel in Watford on Friday evening, in a move that is likely to raise questions about his pledge to lead Britain’s most transparent government.

Downing Street said it was acting in an open manner by publicizing the prime minister’s attendance in advance.

The PM’s spokesman, who said heads of government of countries hosting the annual Bilderberg meeting were usually invited to attend, said it would be a private event and that civil servants were not expected to attend.

No 10 is to clarify the position because ministers are usually expected to be accompanied by civil service note-takers when they meet business leaders. Henri de Castries, the chairman and CEO of the AXA Group, is the Bilderberg chairman.

The PM’s spokesman said: “He will participate in a discussion around domestic and global economic issues. He feels it is an opportunity to discuss economic issues with senior ministers, businesspeople and academics.”

Downing Street said that it would not publicise any details of the prime minister’s meetings. “It is a private meeting so we are not going to go into any further details,” the spokesman said.

“On a wider point the prime minister has always been clear about the importance of transparency which is why this government has taken a number of steps in terms of publishing more data, more information about meetings.”

The ministerial code, published by the government in September 2010, said that “external meetings” held by ministers would be published on a quarterly basis. It says: “Ministers meet many people and organisations and consider a wide range of views as part of the formulation of government policy. Departments will publish, at least quarterly, details of ministers’ external meetings.”

Cameron and Nick Clegg pledged when they formed the coalition to lead the most transparent government to date. The coalition agreement said: “The government believes that we need to throw open the doors of public bodies, to enable the public to hold politicians and public bodies to account.”

No 10 said it did not believe that civil servants would accompany the prime minister. Asked whether he would be accompanied by officials, the PM’s spokesman said: “I am not aware of any officials going. But I am happy to double check.”

Cameron’s attendance at the meeting brings to three the number of British ministers who will attend this year’s Bilderberg group summit. George Osborne is attending and Kenneth Clarke, the former chancellor, is a member of the group’s steering committee.

The Bilderberg group says the costs of the annual meeting are the responsibility of the steering group, whose members include the former Barclays chairman Marcus Agius, the CEO of the defence manufacturer EADS, Thomas Enders, and the Goldman Sachs chairman, Peter Sutherland.

The group says: “There is no detailed agenda, no resolutions are proposed, no votes are taken, and no policy statements are issued.”

Cleric urges candidates to abide by law

0

Tehran interim Friday Prayers leader has called on presidential candidates to adhere to the law and accept the final result of the June 14 election.

“Law-abidance is [an] unchangeable [principle]…. If a candidate has an objection to not being elected, he must pursue it legally,” Ayatollah Seyyed Ahmad Khatami told worshipers in the capital city.

He added that the message of the upcoming presidential and council elections is that the Iranian people are in charge of their own destiny.

The cleric stated that the international community is watching the election closely and that the vote has somehow become internationalized.

Ayatollah Khatami said public participation is important because each vote cast will be another ËœYesâ„¢ to the Islamic Republic.

He also noted that religious leaders do not have the right to back any candidate and it is the Iranian nation that has the final say in this matter.

Å“The [Islamic] government does not support any candidate and the Leader [of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei] has repeatedly stated that he does not back any of the candidates and even those installed by the Leader have no right to support a certain candidate, because it is for people to decide,” he said.

Secretary of Iran’s Expediency Council Mohsen Rezaei, Tehran Mayor Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, President of the Center for Strategic Research of the Expediency Council Hassan Rohani, lawmaker Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council Saeed Jalili, former Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati, former First Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref, and former Telecommunications Minister Mohammad Gharazi will compete in Iranâ„¢s 11th presidential election.

On June 14, Iranians will cast their ballots at over 66,000 polling stations across the country, and some 285 polling stations will be set up for Iranian nationals in other countries.

The fourth city and rural council elections are also scheduled to be held on the same day.

MRS/SS

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Pro-Palestine march to be held globally

0

Pro-Palestinian activists across the world are set to hold demonstrations to call for the liberation of al-Quds (Jerusalem) and all Palestinian territories.

The peaceful anti-Israeli demonstrations called Å“The Global March to al-Quds,” are expected to take place in the West Bank, Gaza Strip, US, UK, Canada, Germany, Turkey, Yemen, Indonesia and many other countries on Friday.

Å“The Global March to al-Quds” is held every year to mark the anniversary of the occupation of East al-Quds by Israeli forces during the 1967 Six-Day War.

The demonstrators will also protest against the expansion of illegal Israeli settlements on the occupied Palestinian lands and Tel Aviv’s apartheid policies against Palestinians.

Last year, hundreds of people were injured after Israeli forces attacked participants in Å“The Global March to al-Quds” in the West Bank and Gaza.

Israel has occupied the West Bank and East al-Quds, where the holy al-Aqsa Mosque is located, in 1967. Tel Aviv annexed East al-Quds in 1981 in a move not recognized by the international community.

Palestinians want East al-Quds as capital of their future state.

HM/KA/SS

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Russia to hold 200 drills this year

0

The Russian Defense Ministry has announced plans for conducting more than 200 drills in the next six months.

The ministry spokesman Colonel Igor Yegorov said on Thursday that the Strategic Missile Forces is expected to hold the exercises.

Å“During the summer training period, the [Strategic Missile Forces] SMF is planning to hold over 200 exercises, including tactical drills at the division-regiment level as well as command post exercises at the army level,” Yegorov said.

The SMF plans to modernize its command-and-control systems to advance its ability to overcome missile defenses and boost the survivability of delivery vehicles.

Six kinds of silo-based and mobile ICBM systems are currently on combat duty with Russiaâ„¢s SMF, such as Voyevoda (SS-18 Satan), which is able to carry 10 warheads, the Topol-M (Stalin) and RS-24 Yars systems.

The Russian forces tested a prototype of a new solid-fuel intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) on Thursday. The missile was fired from a mobile launcher in the Astrakhan region and successfully hit the target in Kazakhstan.

The new missile is expected to replace Topol-M and Yars in the near future.

SAB/KA

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Russia ready to send peacekeepers to Israel-Syria border

0

Russia may replace Austrian UN peacekeepers who withdrew from Golan Heights at Istrael Syria border. A UN representative has welcomed the proposal, announced by the country’s president Vladimir Putin.

Russia may replace Austrian UN peacekeepers who withdrew from
Golan Heights at Israel-Syria border. A UN representative has
welcomed the proposal, announced by the country’s president
Vladimir Putin.

“In view of the complicated situation which is currently
unfolding on the Golan Heights, we could replace the Austrian
peacekeeping contingent, which is withdrawing from this region,
on the disengagement line between the Israeli troops and the
Syrian army,”
Putin said.

“Naturally, that will happen only if the regional powers show
interest in our proposal and if the U.N. secretary-general asks
us to do that,”
Putin said

DETAILS TO FOLLOW

This article originally appeared on: RT

7 Georgian soldiers die in Afghanistan

0

The US-led NATO forces in Afghanistan have confirmed the death of at least seven Georgian soldiers in a car bomb attack in the restive southern province of Helmand.

The military alliance said in a statement that the soldiers were killed on Thursday when Taliban militants blew up an explosive-laden truck outside a Georgian military base in the country’s volatile south.

Å“Seven Georgian International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) service members were killed yesterday when enemies of Afghanistan attacked their position in southern Afghanistan with a vehicle-borne improvised explosive device (IED),” the ISAF said in a statement on Friday.

Nine soldiers were also wounded in the deadly attack that sent shockwaves through NATO countries contributing troops to the Afghan war.

The Taliban militants have claimed responsibility for the attack, noting that they have killed as many as twenty foreign soldiers.

Georgian Defense Minister Irakli Alasania was reported to have arrived in the Afghan capital Kabul to visit Georgian troops and wounded soldiers. Alasania reportedly met with his Afghan counterpart Bismillah Khan Mohammadi to discuss the attack.

The latest fatalities bring to at least 30 the number of Georgian troops killed in Afghanistan since 2001.

According to the icasualties website, at least 3,330 foreign soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan since the US-led war began in 2001.

The offensive removed the Taliban from power, but insecurity continues to rise across Afghanistan, despite the presence of thousands of US-led troops.

The increasing number of military casualties in Afghanistan has caused widespread anger in the US and other NATO member states, undermining public support for the Afghan war.

JR/KA/SS

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Cyber ceasefire? US and China square off over Internet espionage claims

0



Published time: June 07, 2013 12:44

Download video (22.96 MB)
Embed

Code

The issue of cyber-attacks, accusations of which have marred US-China relations for months, is set to be discussed by the two nations’ leaders at their first informal meeting, scheduled to take place in Sunnylands, California.

The talks have been preceded by months of back-and-forth
allegations of cyber-espionage. Washington in particular has
repeatedly accused Beijing of perpetrating cyber-warfare, while
China has continuously denied the accusations.

The latest round in this blame game saw the US Defense Science
Board publish a report saying that nearly 40 Pentagon weapons
programs and almost 30 other defense technologies were
compromised by Chinese hackers, some allegedly tied to the
military or government.

Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel issued a stern warning to China
for its alleged cyber-attacks against the US: “We are also
clear-eyed about the challenges in cyber. The United States has
expressed our concerns about the growing threat of cyber
intrusions, some of which appear to be tied to the Chinese
government and military
.”

Beijing responded earlier this week, when China’s top Internet
security office claimed it amassed huge amounts of data on
hacking attacks against the country perpetrated by the United
States.

“We have mountains of data, if we wanted to accuse the US,
but it’s not helpful in solving the problem
,” said Huang
Chengqing, director of CNCERT, China’s cyber-security body.

The simmering US-China cyber-war became particularly acute in
early February, when US data company Mandiant reported it tracked 141 cyber-attacks conducted by a single Chinese hacker
group since 2006, 115 of which targeted US corporations. US House
Intelligence Committee chair Mike Rogers claimed the attacks were
sponsored by the Chinese government, and warned that the US was
losing its cyber-war with China.

Mandiant also claimed that China carried out a spate of cyber-attacks against the US in May. The
security firm said the attacks had subsided for three months
following the February accusations.

Some in the US are calling for a clear outlining of the rules for
civilized engagement between nations on the Web: “Think of it
like the chemical and biological chemicals conventions. Everyone
can make those sorts of weapons, but most countries agree not to
do so or to use them in conflict. The same is true of cyber,
everyone’s got advanced information technology, but we can agree,
perhaps, not to attack each other’s infrastructure, or at least
not to start doing it
,” professor John Arquilla of the US
Navy’s postgraduate school said.

This belief is shared by a task force sponsored by Council on
Foreign Relations (CFR), an independent US think tank. The task
force is chaired by John Negroponte, a former deputy secretary of
state and director of national intelligence, who has decried the
mutual accusations of cyber-warfare.

 

“I think I’d open the conversation, rather than boom, we know
what you’ve been doing and knock it off and if you don’t, here
are the things we’re going to do. You can have that conversation
if you want to, but I think you’ve got to think through about
whether that is really the best way you’re going to achieve what
it is we want to accomplish which is a global, resilient, open
and secure Internet
,” Negroponte said.

Beijing has vowed to conduct unprecedented military drills,
including actions by special IT-focused unit, later this
month. At the same time, NATO specialists have drafted
preliminary guidelines for cyber-warfare, first published
in March — the Tallinn Manual on International Law Applicable to
Cyber Warfare.

As Washington accuses China of aggressive behavior in cyberspace,
it is simultaneously stepping up its cyber-warfare capabilities.
By 2015, the US will have 40 new teams of cyber-agents to protect
critical infrastructure from hackers and launch attacks against
the country’s adversaries, according to Gen. Keith Alexander, the
head of the US Cyber Command.

Washington is also allegedly investing tens of millions of
dollars yearly into offensive hacking operations in order to exploit
vulnerabilities in the computers of its adversaries, according to
a Reuters report published in early May.

“Even as the US government confronts rival powers over
widespread Internet espionage, it has become the biggest buyer in
a burgeoning gray market where hackers and security firms sell
tools for breaking into computers
,” the report said.

But despite the huge amounts of money it is spending on
cyber-warfare, Washington may be losing its formerly dominant
edge in this field.

“You have a government with many security holes in it. You
have a corporate sector that can’t keep its information secure.
You have defense contractors taking contracts from the federal
government to provide cyber security and they can’t even provide
cyber security for themselves. I’m seeing this as a war in which
the United States is not winning no matter the amount of
resources it’s putting in or the tough talk. And I see the US
taxpayer as being at a real loss here because the money is
bleeding from the Treasury to go into this and it’s having no
effect
,” said Kelley Vlahos, a Washington, DC-based
journalist.

This article originally appeared on: RT

The National Security Agency: Surveillance Giant with Eyes on America

0

One well-informed estimate suggests 100,000 people are employed at the National Security Agency. (Photograph: Terry Ashe/Time & Life Pictures/Getty Images)The very existence of National Security Agency (NSA) was not revealed for more than two decades after its establishment in 1952, and even now its structure and activities remain largely unknown. Hence its wry nickname: No Such Agency.

Of all the US intelligence services, it is has been the best hidden, and has prided itself on having the fewest leaks — at least until now. How many people does it employ? That is classified. Just how many people does it target? The NSA tells members of Congress that it does not have the tools to provide such figures.

When Harry Truman set up the NSA, it was exclusively aimed at monitoring communications abroad. The question that had exercised politicians and civil rights organisations since the Senate unveiled it in 1975 is to what extent its ferocious appetite for data has encompassed American citizens. General Lou Allen, the first NSA chief to appear in public, told Congress in the mid-1970s that the agency maintained lists of hundreds of names, including US citizens under surveillance for anti-war dissent or suspicious foreign connections.

As technology has evolved, so has the NSA’s capacity to intercept an astonishing variety and volume of communications. Satellites scoop up calls and emails in the ether and beam the information back to earthbound receiving stations. One estimate suggests that each of these bases hoovers up roughly one billion emails, phone calls and other forms of correspondence every day, and the agency has up to 20 bases.

“This is not science fiction. It is happening now,” a source with knowledge of the NSA said.

Domestic snooping exploded in scale after 9/11, when George W Bush authorised the agency to eavesdrop on Americans without the previous requirement for warrants. Within a few months of taking office in 2009, the Obama administration’s Justice Department conceded that the agency had been guilty of “over-collection” of domestic communications but claimed the excess had been accidental.

With every passing administration, the NSA has ballooned. One well-informed estimate of its staffing levels is 100,000, of whom about 30,000 are military and the rest private contractors. Its headquarters is a vast edifice of smoked glass in Fort Meade, in the leafy Washington suburbs, with sizeable complexes in Georgia and Texas and overseas bases in Japan, Germany and the UK.

While the NSA is by far the biggest surveillance agency in the world, it shares some of its work with four other allies: Britain, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. Collectively, they are known as the “five eyes”. Of the five, the biggest after the NSA is Britain’s General Communications Headquarters (GCHQ).

The predecessor to the NSA was the short-lived Armed Forces Security Agency, which was set up in 1949. It was a relatively modest body compared with the mammoth the NSA has since become.

The young agency suffered some early embarrassments. In 1960, two of its staff defected to the Soviet Union. Three years later, a former NSA employee published code-breaking secrets in the Soviet paper Izvestia; the same year, an NSA employee killed himself while being investigated for selling secrets to Moscow.

Since then, internal security has been tightened significantly, but as the agency’s secrecy deepened, its reach expanded relatively unchecked. It was a Democratic senator and lawyer, Frank Church, who in 1975 first raised the alarm at the agency’s sprawling tentacles. During a series of hearings into the work of the intelligence agencies, he warned that the NSA’s magnifying glass could be turned inwards on the American people.

“I don’t want to see this country ever go across the bridge,” he said. “I know the capacity that is there to make tyranny total in America, and we must see to it that this agency and all agencies that possess this technology operate within the law and under proper supervision, so that we never cross over that abyss. That is the abyss from which there is no return.”

The Church Senate hearings led to the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (Fisa), which required a warrant to conduct surveillance of communications within the US. A Fisa court, made up of a small group of judges appointed by the chief justice and located inside in the justice department, was given the job of deciding whether to grant warrants — it approves almost all requests.

In the years since 9/11, as the role of the NSA has snowballed, so has the debate over its operations. In 2005, the New York Times reported that the Bush administration had secretly authorised the NSA to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the US, to search for terrorist activity without the Fisa court warrants. The order had been signed in 2002, but the newspaper cited about a dozen serving or former officials who expressed concern about the legality. The Times delayed publication of the article for a year because of government concerns about its impact.

In the face of the subsequent uproar, the Bush administration said it had ceased the warrantless surveillance in January 2007 and resumed the practice of requiring NSA warrants. In 2008, Congress loosened some of those constraints in the Fisa Amendment Act.

The massive surveillance programme has continued under the Obama administration, at home as well as abroad. And the culture of intense secrecy persists. For years, Senators Ron Wyden and Mark Udall have been demanding to know just how many people inside the US have been spied on by the NSA. No answer has been forthcoming.

This article originally appeared on: Common Dreams

China nabs US teacher for sex abuse

0

An American teacher working for a prestigious French school in China has been detained on charges of sexually assaulting students.

According to a statement released by management at the school, the Lycee Francais de Shanghai, on Thursday, the male teacher was nabbed last month after families filed formal complaints against him over assaults on their children including both genders.

The statement added that Chinese police launched an investigation into the sexual assault of the children including four girls and three boys.

Å“The investigation is being carried out by the Chinese police and is ongoing. The teacher has been in administrative detention since his arrest,” the statement said.

The victims attending the school were reportedly from Italy, France and the US.

Another teacher of the school, accused of sexually abusing students, was extradited to the US last year.

Å“There would be no link between the present situation and that of a former teacher from the school,” said the school which has 1,600 students, ranging in age from 3 to 18.

MAM/KA

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Iranian candidates hold third debate

0

Iran presidential candidates are holding their third and final live debate on television, which focuses on foreign policy, Press TV reports.

The eight candidates are expected to use the Friday debate to discuss their foreign policy approaches and their plans on how to tackle US-led Western sanctions against the country.

The debate will also include issues such as the conflict in Syria, the presence of foreign troops in the region and Iranâ„¢s comprehensive talks with the P5+1 group (Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States plus Germany) on the countryâ„¢s nuclear energy program.

On Wednesday, candidates outlined their social and cultural policies in the second round of live debates aired by Iranâ„¢s national broadcaster.

MP Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, Supreme National Security Council Secretary Saeed Jalili, Expediency Council Secretary Mohsen Rezaei, President of the Center for Strategic Research of the Expediency Council Hassan Rohani, former First Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref, Tehran Mayor Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, former Telecommunications Minister Mohammad Gharazi, and former Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati are competing in Iran’s 11th presidential poll.

Iranians will go to the polls on June 14. The fourth city and rural council elections are also scheduled to be held on the same day.

PG/SS

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Nestle and Mars may face $10mn fine for 'chocolate conspiracy'

0

Two food giants and a network of independent wholesalers have been blamed for the price-fixing of popular chocolate bars in Canada. A third company, Hershey’s Canada, could avoid fines for pleading guilty and cooperating with an investigation.


The alleged price-fixing involved chocolate bars sold across
Canada from 2002 to 2008, including Kit Kat, Coffee Crisp, Aero,
Twix, Snickers, Bounty and M&Ms, a spokesman for the
Competition Bureau, Pierre Yves Guay, told AFP.

“It’s difficult, however, to estimate the amount of the
overcharging because of the complexity of the pricing in that
market,”
he said.

Competition Commissioner John Pecman called their alleged actions
“egregious anti-competitive behavior that harms Canadian
consumers”
and “a serious criminal offense”, according
to reports.

Three individuals were also charged: Robert Leonidas, former
President of Nestle Canada; Sandra Martinez, former President of
Confectionery for Nestlé Canada; and David Glenn Stevens,
President and CEO of ITWAL, Reuters reports.

The accused face a possible fine of up to $10 million and/or
imprisonment for a term of up to five years.

Officials said Hershey Canada has cooperated with its
investigation and agreed to plead guilty at a hearing on June 21
in exchange for leniency, the Economic Times writes.

In its statement Hershey expressed regret for its actions and
blamed workers who had already left the company.

“The current Hershey Canada senior management team as well as
The Hershey Company and its management had no involvement in this
conduct,”
Reuters quotes the statement.

Both Mars and Nestle say they intend to “vigorously
defend”
themselves against the allegations, Reuters
reports. Nestle Canada said on its website that it 
operates “with the highest ethical business standards.”

Earlier this year, Nestle was fined, along with 10 other
chocolate and confectionery companies, a total of 60 million
euros ($83 million) for similar chocolate price-fixing in
Germany.

A Mars subsidiary avoided penalties by cooperating with German
authorities, AFP reports.

This article originally appeared on: RT

NSA Taps in to Systems of Google, Facebook, Apple and others, Secret Files Reveal

0

A slide depicting the top-secret PRISM program.The National Security Agency has obtained direct access to the systems of Google, Facebook, Apple and other US internet giants, according to a top secret document obtained by the Guardian.

The NSA access is part of a previously undisclosed program called PRISM, which allows officials to collect material including search history, the content of emails, file transfers and live chats, the document says.

The Guardian has verified the authenticity of the document, a 41-slide PowerPoint presentation — classified as top secret with no distribution to foreign allies — which was apparently used to train intelligence operatives on the capabilities of the program. The document claims “collection directly from the servers” of major US service providers.

Although the presentation claims the program is run with the assistance of the companies, all those who responded to a Guardian request for comment on Thursday denied knowledge of any such program.

In a statement, Google said: “Google cares deeply about the security of our users’ data. We disclose user data to government in accordance with the law, and we review all such requests carefully. From time to time, people allege that we have created a government ‘back door’ into our systems, but Google does not have a back door for the government to access private user data.”

Several senior tech executives insisted that they had no knowledge of PRISM or of any similar scheme. They said they would never have been involved in such a program. “If they are doing this, they are doing it without our knowledge,” one said.

An Apple spokesman said it had “never heard” of PRISM.

The NSA access was enabled by changes to US surveillance law introduced under President Bush and renewed under Obama in December 2012.

Prism

The program facilitates extensive, in-depth surveillance on live communications and stored information. The law allows for the targeting of any customers of participating firms who live outside the US, or those Americans whose communications include people outside the US.

It also opens the possibility of communications made entirely within the US being collected without warrants.

Disclosure of the PRISM program follows a leak to the Guardian on Wednesday of a top-secret court order compelling telecoms provider Verizon to turn over the telephone records of millions of US customers.

The participation of the internet companies in PRISM will add to the debate, ignited by the Verizon revelation, about the scale of surveillance by the intelligence services. Unlike the collection of those call records, this surveillance can include the content of communications and not just the metadata.

Some of the world’s largest internet brands are claimed to be part of the information-sharing program since its introduction in 2007. Microsoft — which is currently running an advertising campaign with the slogan “Your privacy is our priority” — was the first, with collection beginning in December 2007.

It was followed by Yahoo in 2008; Google, Facebook and PalTalk in 2009; YouTube in 2010; Skype and AOL in 2011; and finally Apple, which joined the program in 2012. The program is continuing to expand, with other providers due to come online.

Collectively, the companies cover the vast majority of online email, search, video and communications networks.

Prism

The extent and nature of the data collected from each company varies.

Companies are legally obliged to comply with requests for users’ communications under US law, but the PRISM program allows the intelligence services direct access to the companies’ servers. The NSA document notes the operations have “assistance of communications providers in the US”.

The revelation also supports concerns raised by several US senators during the renewal of the Fisa Amendments Act in December 2012, who warned about the scale of surveillance the law might enable, and shortcomings in the safeguards it introduces.

When the FAA was first enacted, defenders of the statute argued that a significant check on abuse would be the NSA’s inability to obtain electronic communications without the consent of the telecom and internet companies that control the data. But the PRISM program renders that consent unnecessary, as it allows the agency to directly and unilaterally seize the communications off the companies’ servers.

A chart prepared by the NSA, contained within the top-secret document obtained by the Guardian, underscores the breadth of the data it is able to obtain: email, video and voice chat, videos, photos, voice-over-IP (Skype, for example) chats, file transfers, social networking details, and more.

PRISM slide crop

The document is recent, dating to April 2013. Such a leak is extremely rare in the history of the NSA, which prides itself on maintaining a high level of secrecy.

The PRISM program allows the NSA, the world’s largest surveillance organisation, to obtain targeted communications without having to request them from the service providers and without having to obtain individual court orders.

With this program, the NSA is able to reach directly into the servers of the participating companies and obtain both stored communications as well as perform real-time collection on targeted users.

The presentation claims PRISM was introduced to overcome what the NSA regarded as shortcomings of Fisa warrants in tracking suspected foreign terrorists. It noted that the US has a “home-field advantage” due to housing much of the internet’s architecture. But the presentation claimed “Fisa constraints restricted our home-field advantage” because Fisa required individual warrants and confirmations that both the sender and receiver of a communication were outside the US.

“Fisa was broken because it provided privacy protections to people who were not entitled to them,” the presentation claimed. “It took a Fisa court order to collect on foreigners overseas who were communicating with other foreigners overseas simply because the government was collecting off a wire in the United States. There were too many email accounts to be practical to seek Fisas for all.”

The new measures introduced in the FAA redefines “electronic surveillance” to exclude anyone “reasonably believed” to be outside the USA — a technical change which reduces the bar to initiating surveillance.

The act also gives the director of national intelligence and the attorney general power to permit obtaining intelligence information, and indemnifies internet companies against any actions arising as a result of co-operating with authorities’ requests.

In short, where previously the NSA needed individual authorisations, and confirmation that all parties were outside the USA, they now need only reasonable suspicion that one of the parties was outside the country at the time of the records were collected by the NSA.

The document also shows the FBI acts as an intermediary between other agencies and the tech companies, and stresses its reliance on the participation of US internet firms, claiming “access is 100% dependent on ISP provisioning”.

In the document, the NSA hails the PRISM program as “one of the most valuable, unique and productive accesses for NSA”.

It boasts of what it calls “strong growth” in its use of the PRISM program to obtain communications. The document highlights the number of obtained communications increased in 2012 by 248% for Skype — leading the notes to remark there was “exponential growth in Skype reporting; looks like the word is getting out about our capability against Skype”. There was also a 131% increase in requests for Facebook data, and 63% for Google.

The NSA document indicates that it is planning to add Dropbox as a PRISM provider. The agency also seeks, in its words, to “expand collection services from existing providers”.

The revelations echo fears raised on the Senate floor last year during the expedited debate on the renewal of the FAA powers which underpin the PRISM program, which occurred just days before the act expired.

Senator Christopher Coons of Delaware specifically warned that the secrecy surrounding the various surveillance programs meant there was no way to know if safeguards within the act were working.

“The problem is: we here in the Senate and the citizens we represent don’t know how well any of these safeguards actually work,” he said.

“The law doesn’t forbid purely domestic information from being collected. We know that at least one Fisa court has ruled that the surveillance program violated the law. Why? Those who know can’t say and average Americans can’t know.”

Other senators also raised concerns. Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon attempted, without success, to find out any information on how many phone calls or emails had been intercepted under the program.

When the law was enacted, defenders of the FAA argued that a significant check on abuse would be the NSA’s inability to obtain electronic communications without the consent of the telecom and internet companies that control the data. But the PRISM program renders that consent unnecessary, as it allows the agency to directly and unilaterally seize the communications off the companies’ servers.

When the NSA reviews a communication it believes merits further investigation, it issues what it calls a “report”. According to the NSA, “over 2,000 PRISM-based reports” are now issued every month. There were 24,005 in 2012, a 27% increase on the previous year.

In total, more than 77,000 intelligence reports have cited the PRISM program.

Jameel Jaffer, director of the ACLU’s Center for Democracy, that it was astonishing the NSA would even ask technology companies to grant direct access to user data.

“It’s shocking enough just that the NSA is asking companies to do this,” he said. “The NSA is part of the military. The military has been granted unprecedented access to civilian communications.

“This is unprecedented militarisation of domestic communications infrastructure. That’s profoundly troubling to anyone who is concerned about that separation.”

A senior administration official said in a statement: “The Guardian and Washington Post articles refer to collection of communications pursuant to Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. This law does not allow the targeting of any US citizen or of any person located within the United States.

“The program is subject to oversight by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the Executive Branch, and Congress. It involves extensive procedures, specifically approved by the court, to ensure that only non-US persons outside the US are targeted, and that minimize the acquisition, retention and dissemination of incidentally acquired information about US persons.

“This program was recently reauthorized by Congress after extensive hearings and debate.

“Information collected under this program is among the most important and valuable intelligence information we collect, and is used to protect our nation from a wide variety of threats.

“The Government may only use Section 702 to acquire foreign intelligence information, which is specifically, and narrowly, defined in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. This requirement applies across the board, regardless of the nationality of the target.”

Additional reporting by James Ball and Dominic Rushe

This article originally appeared on: Common Dreams

Iran council candidates start campaigns

0

Iranian candidates for the upcoming City Councils elections have begun campaigning for the June 14 polls.

Candidates can continue campaigning within the framework of electoral laws until the eve of the elections day.

Election officials say special inspectors have been charged with monitoring more than 67,000 polling stations nationwide.

Over 200,000 candidates have been qualified to run for both city and rural council seats.

More than 126,000 seats are up for grab in Iranâ„¢s Islamic councils elections which coincide with the countryâ„¢s 11th presidential vote.

The city and village Islamic councils are local establishments that are elected by public vote in all cities and villages across the country. Council members in each city or village are elected for a four-year term.

The councils are tasked with helping the Islamic Republicâ„¢s social, economic, cultural and educational advancement by encouraging public participation in social affairs.

MRS/SS

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

German trade surges, but no magic cure for recession

0

New data shows German imports climbed 2.3% from March to April, and exports also rose. The positive data shows Europe’s largest economy gaining, contradicting the Bundesbank cut in growth forecast to 0.4% in 2013 and 1.5% in 2014.

Friday’s data from the Federal Statistics Office showed imports
jumped 2.3 percent, far outperforming the forecast of 0.5
percent.

Struggling neighboring Euro members have reason to celebrate
Germany’s success- they can harness the strong demand and boost
growth through exports.

“This is good news. The April
figures are significantly better than those for the first
quarter,”
Commerzbank economist Ralph Solveen told
Reuters.

Exports from Germany climbed 1.9 percent, also far outperforming
expectations. Germany has been able to squeak through the
recession because of its export market, as Asian and US demand
for luxury cars have provided a buffer from recession plagued
Europe.

The recovery story in Germany is a mixed bag. A survey published
earlier this week showed manufacturing had declined slightly for
a third straight month, unemployment slightly rose to 7.5
percent, and retail sales have fallen.

Germany’s own Bundesbank cut its growth forecasts for Germany for
the next two years, cutting its 2013 growth projection to 0.3
from 0.4 percent, and the 2014 forecast was cut from 1.9 down to
1.5 percent.

“Much will depend on whether
the economic situation stabilizes in the euro-area crisis
countries and whether expansionary forces will gradually gain the
upper hand there,”
said Bundesbank President Jens
Weidmann, Bloomberg
reported.

Germany, with its luxury car flagship companies Mercedes, BMW,
and Audi, has long been an export-oriented economy, but the
government isn’t only relying on exports to pull them through the
recession. While demand in the US and Asia is still high, Europe,
which accounts for 40 percent of its export market, is still
stuck in slow motion.

The Federal Statistics Office data showed exports to the euro
zone rose by 4.3 percent in April, while exports outside of
European borders jumped by 13.6 percent.

European automakers typically close down factories for a two or
three-week period in the summer, but this summer, so far BMW and
Mercedes have announced they will skip the break. Even in the
crisis, German carmakers continue to expand, and need to keep up
with the hot overseas markets. 

Thursday, the European Central Bank decided to keep borrowing
costs as low of 0.5 percent, opting not to further slash interest
rates.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Six Iranians killed in Iraq bomb attack

0

[unable to retrieve full-text content]Six Iranians are among dozens of pilgrims killed in a bomb attack that hit their convoy in the Iraqi city of Baqouba, north of Baghdad.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Civilian toll of US drones confirmed

0

A reported review of secret US intelligence records has shed more light on the wide suspicion that US assassination drones have killed few militants in Pakistan, contrary to claims often made by top US officials.

According to an Å“exclusive report” on Thursday by major US-based NBC News network, a review of classified US intelligence records indicate that its CIA spy agency, which conducts most of it terror drone strikes over Pakistan, could not confirm the identity of nearly a quarter of those killed by the drone attacks in the country during a period spanning from 2010 to 2011.

According to the report, between September 3, 2010 and October 30, 2011 the CIA assassination drone operators over Pakistan consistently designated the civilians killed during the terror strikes as Å“other militants,” a label used when the spy agency could not determine the affiliation of those killed, if any.

The NBC report draws a troubling depiction of the CIAâ„¢s claim that its assassination drone operations over Pakistan have largely targeted top al-Qaeda militants and commanders.

Of the 14 months worth of classified documents reviewed by the network, 26 out of 114 attacks designate fatalities caused by the terror drones as Å“other militants,” while in four other attacks those killed are only described as Å“foreign fighters.”

One key term in analyzing the assassination drone strike data are what are referred to as Å“signature” strikes, when the strikes kill suspects based on behavior patterns but without positive identification, versus Å“personality” strike, which is when the terror drone targets are Å“known terrorist affiliates whose identities are verified.”

According to an unnamed Å“senior intelligence official” that spoke to NBC for its report, at the peak of the terror drone operations in Pakistan in 2009 and 2010 as many as half of all kills were classified as Å“signature” strikes.

In a major speech on his administrationâ„¢s use of targeted killings operations in May, President Barack Obama defended the CIAâ„¢s drone program as a Å“legal,” Å“lethal” and Å“effective” counterterrorism tool, while also acknowledging some civilian casualties.

However, another report, entitled Å“Living Under Drones,” jointly released by Stanford University and New York University in 2012, is far less muted on civilian casualties, and argues that the civilian death toll in terror drone strikes over Pakistan has been far higher than reported.

MFB/MFB

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

David Petraeus At Bilderberg to Craft “Big Data” Spy Grid

2

Former CIA director helping to bolster same surveillance system that brought him down

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
June 7, 2013

Former CIA Director David Petraeus is in attendance at the 2013 Bilderberg Group conference to help construct the “big data” spy grid, which is set to become the new frontier of clandestine statecraft as Internet connectivity becomes ubiquitous.

Image: Wikimedia Commons

Bilderberg’s official agenda for 2013 lists one of the areas of discussion as, “How big data is changing almost everything,” a reference to how the “Internet of things” along with the ubiquitous growth of social media is transforming the world of surveillance and the ability to foresee and manipulate future events.

At almost the exact same time, a Homeland Security subcommittee in the United States will also be discussing “big data” and its implications in the context of social media.

Bilderberg’s effort to push the “big data” agenda ties in with the secretive organization’s close relationship with Google, which as we documentedis now merging with and taking over from Bilderberg in many aspects.

The discussion about “big data” is also likely to cover how social media can be used to launch more faux revolutions and social movements as it was in Egypt, which was aided in no small part by Google.

As we have documented, the Internet of things is the process of manufacturing every new product with a system that broadcasts wirelessly via the world wide web, allowing industry and the government to spy ubiquitously on every aspect of your existence.

Petraeus has previously hailed the “Internet of things” as a transformational boon for “clandestine tradecraft”. In other words, it will soon be easier than ever before to keep tabs on the population since everything they use will be connected to the web, with total disregard for privacy considerations. The spooks won’t have to plant a bug in your home or your vehicle, you will be doing it for them.

It’s ironic that Petraeus is helping bolster the very same surveillance system that brought him down last year when details emerged of his extra-marital affair.

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Uncertain future: Turkish PM returns to cheering crowd, decries ‘illegal’ protests

0

Turkey’s future hangs in the balance as Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan has pledged to crush the massive anti-government protests. His uncompromising stance has the potential to goad activists into more violence as they call for Erdogan’s resignation.

The prime minister was greeted
with thunderous applause from supporters during a speech in which
he pledged to end the “illegal” anti-government protests. He also
vowed to continue with plans to demolish an art center on Taksim
Square, potentially triggering a further escalation in
tensions.

Upon returning from North Africa, Erdogan addressed thousands of
supporters, encouraging them to disassociate themselves from
“dirty games” and “lawless protests.”

The crowd responded enthusiastically, pledging to die for the
Turkish prime minister and crush Turkey’s worst spate of unrest
in over a decade. At least three people have been killed in the
protester violence over the past week, including one police
officer,with thousands more injured. Activists have condemned the
heavy-handed tactics of the police.

“I call for an immediate end to the demonstrations, which have
lost their democratic credentials and turned into vandalism,”

Erdogan said in a speech at the Istanbul airport, he earlier
branded the demonstrators as “extremists.”  He went
on to state that he was elected by the majority of Turks and
would not step down.

Erdogan will meet with European Union Enlargement Commissioner
Stefan Fule to discuss Turkey’s EU candidacy. A number of
countries, including the US, have voiced concern over the recent
unrest.

Members and supporters of Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party
(AKP) blocked roads leading to the airport, and waited for the
prime minister’s arrival well into the night. He eventually gave
his address at 2:00am local time (23:00 GMT).

Demonstrators gather on Taksim square in Istanbul on June 6, 2013. (AFP Photo / Aris Messinis)

Thousands of opposition activists also gathered in Taksim Square
for Ergodan’s return, with some calling for the prime minister to
resign. They have barricaded themselves in the center of the
square using paving slabs and street signs. 

“It’s all up to Erdogan and what he says right now. He will
decide the fate of this resistance, whether it will calm or
escalate,”
ship captain Mehmet Polat, 42, told Reuters.

Erdogan’s aggressive stance towards the protests has raised
concerns over the political situation in Turkey — particularly
his vow to press on with a controversial plan to demolish the
Ataturk Cultural center in Taksim Square. The dilapidated
building, located in Istanbul’s most bohemian district, has
become a symbol of the anti-government protests across Turkey.

RT’s Irina Galushko called the building a symbol of “protest
and resistance,”
and the political heritage of Kumal Ataturk,
the founder of the Republic of Turkey and its first president.
The proposed demolition of the building runs the risk of inciting
further violence and unrest. 

Demonstrations began last Friday when a sit-in against the
construction plans for Taskim Square turned into violent protests
over the perceived authoritarian rule of Prime Minister Erdogan
and his Islamist party.

Since then, protesters have taken to the streets of Istanbul
every night to show their anger over Erdogan’s rule. The use of
teargas and water cannons, coupled with the heavy-handed police
tactics, has injured more than 4,000 people, according to
Turkey’s Doctors’ Union.

Anti-government protesters shout slogans and wave Turkish national flags during a demonstration in central Ankara June 6, 2013 against the Islamic-rooted government of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan. (AFP Photo / Adem Altan)

This article originally appeared on: RT

Bilderberg event slammed by protesters

0

Hundreds of British protesters have gathered outside the Grove Hotel in Watford, where the Bilderberg group of political and business leaders has begun their secretive annual three-day event.

The meeting of royalty, business chiefs, and prime ministers, which took place in Britain for the first time since 1998, started on June 6 and hosted 140 people ranging from British Chancellor George Osborne and head of the European Commission Jose Manuel Barroso, to executive chairman of Google Eric Schmidt.

According to reports, this yearâ„¢s meeting will discuss topics including growth, US foreign policy, cyber warfare, big data, Africa and the Middle East.

Demonstrators were holding placards while shouting Å“Scum!”, Å“Maggots!” and Å“Pay your taxes!” at the inviteesâ„¢ cars.

Among the protesters was Labour backbencher and former environment minister Michael Meacher, who described the secret conference as Å“utterly anti-democratic”.

He demanded Osborne to reveal plans made in Bilderberg conference, costing the British taxpayer millions of pounds for security.

MOS/SSM/HE

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Aref urges Iranians to vote Reformist

0

Reformist presidential contender Mohammad Reza Aref has urged the Iranians to produce a massive turnout in the upcoming election and vote for the Reformist camp.

The Reformist camp is capable of running the country and solving the countryâ„¢s economic woes as it has proved in the past, said Aref in stump speech to a gathering in the province of Kermanshah on Thursday.

Å“[The administration of] reforms showed that its main concern is the people and their financial problems. [The administration of] reforms showed that it has what it takes to create jobs and control prices. It showed that it can control high prices,” the former vice president said.

Å“The administration of reforms showed that it is committed to what it has pledged to the people and will remain committed to the very end,” he said. Å“Once again we should hand over the reins of the country to a Reformist president.”

He urged a high turnout in the election and stressed that people should go to the polls to contribute to the resolution of economic woes and the establishment of good and constructive ties with the world.

If elected president, the candidate said, he will use the wealth of experience he has gained while serving the country to bring about progress and development for Iran.

Å“I hope by drawing on my experience, having served in different sectors in the Islamic Republic of Iran for 30 years, including eight years in the administration of reforms, and with the help of the elite in the country, we will be able to put the country on the path to progress and development,” Aref went on to say.

Å“I hope that the administration of reforms will once again prove that it pursues peopleâ„¢s concerns and problems,” the candidate said.

Aref faces seven rivals in the election, namely President of the Center for Strategic Research of the Expediency Council Hassan Rohani, Tehran Mayor Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, lawmaker Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council Saeed Jalili, Secretary of the Expediency Council Mohsen Rezaei, former Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati, and former Telecommunications Minister Mohammad Gharazi.

The president of Iran is elected for a four-year term in a national election. This yearâ„¢s election will be held on June 14.

AR/NN/HMV

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

‘West plotting rifts to hold Muslims back’

0

Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei has warned against enemy plots to create divisions among Muslim nations to impede their progress.

Å“Hegemonic powers intend to sow discord among Muslims in order to distract them from their main issues and making the necessary progress,” Ayatollah Khamenei said in a meeting with Iranian officials, and ambassadors of Muslim countries in Tehran on Friday on the occasion of Mab’ath – the anniversary of the appointment of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) to prophethood.

The most important duty of Muslim nations at this juncture is to remain vigilant and to know their roadmap and enemy plots in order to be able to take appropriate measures and avoid mistakes, Ayatollah Khamenei stressed.

Å“The enemyâ„¢s main scheme is to create rifts and conflict among Muslims. So, unity, solidarity, cooperation and rapport are the most pressing needs of the Muslim world.”

Ayatollah Khamenei added that sacrilegious acts against Islam and Islamophobia campaigns cannot have been orchestrated without the design and finance of superpowers and their intelligence services.

The Leader said that the enemy seeks to drive a wedge between Muslims to deflect their attention from their main enemies which are corrupt capitalism and the Zionist regime of Israel.

SF/NN/HMV

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

‘Israel in rush to finish Golan fence’

0

File photo shows Israeli forces patrolling next to the fence on the Syrian border in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights.

The Israeli regime is scrambling to finish the construction of a 45-mile fence along the Syrian border in the occupied Golan Heights, a report says.

According to a Friday report by the Washington Post, the new Å“smart fence” is equipped with concertina and razor wire, touch sensors, motion detectors, infrared cameras and ground radar.

The Tel Aviv regime claims to be bolstering an already broken-down fence built in the area for the fear that the foreign-backed turmoil in Syria might spill over into the occupied Palestinian territories, the report said.

On Thursday, anti-Syria militants briefly took over the Quneitra crossing between Syria and the Golan Heights. However, the Syrian army later moved in and recaptured the area.

According to the Post, some Israelis, however, believe that the regimeâ„¢s barricading itself has increased a Ëœsense of isolation.â„¢

While the Israeli fence network is almost complete, the Israeli military is also drawing up plans for a final stretch along the Jordanian barrier. Watch towers, patrol roads, intelligence centers and military brigades would also be built along the fence line, the report said.

In January, a spokesman for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the regime had completed the construction of the main part of a 230-kilometer-long fence along the Egyptian border.

From the north, the Tel Aviv regime has also built a similar fence along the Lebanese border.

MKA/HSN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Watch Nancy Pelosi Lie Through Her Teeth: “I Don’t Remember Saying that Everybody in the Country Would Have a Lower Premium”

0


Just a few weeks ago the honorable Congresswoman from San Francisco, Nancy Pelosi, made the stunning claim that health insurance in America would be cheaper than ever before. “Many of the initiatives that he passed are what are coming to bear now, including the Affordable Care Act,” she said at a recent press conference about legislation championed by the President. “The Affordable Care Act is bringing the cost of health care in our country down in both the public and private sector.”

Of course, days later we found out what the future of  ”affordable” health care and lower costs actually meant, when the IRS admitted that prices would top $20,000 per year for the average American family.

It seems that these are the ramifications for passing a sweeping overhaul of the U.S. health care industry without having first read the bill to find out what was in it.

Now that we know government mandated ObamaCare will actually cost Americans at all income levels significantly more than was promised by the President and Congressional democrats, Nancy Pelosi is back peddling on her statements, claiming that she and the bill’s supporters never said there’d be lower premiums.

Well, some people don’t have health insurance and they’ll certainly have their health insurance premiums go up [laughs] because they don’t have any health insurance now, so they don’t have any premiums now.

But for anyone that that is a challenge, there are subsidies in the exchanges.

And, it’s also about what you get for your money. In other words, people will be getting no lifetime or annual limits on their coverage, no discrimination because of pre-existing medical conditions… it has a whole array of quality that is in the legislation.

But if you don’t have health insurance and you don’t qualify for a subsidy… and you’re mandated to have health insurance, you won’t have an increase.

We’re very sensitive to what it means to young people, especially to young singles. And, umm, there are policies that people can get.

I don’t remember saying that everybody in the country will have a lower premium, because everybody in the country doesn’t have health insurance so how could it be lower.

But the fact is, the value of what you get for the cost that you pay, is a reduction in cost to you.

…for everybody it is going to be a liberation, a freedom.

…and if you’re a small business. What this means for small business. It is… it is…umm… it’s uh… it’s a solution for the American people. It lowers cost.

Nancy Pelosi is absolutely right.

Obamacare, which will be enforced at the barrel of a gun, is freedom!

It’s a liberation… of your money from your wallet, to be spent on Nancy’s mile high booze-it-up plane junkets and subsidies for her district that will enrich her colleague Diane Feinstein’s personal net worth.

What’s worse is that the people of San Francisco and the greater United States remain oblivious to how they just got raped by this woman, her cronies in Congress and the health care industrial complex.

Nancy Pelosi belongs in prison, not on the floor of the United States Congress.

Watch the video — if you’ve got the stomach for it:

Please Spread The Word And Share This Post



Author:
Mac Slavo
Views:
Read by 1,011 people
Date: June 7th, 2013
Website: www.SHTFplan.com


Copyright Information: Copyright SHTFplan and Mac Slavo. This content may be freely reproduced in full or in part in digital form with full attribution to the author and a link to www.shtfplan.com. Please contact us for permission to reproduce this content in other media formats.

This article originally appeared on: SHTF Plan

One killed in fresh Egypt clashes

0

Clashes have erupted between anti-government protesters and supporters of Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. (File photo)

At least one person has been killed and more than 20 others injured in clashes between supporters of Egyptâ„¢s Muslim Brotherhood and anti-government protesters in the northern town of Damanhour.

The clashes broke out on Thursday between members of the Brotherhood and the Youth Revolutionary Forces in the al-Saâ„¢aa square.

Security forces fired tear gas to disperse the two groups.

Anti-government demonstrators staged another protest outside the cityâ„¢s Creativity Center near the Egyptian lawyersâ„¢ syndicate office.

On June 2, Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi stated that he reinstated the Senate, known as Shura Council, after the countryâ„¢s Supreme Constitutional Court ruled that the Senate and the panel that drafted the constitution were illegally elected and must be dissolved.

The lower house of the parliament, dominated by Muslim Brotherhood lawmakers, was dissolved by a military decision in line with a ruling by the same court prior to the presidential elections in June 2012.

No date has been set for the parliamentary elections, but President Morsi had previously hinted that the vote could be held in October 2013.

GMA/HSN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

US activists urge end to police abuse

0

Occupy Los Angeles activists have joined social justice groups across the US state of California in a protest rally to demand an end to persisting police brutality in the west-coast state, Press TV reports.

The protester urged in a rally on Thursday for an end to continued police violence throughout the densely populated multicultural state, reiterating that too many people are being unnecessarily killed by law-enforcement officers in California with no legal consequence.

Protest organizers insist their demand for a halt to police brutality follows a recent surge of incidents in which officers throughout the state were involved in unwarranted killings, including cases involving unarmed suspects.

The development comes as Southern California has witnessed a climbing number of questionable police killings over the past couple of years.

In cities such as Los Angeles and Anaheim police officers have reportedly shot and killed unarmed suspects, claiming that they had posed unspecific threats.

One of the participants in the rally, Jean Thaxton, says, however, that her son was not posing a threat to anyone when he was shot in the back by police officers as he attempted to flee from them.

Protesters further stated that police departments in the large state do not provide their recruiting forces with proper training and equipment, noting that while some police officers do try to do a good job, they are not adequately supported by their respective departments.

Protest organizers further pointed to what they see as the central issue in California police killings, saying that the stateâ„¢s District Attorneys are often hesitant to file charges against any police officer.

Instead, they said, police officers involved in questionable shootings are usually suspended with pay and then brought back to the force after a while.

Activists also called for a greater community involvement in setting up police watchdog committees and organizing workshops to teach citizens about their legal rights anytime they are confronted by a police officer.

MFB/MFB

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

G4s meeting stormed by pro-Palestinians

0

Pro-Palestine campaigners have staged a protest at the annual meeting of shareholders of disgraced security firm G4S in London, calling for an end to the firm’s Israeli prison contracts.

G4S meeting on June 6 was twice disrupted by protesters, who voiced their anger against the private companyâ„¢s provision of expertise and security systems to Israeli prisons, and its complicity in the detention and torture of Palestinian children.

The demonstration was organized by the Innovative Minds (inminds) and Islamic Human Right Commission (IHRC) campaign groups.

“G4S cannot expect to do business as usual whilst it equips Israeli prisons which hold Palestinians in breach of the Geneva Convention,” said Sarah Colborne, director of Palestine Solidarity Campaign.

G4S faces criticism for its cooperation with the Israeli regime, including providing equipment and services to Israeli checkpoints, illegal settlements, the apartheid wall and jails where Palestinian political prisoners are subjected to mistreatment and torture.

SSM/MOS/HE

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Japan, France to boost military ties

0

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe (R) and French President Francois Hollande shake hands during a joint press conference in Tokyo, on June 7, 2013.

Japan and France have announced a plan for working on the joint development of military hardware, as Tokyo is still engaged in a territorial dispute with China over a group of islands in the East China Sea.

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said at a joint press conference with visiting French President Francois Hollande in Tokyo on Thursday, Å“We agreed that Japan and France, which share common values, interests and responsibility will enhance our special partnership.”

Abe added that Tokyo and Paris agreed to collaborate on advancing stability in the Asia-Pacific region.

Å“We agreed on dialogue between foreign and defense officials and agreed on joint development of military equipment and control of exports,” the Japanese premier said.

The two countries are also expected to sign agreements in the atomic sector during Hollandeâ„¢s three-day trip, which will focus on trade.

The announcement on the enhancement of partnership between Tokyo and Paris comes amid the ongoing territorial dispute between Japan and China over the sovereignty of the uninhabited islands, known as Senkaku in Japan and Diaoyu in China, which are located near a crucial shipping lane and would give the owner exclusive oil, mineral and fishing rights in the surrounding waters.

On September 11, 2012, Tokyo signed a deal to buy three of the islands from their private Japanese owner in line with plans to nationalize the archipelago.

Japan has also voiced unease over a French firm selling helicopter landing equipment to China, saying Beijing might use it to reinforce its presence around the disputed islands.

MR/HSN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Social networks part of cyber-war against Russia – Rogozin

0

Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin is warning that social networks have become a tool for manipulating public opinion and that the threat of cyber war is already real.

Speaking at a lecture in Moscow, the man in charge of the defense
industry said social networks allowed specialists to probe users
without their consent or even knowledge the fact.

“A powerful manipulation of public opinion is being carried
through — all sorts of “likes” and other buttons that you press
there they instantly include you in certain groups that are later
analyzed and systemized
,” Rogozin said.

According the Deputy PM this allows for work with people who
share opposition views by putting them into special sectors that
cannot be seen by other users of open social networks.

“Through this they increase the number of people who receive
special content that is undermining the authority of the state
and the values of the established state. We know that this is
being actively used
,” he elaborated.

Rogozin added that the United States’ Department of State had
created a special unit for work in social networks and that he
had met the head of this unit who works so that the United States
could reach their objectives in a non-military
way.

The Russian official said that for NATO cyber warfare is already
a military threat and a military response, and Russia is also
watching these processes.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Evil Takes the High Road

0

The natural gaze of human beings is to the heavens. The welcoming light of the dawn. The warmth of the noonday sun. The beauty of a multi-colored sunset. The stars that invite wonder and provide a compass for exploration. The vastness of the heavens inspires the mind to expand its horizons. Their boundlessness offers meaning for everyone. People of faith look to the heavens for inspiration, guidance and strength, offering their prayers upward, for only the spaciousness of the skies is big enough to house their god. There is infinite space for the reflections and feelings of all kinds of people, including lovers: “Blue skies smiling at me,” an inspired Irving Berlin composed, “nothing but blue skies do I see . . . when you’re in love.” The heavens are for lovers–and for worshippers, and stargazers, and beachcombers, and everyone else.  Unless you live in one of the Muslim countries in which the United States is waging its preemptive global “war on terrorism.” In those distant lands–far from the eyes of us Americans–US drones have turned the heavens into hell–in our name.

In a recent speech at the National Defense University, President Obama sought to counter critics of his drone warfare by dressing it in morality. His lofty words demonstrate the extent to which evil can take the high road. Our conscience-robed president’s speech needs to be seen in the context of what his administration’s criminal drone warfare has done to the beloved heavens of countless people— from which blessings no longer descend, but rather missiles and death–and constant fear.

A Stanford/NYU nine months study, beginning December 2011, reveals what life is like for people in Pakistan “living under drones.” The study’s Executive Summary begins by undermining President Obama’s attempt to put a moral spin on his drone warfare policies now spearheading America’s unending war against so-called “terrorists.” “In the United States,” the Summary states, “the dominant narrative about the use of drones in Pakistan is of a surgically precise and effective tool that makes the US safer by enabling ‘targeted killing’ of terrorists, with minimal downsides or collateral impacts.[1] This narrative is false”[italics added]. The Summary continues, “Based on extensive interviews with Pakistanis living in the regions directly affected, as well as humanitarian and medical workers, this report provides new and firsthand testimony about the negative impacts US policies are having on the civilians living under drones.” (“Living Under Drones: Death, Injury and Trauma to Civilians from US Drone Practices in Pakistan,” International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic of Stanford Law School and the Global Justice Clinic at New York University School of Law, www.livingunderdrones.org)

The Stanford/NYU report provides a reality check for President Obama’s speech on drone warfare. Obama is adept at clothing his administration’s policies in righteousness. “To say a military tactic is legal, or even effective, is not to say it is wise or moral in every instance.” He then continues to reassure the American public with more self-serving enlightenment: “For the same human progress that gives us the technology to strike half a world away also demands the discipline to constrain that power— or risk abusing it. That’s why,” he says, “over the last four years, my Administration has worked vigorously to establish a framework that governs our use of force against terrorists–insisting upon clear guidelines, oversight and accountability that is now codified in Presidential Policy Guidance that I signed yesterday.” (“Obama Drone Speech At National Defense University (FULL MANUSCRIPT),” The Huffington Post, May 23. 2013)

Nor does he neglect diplomacy: “America cannot take strikes whenever we choose–our actions are bound by consultations with partners, and respect for state sovereignty.” His bottom line on drone strikes: “And before any strike is taken, there must be near certainty that no civilians will be killed or injured–the highest standard we can set.”(Ibid)

A classic example of evil taking the high road. The Stanford/NYU report’s Executive Summary tells quite a different story. Its first point is that “civilian causalities are rarely acknowledged by the US government,” in the face of “significant evidence that US drone strikes have injured and killed civilians.” The Summary goes on: “in public statements, the US states that there have been ‘no’ or ‘single digit’ civilian casualties. [2].” And “it is difficult to obtain data on strike casualties because of US efforts to shield the drone program from democratic accountability, compounded by the obstacles to independent investigation of strikes in North Wazinistan.” The Summary then states, “The best currently available public aggregate data on drone strikes are provided by The Bureau of Investigative Journalism (TBIJ), an independent journalist organization, which reported “that from June 2004 through mid-September 2012, available data indicate that drone strikes killed 2,562-3,325 people in Pakistan, of whom 474-881 were civilians, including 176 children . . . [and ] also injured an additional 1,228-1,362 individuals.” (“Living Under Drones,” Ibid).

“There must be near certainty that no civilians will be killed or injured.” President Obama’s high-sounding words are contradicted by the Stanford/NYU study’s Recommendations concluding words: ”Journalists and media outlets should cease the common practice of referring simply to ‘militant’ deaths, without further explanation,” and “all reporting of government accounts of ‘militant’ deaths should include acknowledgment that the US government counts all adult males killed by strikes as ‘militants,’ [italics added] absent exonerating evidence— the “exonerating evidence” provided posthumously, of course. The Recommendations double down here: “Media accounts relying on anonymous government sources should also highlight the fact of their single-source information and of the past record of false government reports.” (Ibid)

“Our actions are bound by consultations with partners, and respect for national sovereignty.” President Obama’s words fly in the face of the Stanford/NYU report’s finding that “drone strikes have also soured many Pakistanis on cooperation with the US and undermined US-Pakistani relations.” It then cites “one major study [which] shows that 74% of Pakistanis now consider the US an enemy. [6]” (“Living Under Drones,” Ibid)

President Obama ended his speech on US drone warfare with an uplifting statement about America’s future. “Our victory against terrorism won’t be measured in a surrender ceremony on a battleship,” he said, “or a statue being pulled to the ground. Victory will be measured by parents taking their kids to school; immigrants coming to our shores; fans taking in a ballgame; a veteran starting a business; a bustling city street.” His “high road” continues: “The quiet determination; that strength of character and bond of fellowship; that refutation of fear–that is both our sword and out shield.” (“Obama Drone Speech,” Ibid) It is almost like the godly peace mandate of beating “swords into plowshares.” (Isaiah 2: 4)

There will be no such victory–until America puts down the “sword and shield” of its criminal war of terrorism, which has turned the heavens of so many people into a nightmare. Compare President Obama’s lofty down-to-earth statement with the hell-on-earth reality his administration’s drone warfare has created. “US drone strike policies cause considerable and under-accounted-for harm to the daily lives of ordinary citizens, beyond death and physical injury,” the Stanford/NYU report’s Executive Summary states. “Drones hover twenty-four hours a day over communities in northwest Pakistan, striking houses, vehicles, and public spaces without warning.” (“Living Under Drones,” Ibid) That reality is not about “a ball game” or “a bustling street” or a “refutation of fear.” That reality is about the presence of US drones that “terrorizes men, women and children, giving rise to anxiety and psychological trauma among civilian communities. . . . the constant worry that a deadly strike may be fired at any moment, and the knowledge that they are powerless to protect themselves.” (“Living Under Drones,” Ibid)

“Victory will be measured by . . . that strength of character and bond of fellowship.” Not as long as the United States continues to perpetuate the horrible reality disclosed by the Stanford/NYU report: “The US practice of striking one area multiple times, and evidence that it has killed rescuers, makes both community members and humanitarian workers afraid or unwilling to assist injured victims.” Even “some community members shy away from gathering in groups, including important tribal dispute-resolution bodies, out of fear that they may attract the attention of drone operators.”  Villagers have also told the researchers “that the strikes have undermined cultural and religious practices related to burial, and made family members afraid to attend funerals.” And “families who lost loved ones or their homes in drone strikes now struggle to support themselves.” (Ibid) Where is “the strength of character” in US drone warfare that undermines the “bond of fellowship” for countless other human beings?

“Victory will be measured in parents taking their kids to school.” Not until another reality ends: “Some parents chose to keep their children home,” The Stanford/NYU report states, “and children injured or traumatized by strikes have dropped out of school.” (Ibid)

Evil really took the high road with President Obama’s qualified sympathetic gesture toward the civilian deaths from drone strikes. “There is a wide gap between U.S. assessments of such casualties, and non-governmental reports,” he says. “Nevertheless, it is a hard fact that U.S. strikes have resulted in civilian casualties, a risk that exists in all wars.” He reminds us why words can be so self-serving: “For the families of those civilians, no words or legal construct can truly justify their loss.” He then reveals the depth of his own sociopathically expedient personality in saying, “For me, and those in my chain of command, these deaths will haunt us as long as we live, just as we are haunted by the civilian casualties that have occurred through conventional fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq (italics added). “But,” he morally labors on, “as Commander-in-Chief, I must weigh these heartbreaking tragedies against the alternatives. To do nothing in the face of terrorists networks would invite far more civilian casualties.” (“Obama Drone Speech,” Ibid)

Our political and military leaders want us Americans to believe that “we are the good guys”–and obviously those who resist and are killed “the bad guys.” How many times have we heard these simplistic, moralistic words used by leaders for our public consumption? They love to mimic these macho lines of heroes in Hollywood movies, which reveals their need to stereotype the behavior of their victims–and justify their own.

Just when you think evil cannot take a higher road, President Obama finds another route. “The high threshold that we have set for taking lethal action applies to all potential terrorist targets,” he says, and adds, “This threshold respects the inherent dignity of every human life.” (Ibid)

The policy of President Obama and his “chain of command” is to deny and, if that Is not possible, minimize civilian casualties in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen and elsewhere. And when faced with dead bodies and eyewitnesses, the “chain of command’s” (Pentagon) going rate is up to $5,000 for a death or injury

“We are haunted by the civilian casualties in Iraq.” Over one million civilians has been killed in an illegal, criminal war, launched by President George W. Bush’s administration, based on its repeated lie that Saddam Hussein possessed mushroom-cloud-threatening weapons of mass destruction. The number of Iraqis displaced by the war, those who remained in Iraq and those fleeing the country, is estimated to be from three to five million persons. The US war of choice created close to one million widows in Iraq. The invasion and occupation also created civil war-like sectarian violence, which has resumed with the same severity in the wake of America’s departure. Also in America’s wake is a devastated Iraqi infrastructure. And nearly 4500 American lives sacrificed, and tens of thousands more wounded in body and mind in a needless criminal war–and the depletion of our national treasury, with a now tightening sequester belt that undermines, even more, the economic security of millions of Americans.

“This threshold respects the inherent dignity and worth of every human life.” Journalist John Pilger reveals just how “haunted” and “heartbroken” President Obama and his “chain of command” are about “the inherent dignity of every human life” lost and diminished in Iraq. In an article called “The Iniquities of the Iraq War: A Tragic Reminder to Prosecute the War Criminals,” he states that Hans von Sponeck, senior UN humanitarian official in Iraq wrote to him, stating, “The US government sought to prevent WHO [World Health Organization] from surveying areas in southern Iraq where depleted uranium had been used and caused serious health and environmental dangers.” Von Sponeck told Pilger that the “mess” George Bush and Tony Blair left in Iraq “is a crime of epic proportions . . . referring to the Iraqi Ministry of Social Affairs estimate of 4.5 million children who have lost both parents. ‘This means a horrific 14 per cent of Iraq’s population are orphans,’ he wrote. ‘An estimated one million families are headed by women, most of them widows’.” Pilger ends his piece with, “These crimes . . . await prosecution. But who will demand it?” (Counterpunch, May 31-June 2. 22013)

Not President Obama. He is not that “haunted” by the civilian casualties in Iraq. His stated opposition to the war against Iraq helped to get him elected president, but once in office he dismissed any thought of prosecuting the war crimes of George Bush and Dick Cheney, “wanting to look forward and not back.” (See “Statues of Limitations Are Expiring on Some Bush Crimes,” Elizabeth Holtzman, The Nation, Mar. 20, 2013) Nor is Obama that “haunted” by his drone warfare. With his “high threshold . . . for taking lethal action,” he is taking the high road: “We must define our effort not as a boundless ‘global war on terror’–but rather as a series of persistent, targeted efforts to dismantle specific networks of violent extremists that threaten America.” (“Obama Drones Speech, Ibid) Never mind that there will always be the Other, as so-called “extremists” will continue to resist America’s global domination camouflaged as spreading “freedom and democracy.”

President Obama’s behavior reveals that he is not really “haunted” by the civilian deaths as a result of his administration’s drone warfare policies. But we Americans will continue to be haunted by the threat of blowback violence. The Stanford/NYU report’s Executive Summary refers to that threat. “Publicly available evidence that the strikes have made the US safer overall is ambiguous at best,” the Summary states. “The number of ‘high-level’ targets killed as a percentage of total casualties is extremely low–estimated at just 2%.[4] Furthermore,” it continues, “evidence suggests that US strikes have facilitated recruitment to violent non-state armed groups, and motivated further violent attacks. As the New York Times has reported, ‘drones have replaced Guantanamo as the recruiting tool of choice for militants.’” (“Living Under Drones,” Ibid)

The Guantanamo Bay detention center remains an influential anti-American recruiting tool. President Obama pledged to close the detention center if elected president. The best he can now do is moralize about it having “become a symbol around the world for an America that flouts the rule of law.” (“Obama Drone Speech,” Ibid) While his “chain of command” continues to force-feed 36 of the 166 remaining detainees who are on a hunger strike, reportedly, to draw attention to their “abusive conditions . . . after years of imprisonment without charge and little sign of Guantanamo’s imminent closure.” (“Guantanamo Bay hunger strikers demand new doctors in letter of protest,” Spencer Ackerman in New York, the Guardian, May 31, 2013)

But the Obama administration’s use of the heavens to confine and kill people has created countless more enemies. A recent example of the anti-American anger fueled by drone strikes is the testimony of Yemeni citizen, Farea al-Muslimi, before a public hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Al-Muslimi said that, just six days before the hearing, a drone strike in his village killed a reported member of al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), and at least four other persons who could not be identified. He stated that the AQAP member was well known and could have been easily apprehended by the Yemeni government. “Now,” he continued, “when they [the villagers] think of America, they think of the terror they feel from the drones that hover over their heads, ready to fire missiles at any time.” He then made the point: “What the violent militants had previously failed to achieve, one drone strike accomplished in an instant. There is now an intense anger against America in Wessab. This,” he emphasized, “is not an isolated incident. The drone strikes are the face of America to many Yemenis.” His concluding statement is about empathy, and The Golden Rule: “I deeply believe that when Americans truly know about how much pain and suffering the U.S. air strikes have caused and how much they are harming efforts to win . . . hearts and minds of the Yemeni people, they will reject this devastating targeted-killing program.” (“Hearing reveals human and moral costs of drone warfare, Church of the Brethren Newsline, by Bryan Hanger, www.brethren.org, May 16, 2013; “Drone Strike Testimony: Not News?,” By Peter Hart, www.fair.org, Apr. 24, 2013)

President Obama is taking the same “high road” as his predecessor–a road paved with anti-introspective stereotypes. President Bush repeatedly stereotyped those who resisted America’s imperialistic presence in their lands as “evildoers,” “the evil ones,” “killers,” and “terrorists,” who “hate our success [and] our liberty,” and whom you can’t talk sense to.” (“George W. Bush’s Insights on Evil, www.irregulartimes.com, Oct. 5, 2004; “President’s Remarks in Canton, Ohio,” www.whitehouse.gov, July 21, 2004)

President Obama’s “high road” is paved with similar anti-introspective stereotypes. In his drone speech, he says, “We will never erase the evil that lies in the hearts of some human beings.” He states, “Unrest in the Arab World has also allowed extremists to gain a foothold in countries like Libya and Syria.” He continues, “Finally, we face a real threat from radicalized individuals here in the United States.” And his closing words especially betray his refusal to be guided by the reality and wisdom of cause and effect: “And long after the current messengers of hate have faded from the world’s memory, alongside the brutal despots, deranged madmen, and ruthless demagogues who litter history–the flag of the United States will still wave from small-town cemeteries, to national monuments, to distant outposts abroad. And that flag will stand for freedom.” And, of course, he ends with, “God bless you. And may God bless the United States of America.” (“Obama Drone Speech,” Ibid)

“Distant outposts abroad.” The United States has around 1000 military bases in “distant outposts” around the world. So-called “extremists” are not resisting the American flag waving “from small-town cemeteries to national monuments” in the United States, but from their hallowed spaces as a symbol of domination.

Norman Pollack fills in the cause and effect connection that is missing from President Obama’s speech. In an article on Obama’s speech called “Obama’s Militarism-Imperialism Lite, ”Pollack writes,

At times one feels the identity of the ‘enemies’ is immaterial, just that they are there to keep the people in line, and the dominant structure of power intact. In this regard, Obama is helpful, his speech tossing in all manner of terrorists, from the Right, from the Left, from the individual run amuck–it doesn’t matter, just let  America always be on guard. For America to operate as it has, as it wants, as it strives to continue, with hegemonic ‘responsibilities’ always in view, and a domestic class system which preserves the prerogatives and power of wealth,  terrorism must hang like a thick pall over the mental landscape. Otherwise, we may see what our Leaders, Generals, Bankers, Industrialists and others fortunate to join the ranks of the ruling elite, are doing, and often doing in our name–   transparency be dammed. (Counterpunch, May 27, 2013)

President Obama wrapped our government’s policy of global domination in the American flag, and hid it in “small-town cemeteries” and “national monuments” and “freedom” and “God.” History will reveal to our children and grandchildren what countless millions of people inhabiting the “distant outposts” around the world already know: that America harbors some of the most “brutal despots” and “ruthless demagogues,” and chief among them are George Bush and Dick Cheney and, now, Barack Obama.

In America, there is the worship of the State, under the pretext of “freedom” and “democracy” and “God”–and security from “deranged madmen.” People of faith have to decide whether it is in drones they trust, or their god. Is it about pledging allegiance to the government? Or about praying to a loving deity whose heavens–and earth–are for everyone?

Rev. William E. Alberts, Ph.D., a former hospital chaplain at Boston Medical Center, is a diplomate in the College of Pastoral Supervision and Psychotherapy. Both a Unitarian Universalist and United Methodist minister, he has written research reports, essays and articles on racism, war, politics, religion and pastoral care. His book, A Hospital Chaplain at the Crossroads of Humanity, is available on Amazon.com. His e-mail address is wm.alberts@gmail.com. 

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

Marching to Jerusalem

0

46 years ago this month, Israel seized East Jerusalem, the home of many significant holy sites for Muslims, Christians and Jews, as well as the proposed capital for any future Palestinian state. Since then, Israel has increasingly undertaken measures, particularly the placing of restrictions on Palestinian movement, the construction of a separation wall, the confiscation of Palestinian land, and the building of Jewish-only settlements, that are threatening to push out the Palestinian presence in Jerusalem entirely.

Indeed, according to a report issued last December by the International Crisis Group, Jerusalem “no longer is the city it was” even “in 2000, when Israelis and Palestinians first negotiated its fate.” And this was the case despite the fact that many countries and international institutions have frequently criticized the Israeli occupation of East Jerusalem, and the UN has deemed some of the above measures against international law.

In the absence of any international effort to actually stop Israel’s attempt to “change facts on the ground” in the holy city, and during a time when Palestinians are once again increasingly mobilizing through nonviolent political actions, such as the recent mass prisoner hunger strikes, weekly demonstrations against the separation wall, and the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign, many thousands of Palestinians are mobilizing today in a Global March to Jerusalem to draw attention to the continued violations against East Jerusalem and its people. Palestinians will assemble in Beit Hanoun, the nearest point possible to Jerusalem in Gaza, to hold a peaceful rally, and nonviolent demonstrations will also take place in Jerusalem and throughout the West Bank, as well as in Cairo, the Jordan Valley, and many major cities around the world.

Unfortunately many Americans will not learn about these peaceful protests today unless they turn violent, even though some solidarity demonstrations are also happening here in the US. And even if Americans do learn about the protests, it may take a documentary film (and possibly even an academy award nomination) to really communicate to them the context for why these protests are happening at all — about what the Israeli occupation really means for Palestinians living in East Jerusalem and the West Bank.

Back in 2011, the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) at the UN issued a worrying report that Palestinian residents of East Jerusalem were becoming increasingly vulnerable.[1] And two years later, the situation has deteriorated even more.

Palestinians cannot move freely in Jerusalem, or between the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Numerous checkpoints either deny them entry or delay their passage from one place to another, limiting their access to health and educational services, separating their families, and threatening their livelihoods. Indeed Palestinians from the West Bank, both Christian and Muslim alike, must have permits to even access places of worship. And Israel grants few permits, often completely denying them to men under the age of 40, as was the case during Ramadan last year, preventing many Palestinian males the freedom to pray at one of Islam’s holiest sites, the Al-Aqsa Mosque. And earlier this year the PLO accused Israel of only issuing 30 to 40 per cent of the permits requested by West Bank-based Palestinian Christians hoping to spend Easter in Jerusalem.

Israel’s continued construction of the separation wall further limits Palestinian mobility, as well as isolates the East Jerusalem economy. A recent report by the UN blamed Israeli “segregation policies” for causing deep economic isolation leaving more than 80 percent of Palestinian children living in poverty. According to the human rights organization B’Tselem, 8.5% of the West Bank area (including Jerusalem) was seized during the construction of the separation wall, which began in 2002. Although the International Court of Justice, the principal judicial organ of the UN, declared in 2004 that construction of the wall must cease, and demanded that those sections located in the occupied territories be dismantled, construction of the wall continues to this day.

The Israeli authorities also regularly demolish Palestinian homes and businesses on the pretext of rules and regulations, but in reality it is extremely difficult for Palestinians to get permission to build or register anything, even when existing homes have been lived in for many years. Despite the massive need to build new homes for Palestinians, only 13 percent of East Jerusalem is zoned for Palestinian construction, and much of this area is already built-up. Furthermore, the number of permits that Israel grants each year is well below Palestinians’ extraordinarily high demand for housing.

These kinds of bureaucratic measures often reify the physical structures of occupation that isolate East Jerusalem, making life for Palestinians in the city unbearable. For example, Palestinians in East Jerusalem are defined as permanent residents, but only if they can prove that their “center of life” lies within either West Jerusalem or Israel. And according to the OCHA report, the application process for those Palestinians who seek to unify their families is now almost impossible to successfully complete.

And then, of course, there are the illegal settlements. Over one third of the area within the extended boundary of East Jerusalem has been appropriated for settlements (remember this is in comparison to the 13 per cent approved for Palestinians). Approximately 180,000 Jewish settlers are living in settlements today, and Israel has plans to continue building settlements in East Jerusalem, despite international condemnation.

On top of all this oppression, extremist settlers regularly carry out “price tag” attacks against Palestinians, including their Christian and Islamic holy sites, supposedly in retaliation for Israeli government policies that are unpopular with the settler population. Only last Friday, settlers attacked the Dormition Abbey in Jerusalem by spraying graffiti on its walls with anti-Christian slogans like “Christians are monkeys” and “Christians are slaves.” Israeli police forces also continue arresting politically active Palestinians in East Jerusalem, including women and children, many of who are being held in indefinite detention without charge. Dozens have been arrested in the last month alone.

These are just some of the characteristics of occupation that Palestinians living in East Jerusalem have to endure, and help to explain why so many Palestinians are symbolically marching to Jerusalem today. Similar to the recent wave of Arab Uprisings, this is as much about politics as about human dignity. But only in this case if change is ever to be realized, then the world has to do more than issue statements and reports about ending the occupation of a city that is so important to our shared history that it should be for us all.

Sarah Marusek earned her PhD in social science from the Maxwell School of Syracuse University and is currently a traveling faculty member with SIT Study Abroad. She is also a member of International Executive Committee of the Global March to Jerusalem

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

Iran and the Outside World

0

London.

The presidential election in Iran, due to take place on June 14, has ignited a fresh round of debate in the West on the country’s internal politics when Syria and Iran’s nuclear program dominate the Middle East agenda. They are all part of the same big picture and motives of competing powers in the region. The Guardian Council’s ruling to exclude the 78-year-old former president Hashemi Rafsanjani, apparently because of his age, has led to questions being raised about the future direction of Iran, once Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s successor is elected.

Writing in the Guardian newspaper last week, Peter Oborne and David Morrison opined that Rafsanjani’s absence from the presidential race was taken as a sign that Iran was “about to turn its back on nuclear negotiations.” The verdict already is that it is too gloomy. Eight presidential candidates have been debating the issues on television as the campaign proceeds. In the run up to the June 14 vote and thereafter, more will be said in Western capitals, not much positive, about Iran and its politics in isolation. In a sense, it is a continuation of familiar history of what many Iranians see as interference and humiliation—history that strengthens those in power and weakens genuine dissent.

Iran has been an object of desire in the strategic rivalry called the Great Game between the British and Russian imperial powers in Central Asia from the early nineteenth century. The twentieth century had been a traumatic journey for the Iranian people, who endured foreign intervention, manipulation, and revolutions. These transformational events were, to a large degree, imposed on the country. Mules and camels were the normal means of transport at the beginning of the twentieth century. A hundred years on, Iran is officially a theocracy; Tehran city has heavy motor traffic; Iranian scientists are engaged in stem cell research with a vast potential in the treatment of serious illnesses–the kind of research which America’s right-wing lobbies opposes; and Iran has a nuclear research program, a major cause of brinkmanship with Washington.

In a hundred years Iran has transitioned from a country without an effective bureaucracy, communication network, or standing army to a major power in Central and West Asia–a country of vast energy resources. At the beginning of the twentieth century, local tribal leaders, notables, clergy, and powerful merchants ran the country in the name of the shah of the reigning Qajar family in Tehran. Internal conflict in a weak state brought insolvency and foreign intervention by the Russian and British imperial powers and the United States. Each intervention was followed by further upheaval that shaped Iran into an Islamic republic vehemently opposed to the West by the end of the century.

Like many ruling dynasties of the time, the Qajar family suffered decline in the early part of the twentieth century. Qajar rulers had been on the throne for more than a hundred years, not so much because of bureaucratic institutions and coercion, but thanks to systematic manipulation of social divisions. The jurisdiction of the Qajar state was
imperialdesignsreally limited to Tehran and surrounding areas. But wearing grand titles, including that of Supreme Arbiter, the shah was content with clan and tribal chiefs and powerful notables exercising real authority in the outer reaches of his kingdom. Some of them married into the royal family to cement their relationship with the ruling family.

Facing an economic crisis brought by bankruptcy and high inflation in 1904—5, the Qajar ruler, Muzaffar al-Din Shah Qajar, threatened a steep rise in land taxes and turned to Britain and Russia for loans on top of the £4 million Iran had already borrowed. The imperial powers forced him to hand over control of Iranian customs to Belgian administrators, who promised that repaying the outstanding loans to Britain and Russia would be a priority.

The crisis triggered what became Iran’s Constitutional Revolution. Speakers at sermons in the capital mourned the loss of their nation’s sovereignty. One protested that the country had been “reduced to such a condition that our neighbors of the north and south already believe us to be their property and divide our country between themselves.” Widespread protests shook the monarchy, and attempts to suppress them were unsuccessful. On August 5, 1906, Muzaffar al-Din Shah finally signed a royal proclamation to hold national elections for a constituent assembly.

In October an elected assembly convened and drew up a constitution that provided for strict limitations on royal power; an elected parliament, or Majlis, with wide powers to represent the people; and a government with a cabinet subject to confirmation by the Majlis. The shah signed the constitution on December 30, 1906. He died five days later. The Supplementary Fundamental Laws approved in 1907 provided limited freedom of press, speech, and association and security of life and property.

The attempt to replace Muzaffar al-Din Shah’s despotic rule with a written code of laws debated and approved by an elected assembly was short-lived. The 1907 Anglo-Russian pact signed by the two imperial powers, who were fearful of Germany, divided up much of Iran. Isfahan in the north went to Russia, and areas in the southwest, including Baluchistan, Kerman, and Sistan, went to Britain.

Furthermore, the empires in the north and the south agreed to keep the Belgian customs officials to collect taxes and use the revenues to recover the loans. The rest of Iran was declared a “neutral zone,” leaving the constitutionalists to deal with the shah. As a keen observer was to write later, the pact “taught Iranians a hard lesson in realpolitik–that however predatory the two neighbors were, they were even more dangerous when they put aside their rivalries.” Conflict broke out between the shah and the constitutionalists, spreading far afield, and instability continued until the middle of the century.

Fifteen years of internal conflict and intervention by Britain and Russia, soon to become the Soviet Union after the fall of the czarist regime in 1917, left Iran in a fragmented state in 1920. The Qajar shah had been forced to grant Britain access to Iranian oil fields, including in the north, which was under Russian influence. In return, Britain would offer weapons, ammunition, and military advisers to the Iranian ruler. The Anglo-Iranian agreement, issued by the British foreign secretary Earl Curzon, turned Iran into a virtual British protectorate and was widely condemned, most notably by France and the United States.

Soon the Red Army threatened to march on Tehran. Amid all the turmoil, General Reza Khan, commander of a Russian-trained Cossack brigade in Qazvin to the west, marched into Tehran. Reza Khan declared martial law, took control of the capital, and told the Qajar ruler, Ahmad Shah Qajar, that he had come to save him from the Bolsheviks. In reality, though, the Qajar dynasty was coming to an end. Reza Khan was the new shah of Iran by 1925, and he declared his own Pahlavi dynasty a year later. In the end, the Qajar dynasty fell with a whimper.

The Iranian state’s systematic humiliation and consequent weakness had made it progressively susceptible to external forces. A lack of infrastructure and instruments of enforcement at the state’s disposal were responsible for two distinct phenomena in the country. The Qajar dynasty collapsed because it had little to give its subjects and few means of control in Iranian territory. A state without means is a state without authority. Its fate is in the hands of those who move in to fill the void created by the state’s inability. The Qajar dynasty lasted more than a century (1794—1925), but in the end it was a puppet of whichever external power was ascendant.

Social upheaval of such order frequently leads to radicalization. The 1906 Constitutional Revolution had raised hopes that the Iranian parliament would assert itself and be a counter to manipulations of the Qajar regime and imperial powers. In the end, the Qajar dynasty and the constitutionalists both failed, and a new order emerged under the leadership of Reza Shah, who in February 1921 staged a coup that made him Iran’s effective ruler. Four years later he proclaimed the Pahlavi dynasty. The last king, Ahmad Shah Qajar, went into exile in Europe.

His successor, an autocrat, was clear about what was wrong with the country. He abrogated the Anglo-Iranian agreement and signed a pact with the Soviet Union. The British retreated. The Soviets were persuaded to withdraw to Gilan Province in northwestern Iran and cancel most of the czarist debt and claims. However, the new Communist rulers in the Kremlin gave Iran a guarantee that they would intervene if a third power ever invaded the country and posed a threat to the Soviet Union.

Reza Shah consolidated his rule through state building in two areas: the bureaucracy and the armed forces. By bolstering the bureaucracy he meant to create a hierarchy of authority from the center down to the local level. Government officials would implement laws, gather information, and perform the vital function of tax collection. Reza Shah’s attention to the armed forces reinforced the nation’s primitive defenses. It was the beginning of a trend that would turn Iran into a major power in the Persian Gulf in the next half century.

At this stage, Reza Shah appointed an American, Arthur Millspaugh, to the post of treasurer-general.  Educated at the University of Illinois and Johns Hopkins, where he also lectured, Millspaugh had worked at the drafting office at the State Department and then as a trade adviser. Reza Shah’s decision to hand over the responsibility of reorganizing the economy to an American technocrat looked like a master stroke. It reduced British and Soviet interference in Iran’s affairs. Moreover, Millspaugh and Reza Shah worked well together for some time, and the economy improved dramatically.

Using the shah’s personal authority and the coercive power of Iran’s expanding military, Millspaugh started collecting taxes from those who had been avoiding paying. He made the Majlis raise the tax rates every time more revenues were needed for expansion of the military or bureaucracy. He appointed full-time civil servants to run departments. All this strengthened the authority of the central government under Reza Shah–a remarkable turnaround in a country squeezed between two major imperial powers of the day. Millspaugh stayed in Iran for five years, until 1927. Many Iranians saw him as the man who could liberate them from British and Russian domination and the United States as a friend of their country.

The advent of the United States as the third significant power in the region did not prevent Britain and the Soviet Union intervening again in Iran, most notably in the early 1940s and a decade thereafter. In 1941 Reza Shah Pahlavi was seen as sympathetic to Germany’s Nazi regime in World War II. The British and the Soviets forced him to abdicate and his son, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, became shah. The Allied forces promptly occupied Iran and transported armaments to the USSR to repel the Nazi advances.

More than ten years later, the American CIA and the British MI6 staged the 1953 coup in which the democratically elected prime minister, Mohammad Mosaddeq, was overthrown. General Fazlollah Zahedi, who had collaborated with the Western intelligence services, became prime minster. Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, who had fled into exile, was reinstated on the throne. The 1953 overthrow of Iran’s democratically elected nationalist government in an American-inspired coup plot sank deep in the Iranian psyche. Those events determined the nation’s state of mind, finally led to the 1979 Islamic Revolution, and explain the Iranians’ attitude to the outside world.

Deepak Tripathi is a British historian of the Cold War, the Middle East and the United States in the post-Soviet world. His latest books Imperial Designs: War, Humiliation and the Making of History (Potomac Books, imprint of the University of Nebraska Press) and A Journey Through Turbulence (Dignity University Press), have just been published. His works can be found at: http://deepaktripathi.wordpress.com and he can be reached at: deepak.tripathi.writer@gmail.com.

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

The Art of Lying

0

After so many politicians and entertainers have embarrassed themselves by being caught in pathetic, utterly transparent lies, you would think people in the public eye would have learned enough from these past blunders to come up with a different strategy when asked potentially damaging questions. Alas, that doesn’t seem to be the case.

The most recent goof was that of Anne Gust Brown, California Governor Jerry Brown’s wife. It all began with a message left on an answering machine, in 2010, during the California gubernatorial race. Apparently, as reported in the Sacramento Bee (June 6), an anonymous female caller had left a message on someone’s machine in which she referred to Republican candidate Meg Whitman as a “whore.”

Because the voice sounded like Mrs. Brown’s, she was asked point-blank if it were, in fact, she who had left the message. At this juncture, Mrs. Brown could have simply copped to it and said, “Yep, that was me. In the heat of battle I used a very poor choice of words, for which I apologize.” Or she could have flatly lied, and risked going to Hell, and said, “Nope, that wasn’t me. Sorry, but that is definitely not my voice.” Period.

But instead of either, this was the convoluted answer she gave: “I listened to that tape, and I couldn’t hear the word in question. I couldn’t hear it at all….I don’t know who it was. I’m not saying it couldn’t have been me. I thought okay, it probably was me….By the eighth time listening to it, I thought it wasn’t really worth my time.”

So the word “whore,” the word everyone else had heard on the recording, was the one word Mrs. Brown insisted she couldn’t hear. Moreover, she claimed she was unable to identify her own voice. She said she had no idea who it was who was talking. Then, as the questioning continued, she admitted that, yes, it could have been her. Then she finally confessed that “it probably was me.”

Granted, one could rightly criticize the media for trying to make an issue out of something this trivial. Really, guys, you have nothing better to write about than the use of a pejorative term on somebody’s phone machine three years ago? But trivial or not, Mrs. Brown made a mildly embarrassing situation infinitely worse by equivocating to the point of near absurdity. This bright and engaging woman came off sounding like a fool.

Which brings us to Anthony Weiner’s penis. We all know the story. Congressman Weiner sent photos of his penis to an appreciative woman Internet acquaintance. As happens all too often (learn from this, people!), these embarrassing photos managed to find their way into the public domain, and Weiner found himself in a world of trouble.

In fairness to Weiner, let’s not pretend that all he needed to do to get out of this mess was to say what we suggested Mrs. Brown say–in other words, simply cop to it and expect to move on. “Yes, it was my penis in those photos. And I have no further comment.” In no way was that terse little statement going to satisfy the media, not by a long-shot.

But Weiner put himself in the untenable position of sounding, simultaneously, both intelligent and idiotic. In answer to whether or not that was his penis in the photo, he professed not to know, which, I would argue, wasn’t an entirely unreasonable answer. After all, how many men, if shown flashcards of penises, could instantly identify their own? I seriously doubt I could.

What sank Weiner were his subsequent answers. When he admitted he couldn’t say whether the penis in the photo was his own, the follow-up question was: Have you ever had photographs taken of your penis? And when Weiner said he was uncertain of that as well, that’s when his shaky account began to unravel.

The lesson? Assume that the truth will eventually see the light of day, that you’ll be caught and exposed, and plan your response accordingly.

David Macaray, an LA playwright and author (“It’s Never Been Easy: Essays on Modern Labor” 2nd edition), was a former union rep.  Dmacaray@earthlink.net

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

Let the People Know

0

Openness in our government is essential for a healthy democracy. When citizens and voters have access to information about the inner workings of their government and representatives, they can cast informed votes. However, when this information remains in the shadows, citizens are left without access to the information necessary for them to properly exercise their civic powers and responsibilities.

Certainly the regular disclosure of how our government spends our tax dollars is extremely important.

In 2006 and 2009, legislation was passed that advanced open government initiatives. With the creation of USASpending.gov in 2006, the public was given access to an online, searchable database that discloses federal financial awards and their recipients. In 2009, the Recovery Act included openness provisions that created a public website to track recovery spending and formed a board that would oversee the Recovery Act funds to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse. These were good first steps, but there is much that is left to be done.

Just last month, President Obama signed an Executive Order and a Policy Directive that would officially require data generated by the federal government to be made available to the public online. As with all open government initiatives, this is a welcome development. But again, President Obama and his colleagues in Congress can — and need to — do more.

Attempting to build on the foundation of the 2006 and 2009 transparency laws, Republican Congressman Darrell Issa and Democrat Senator Mark Warner have been working to advance the DATA Act in the House and Senate. The DATA Act passed the House in April 2012, but was not acted on in the Senate and died in committee in the 112th Congress. The Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs did, however, hold a hearing to discuss the bill, titled “Show Me the Money: Improving Transparency of Federal Spending.” During this hearing, despite bipartisan support in Congress, White House representatives from the Office of Management and Budget and the Treasury Department balked at the bill, giving insight to improvements that could be made. Comptroller General Gene Dodaro, however, made it clear that a law is needed to specifically enumerate what information must be reported.

The DATA Act was reintroduced in the 113th Congress (H.R. 2061 and S. 994) at the end of May 2013 and unanimously passed the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. It aims to improve the quality of publicly accessible government information, set uniform data standards, collect spending data, and examine the information to root out waste, fraud or abuse.

Neither the President’s Executive Order nor the DATA Act, however, has gone far enough. There remains one crucial provision that is notably absent from both proposals: making full contract texts available online. Unfortunately, when it comes to government spending and government contracts, the devil is in the details. Providing this degree of public access to reporters, scholars, taxpayer associations, and more competitive bidders would be an important step forward. It would help keep corruption in check, hold government accountable for its actions, propagate best practices in contracting, give rise to significant taxpayer savings, and encourage fiscal responsibility.

Each year hundreds of billions of dollars in federal government contracts, grants, leaseholds and licenses are awarded to corporations. Taxpayers should be able to easily access clear and concise information on how their tax dollars are being spent by the government at all levels. This is especially needed in an era of massive outsourcing to large private corporations.

States across the country have been implementing their own open government initiatives in the past several years. States leading the way by consistently moving toward making full contract texts of all direct government spending available online include Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Indiana, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, and Texas. Requiring federal agencies and departments to post the full text of all federal contracts online would be the logical next step.

Concerns about confidentiality or cost of such an endeavor are vastly overblown. The computer age should make it possible to efficiently allow for certain redactions related to only legitimate concerns about genuine trade secrets and national security in contracts before they are posted online in a publicly-available database.

To repeat: Let the people know now. No more secret contracts and other deals.

Putting the full text of these contracts online could give taxpayers both savings and better value; lets the media focus more incisively on this vast area of government disbursements to inform the wider public; encourages constructive comments and alarms from the citizenry; and allows research by scholars specializing in the daily government procurement, transfers, subsidies, giveaways, and bailouts.

Ralph Nader is a consumer advocate, lawyer and author of Only the Super-Rich Can Save Us! He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion, published by AK Press. Hopeless is also available in a Kindle edition.

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

The Architects of Economic Disaster

0

The economies of the United States and Europe are seeing their worst downturn since the Great Depression. Tens of millions of people are unemployed or underemployed. This has led to millions losing their homes, their access to health care, and, in some cases, their lives.

Remarkably, the two individuals who bear the greatest responsibility for this disaster, former Federal Reserve Board chairman Alan Greenspan former president of theEuropean Central Bank Jean-Claude Trichet, do not appear to be suffering at all for their failure. Both are living comfortably and continue to be sought out for their expertise on economic policy. This should infuriate reasonable people everywhere.

At this point everyone should understand that the economic wreckage destroying tens of millions of lives across the globe was an entirely preventable disaster. In the case of both the United States and Europe unsustainable asset bubbles were allowed to grow to ever more dangerous levels. It was inevitable that the bubbles would burst and when they did the outcome would be a severe downturn from which it would not easy to recover.

In the case of the United States the story was a housing bubble that resulted in an unprecedented run up in house prices. After just keeping pace with inflation for a hundred years, nationwide house prices rose by more than 70 percentage points in excess of the rate of inflation over the decade from 1996 to 2006.

There was nothing in the dynamics of the supply and demand of the housing market that could have justified such an increase. Rents were going nowhere and there was a record high vacancy rate as early as 2002. More importantly the bubble was clearly driving the economy with near record rates of residential construction from 2002-2005. And housing wealth driven consumption pushed the saving rate to nearly zero from 2004-2007.

Of course these sources of demand would disappear when the bubble burst. What did Greenspan think would replace them? We may never know what Greenspan was thinking, but what he has said in his own defense is utterly absurd. In fact he told the Washington Post that he did not even know of the explosion of subprime lending until his last month as Fed chair in January 2006. If that is actually true it displays a level of incompetence that puts a drunken school bus driver to shame.

Greenspan should have been attacking the bubble with everything in his vast arsenal. Most immediately he should have been using the research of the Fed and his megaphone as Fed chair to warn the country about the bubble in unmistakable terms. (He actually did the opposite, denying the existence of a bubble and encouraging people to take out adjustable rate mortgages.) He also should have used his regulatory authority to crack down on bad mortgages. If both of these tools failed, he should have raised interest rates. This would have slowed the economy and increased unemployment, but it was better than the disaster we are seeing now.

Trichet doesn’t have any better defense. The bubbles in the peripheral countries were leading to trade imbalances that were clearly unsustainable. As early as 2004 the current account deficit in Spain was already 5.2% of GDP, in Greece it was 5.8% of GDP and in Portugal it was 8.3% of GDP. These deficits peaked in 2007-2008 at 10% of GDP or higher. How did Trichet think that deficits of this size would resolve themselves in a single currency? What was the process whereby the peripheral countries would suddenly be able to pay for their imports from the core countries? If he envisioned some mechanism for this adjustment that didn’t involve an economic earthquake, it is difficult to imagine what it could have been.

European Central Bank officials are prone to say in their own defense that their mandate is only to target 2% inflation; it doesn’t say anything about preventing depressions. Interestingly the ECB did not take this narrow view of its mandate when the euro zone’s largest banks faced insolvency in the fall of 2008. It came through with trillions of euros of below market loans.

The reality is that a central bank has to be responsible for maintaining economic stability as the ECB has implicitly acknowledged with its actions since the onset of the crisis. This means the ECB has no more excuse for failing to stem the imbalances of the last decade than does the Fed.

This raises the question of why the public should be paying for the generous pensions that both Greenspan and Trichet enjoy. After all, if Greenspan and Trichet had tried to burn down their respective institutions would we be paying their pensions? Given the consequences of their policy failures, we would be much better off if they had done their done their jobs competently and our only complaint was an incident of arson.

Economists believe that it is important that workers be given incentive for good work and punished for bad work. It would be hard to imagine central bankers more in need of punishment than Greenspan and Trichet. If we don’t take action against these two, why would we expect that their successors will be any better?

Dean Baker is the co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR). He is the author of Plunder and Blunder: The Rise and Fall of the Bubble Economy and False Profits: Recoverying From the Bubble Economy.

This article originally appeared on The Guardian.

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

Explaining Afghanistan’s Future

0

Email is a wonderful medium for communication, but there are drawbacks, one of which is the deluge of spam that hits our inboxes. We’ve all had weird messages couched something like

Forgive my indignation if this message comes to you as a surprise and if it might offend you without your prior consent and writing through this channel. I am Moses Arnett, Chairman, Contract Awarding committee . . .

They’re stupid and annoying, but sometimes they’re amusing, if you can be bothered opening them. After all, who would believe a missive that begins “forgive my indignation”? – although I have to admit the phrase does have a certain quirky humor. But when we consider more serious things, like the future of Afghanistan and Washington’s commitment to that dismal prospect,  it isn’t at all funny to listen to some of those who explain US policy to the world. Sometimes it’s like opening a spam-mail, because many mouthpieces of the Pentagon and the State Department are no more effective in their attempts at communication than the preposterously illiterate spam-dodos.

Consider, for example, the matter of disagreement concerning the ability or otherwise of the Afghan army to operate independently. There are many authorities who assert that it cannot do so, and the meaning of the word ‘independent’ has come under well-deserved scrutiny.

There seems to be no definition in any US military dictionary of the word “independent” ; not even in the Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms. But although it doesn’t appear in official volumes, the word is explained in ordinary dictionaries as meaning  “free from control in action . . .  autonomous . . .  capable of acting for oneself or on one’s own.”  That’s clear enough ;  but over the past year the Pentagon has modified the meaning of ‘independent’ so far as operations by the Afghan army are concerned.   It is evident to almost everyone that the Afghan army is incapable of undertaking operations without assistance from foreign forces, but in order to clarify matters the Pentagon’s spokesman said

Let me talk about ‘independently’ a little bit . . .  You heard me earlier say, Afghan – the Afghans are in the lead, and carry out independently many of the operations. So, when – and that – and that measurement that we’re talking about, being operated independently, that means they have every – that they have not just the – that their soldiers are capable, and that their leaders are capable, but they have the equipment, including the enablers, including the intelligence-collection ability, including the access to their own air force – air capability . . .  I think in terms of the fighting capability of the Afghan forces, the fact that they go out and carry out – carry out – independent operations at many levels, with some coalition support – sometimes that’s actual advisers with them, sometimes that’s fighting units with them, sometimes that’s intelligence, sometimes that’s air support either rotary wing or fixed wing air support – but, that’s the actual fighting, the actual operations on the ground, the actual patrolling is being done.

So, I wouldn’t – very careful to not confuse the term that we use, “independent operations.” “Independent operations” means that they’re independent sort of from bottom through all the range of capabilities when you have a military. But it doesn’t mean that they don’t operate independently.”

Do you understand what this person said?   Did he explain how “independent” the Afghan army is? What on earth did he mean?

The Afghan war is a shambles, and the least the world deserves is to be told in frank and lucid terms exactly what is happening and what is to be done in the future. But there’s no hope of that, because the Washington briefings are supported in the field by equally stupid purveyors of fatuous gobbledygook.

Take Major General Jake Polumbo, the Director of the International Security Assistance Force Air Component Coordination Element, and Commander 9th Air and Space Expeditionary Task Force, Afghanistan. You might imagine that anyone who could reel off that lengthy job description without looking at his notes would be a person with verbal talent. Alas,  No.  Because when the general was asked by a reporter  “what other types of airmen do you see in Afghanistan post-2014?” he replied

The types of airmen that we’ll have besides the advise and assist airmen will be primarily airlift, people that assist in regards to any of the drawdown that might not yet be done and assisting with the aerial ports of demarcation for our retrograde ops, and then some manned ISR will be a small footprint, but, again, enough that it’ll be a recognizable percentage of the footprint into ’15.

This is garbage-speak; and his replies in the rest of the interview are equally fatuous and incoherent. But no doubt he will be promoted, because he speaks with the tongue and style of his leader, the pompous General Joseph Dunford, who commands everything in Afghanistan.  Last week at a Nato meeting in Brussels he enthralled his audience by stating that

And – and I would just offer to you, there’s a number of variables that you should track over the next 18 months – certainly the performance of the Afghans this summer, the results of the elections in 2014, any political processes that may – that may bring the Taliban into a political process will have an effect on that, which obviously affects the – the strength of the insurgency. So I think it’s impossible today, except with a linear progression, to project out to 2015 what the security environment is going to be. So I think all those discussions about what’s going to take place in 2015 right now, I think you need to bear down and – and take a hard look at the assumptions that people are making when they – when they have that discussion.

It might not be a bad idea to take a hard look at Joseph Dunford himself, because he considers high casualties to be a measure of success. That’s high Afghan Army casualties, of course, not dead Afghan militants.

This all-powerful US general was asked “We’ve heard that the Afghan security forces are facing very heavy losses. Could it be useful to get a sense of just how many?” And he replied  “Yeah, they are – they are taking heavy losses. In fact, last week, we had a memorial service, and they – they lost 104 in one week. And that’s been an issue,” and changed the subject.  But when asked again about Afghan army deaths he said “it’s probably, you know, 70 one week. It was 44, 34, and then the last two weeks have been over 100.”  So that is over 350 dead in five weeks. Imagine the furious outcry there would be if the US military suffered a dead body count even approaching this number. But of course it’s only Afghan soldiers who are dying, not Americans, and, according to General Dunford, their deaths show that  “in terms of on the ground, you know, I think their performance actually exceeds where we thought they’d be a couple of months ago.”

It is beyond belief that any military commander – any military person of any rank, never mind the senior man in Afghanistan – could possibly claim that the performance of an army could be regarded as improving when it suffers a staggering increase in the number of its soldiers killed in combat.

Let’s put it in perspective : 310 members of the US armed forces in Afghanistan were killed in the whole of 2012. Now we have the Afghan army taking 350 killed in the last five weeks and the US commander declares that “And I would tell you that based on their performance over the last couple months, I feel pretty good about that. The – the challenges they’ve had against the Taliban, they’ve absolutely confronted those. And – and not had an issue, you know.”

No; they haven’t had “an issue” other than 350 grieving families, and appalling effects on the morale of the Afghan army – and sense on the part of the militants that they are on a wave of success, described by General Dunford as  “in terms of how they’re doing, the Taliban came out and they’re doing exactly what they said they would do, high-profile attacks, attempting insider attacks against the Afghans, and then fear, murder and intimidation.”

Good prediction, General. But when the senior US commander in Afghanistan says of his enemy that  “they’re doing exactly what they said they would do” this is a bizarre admission of utter failure. It’s his job to STOP an enemy doing what it says it will do.

In terms of explaining what’s happening in Afghanistan, Dunford and the rest of his incompetent followers make as much sense as the email spammers who “respectfully request” our bank account details. They want our attention, but all they get is well-deserved derision.  And Afghanistan goes further down the drain.

Brian Cloughley’s website is www.beecluff.com

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

The Medicos, the Mentor and the Music

0

Enroute to Saigon from Taipei for the final location shooting for a film about Vietnam that has been four years in the making, I opened the China Post and saw a picture of a vibrant young man with an impish grin wearing a Village Voice t-shirt. Although I knew how long and how ill Alex had been, I wasn’t prepared for the headline’s finality: Radical ‘Nation’ columnist Alexander Cockburn dies at 71 .   

The air left the plane. Numb, I dropped the paper in my lap.

Like many of his friends must have, I read the article over and again, hoping to find something in it that said it wasn’t so. I tore the article from the paper and folded it in my journal. Later, on page two of the International Herald Tribune, the headline read: “Alexander Cockburn 71, author and unapologetic leftist”.  Both articles reflected on Alex the journalist, columnist and author. One of his Village Voice colleagues remembered his “remarkable mind,” and the editor of the venerable Nation called him “an extraordinarily provocative, polemical, elegant columnist and writer.” Other papers, picking up the line “unapologetic leftist,” caused me to smile; I never thought of Alex as a leftist at all, but more a centrist, as he always seemed to be in the middle of things. And he never apologized for any of it. The editor of The Nation spoke the truth when she said he “never wavered in dissenting from what was the conventional line.”

Alex was a centrist all right — always in the middle of everything.

In our last correspondence I told him how powerful his last few essays had been. Somehow, I knew he must be approaching the end, so I pulled no punches closing with “Alex, I know you didn’t choose Germany as a vacation spot, how are you?” He replied: “Thanks Bold Avenger, All good. Mustn’t let up an instant or they gain ground. Love, A.”

Medicos

I didn’t know Alex as well as his Petrolia friends and family or his legions around the globe, so I was a bit surprised when, over dinner one night in July of 2010, he asked me to accompany him to town the next morning as he had a “routine” examination and they had mentioned the medication might render him unable to drive. The medicos had suggested he find someone to accompany him. Didn’t sound all that routine to me, but I relished the opportunity to have time with Alex to myself, especially riding the beautiful Lost Coast highway in one of his several late 50s or early 60s Chrysler land yachts. “The last great American automobiles made in the last great American era,” he’d say. “Steel, baby.”

Instead, next morning,we squeezed ourselves into his red Colt — a smaller, less-superior model which, in a fairer world — would never even be parked next to one of his other cars or trucks as it was “quicker.”

I dropped him off at the hospital and was prowling through one of Eureka’s book stores when my cell phone rang.

” Mr Perryman, Could you come to the hospital to discuss Mr Cockburn?”

“Is he ok?” was my first response. “

He’s bit drowsy from the medication. Do you know how to get to the hospital?”

I arrive at the near-empty building to be met at the door by a nurse who rapidly escorts me to Alex’s bedside. He gave me a weak smile in greeting. I felt as if I’d walked in on an intimate scene where my presence was welcome, but not joyfully.

“Are you related to Mr Cockburn?” the nurse across the bed asked.

“Well, we’re brothers, but not biologically” eliciting a smile from Alex. “Should I call a family member?”

“No, we’re waiting on an ambulance to take him to the emergency room at our other hospital. You need to hear this because we’re not certain he’ll remember. He needs to contact his primary care physician immediately and schedule an appointment with an oncologist.”

I looked at Alex, his eyes were closed. I then asked if the procedure had discovered significant problems. The nurse standing alongside me touches my arm. She nods once. I turned toward her and murmured “advanced stage?” Another nod.

“Metastisized?” Again, a nod.

I could swear she had a tear in her eye.

Alex, drifting in and out from the drugs, opens his eyes and locks an unblinking gaze on me. After an eternally long time, he sighs and closes them.

The nurse on his side of the bed touched him gently on the shoulder and turns to walk by me, semi whispering toward me:”Good luck with your friend.”

I moved closer to Alex’s side, and, not knowing what else to do, began to rub his arm.

Time had stopped—again.

Alex reentering this world, says “D., they were talking radiation and chemotherapy to me in there. What do you make of it?”

“I’ve never been to medical school Alex, but that can’t be a lot of fun.”

“Oh, what do they know”, he says and begins patting my arm.

I know both of us wanted to cry.

I followed the ambulance the the other hospital where Alex was rolled into the emergency room After a bit, a male nurse comes over and began thanking Alex for his writing, not believing that the “great man actually lived in Petrolia, of all places.”

He started cracking jokes that in both Alex’s socks, one black, one blue, his big toe was sticking out.

“Mr. Cockburn, you didn’t have to dress up for us, being neighbors and all. We’re pretty low-key here.”

Alex quipped. “Well, thank you but a gentleman should never go for a colonoscopy without proper socks” and winking at me, adds ” Besides, I have another pair just like these at home.”

Shortly after he tells me I ought to go outside and get some of that golden California sunshine that we had driven so far to enjoy. “It’s pretty dark and dismal in here , Deryle. Go enjoy the fresh air.”

The ride home was quiet unto we dropped down to the coast where he immediately sat up in the seat and started excitedly rummaging through the glove box, the console and under the seat.

“What are you looking for, pal. Can I help?”

“I was hoping for a Little Richard cassette to show up. I could sure use him about now.”

We made it into the house without Little Richard and I walked him to the door.” “Deryle, I remember everything that was said in there.” He bade me to go on up to the Tower where “the lovely Ms Chard will certainly be glad to see you.”

The usual happy walk up the hill to the jewel box he’d designed and had built there was longer and lonelier and harder that evening. My entire walk was a slow moving meditation on what must be going through his mind at that moment, how powerful those thoughts must be and if he was praying to any deity or natural force for aid or mercy.

I know I was.

I was also walking slower with the weight of the burden Alex had bestowed just before we exited the car not to mention anything of the day to anyone.

“Alex, your family and friends can be incredible assets in whatever struggle toward health this is to be. That’s a heavy burden to carry alone. Take the help.”

Another unblinking look: “In time Deryle, in time.”

That was the hardest promise I ever kept.

alex:light

Alexander Cockburn driving into the light of the King Range, Petrolia. Photo: Deryle Perryman.

Mentor

I used a lot of my time with Alex to talk about writing—the art and craft, the sublime and the nitty-gritty. He was always willing to indulge me.

“How long you been writing for living, Alex? You’ve cranked out a lot of words, and from what I’ve read, they’ve always been powerful. What’s the key? Got any tips for us novices on what makes good writing?”

“I’ve been doing it for almost fifty years. The key is that every sentence must have fire or dynamite in it, and it always”- — he punches the air emphatically — “… always must be interesting to one person. And that one person is you.”

Books/Music

Alex had an incredible vinyl collection covering a most incredible and eclectic variety of music. Flipping through his vinyl collection was a music lover’s dream. Amazing but forgotten sounds from across time and around the world.

Albums as diverse as Van Walls and Spider Sam, Jimmy Witherspoon and Ann Cole and the Suburbans, to Eddy Chamblee and Patsy Cline to Maria Callas and Little Willie Littlefield. Hal Paige and Dave Alexander to John Lee Hooker to Chuck Carbo and The Soul Finders and Billie Holiday to Ray Cane and the Hawaiian Slack Key Masters would fill his house with fine music to accompany the fine food he’d always cook, all accompanied by incredible conversation. Attending salon at Alex’s was a serious endeavor — not for fools or triflers or the weak of heart.

Books and books and more books.

Mr. Cockburn dearly loved books. His library was filled with books; his house held more. There were boxes and stacks of books out by the washing machine behind his house. Once Sheryl and I were headed for the beach and saw a dust-covered paperback wedged between the grill and the radiator of his beloved Belvedere station wagon. Road kill? Library kill?

On a supply trip to Eureka one day, I accompanied him to the local hardware store. He immediately struck up a conversation with someone so I went shopping, buying a pair of painter’s pants. As Alex was still deep in the conversation — by this time leading the discussion with several folks — I walked out to the car. He followed shortly, empty-handed. “Chatting with an old friend, eh?” “Oh no,” he said, “I didn’t know her before that. I heard her talking to the clerk about the California budget and couldn’t resist.” “Oh, so you couldn’t find what you went after?” He slapped the wheel with both hands. “Oh, I got so engrossed in conversation, I forgot what I went for. Let’s go for a bite to eat.”

I left the pants in the car, and Sheryl and I returned to Albuquerque. Several emails to Alex requesting he mail them to me finally resulted in my accusing him of wearing them — even though I’d never seen him in anything so pedestrian as a pair of Dickie painter’s pants. Shortly thereafter the pants arrived via post, accompanied by a postcard of a photograph he had taken in Italy, signed “Untouched by human crotch. Love to you both. Alex.”

“Alex, you’re the closest to royalty I’ve been around since I visited the Campbell Clan Castle in Inverary.  You really grow up in a castle?”

“Yes, D, I did. Well, a big stone house. I had a stone bedroom in a building built in the 1500s, and the nearest fireplace was a quarter mile away in the kitchen. It can get cold in Ireland.”

Visiting Alex’s house and library and gardens was a true inspiration, akin to having access to a one-of-a-kind museum of magic and music, mystery and beauty. Like his life, all that he built there in Petrolia was so rich, so full, and — yes — so blessed. His art, his music, his friends, the food and conversation, and his friendship was a gift to me. Alex Cockburn’s salon was a gift to so many.

After each of the numerous trips to Vietnam making Same Same but Different, Alex would invariably ask me to write something for Counterpunch. “I’ll print it,” he’d say. I never did. I’d make a comment or observation about some arcane topic or another, and he’d say, “That’s interesting. You should write a piece about that. I’ll print it.” I never did.

I wish this essay had a different topic.

Knowing Alex was writing until the very end gave me small solace at not being able to make his funeral. His encouragement had given me strength and hope the many times I felt that no one gave a damn about another story about Vietnam. Once, after some wine and serious discussion, he turned to me and said: “It’s important, D, and you should finish it.” “Why?” “Because it’s not really over, is it?” he said with a twinkle in his eye as he touched his glass to mine. “That’s why.”

A few days after my arrival in Vietnam in this July, I was interviewed by the Labor Party newspaper about the film, evoking cries of “traitor” and “un-American” from some who read it online. I think Alex would have smiled at that.

No, I know he did.

Alex was — to borrow from Kunstler — a “fabulous transcender of the mundane.” He presented us with uncomfortable truths. He held strong ideas and expressed them elegantly and eloquently. And he was never afraid of the breach. His life of philosophical inquiry, flagrant rebellion of convention, and an increasing pursuit of the real was an inspiration to many.

As the the Boss sang about a departed friend, “When they built you brother, they broke the mold.”

To paraphrase him speaking from his friend  Andy Kopkind’s memorial service in 1994: “Alex’s not dead to me.”

Alex was here, but not long enough.

Deryle Perryman is a documentary filmmaker living in Albuquerque, New Mexico. His latest film, “Same Same But Different” is about American Vietnam Veterans who have found forgiveness and redemption by living and doing humanitarian work among their former enemies. He can be reached at samesamedoc@gmail.com

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

Ill at Ease in Zion

0

Sunday started off after a good night’s sleep with a quick read of the Austin newspaper. Wanting more news than the ten minutes of reading the Austin American-Statesman Sunday edition has in it, I went off to the local coffeeshop with my computer and read a bunch of articles I’d been sent by various listservs and friends. Read the weekend edition of CounterPunch, too. By then it was noon and I went off to do something useful.

Gal who works the counter at the sandwich shop I spend too much time at has a slumlord landlord who let her yard get chock full of poison ivy. Showed up at her house with chemicals and equipment and gear and 90 minutes of work later the poison ivy was all dead, or going to be that way in about two weeks. Told her she owed me lunch for all that, and we were both happy with that deal. Nobody much else in this town of almost a million persons could have solved her poison ivy problem the fast and effective and safe way I did. The reasons for that are many and long and unattractive and I’ve dealt with them elsewhere and they don’t need to be repeated here. But I was glad to help her out and to make her happy by doing so.

Went then off to a buddy of mine’s new business site. Dennis runs the only decent automotive machine shop in this town, and he’s a solid guy who I’ve done business with for decades now. He’d called me a couple of days earlier about poison ivy question mark on his new site, could I come and look at it, and I drove there and sho’ nuff, lot of it there. Seeing as I was already loaded up, I went to work and sprayed. Got most of it done, told him that it was on the house, but that if he wanted some chainsaw work done, like a basal pruning on the trash trees there, well I’m available for about $200 a five hour day with a chainsaw. Got told sure, come on out. So I made Dennis happy and got some good work lined up now to keep the wolf from the door for a spell. And you know, when a buddy of yours takes a big stretch in buying a building for his business, the right thing to do is to lend a hand when it counts, right up front, with all the time-eating jack with factors that go with a new building and a move into it. And it’s also a celebration of sorts, lending him a hand is, that he’s going to make it, and you are lending a hand to be a small part of it. Might be the urban equivalent of a barn raising, or the nearest there is anyways to one nowadays.  I suspect that it is a bluecollar thing, that insofar as it still happens it only happens in bluecollar America.  I did my share. Dennis and I were both happy.

Went then off to a showing of The Gatekeepers, the new documentary on Shin Bet’s commanders interviewed, organized by J-Street Austin’s chapter. Movie has gotten rave reviews but didn’t have any  surprises in it to me, or to anyone else who is knowledgeable of things military.  Movie just shows the truth of DeGaulle’s fine statement about how the army can’t see any farther than the top of the next hill. J-Street organized a discussion afterwards at La Madeline next door, moderated by Glen Frankel, ex-Tel Aviv bureau chief for the Washington Post.

I’ve attended several J-Street events over the past two years and I confess, a big part of why I attended them was to see about meeting some cute bright with it Jewish gal.  But that didn’t pan out here with the Austin chapter and I doubt that it’d pan out with any other J-Street chapter either. Hell in my mid-50’s I’m one of the younger members, and there isn’t a single member any younger than 40. Doesn’t say much for the future of that organization, that its membership is most all social security age. The demographics are about the same for J-Street as it is for the local Democratic Party regulars–affluent west-Austin well-intentioned much older than average white professionals. Their Q&A was pretty lame, and it showed a distinct lack of political will and drive in their individual makeups. Again, like the local Dem regulars. Between the bad demographics and lame members I don’t see much of a future for either organization.

J-Street is a second-tier player at best and nobody much is going to expect much out of them, sadly. But I saw something there at that meeting that was big and mattered. The attendance was almost 70, which was very good for an event like that. Most of the attendees went off to the nearby La Madeline for the discussion afterwards, mostly I suspect because a lot of what the Shin Bet heads said was pretty disturbing to them–several Shin Bet heads compared Israel to apartheid South Africa, one to the Nazis even. Numbers like that overfilled La Madeline’s meeting room where we were scheduled, and the get-together expanded to take over the back half of the mostly empty restaurant.

Restaurant was mostly empty that Sunday evening, but there was this one gal studying away in the back corner on her upper-division college accounting course. She got displaced by the J-Street meeting, and I saw that that was going to happen before it did, and I went over and talked to her. I apologized to her about interrupting her studying, and suggested that she talk to the management about getting a comp meal in exchange for the inconvenience, that restaurants do that sort of thing all the time. She replied that she didn’t want to bother with that, that she wasn’t being inconvenienced any, that she was about to leave anyway. I told her that she wasn’t going to get anything in this world if she didn’t ask for things she wanted, and she ought to ask for something here. I left it at that, and went to move tables and chairs. At the end, as things were breaking up, I went over to the manager and told him about our displacing the student at her studies, that I suspected she was a regular there, and could we arrange some sort of comp meal for her the next time she was at his restaurant? The manager replied that he’d already taken care of it, that he’d given the gal a twenty for the inconvenience. I slapped my hand down on the counter, and said “God bless you, that was nice and fine, and I’m so glad you did.” I laid on the complements thick, and they were all genuine and heartfelt on my part, and I could tell he appreciated hearing them, and that he didn’t get too many like that too often. Made his day, I think. And it was a third good deed for the day I did, on a goof-off day when you generally don’t do anything useful or worthwhile, and I felt pretty good about it all. Almost.

Went over to the J-Street president, a gal I’ve known for a long while, and told her about the gal we’d displaced, told her that the manager had given her a twenty, but suggested that her as  J-Street go talk to the manager officially and see about comping her a meal anyway. Charlotte was somewhat hesitant about the possibility/logistics of the gal getting a comp meal,  but I argued that it was straightforward and very doable. She also waffled some on the issue of the manager taking care of it already–I pointed out that it made J-Street look good to thank the manager again and to comp the gal a meal on the J-Street nickel. Charlotte is smart and saw the virtue of my arguments and said she’d take care of it.

But Charlotte hadn’t seen the gal studying, hadn’t seen her have to pack up and leave on account of the J-Street gathering. And it hit me that nobody else there had, or if they had, it simply didn’t matter to them that they were inconveniencing someone trying to study for school. J-Street–the people in it are the heart of liberal Austin, liberal Austinites, die-hard liberal democrats, liberal well-intentioned well-meaning politically active and in tune American Jews, and not a one of them noticed their inconveniencing that gal studying hard. That sort of not paying attention to the world around you is bad. What is worse, and how much this was the case I can’t say, was if they saw what was happening and they just didn’t care that they and their group were going to inconvenience some gal studying hard for school, that that didn’t mean anything to them.

Forty years ago a crowd of these sort of American Jews would have certainly had someone in it, probably several or more someones, who would have noticed what happened and who would have had the heart to do something about it. They would have had the smarts to see how important it was to do the right thing by that gal and by the restaurant manager and in doing so earning their respect for your organization and the people in it. Blue-collar politically with-it Democrats would all have caught it too, back in the day. But nowadays, no, that’s all gone. Out of the 70 liberal well-intentioned well-educated cultured politically and socially engaged persons there, I was the only one tuned in to what was going on around me and who had the sense and decency and get off my ass to do something about someone we’d done wrong to–wrong to without intending to, or being able to not but wrong to anyway.  Liberal and decent America being like that, that’s bad. Got to wonder if a conservative Republican Baptist businessman type group would have done any better.* Don’t know, can’t say, mostly I doubt it, but you know, there are some pretty observant folks in some parts of the business world so I’d go with maybe.

So that’s us, the baby boom generation in full adulthood. Our most liberal and decent are unobservant of the world around them and are uncaring of strangers. It aint pretty and you can’t hide it. I’ll bet, though, that it is more than just my generation, it is America and Americans across the board these days. At least us city folks, and that’s most all of us. That’s my bet, and if anyone younger than me says otherwise, well, I’m listening, but I’m from Missouri. Show me.   A big and important part of our awareness of our world and of ourselves and our actions is gone for most all of us here in the USA, that and a fair part of our decent humanity to others, too. How and why it left us is another story for another day, a story that I probably ain’t sociologist enough to tell anyway. But our individual failings go a long way in explaining our nation’s. No hiding that one, either. And for all my good deeds that day, ones to be proud of, ones that yielded great personal satisfaction,  ones that did real good for friends and strangers both, well in the end I was feeling discomfited by it all, and feeling yet again ill at ease in Zion.

*I have to give the Southern Baptists another good kicking. Seems as Baylor University has made Ken Starr, of Whitewater and Lewinsky fame, their new president. There is something very seriously wrong with them and Baylor University to make that evil turd a university president. Somehow that piece of news didn’t make the local paper, or nationwide like it ought to have, either. 

Daniel White can be reached at louis_14_le_roi_soleil@hotmail.com

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

Austria to withdraw UN Golan forces

0

An Indian UN peacekeeper stands at the gates of the UN headquarters in the zone of the UN Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF), the Israeli-occupied Syrian territory of the Golan Heights, May 7, 2013.

Austria says it will withdraw all of its peacekeeping forces from the Israeli-occupied Syrian territory of the Golan Heights, following clashes between Syrian forces and militants that led to the injury of two UN observers.

UN spokesman Martin Nesirky said on Friday that Austrian Foreign Minister Michael Spindelegger had informed UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon about the matter.

Austriaâ„¢s Defense Minister Gerald Klug also said the withdrawal would start on June 11.

Vienna made the decision after anti-Syria militants briefly took over the Quneitra crossing between Syria and the Golan Heights. However, the Syrian army later moved in and recaptured the area. An Indian and a Philippine UN peacekeeper were wounded in the heavy fighting, according to UN diplomatic sources.

Austrian Chancellor Werner Faymann said the country was worried about the safety of its soldiers, who were Å“not trained or deployed for a military operation.”

Austrian forces account for about 380 out of the 1,000-member UN Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF), which has monitored the zone since 1974.

According to a report by the Guardian, Austriaâ„¢s decision has irked the Israeli regime.

Å“For the first time in 40 years, itâ„¢s not easy so the presence ends? That sends a very problematic message to the Israeli public,” an Israeli official told the UK daily.

Japan and Croatia have also pulled out troops from the UNDOF in recent months.

In March, 21 Philippine UN peacekeepers were abducted for five days by militants in Syria. Four more were also seized by the militants earlier this month and released on May 12.

The Philippines and other countries that provide troops to the UN force in Golan have expressed concern over such abductions. Philippine Foreign Minister Albert del Rosario has said the countryâ„¢s contingent could be withdrawn due to such incidents.

MKA/HSN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

'Qusayr victory brings stability to Syria'

0

Iranâ„¢s ambassador to Damascus has hailed the recent victory by Syrian Army troops in regaining control of the strategic town of al-Qusayr, saying the triumph brought stability to the crisis-hit country.

Å“The recent victories by the Syrian Army and popular forces in al-Qusayr region have brought stability to Syria. This will ease peopleâ„¢s sufferings,” Mohammad-Reza Raouf-Sheibani said in a meeting with Syrian Prime Minister Wael al-Halqi on Thursday.

He added that the Syrian peopleâ„¢s resistance against international plots over the past two years is in itself a victory over the countryâ„¢s enemies.

The Syrian Army managed to fully recapture the western town of al-Qusayr, an important center and supply route for the foreign-sponsored militants fighting against the Arab state, following three weeks of combat, Syriaâ„¢s state television reported on Wednesday.

Many of the foreign-backed militants and members of the armed groups were reportedly killed or injured during the Syrian Army operation to clean Qusayr from terrorists.

Halqi, for his part, appreciated Iranâ„¢s support for Syria, adding that the victories scored by the Syrian Army, particularly in Qusayr region, paved the way to clear a major hub of terrorists backed by the Israeli regime.

Syriaâ„¢s recent military and political victories have played a leading role in increasing public support for the Syrian government, the premier added.

A day after Syrian Army troops fully purged Qusayr from foreign-sponsored militants, they took control of al-Daba’a town in the central province of Homs.

Syria has been gripped by a deadly unrest since March 2011, and many people, including large numbers of government forces, have been killed in the violence.

Damascus says the chaos is being orchestrated from outside the country, and there are reports that a very large number of the militants are foreign nationals.

SF/NN/HMV

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Fracking, Coal, and the Question of Social Reproduction

I live in fractivist country. While there are vibrant pockets of fractivism essentially anywhere hydraulic fracturing occurs — from New Mexico to Pennsylvania — New York State fractivists have the esteemed honor of actually preventing (at least, thus far) the expansion of fracking in New York State. I’ve lived here since 2009 and each winter the drumbeat of ’drilling will commence in spring‘ appears inevitable, until it doesn’t. Summer after summer (and the summer of 2013 will be no different), NY state is spared the fate of many communities directly to the south in Pennsylvania who have had their water poisoned, infrastructure smashed, and countryside industrialized. The struggle continues. New York fractivists will not rest easy until the current ‘moratorium’ is transformed into an outright and permanent ‘ban’ on fracking in NY. Given the low price of gas at the moment, gas producers would likely shirk much investment in NY anyway. But, if export markets for fracked gas open up as the industry hopes, and the price increases, NY could be the next frontier of the shale gas ‘revolution’. With that in mind, some municipalities — like Dryden, NY — have attempted to ban fracking at the local level. Mora County, New Mexico has just recently illustrated the power of local government to create conditions, “where it is a crime to be an oil company.”

I know an easy way to make my NY fractivist friends uncomfortable. I mention that the massive boom in shale gas has essentially hastened a dramatic decline in coal use for electricity — and thus, a decline in coal mining and production. Many new coal-fired electric plants can easily be switched to gas, and, as gas prices have declined, they have. Since 2006 U.S. coal production has declinedsome 13 percent. The percentage of electricity derived from coal has declined from nearly 50 percent as recently as 2008, to 37 percent in 2012. Forecasts predict this will not last (coal is expected to rise again in the mix), but there is clearly a palatable crisis in coal country that can be directly attributed to the expansion of shale gas production. In November 2012, Patriot Coal effectively ended their Mountaintop Removal Mining Operations. This is partly because of massive organized resistance against this practice, but it is also because cheap shale gas is overrunning coal’s most important source of demand in electric power.

So, more exploding faucets in Dimock, PA, earthquakes in eastern Ohio, contaminated water in Wyoming, has led to less mountaintop removal coal mining; less Appalachian landscape destruction;fewer valleys filled in with toxic waste rock and chemicals. Although some disagree, it also probably means less Greenhouse gas emissions, as has been reported. How do we make sense of this? The knee-jerk reaction is to proclaim fracking is “good.” There are certainly arguments to be made that the extractive process is much worse and destructive for mountaintop removal coal mining when compared to fracking. Yet, those who have experienced the often horrific local consequences of fracking would surely protest such a conclusion. Others would argue that it is a false ‘choice’ to have to choose which form of dirty fossil fuel extraction will destroy whose ‘commons’— fresh air, water, and even the atmosphere/climate.  NY fractivists hope it is not their commons in the beautiful Southern Tier region of upstate NY — but, does the prevention of NY fracking create more tragic consequences for ‘other’ people’s commons?

Even if it is often extremely difficult, the most obvious politics is to reject the local destruction of the commons. The logic is compelling and powerful. In Mora County — the jurisdiction that recently banned fracking — local activists have situated the protection of their local water and land at the center of their opposition. As one local resident told The Washington Post, “To me, the fresh air and the land, and water. It’s better than money.” Hard to argue with that. Yet, it fails to confront that we live in a capitalist world where life is only reproduced through money.

While most fractivism (in fact, most environmental activism) is positioned as a “defense” of precious local landscapes and resources, the more difficult politics is to confront the underlying questions presented by the shift from coal to gas. We live in a society and economy utterly dependent upon high levels of energy consumption. The energy must come from somewhere. The extraction of energy almost always has negative effects (e.g. even the solar photovoltaic industry can leave a toxic legacy for workers and landscapes). We need to go beyond just rejecting Huber_Coverextraction because of its negative local effects of land dispossession, poison and violence. We need to ask broader questions about energy and the social reproduction of life itself. How can we balance the destructive aspects of energy extraction with the necessity of energy (and electricity) for everyday life? I would suggest that it is alienation under capitalism which allows us to see these two moments — extraction and the use of energy in everyday life — as separate and disconnected. I would argue that an anti-capitalist energy politics needs to promote connections between these two domains.

Drawing from feminist and Marxist theory, scholar-activists like Silvia Federici and Cindi Katz have shown the analytical and political importance of focusing on everyday practices of “social reproduction” — that is, the actual material and cultural “work” it takes to reproduce lived existence (e.g., household work, cooking, child and medical care). The key is to understand how capitalist social relations set the conditions and constraints on how everyday life is reproduced.  Under capitalism — and specifically the social relations of wage labor — we are alienated from the means of social reproduction. Firstly, insofar as ‘production’ is a realm controlled by private industry for profit, we are alienated from the productive process that underlies the things we need in order to live — including the decisions and control over all forms of energy production which is oriented toward profit above all else. Secondly, the nature of the wage relation — money in exchange for our labor capacities — ensures that we are alienated from the means of social reproduction — commodities. Although some aspects of social reproduction remain partially uncommodified (love, sleep, household work —there are exceptions to all of these!), we mostly access food, energy, and shelter through the commodity form. This is alienating because we access these goods in a marketplace saturated only with price signals attached to goods — hiding the social and ecological conditions of their production (this is also what Marx called “commodity fetishism”). Thus, living in a capitalist society makes accessing commodities produced under exploitative conditions (like fracked gas or coal) a matter of necessity and survival. Yet, this also means it is much harder to create a politics around social reproduction. Alienation means the real conditions of our social reproduction is hidden from us, and, it is harder to rally people to organize around things which they ‘need’ in life. On the other hand, it also makes the world of local nature around us — threatened by various forms of extraction —  seem more ‘real’ and distant from the world of ‘money’ — even as we use  money on a daily basis to consume commodities premised on the destruction of ‘other’ natures.

Confronting social reproduction under capitalism means we have to ask thorny questions about the displacement of coal from the electricity mix. Obviously, one of the critical aspects of social reproduction is energy. From firewood in developing world contexts, or heat, electricity and motor fuel in the United States, energy literally fuels the processes of everyday life.  It is natural for us to understand we need energy to reproduce our lives, but the world of how that energy is produced is alienated from us by gasoline prices and utility bills that only appear ‘exploitative’ when prices rise. Lately we might have noticed the bills we pay for electricity — a vital component to social reproduction — have declined, but what we did not see is that decline in price might have something to do with the shift from coal to shale gas in the electricity mix. Thus, many of us have no idea if our electricity comes from a coal-fired plant, a nuclear power station, or a wind farm. Alienation means we don’t have to know. What we do know — what we can see — is that the destruction of the local commons (air, water, infrastructure) by multinational fossil fuel companies really sucks. It is easy to conclude that the beauty and importance of these landscapes is, “better than money.” But, meanwhile our lives are reproduced through high levels of energy use paid for by money. As we send off online petitions with electric powered laptops/smart phones; as we travel to rallies in oil powered hybrid cars; as we wear clothes produced in buildings bound for collapse in Bangladesh (all purchased with money!), the opposition — not only the companies, but also the landowners and rural people (among others) who support energy extraction — easily caricature such activism as hypocritical. The opposition can always say: society needs energy and we will provide it at reasonable prices. As long as our energy politics is wholly focused on the destructive forms of extraction (From the tar sands to Dimock, PA), and not on some alternative form of energy provision, this politics will not only be easily marginalized as scattered, fragmented, and localistic, but also mocked as just another form of NIMBYism.

Overcoming capitalist alienation requires organizing a decidedly anti-capitalist politics that rejects capitalist forms of dispossession and recognizes the need to propose alternative forms of social reproduction. This politics must not only be about capitalism’s dispossession of that which is ‘outside’ capitalism — clean air, rivers and forests  — but also, how the internal relations of capitalism structure and constrain our lives in the abstract world of money and commodities. It means we need to agitate and organize for completely different social relations around how energy is produced (in fact how all production unfolds). Private, for-profit energy production (guided by money and shareholder value) is taking the planet to the brink, and it is clear that we require a more collective and democratic approach to energy provision. This collective and democratic approach would only be born out of struggle and its outcome highly uncertain. One would hope the struggle would result in overcoming the false choice between coal and gas and move toward clean and renewable energy sources (what David Schwartzmann calls “solar communism”). What is clear is we cannot leave it up to the venture ‘green capitalists’ (even if their hearts and technologies are in the right place) to develop a clean, green economy. Green capitalism means green alienation. Rather than leaving it to the market, we need to assert conscious and collective control over our energy future.

Matthew T. Huber is an Assistant Professor of Geography at Syracuse University. His forthcoming book is entitled, Lifeblood: Oil, Freedom and the Forces of Capital (University of Minnesota Press, August 2013).

This essay first appeared in La Jicarita: An Online Magazine of Environmental Politics

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

UN slams ‘cold-blooded murder’ in Iraq

0

Iraqi soldiers stand guard at a checkpoint on the border with Syria. (File photo)

The United Nations envoy to Iraq has condemned the killing of over a dozen people near a town in the western province of Anbar.

Martin Kobler, the special representative of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon in Iraq, denounced the killings as a Å“cold-blooded murder,” Banâ„¢s spokesman Martin Nesirky said on Thursday.

The incident took place near the town of Nukhaib on June 5 after unidentified gunmen stopped the victims at a fake checkpoint set up along the main highway connecting Iraq to Saudi Arabia. The assailants then opened fire on them. No group has claimed responsibility for the attack so far.

The UN envoy to Iraq also offered condolences to the families of the victims, calling on Iraqi authorities to take swift and decisive action to bring the perpetrators of the crime to justice.

There has been a recent upsurge in violence across Iraq. Authorities say Qatar and Saudi Arabia are to blame for involvement in the violence.

On May 30, Kobler also warned that Å“systemic violence is ready to explode at any moment” in Iraq.

The United Nations said on June 1 that a total of 1,045 people were killed and nearly 2,400 others were injured in the incidents of violence across Iraq in May.

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has blamed militant groups and the remnants of the former Baâ„¢athist regime for the recent wave of violence.

MKA/HSN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

How Rick Perry Spells Relief

0

Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

— King James Bible, Matthew, 25:40 

It’s not that he doesn’t like veterans. In fact in his remarks on Memorial Day when signing four bills passed by the Texas legislature he said: (invoking sober tones to deliver his message) “I don’t think there’s a deeper obligation that we have than to those who have sacrificed for our nation.” And saying that, he signed a bill that gives a total property tax exemption to the surviving spouse of someone killed in action and a partial property tax exemption to a partially disabled veteran living in a house given to the veteran by a charitable organization. (A third bill funds a “veteran entrepreneurship program” and a fourth gives World War II veterans with veteran license plates privileged parking benefits, a privilege with almost no fiscal impact given the ages of the benefits’ recipients.) Providing anyone relief from taxes is something every governor would enjoy doing and Governor Perry is no exception. And nothing is more important, as he makes clear in his Memorial Day remarks, than paying veterans the enormous debt we owe them. Of course the property tax relief only benefits those who own homes. Those unable to afford homes are given no benefit from the legislation the governor so proudly promoted.

There is one thing the governor refuses to do that would benefit far more veterans than the bills he signed on Memorial Day. That is something he is unwilling to do as he eloquently explained on April 1, 2013. Addressing reporters at the state capitol the governor said: “Seems to me April Fool’s day is the perfect day to discuss something as foolish as Medicaid expansion, and to remind everyone that Texas will not be held hostage by the Obama administration’s attempt to force us into the fool’s errand of adding more than a million Texans to a broken system.”

The governor has wonderful health insurance as part of the many benefits he receives being governor including a salary of $150,000 and a pension of $92,000 a year for the years he served in the state legislature. If it were not for his philosophical objection to health care for the indigent he could, at very little cost to the state of Texas, permit Texas to participate in the Medicaid expansion. Participation would mean that more than 1.5 million Texans who now have no health insurance protection would be covered and get health insurance just like people in Texas who are not living at the poverty level.  And not all of the 1.5 million are people who would simply be getting something that they, being poor, have no right to expect nor receive in this country where medical care is a privilege-not a right.

Among the 1.5 million Texans who would benefit are 49,000 veterans who “sacrificed for our nation” to whom, as Mr. Perry so eloquently stated on Memorial Day, we have a deep obligation. He probably intended to say the obligation did not exist if it meant signing on to something as repugnant as health care for the poor.

By not signing on to Medicaid expansion for Texas residents, the governor is insuring that Texas will maintain its reputation that everything in Texas is bigger and better than everywhere else. Texas will maintain its status as the state with the highest number of people without medical insurance of any state in the union. El Paso, Texas with a population of about 700,000 has more than 230,000 residents who have no health insurance. The University Medical Center in El Paso estimates that that number would be reduced by more than one-half were Texas to participate in the expansion of Medicaid.

On June 2, 2013, it was reported that Texas U.S. Representative Pete Gallegos and ten of his democratic colleagues in Texas’s Congressional delegation signed a letter to the Governor in which they asked him to expand Medicaid assistance in Texas. Echoing the governor’s Memorial Day remarks they observed: “Our servicemen and servicewomen put their lives on the line and sacrifice so much for our freedom. They deserve much more than lofty rhetoric alone.” The governor would almost certainly respond that giving relief from real estate taxes to some veterans who are lucky enough to own their own homes is the kind of relief that everyone can support. Other would say that given a choice between not having to pay real estate taxes in Texas and being able to obtain the kind of medical care that is available in all civilized countries except the United States, veterans would opt for adequate medical care for themselves and their families. So would the poor who did not serve in the armed forces but find themselves uninsured. Rep. Joaquin Castro, another signer of the letter said: “We know this can be done and hope Gov. Perry does the right thing.”

So do 1.455,000 uninsured poor. They shouldn’t get their hopes up. They are in the noble position of being held hostage to the governor’s dislike of anything supported by President Obama.

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

Russia deploys unit to Mediterranean

0

Russian President Vladimir Putin, second left, has a meeting in the Russian Armed Forces main operational center in Moscow, June 6, 2013.

Moscow says it has dispatched a permanent naval unit to the Mediterranean Sea, a move that the Russian president says is aimed at defending the countryâ„¢s security.

The Russian chief of staff said Thursday that Moscow had deployed 16 warships and three ship-based helicopters to the region.

Russian ships have been making regular visits to the Mediterranean, but the recent move marks the countryâ„¢s first permanent naval deployment in the region since Soviet times.

Putin said the plan is not meant as a threat to any country and should not be seen as Å“saber-rattling.”

The Russian president added that the Mediterranean Sea is Å“a strategically important region and we have tasks to carry out there to provide for the national security of the Russian Federation.”

The announcement comes after Moscow said it intended to resume patrols by nuclear-armed submarines in the southern seas, which is part of a broader effort by Putin to revitalize Russia’s military power.

On June 1, a source in the Russian military said Moscow is planning to deploy submarines equipped with nuclear ballistic missiles to southern international waters for the first time since the collapse of the former Soviet Union.

The official at the Russian General Staff, who asked to remain anonymous, told Itar-Tass news agency that an expansion of Russiaâ„¢s strategic submarine patrol area is going to begin from 2014.

The first nuclear-powered Russian Borei-class submarine was put into service in January.

The Russian president has highlighted the significance of a powerful military since becoming president last May.

MR/HMV

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Russia warns against claims on Syria

0

Russiaâ„¢s foreign minister has warned against Ëœspeculations and provocationâ„¢ surrounding claims that Syrian forces used chemical weapons against militants.

Sergei Lavrov said on Thursday that reports about the possible use of chemical weapons by Syrian government forces should not be used as an excuse for a foreign attack on the country.

France and the UK claim the Syrian government has used chemical weapons against foreign-backed militants operating in the country.

The Russian minister added that the claims could be employed by Å“certain forces, who may say that the red line has been crossed and that a foreign intervention is necessary.”

Lavrov further said a more comprehensive investigation is required, noting that investigators should also explore claims of the use of chemical weapons by the militants.

The White House had previously described any use of chemical weapons in Syria as a Å“red line” that could trigger possible military action.

Syria strongly rejects the claims as Å“lies,” saying that the militants have used chemical weapons on several occasions, including an attack in the region of Khan al-Assal in the northwestern province of Aleppo, where over two dozen people died.

On June 4, French officials claimed that they were in possession of Å“evidence,” based on laboratory tests, that proved nerve gas sarin had been used by the government forces in Syria.

The French government said it had handed the test results to a UN chemical weapons investigation team, which is led by Swedish scientist Ake Sellstrom.

The UN said in a statement on June 5 that Sellstrom had cautioned that the Å“validity of the information is not ensured.”

MR/HSN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Swimming in the Jury Pool

0

“Bet you’re glad you’re in here today instead of court,“ he said, smiling. I braked in front of the Bucheron, not recognizing him immediately. When I’d seen him at the courthouse, he was wearing jeans. At the grocery, he was business attired.

I told him I was prepared to tell the judge and attorneys that I have no confidence in the justice system.  And then I said,  “But it’s an interesting case, and I wouldn’t have objected to sitting on that jury.”

We talked for at least 20 minutes.  About the civil case. His perspective. Mine. We weren’t told much, in court–just that the plaintiff, a young man, was suing Kennedy Krieger Institute for lead-paint damage.

I’ve never gotten as far as I did last week–you know, a decider of a litigant’s future. A little over a year ago, when I received a summons, I wrote a lengthy statement about why I should be exempted–that I was convicted of trespassing at the US Mission to the United Nations in 2006 (jury trial), that witnesses lied, and that I would side with the defendant almost always. Thought that would be the end of it. Silly me. The next correspondence was notification to be at the Clarence M. Mitchell, Jr. Courthouse at 8:00, where I sat all day in a room without being called for a trial.

This time, I was seated in that same room, watching a video, waiting. An actor said something like: “With the exception of voting, jury service is the most important responsibility.”  I thought about turning to the person next to me to declare that jury duty, like voting, is participating in corruption. But the woman behind the desk spoke into the microphone, announcing that jurors with numbers between 6,000 and I can’t remember what (mine was 6,143) should go to another building.

During this walk, I was thinking about my new protest tactic–asking random people: “Do you know who Bradley Manning is?” And: “Have you heard about the Fallujah massacre?’ That it would be interesting to voir dire the judge and attorneys.

But there I sat, staring at a young man and his attorneys. At the respondent’s attorneys. The judge. But mostly at the young man.  Then the judge provided a little information about this civil case before he instructed the group. He said he’d ask a question and if any of us answered in the affirmative, he wanted each to stand and state our juror number.

“Are you or any member of your family in the medical profession?”

I stood. “Number 6,143.”

“Are your or any member of your family in the legal profession?”

I stood. Again, I said that I was “juror number 6,143.”

“Have you or any member of your family worked for a landlord?”

“Have your or any member of your family owned rental property?”

“Have you or any member of your family worked for an insurance company?”

“Have you or any member of your family sued for lead-paint damages?”

“Have your or any member of your family sued for any health damages?

“Do you believe a witness would ever lie under oath?”

I was up and down, and I hesitated when the judge asked if the plaintiff’s race would affect judgment. I thought about standing, knowing that the term “white privilege” would be unnecessary if we lived in a just society.

On and on the questions continued. And this wasn’t even voir dire.

Finally, it was.

The judge asked juror number 6,000 to approach. The lawyers huddled, talking with the juror and the judge.

I sat, watching the young plaintiff.  Then, looking at the respondent’s attorneys, the suits, representing Big Business. I will tell you that without hearing a smidge of evidence (this, after all, was not the trial), I had formed an opinion.  Had someone told me about the case before I arrived, I would have formed an opinion.

The judge proceeded, calling number after number. He stopped with juror 6,139.

When we were dismissed, I asked one of the plaintiff’s attorneys for her card. “I’d like to call you in three weeks (yes, this was going to take a while) to learn the outcome.”

I told the man at the grocery I’d done this. He revealed that he worked for a company that rented low-income property.

“I couldn’t have served, conflict of interest, “ he said. Told me he’d have sided with the respondent.  Then he said, “And the plaintiff’s attorneys would have loved you.”

Missy Beattie can be reached at missybeat@gmail.com.

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

Market Buzz: Investors look to US for end-of-week updates

0

Russian stocks opened Friday in positive territory in anticipation of a batch of important data from the US as the week comes to a close, including an updated jobs report.

On Thursday Russian floors closed in the red, with the MICEX
declining 0.74 percent to 1316.92 and the RTS down 1.09 percent
to 1286.86.

European markets also closed lower on Thursday, with finance
leading the decline after the European Central Bank revised its
economic projections for 2013, predicting that the eurozone
recession will deepen. The ECB has also kept its historically low
interest rates steady at 0.5 percent.

The UK’s FTSE100 fell 1.30 percent to 6,336.11 points, Germany’s
DAX 30 shed 1.19 percent to 8,098.81 points and France’s CAC 40
slid 0.99 percent to 3,814.28 points.

European stocks are expected to open higher Friday following the
previous session’s losses, although gains may be muted ahead of
the US Labor Department’s monthly jobs report, slated for release
later in the day. Germany will also release official data on its
trade balance and industrial production, a leading economic
indicator.

American markets had a volatile trading session Thursday, with
the US dollar sliding and bond prices rising. The major indices
still ended the day in the black ahead of the May jobs report.
The Dow Jones closed up 0.53 percent at 15.040.62, the S&P
500 climbed 0.84 percent at 1,622.49 and the Nasdaq rose 0.66
percent to 3,424.05.

The US will also release hotly anticipated data on nonfarm
payrolls, as well as a report on average hourly earnings.
Employment is expected to rise by around 167,000 jobs in May,
after adding 165,000 jobs in April; the unemployment rate is
expected to remain unchanged at 7.5 percent.These developments
could solidify the Fed’s plan to end its bond-buying stimulus
program.

Most Asian stocks fell on Friday, with investors eying the
forthcoming US jobs report. The revised ECB forecast predicting a
deepening recession in the eurozone has compounded the negative
sentiments.

Japan’s Nikkei 225 fell 1.3 percent to 12,734.91 after the yen
climbed against the dollar. Hong Kong’s Hang Seng fell 1.3
percent to 21,549.68, South Korea’s Kospi declined 1.5 percent to
1,930.80 and Australia’s S&P/ASX 200 shed 0.7 percent to
4,746.40.

Oil is currently trading in the black, with Brent up 0.09 percent
to $103.40 and WTI up 0.15 percent to $95.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Suu Kyi snubs issue of Rohingya Muslims

0

Myanmarâ„¢s opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi has rejected criticism leveled at her over her silence about the persecution of the Rohingya Muslim community, while announcing her desire to run for president.

The Muslim minority of Rohingyas in Myanmar accounts for about five percent of the countryâ„¢s population of nearly 60 million. The persecuted minority has faced torture, neglect, and repression since the country achieved independence in 1948.

Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have called on Myanmarâ„¢s government to address the plight of the Rohingya Muslim population and to protect the community against Buddhist extremists.

Å“At the moment nobody seems to be very satisfied with me because Iâ„¢m not taking sides,” Suu Kyi said. Å“I have not been silent. Itâ„¢s just that they are not hearing what they want to hear from me.”

Å“I do not want to aggravate the situation by saying that one community is wrong or the other community is wrong,” she added.

Suu Kyi made the remarks during a meeting with foreign business executives in the city of Naypyidaw on Thursday.

She also expressed her political ambitions and said, Å“If I pretended that I didnâ„¢t want to be president I wouldnâ„¢t be honest. And I would rather be honest with my people than otherwise… I want to run for president.”

Under the current law, her marriage to a foreigner disqualifies her for Myanmar presidency.

GMA/HSN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Interview with Peter McLaren

0

Peter McLaren is the inaugural recipient of The Social and Economic Justice in Public Education Award by the Marxian Analysis of Society, Schools and Education, The American Educational Research Association, 2012; The Central New York Peace Studies Consortium Lifetime Achievement Award in Peace Studies; the 2013 Award of Achievement in Critical Studies by the Critical Studies Association (Athens, Greece); and the First Annual Social Justice and Upstander Ethics in Education Award presented by the Department of Education, Antioch University, Los Angeles. He is also the recent recipient of the Ana Kristine Pearson Award in Equity in Education and Economy presented by The Center of Education and Work, the University of Toronto, 2012. The government of Venezuela recently honored Professor McLaren with the International Award in Critical Pedagogy. 

Professor McLaren’s work has been translated into 20 languages. One of his books, Life in Schools, was chosen in 2004 as one of the 12 most significant education books worldwide by an international panel commissioned by The Moscow School of Social and Economic Sciences and by the Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation. As a political activist, he lectures worldwide and works with revolutionary, community and educational groups around the globe. Peter McLaren is Professor of Urban Schooling, the Graduate School of Education and Information Studies, University of California, Los Angeles. He is also currently Distinguished Fellow in Critical Studies at Chapman University, California.

McLaren’s also a friend of mine, and this is the transcript of a short online interview we conducted on May 24th. The interview took place several days after Peter was tear-gassed and flattened by Turkish riot police in Ankara.

SDF: Peter, give the readers of this interview a brief precis of what your most important past projects were, and what your most important project is now.

Peter: My work is in the area of revolutionary critical pedagogy. In a nutshell it involves teaching for the purpose of creating a democratic socialist alternative to a society ruled by the value form of labor, or the selling of one’s labor power for a wage. When corporate appetite betrays such a ruthless insatiability, delighting in its own unchecked authority like a medieval king whose power knows no excess outside of a failure of the imagination, we know we are in for trouble.

The marketplace has no bearing whatsoever on how we need to structure our humanity. Human beings have no reason to endure debt peonage as some sort of character builder. We have no need to live in conditions that Chris Hedges calls “replicate slavery” or “unpaid bondage”—gifts to the poor not simply by corporate oligarchs but by capital itself. When human misery becomes nothing more than a business venture made over a toast with a Davidoff cigar and with the matching obscenity of a diamond martini at the Ritz-Carlton Tokyo, then we know where we are headed and it’s going to be bleak, at best, for those who survive.

To all those good Christians out there who believe the Bible has given humankind the authority to use nature as it pleased, I would argue that Jesus did not mean for his followers to be baptized in the toxic waste of drilling retention ponds. The coal ash in surface impoundment ponds was not meant to be worn on the foreheads of believers on Ash Wednesday. As an educator, I believe it is my duty to promote a socialist agenda, and I make no apologies for that.

SDF: So what brought you to this particular conference you attended, in Turkey?

Peter: I was one of the keynotes at the 3rd annual conference on critical education titled Education Under Siege by Neoliberalism and Neoconservatism and held in Ankara Turkey.

SDF: Who were you with in Turkey, and what did you do with them there?

Peter: During a break in the conference at the University of Ankara, I heard that some students were protesting media censorship surrounding twin bomb attacks on the border town of Reyhanli that killed 51 people on Saturday (May 11). I heard they were tear gassed and wanted to show them my support so I followed them a few blocks but since I am recovering from knee surgery, and still mostly walk on crutches, I had to return back to campus before the protesters arrived at their final destination. Then, several days later, Dave Hill, an education professor from London, and I were at the city center and heard about a similar protest and joined in to support the protesters. Police fired tear gas into the crowd and I was knocked over and thanks to the help of a waiter at a nearby restaurant, was taken into his restaurant and hidden in a back room.

SDF: What sense of accomplishment did you take away from the conference in Turkey?

Peter: It was heartening to be with educators from Turkey and Greece who were working together in an atmosphere of solidarity and respect for each other. There was a bond that was present between the two groups that grew stronger as the conference progressed. The presenters and audience were from around the world, and to see so many critical educators agree on so many political platforms was encouraging. the analyses of neoliberalism were sophisticated and there was a general agreement that a socialist alternative to capitalism was urgently necessary. The comradeship was strong, and the conference was absent of demagoguery or prima donnas. There was a strong emphasis on class struggle for the most part shorn of qualifications from identity politics. When race and gender and disability and patriarchy and sexuality were discussed, it was within the larger optic of neoliberal capitalism and a search for alternatives.

Over the course of twenty years, I have had the opportunity to meet and work with educators from a variety of social movements, including the shack-dwellers’ movement, Abahlali baseMjondol, the landless workers’ movement, Movimento dos Trabalhadores Rurais Sem Terra — MST, in Brasil, the Zapatistas in Mexico, and members of the Bolivarian revolution in Venezuela.  But most of my work has been with schools of education and teachers’ unions throughout Latin America. The conference in Turkey introduced me to a new set of comrades working in very difficult contexts, and against a very repressive social order.

SDF: Now I’d like to change the topic of this interview, a bit, and focus upon the search for alternatives to capitalism, now, in the neoliberal age. My friend Jason W. Moore, recently moved into a professor position at the University of Binghamton in New York State, discusses how the capitalist world-system appears to be approaching a state of “peak accumulation.” We can, then, expect to see a multiplication of crises, economically, socially, and in terms of resources. How do you see this affecting activism in the future, and how does the class struggle continue in light of “peak accumulation”?

Peter: As you know, my work has been to bring a Marxist analysis to the system of global capitalism, and to examine education reform efforts from this perspective. Most critical educators in the United States are arguably left-liberals and while they have sophisticated analyses of neoliberal capitalism, do not seriously consider socialist alternatives to capitalism.

Those that do come to their conclusions not necessarily through Marx but through ecopedagogical analyses such as those offered by you, Sam, or people like Richard Kahn, David Greenwood and Tina Evans, to name a few of the major exponents addressing education in particular. I begin with an economic analysis. Consider comments by the liberal economist, Robert Reich, who argues (2013) that “as global capital becomes ever more powerful, giant corporations are holding governments and citizens up for ransom — eliciting subsidies and tax breaks from countries concerned about their nation’s “competitiveness” — while sheltering their profits in the lowest-tax jurisdictions they can find.” He points out, correctly, that “Google, Amazon, Starbucks, every other major corporation, and every big Wall Street bank, are sheltering as much of their U.S. profits abroad as they can, while telling Washington that lower corporate taxes are necessary in order to keep the U.S. ‘competitive.’” This is true, of course, as is the incalculable human suffering which results from the pauperizing effects and downward mobilization as a result of global capitalism.

It is also true, according to Reich, that “global corporations have no allegiance to any country; their only objective is to make as much money as possible — and play off one country against another to keep their taxes down and subsidies up, thereby shifting more of the tax burden to ordinary people whose wages are already shrinking because companies are playing workers off against each other.” This is what Marxist sociologist, William I. Robinson (2012) would describe an economy driven by “militarised accumulation”, “wild financial speculation”, and “the raiding of sacking of public finance to sustain profit-making in the face of over-accumulation.” He writes chillingly that the transnational capitalist class “has unloaded billions of dollars into speculation in the housing market, the food, energy and other global commodities markets, in bond markets worldwide (that is, public budgets and state finances), and into every imaginable “derivative”, ranging from hedge funds to swaps, futures markets, collateralized debt obligations, asset pyramiding, and Ponzi schemes” (2011a). This led directly, as we know, to the 2008 collapse of the global financial system.

Now the problem with this liberal perspective is that it doesn’t deal with global capitalism as a systemic crisis.  Marxist humanist philosopher Peter Hudis makes this point forcefully in his discussion of the U.S. economy, the crisis in the Eurozone, and the declining growth rates in such countries as China, India and Brazil. Hudis argues that the expenditure of trillions of dollars in bank bailouts and economic stimulus programs didn’t do much to reverse the structural/systemic crisis.  It was thought by many so-called experts that the mortgage crisis and the collapse of the global financial system in 2008 was the result of a cyclical downturn that could be resolved through state-sponsored bailouts and stimulus packages. Thus, we are faced with the prospect of austerity measures as a supposed antidote to the crisis (which some experts speculate may last four or five decades). Hudis argues that the political ineptitude and corporate greed of a small cabal of wealthy oligarchs is not the cause of the current economic crisis but the result of it–the egregious actions of bankers and hedge fund slime masters are rooted in the crisis of capital itself and cannot be restricted to human traits such as greed and avarice (although those human characteristics cannot be discounted entirely). Keynesian stimulus measures no longer suffice to resolve the deeper, structural crisis underlying the 2008 near-collapse of the economy–which Hudis describes as “the decline in profit rates that have plagued global capital for decades.”

William I. Robinson explains the bigger picture better than most. He describes cyclical economic crises as “on-going episodes in the capitalist system, occurring and about once a decade and usually last 18 months to two years” (2011).  And he contrasts this with structural crises that “are deeper; their resolution requires a fundamental restructuring of the system”. He describes earlier world structural crises of capitalism to the 1890s, the 1930s and the 1970s, crises that were resolved “through a reorganisation of the system that produced new models of capitalism” that was able to overcome the constraints of capitalism, leading to a resumption of capital accumulation on a world scale. Robinson argues that the crisis of the 1890s “was resolved in the cores of world capitalism through the export of capital and a new round of imperialist expansion.” He points out that the Great Depression of the 1930s “was resolved through the turn to variants of social democracy in both the North and the South — welfare, populist, or developmentalist capitalism that involved redistribution, the creation of public sectors, and state regulation of the market.” In order to understand the crisis of capital at the current conjuncture which we could call “the globalisation stage of world capitalism” is to examine it in relation to previous episodes of crisis, in particular, the 1970s crisis of social democracy, or what Robinson refers to as the stage of “Fordism-Keynesianism,” or “redistributive capitalism.”

We need to understand the emergence of “a qualitatively new transnational or global phase of world capitalism that can be traced back to the 1970s, and is characterized by the rise of truly transnational capital and a transnational capitalist class” (2011a) that came about when capitalist expansion went global through the machinations of neoliberalism and, as a result, the transnational capitalist class was able to capture state power in most countries during the 1980s and 1990s.  Here, according to Robinson, globally-oriented elites or the “transnational capitalist class” broke free of nation-state constraints to accumulation and have reconstituted their class power. Advances in computer and information technology helped the transnational capitalist class “to achieve major gains in productivity and to restructure, ‘flexibilize,’ and shed labor worldwide” (2011). The result was “a major extensive and intensive expansion of the system and unleashed a frenzied new round of accumulation worldwide that offset the 1970s crisis of declining profits and investment opportunities.”

I noticed the effect on education of what Robinson (2011a) refers to as “hyper-accumulation through new technologies such as computers and informatics, through neo-liberal policies, and through new modalities of mobilizing and exploiting the global labor force – including a massive new round of primitive accumulation, uprooting, and displacing hundreds of millions of people — especially in the third world countryside, who have become internal and transnational migrants.” I encountered this militarized style of global capital accumulation on education when I first came to the U.S. from Canada, working with Henry Giroux. We were struggling to create what we called a critical pedagogy whose goal it was to create a critically informed citizenry–critical citizens who were able to develop critical consciousness capable of challenging the dominant hegemony relationships in the economy, the state, in cultural production, the law, civil rights, etc. But this was at the time when corporations were gaining more power than nation states in many areas–so that education was being sold to hedge fund managers and speculators, bankers and entrepreneurs and was transformed into a sub-sector of the economy and the emphasis was on creating consumer citizens, not critical citizens.

Here’s how it is spelled out in theory. Capital wants to reduce its reliance upon living labor and to squeeze more value out of labor–but it fears a social revolution from those who are most devastated by the capitalist system. Capitalism, as Hudis reminds us, is continuously driven to reduce the proportion of living labor to dead labor (or capital), over time even the relative over-employment of non-productive workers comes under attack by capital and we see this today “in the concerted effort by numerous factions of global capitalism to reduce the number as well as the wages and benefits of public-service workers especially through austerity-measures.” The social and class struggles worldwide that were able in the 20th century to impose a measure of social control over capital are not necessarily going to work in the same way; unlike in the past, they are unable to, as Robinson notes, “force the system to link what we call social reproduction to capital accumulation” (2011). It is the “severing of the logic of accumulation from that of social reproduction” that today results “in an unprecedented growth of social inequality and intensified crises of survival for billions of people around the world.”

Robinson identifies “the chronic problem of over-accumulation” or the inability of transnational capitalists “to unload their bloated and expanding mass of surplus — they can’t find outlets to invest their money in order to generate new profits; hence the system enters into recession or worse”. The transnational capitalist class is using the current crisis in global capitalism is to brutally dismantle what is left of the welfare state. Robinson notes that the system is sinking deeper into chaos and the transnational capitalist class in no longer able to manage the contradictions in the system, but nevertheless has acquired tremendous transnational power and control over global resources and institutions.

We may defeat neoliberal capitalism but the result might be a new restructuring that leads to some different model of world capitalism — what Robinson rhetorically notes might be new reformed capitalist order, “a global Keynesianism involving transnational redistribution and transnational regulation of finance capital.” Or, Robinson notes, we could be headed towards a systemic crisis that demands a complete destruction of the system itself and the creation of an entirely new system. Whether or not a structural crisis becomes systemic depends, Robinson warns, “on how distinct social and class forces respond — to the political projects they put forward and as well as to factors of contingency that cannot be predicted in advance, and to objective conditions.”  So we cannot tell at this current historical conjuncture what those responses will be. We don’t know the outcome. What we do know, according to Robinson, is that the system today has certain very unique features that the crises of the 1930s and 1970s did not–the system “is fast reaching the ecological limits of its reproduction.”  Second, “the magnitude of the means of violence and social control is unprecedented” and here Robinson refers to “computerised wars, drones, bunker-buster bombs, star wars, and so forth.” And third, there is now an unprecedented “concentration of control over the mass media, the production of symbols, images and messages in the hands of transnational capital.” And fourth, we know unequivocally that we “are reaching the limits to the extensive expansion of capitalism, in the sense that there are no longer any new territories of significance that can be integrated into world capitalism.”  He writes: “De-ruralisation is now well-advanced, and the commodification of the countryside and of pre- and non-capitalist spaces has intensified, that is, converted in hot-house fashion into spaces of capital, so that intensive expansion is reaching depths never before seen.” And fifth, there is “the rise of a vast surplus population inhabiting a planet of slums, alienated from the productive economy, thrown into the margins, and subject to sophisticated systems of social control and to crises of survival — to a mortal cycle of dispossession-exploitation-exclusion.” Here, Robinson raises the specter of “a 21st-century fascism and new episodes of genocide to contain the mass of surplus humanity and their real or potential rebellion.” Now others have said what Robinson has said, but what I think is distinctive about Robinson’s analysis is that he emphasizes the important fact that transnational state apparatuses are no longer able to play a hegemonizing role that they once did, that is, they can no longer control or stabilize the capitalist system like they did during the Fordist/Keynesian stage of global capitalism and thus nation states tend today to lose their political legitimacy, and we witness, for instance, what is happening now in Greece, for instance, or Spain, or countries now coming apart as a result of brutal austerity measures imposed by the International Monetary Fund.

Robinson identifies three sectors of transnational capital that “stand out as the most aggressive and prone to seek neo-fascist political arrangements to force forward accumulation as this crisis continues: speculative financial capital, the military-industrial-security complex, and the extractive and energy sector.”  What about capital accumulation in the military-industrial-security complex? Well, that “depends on endless conflicts and war, including the so-called wars on terrorism and on drugs, as well as on the militarisation of social control.” Robinson disturbingly reveals that in the United States, “the private immigrant prison-industrial complex is a boom industry. Undocumented immigrants constitute the fastest growing sector of the US prison population and are detained in private detention centers and deported by private companies contracted out by the US state” (2011a). What about transnational finance capital? Well, that  “depends on taking control of state finances and imposing debt and austerity on the masses, which in turn can only be achieved through escalating repression” (2011). And what about extractive industries? Well that can best be understood in terms of “new rounds of violent dispossession and environmental degradation around the world.” We are now witnessing a global revolt.

I have been at Occupy Los Angeles, I have visited the town of Cheran in Mexico that is breaking away from the Mexican state and forming its own militia, I have spent time working for the Chavistas in Venezuela, and I have just returned from protests in Turkey. Yes, there is revolt everywhere, it is truly global.  We need, clearly, a transnational coordination of resistance against transnationally coordinated mass repression, and we see all around us efforts by the transnational capitalist class to destroy unions, to weaken labor, to target intellectuals, and to destroy whatever is left of what could be called a public sphere. This is the reason why Chavez tried to build up a region bloc against the United States attempt to bring Latin America back into line after the election of leftist leaders. I agree with Robinson that we need a “massive redistribution of wealth and power downward towards the poor majority of humanity along the lines of a 21st-century democratic socialism in which humanity is no longer at war with itself and with nature.” That is what my work in revolutionary critical pedagogy has been all about–helping to create democratic socialism through education, through the project of critical pedagogy as I developed it from my mentor, Paulo Freire.

Now Robinson is right on target about Obama, and I like very much his Gramscian analysis of how Obama is seeking to restore the hegemony that was lost during the resistance to the Bush Jr. administration by instituting a soft revolution designed to undercut massive challenges by the more militant left. It challenges the state at the cultural and ideological level, by pushing for immigrant rights, and gay rights, etc. (which of course are good policies in themselves) and other ‘moral issues’ to a certain extent but at the same time it makes sure that the socio-economic order is never fundamentally questioned or challenged and in case it is challenged it has created a massive security state to enforce any real challenges to the marriage between corporate rule and state power. It covers up the systemic barbarism of capitalism under the smokescreen of corporate greed as a human frailty. This soft revolution is what Gramsci terms a “passive revolution” against popular resistance–and it is successful through its ability to co-opt leadership from below.  Robinson notes that dominant forces in Egypt, Tunisia, and elsewhere in the Middle East and North America are moving in the direction of a passive revolution. The Obama administration has been brilliant in channeling popular resistance into a passive revolt, depotentiating and enfeebling more militant forms of insurgency by militant trade unions, socialists, and environmentalists. What worries Robinson is what worries me–and that is the consolidation of a social base of consisting of a broad swath of the disenfranchised white working class who historically enjoyed what Robinson describes as “racial caste privilege” during the previous Fordist-Keynesian epoch of national capitalism. Those who are caught in “a deadly circuit of accumulation-exploitation-exclusion” are simply abandoned, isolated, criminalized and repressed into the hinterlands of surplus – or super-exploited — labor.

Clearly, today, whether we choose to call techno-scientific labor ‘immaterial’ or ‘immiserated’, it is clear that the struggle is no longer men in boiler suits or railhead pants versus factory owners in top hats, continental cross ties and double-breasted vests. Or the sans-culottes versus the breech-garbed ruling class. Or workers in full-grain leather steel-tipped boots and clanging tool belts dangling from sturdy hips. Or financiers with capes and silver-tipped canes exploiting the labor power of frutiers, cobblers and copper miners lugging luchpails of lost dreams. We have ‘knowledge workers’ and ‘service workers’ and ‘sweatshop workers’ all of whom can play a role in the coming struggle. The struggle is the transnational capitalist class against all those who depend upon wages for their labor.

SDF: Jason W. Moore discusses how the capitalist world-system appears to be approaching a state of “peak accumulation.” We can, then, expect to see a multiplication of crises, economically, socially, and in terms of resources. How do you see this affecting activism in the future?

Peter: One dimension of my work that is relatively new deals with the current ecological crisis. Here I have been influenced by the work of Joel Kovel, John Bellamy Foster, and Jason W. Moore, in particular.

My position is that consequences of the simultaneous emergence of a transnational forms of capitalism based on the exploitation of human labor and the endemic crisis of capitalism – based on the political, class conflicts taking place given exploitative relations of productions – is also the origins of the current ecological crisis. In the same ways that the exploitation of human labor sustains the conditions of possibility of all other antagonisms, including profound, globalized racial hatreds, which is not to reduce them all to class, transnational forms of capitalism today and their historical precedents are preconditions for ecocide.

Jason Moore has been useful in this regard, who argues not only that “capital externalizes nature through the appropriation of extra-human nature as ‘free gift’ (Marx 1967 III:745), but also asserts that nature’s free gifts are not “limited to minerals, soil, and so forth: they also include human labor power (re)produced outside the circuit of capital (Marx 1967:377).” Thus capital exploits both society and nature in the way ascribed to its exploitation of nature as such.

In discussing William I. Robinson’s work (in Capitalists and Conquerors), I identified “the chronic problem of over-accumulation” or the inability of transnational capitalists “to unload their bloated and expanding mass of surplus — they can’t find outlets to invest their money in order to generate new profits; hence the system enters into recession or worse”. In other words, there are more commodities being produced than customers to purchase them.

But I also want to discuss what Jason W. Moore describes as crisis of underproduction, which he takes directly from Marx. In underproduction, what Marx referred to as a general law of accumulation that works alongside overproduction, capital is forced to substitute increasing amounts of capital and labor for the disappearing aspects of nature that Marx referred to as “free gifts,” which refers to both outer nature (the environment) and inner nature (human tendencies). Both inner and outer nature have, by the time of late capitalism, been configured to contribute to processes of capital accumulation. Capitalism appropriates nature’s free gifts outside of the system of commodity production in order to maximize labor productivity.

There are a lot of non-commodified relationships that have been exhausted in order to make capital accumulation possible. After all, nature had to be reconfigured in particular in order to enable the rise of capitalism itself—and Moore notes that this was premised on the peculiar reconfiguration of nature that prioritized labor productivity over land productivity. This led to the dialectic of plunder and productivity that is at the heart of contemporary capitalist accumulation. This is important in understanding capitalism as a world-ecology, and capitalism is a way of organizing nature.

The re-ordering of human-and extra-human natures into specific ecological regimes occurs today via financialization, the creation of new racial orders, the emergence and reproduction of the colonial regimes as well as the reproduction of the coloniality of power. There are indeed popular resistances to all of the above. All economic crises are ecological crises, all revolutions are ecological revolutions, all critical pedagogies are ecopedagogical. Now Robinson notes that popular struggles might lead to a new reformed capitalist order, “a global Keynesianism involving transnational redistribution and transnational regulation of finance capital.” Or, perhaps towards a systemic crisis that demands a complete destruction of the system itself and the creation of an entirely new system—what we could call a socialism for the twenty-first century to echo a common phrase used in Venezuela to describe the Bolivarian revolution instituted by Chavez.

In Jason W. Moore’s terms, we would be faced with a “developmental crisis,” in which capitalism transforms itself to overcome the crisis, by technological innovation and by expanding capital accumulation, or else an “epochal crisis,” which refers to the end of one form of economic life and the beginning of another – such as the move from feudalism to capitalism or from the post-Fordism/Keynesianism of the 1970s to finance capitalism that marks the era of neoliberalism. All of this depends upon how distinct social and class forces respond to these crises. That is, it depends upon us. And to what extent we are willing to become active and protagonistic agents of historical transformation—makers of history as opposed to passive products of history. Of course, we are always already both, dialectically speaking.

But we need to tip the scales and reclaim our protagonistic agency because while we will always be both producers and products, we need to reclaim our right to have a choice as to what we produce, and how, and in whose interest, and to what purpose. Otherwise we might as well choose not to exist at all, which is what many of us, tired, beaten, despised and forgotten, have already done, under the guise of accommodating ourselves within a system we know to be unrelentingly barbaric, morally schizophrenic, savagely abusive, ruthlessly repressive, selfishly unfeeling, and mordantly destructive.

SDF: Could you say something about the ongoing protests in Turkey? 

One of my friends, a professor at the University of Ankara, sent me a note just prior to participating in a demonstration, and told me that the protests were against “police terror and the pro-American and pro-European Union ruling power of the country (AKP)”. The protesters “want theAKP/Erdogan government to resign”. In a broader sense, the protesters are against ”the neo-liberal and neo-conservative policies of the ruling power of Turkey” which have resulted in “a dramatic rise in poverty, unemployment, hunger, injustice in distribution of income, migration etc.” The second problem is the “one-man show of Erdogan, actually a religious-fascist leader who was shown by the West as a good model to all Islamic countries.” People from all walks of life are participating in the protests “except for religious people who voted for the AKP. The rate of their votes in the last selections was 51 %. Erdogan relies on this percentage and threatens all protesters with this gun. The leaders of all demonstrations are socialists (leaders of all resistance), anarchists, and some anti-capitalist groups including ecologists. There are 19 socialist political parties in Turkey but their votes are under 2 %. It is very interesting fact that some Turkish nationalist groups/individuals are also participating into the resistance. One of their political party’s (MHP-National Movamenet Party) vote is 15 % but this party’s leader declared that they would not take a part in this resistance. Kurdish side (BDP-Peace and Democracy Party) also decided not to participate into the resistance because of the resistance’s some national characteristics and an agreement with the government for solving the Kurdish Question in peaceful way.

Our umbrella organization of public workers KESK has decided to a half-day solidarity strike, today and tomorrow.”

SDF: How do the protests—particularly among youth— which you witnessed in Turkey compare with other movements you have witnessed and written about around the world?

Peter: For one thing, all of the movements that I have witnessed of late—the Occupy Movement, the uprising in Greece, protests of university students in Mexico, the Indignados, etc.—are making more than minor demands, they are struggling for an entirely different kind of future and the originality and creativity of their protests speak to that future. They are not just about negating the present but about reclaiming space—parks, public squares, university buildings, and other spaces where they can enact a new, more horizontal form of governance and decision-making. They are moving beyond narrow sectarian interests and seeking to put participatory democracy into practice as an alternative to vertical forms of organization favored by liberal, representative democracy. And, of course, they are fighting state authoritarianism. They are seeking to challenge consumer citizens to become critical citizens again, as many citizens strove to become before the era of asset capitalism, or neoliberal capitalism. But the movement goes beyond nostalgia for the past—since most of the youth have only known neoliberal capitalism all of their lives. The youth have also have figured out that parliamentary forms of representation can no longer suffice in creating democracy in a social universe of asset or finance capitalism which requires a neo-fascist reorganization of the state in order to preserve massive profits for the transnational capitalist class. Youth protesters today are struggling for participatory forms of association using new social media and new convergent media production as digital tools, as technological literacies to educate themselves and their comrades to link their experiences of struggle to goal-directed actions. They are struggling for different forms of social life. Here the digital media do not become ends in themselves but augment or supplement real-world experiences of struggle for popular sovereignty—and in the case of the Zapatistas in Chiapas or the Purepecha nation in Cheran, Mexico, an autonomous community within the state. As a result of these struggles, these tools become more integrated as part of an effort to creative a collective intelligence with multiple visions of a socially just a fairer world. As Greek scholar and activist, Panagiotis Sotiris, wrote recently,

“Contrary to the supposedly post-modern tendency towards virtual communities digitally connecting fragmented individuals, as expressed in various cybespace trends, but also in the whole concept of a potential ‘on-line ‘democracy’ and ‘consultation’, nothing can beat the appeal and the power of people meeting in the street, joining forces, creating communities of struggle and resistance.”

According to the semiofficial Anadolu Agency news service, during a recent protest in Izmir, police have arrested 25 people on accusations of using social media networks such as Twitter to spread false details about the anti-government protests and police reaction to them, Many youth can see that the survival of neoliberal capitalism requires the state to reorganize itself in more fascist formations—and this is no less true of the youth in Turkey where many secular young people are fearful of the intolerance of criticism and diverse lifestyles by the
Islamist-rooted government.

Again, as Panagiotis Sotiris lucidly proclaims:

“The importance of youth in all these movements should not lead us to treat them as student or youth movements. Rather, youth who are at the epicentre of the current capitalist attempt to change the balance of forces in favor of capital, and are being treated in some cases as a ‘lost generation’, and almost always as the generation that will receive the full blow of capitalist restructuring, act like the vanguard of more generalized and deeper forms of discontent. This has to do with the particular quality of youth as potential labor power. Contemporary youth are more educated, more skilled and at the same time face precarization and the consequences of the economic crisis. However, they have the communication skills to make their discontent more evident than ever and are in a position to create networks of struggle and solidarity, thus making themselves more than instrumental for the creation of new public spaces, both real and virtual.”

I strongly agree with this observation of Sotiris and with his conviction that these movements are also productive sites of knowledge and potentially counterhegemonic projects. He makes profound sense when he argues, additionally, that the left needs to be more proactive in helping to transform such movements from spontaneous uprisings to historical blocs in the Gramscian sense that involve “combinations between social forces, new forms of political organization and new social configurations as alternative narratives that do not simply repeat historical left-wing projects, but actually attempt to think how to move beyond neoliberal capitalism…from the current ‘age of insurrections’ to a new ‘age of revolutions’”.

That said, I do believe there is an ongoing danger of communitarian popular fronts. Think of Poland and Iran in 1979-81. Mass movements in these countries were taken over by Catholic reactionaries in the former, and Islamic fundamentalists in the latter, and both movements had progressive elements such as women’s movements and workers councils. Political parties have a history of taking over various forms of spontaneous movements. I think popular-frontism could become reified as the “lost generation” versus the bankers and hedge fund profiteers. We have to fight to be wary of the struggle becoming the “good capitalists” who are against monopolies, etc, versus the unproductive parasites in the finance sector who accumulate their fortunes on the shoulders of others who are forced to sell their labor power for a wage. We must begin to wage a struggle for an alternative to capitalism based on the creation of real wealth rather than the value form of labor.

Peter also insisted that these references be given:

Hudis, Peter. (2012). From the Economic Crisis to the Transcendence of Capital. The International Marxist Humanist. Retrieved from: http://www.internationalmarxisthumanist.org/wp-content/uploads/imho-article-hudis-20120827.pdf

Reich, Robert. (2013). Global Capitalism and the State. Retrieved from http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/279-82/17512-focus-global-capital-and-the-nation-state.

Robinson, William, I. (2011). Global rebellion: The coming chaos? Al Jazeera. December 4. Retrieved from http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2011/11/20111130121556567265.html

Robinson, William, I. (2011a). Global capitalism and 21st century fascism. AlJazeera. May 8. Retrieved from: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2011/04/201142612714539672.html

Sotiris, Panagiotis. (2013). The New ‘Age of Insurrections’ is Far From Over! Wednsesday, June 5. Radiobubble.gr Retrieved from:
http://international.radiobubble.gr/2013/06/guest-post-new-age-of-insurrections-is.html

Samuel Day Fassbinder, Ph.D. (The Ohio State University, 1998) is a political blogger (http://www.dailykos.com/blog/cassiodorus) and a “Visiting Professor of English” with DeVry University Online. His most important work, however, is in the volunteer time he puts in with the Pomona College Natural Farm. He can be reached at Cassiodorus.senator@gmail.com .

 

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

Suu Kyi snubs issue of Rohingya Muslims

0

Myanmarâ„¢s opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi has rejected criticism leveled at her over her silence about the persecution of the Rohingya Muslim community, while announcing her desire to run for president.

The Muslim minority of Rohingyas in Myanmar accounts for about five percent of the countryâ„¢s population of nearly 60 million. The persecuted minority has faced torture, neglect, and repression since the country achieved independence in 1948.

Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have called on Myanmarâ„¢s government to address the plight of the Rohingya Muslim population and to protect the community against Buddhist extremists.

Å“At the moment nobody seems to be very satisfied with me because Iâ„¢m not taking sides,” Suu Kyi said. Å“I have not been silent. Itâ„¢s just that they are not hearing what they want to hear from me.”

Å“I do not want to aggravate the situation by saying that one community is wrong or the other community is wrong,” she added.

Suu Kyi made the remarks during a meeting with foreign business executives in the city of Naypyidaw on Thursday.

She also expressed her political ambitions and said, Å“If I pretended that I didnâ„¢t want to be president I wouldnâ„¢t be honest. And I would rather be honest with my people than otherwise… I want to run for president.”

Under the current law, her marriage to a foreigner disqualifies her for Myanmar presidency.

GMA/HSN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Resistanbul!

0

Boston, Saturday, June 1–Braving temperatures well over ninety degrees, as many as 500 people gathered on the outer edge of the Boston Common Saturday, across the street from the Massachusetts Statehouse, to demonstrate their solidarity with the protests currently under police attack in Turkey.

Massed in a giant circle on the Common steps, the demonstrators weren’t there to address local politicians or passerby, so much as one another. A spirit of militant resistance was in the air, as attendees declared themselves on the side of those who, at that very moment, were facing down water cannons and tanks, tear gas and police batons in Turkey.

It was an impressive turnout for a rally called just the day before via Facebook. The initial call was put together by an improvised group calling themselves BostonBullular (a phrase meaning People of Boston in Turkish). It quickly took off with over 800 “joining” the event.

And most showed up.

The vast majority present appeared to be themselves from Turkey, and most were young, with few over forty in the crowd. Many said they had come to Boston from Turkey to study, whether as undergraduates or graduate students, in medicine, biology, engineering, or even business.

Though several of the organizers identified themselves as various stripes of socialist or communist, for most in attendance, this was their very first political demonstration, not just in the United States, but ever. The exuberance of the crowd suggested people not just opposing the governmental abuses of the moment, but affirming the newfound power of their own voice. There was outrage and sorrow, but also discovery and joy.

Many held aloft home-made signs, some painted in beautiful full color. Others wore Turkish flags as capes, or clasped strings attached to red and white balloons inscribed with the crescent and star of the national flag. The chanting was almost exclusively in Turkish, with only an occasional English refrain thrown in–“Hey hey! Ho ho! Tayyip Has Got to Go!” or “The People, United, will Never be Defeated!”–perhaps out of respect for the small but supportive non-Turkish allies.

The most frequent chant by far was for the resignation of Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan, and for the dissolution of his Justice and Development Party (NKP) government, whom protesters hold responsible for the escalating police repression. Several people held signs mocking Tayyiq as a “Sultan” (playing off his recent calls for restoring the ‘glory’ of the Ottoman Empire in contemporary Turkey). Others denounced him as a “Dictator,” picturing him as a long-fanged vampire, or else encircled in red and crossed out. One protester likened him to “Hosni Mubarak #2,” conjuring the specter of not only another repressive ruler, but of a leader who, after having seemed untouchable for decades, fell from power rapidly in the face of popular uprisings.

Could Taksim Square be the new Tahrir? Could this be the start of a “Turkish Summer” to follow the “Arab Spring”?

In the shade of the towering, historic trees that line the Boston Common, new arrivals knelt to make signs from stacks of cardboard. The signs held high gave a sense of the grievances and aspirations of the demonstrators:

“Istanbul is not alone. We are with you!”

“Stop Police Brutality.”

“Fight Fascism Everywhere.”

“Democracy without freedom of expression is a joke.”

“Down with Sultan Tayyiq”

“Down with Dictatorship!”

“Shame on Turkish Media”

“RESISTANBUL.”

This last—and quite witty–phrase, which originated with the 2009 anti-capitalist protests against the International Monetary Fund meetings in Istanbul, has now become a Facebook page for those in solidarity with the revolt.

The nature of their protest occurring in a cherished Boston public park was not lost on organizers, several of whom held signs that said:

“Imagine if they demolished the Boston Common to build a shopping mall!”

This, after all, was what many saw Tayyip and his government as planning to do in Istanbul, by bulldozing the last remaining green spaces in Istanbul: Gezi Park. The main protest leaflet, under the title “RESISTANBUL” explained the connection further, outlining the origin of the uprising, and its significance. It was read aloud both in Turkish and in English mid-way through the rally:

“Since Monday, May 27th, 2013, citizens of Istanbul from all backgrounds have been staging a peaceful resistance in Gezi Park. Gezi Park is the city’s most central public park, comparable to Boston Common and Central Park in New York. The protestors’ goal was to protect the park, its trees, and landscape from a large project that would transform a public park into a shopping center. The demolition of the park should be recognized as yet another incident of the government’s ongoing appropriation and privatization of public and common resources with no respect for public opinion and judiciary process, and a lack of participatory democratic culture.”

[A video of the statement being read both in English and in Turksih can be found online at the “Bostonbullular” Facebook page.] 

Of course, it was the police assault on Gezi Park and on the peaceful protesters there that set off the current uprisings across Istanbul, and across Turkey. As with the outbreak of the Occupy Wall Street movement in 2011, police brutality provoked widespread outrage, fanning rather than stamping out the flames of resistance. Images of Turkish police beating, gassing, severely injuring, and even killing protesters have gone viral across social media, in Turkey and beyond.

Protesters actively checked smart-phones throughout the rally, reading live social media posts from friends and family on the street in Istanbul and elsewhere. Some held signs with one hand while checking their phones with the other. There were reports of nearly 1000 protesters arrested, and of just as many seriously injured, including several who were in critical condition, and several actual deaths.

At one point the rally chants were interrupted by a man who quieted the crowd to ecstatically report that Tayyip Erdogan had resigned, provoking great cheers. The report was soon disproven, but was followed by more accurate and equally encouraging news: with hundreds of thousands of people now converging on Taksim Square and Gevi Park, the police had been ordered to retreat from the area. The mobilized people had held the park, saving their city’s green space, at least for the moment.

Online memes of trees growing into human fists and hands growing like trees proliferated, as Turkish artists and activists gave the uprising symbolic “roots” in the besieged park.

“They destroyed a tree and awoke a Nation!” One protest sign declared, painted in full color.

But the “Resistanbul” statement made clear that the attack on Gevi Park was not an isolated incident of police brutality, and that this movement has become about more than just defending a park. As they wrote:

“This is not the first time protests have been met with excessive state violence. Most recently, the Turkish police used unreasonable force to disperse May Day protestors again attacks a group of peaceful demonstrators in Istanbul’s Taksim Square. This disproportionate reaction and outrageous violence by the government against its own citizens cannot be justified in any way.”

Everyone I reached out to at the demonstration spoke quite fluent English, but Turkish remained the tongue for chanting. (I relied on a friend for rough translations):

“Tayyip Resign! Tayyip resign!”

“We Stand Shoulder to Shoulder, Against Fascism!”

“Taksim is everywhere. Resist Everywhere!”

As indicated in the statement above, by invoking Taksim, protesters connected with a spot which for years has served as a common rally point for marches and demonstrations in Istanbul, including annual May Day marches that often lead to violent clashes with police, who have attempted to suppress May Day marches since 1977. To call for Taksim everywhere, is thus effectively to challenge the state directly, that is, to call for revolution. Capturing the militancy of Taksim, other protest lyrics practically dared the government into confrontation with a defiant people. For instance, one song declared (translated):

“Bring on your gas. Bring on your gas. We won’t obey you any longer. Take off your mask, take off your mask. And we’ll see who is the stronger.”

This was no appeal to the “powers that be,” but a declaration of the people’s own power and daring.

The chants appeared to be among the very same that were being shouted in the streets of Turkey. Thus this demonstration, as one man told me, was less an appeal to US media or authorities than a virtual extension, a “microcosm,” of the protests there, a way to symbolically participate in the uprising. No doubt many photos and video-footage from the Boston rally would find their way home to those struggling on the streets of Istanbul, perhaps helping to spur them on.

Despite the police violence, people I spoke with indicated that if they were back home, they would most definitely be in the streets as well. Perhaps it was the Turkish street as much as anyone who was the intended audience of the rally.

Here in Boston however, the protest stayed in the park, retaining the form of a giant, close-knit human circle. People stood facing one another, together chanting and singing, clapping, pumping their fists, calling out to one another, to whoever was there to hear them.

**

Contrary to local Boston CBS coverage of the event, (available here: http://boston.cbslocal.com/2013/06/01/massachusetts-statehouse-demonstration-supports-turkish-protesters/ ) the primary focus of the protesters here was not just a secularist opposition to the religious aspects of the Islamic Justice and Development Party, but to a constellation of detested policies: related to economic development and foreign policy, as well as social and cultural matters.

Several protesters certainly expressed opposition to the government’s conservative social policies–which have included restrictions on consuming alcohol, and even bans on kissing in public. But just as important to people I spoke with was the government’s suppression of independent journalism and the shameful slavishness of a mainstream Turkish media that has been bought off or intimidated by the state. (Turkey currently imprisons more journalists than any country, with a constitution that makes “insulting the nation” a crime.) Similarly, several people I spoke with indicated outrage about the Turkish media showing “stupid” TV programs or features on “Miss Turkey” instead of covering the civil war that raged in the streets.

Just as crucial was many protesters’ sense that the entire city of Istanbul is being “sold off,” that their public property and common heritage is being privatized for the benefit of corporations, to appeal tourists, for the sake of “economic growth.” The threat to the trees of Gezi park–and to the forests that are threatened to be bulldozed if a new (third) bridge is built across the Bosphorus River–was seized upon by people as a metaphor for the common rights and the beauty that the current regime would strip away for the sake of its stubborn idea of “growth.”

Still others told me they object to Tayyip’s increasingly interventionist foreign policy, which they believe is making Turkey a junior partner to Western Imperialism across the Arab World. Several felt that this has had the effect of exacerbating ethnic and sectarian divisions within the country, while exposing Turks to potential violent retaliation. People I spoke with saw Tayyip’s close relationship with the US administration not as a solution, but as part of the problem, again likening him to the “new Hosni Mubarak” of the region. Others were concerned the US is getting Turkey to do its dirty work in the Syrian civil war.

All in all, despite rallying near the Statehouse, the sense on the Common was not of a group calling on others to do something so much as a community rallying itself for the task that must be done, for the struggle that only the people themselves can move forward.

Proposals to march on the Turkish consulate, located just down the street from the Common, were considered but apparently shelved. Instead, after more than an hour of rallying, protesters left the steps for the park, packing up signs, and gathering on the grass in the shade of the Common. There many stayed to take in a Turkish music concert and sing-along.

While some may have longed for a more militant and street-oriented march-action, the park sing-along was an appropriate finish. After all, the uprising in Turkey was kicked off by the defense of a public park. And even at that very moment, while street battles were raging across Turkey, hundreds of thousands of people gathered in Gezi Park were enjoying–for the moment–a victory and a much needed festival too, having successfully defended Taksim square from police and from privatization.

After an hour of shouting in the hot June sun, protesters in Boston soaked in the shade, the trees, the music, the soft grass, and each other’s companionship, these shared common things, the green roots from which raised fists grow.

Joe Ramsey is a writer, editor, scholar, and activist residing in the Boston area.  He is co-editor of Cultural Logic: an electronic journal of marxist theory and practice www.clogic.eserver.org and a participant in the Kasama Projectwww.kasamaproject.org.

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

“No Nukes” is Still the Case

0

Despite spending several days in detention facilities in the late 1970s and early 1980s because of my opposition to nuclear power and its consequent dangers and debris, I honestly never thought nuclear power would be gone by 2013. The setup for the industry was just too sweet of a deal. However, I did have hope that nuclear power’s reputation would be so tainted that no new plants would ever be considered. Unfortunately, even those hopes were for naught. To make matters even worse, nuclear power—perhaps the most wasteful and most dangerous form of power generation—is actually being touted as a “green” source of power. This support is not just coming from the industry, either. One-time opponents like Whole Earth Catalog editor Stewart Brand and thumbnailformer Greenpeace president Patrick Moore are now on record as supporters of a power source and industry they used to oppose vehemently. When considering these retreats, the phrase “two steps forward, one step back” comes to mind.

Fortunately, a recently published book by journalist Gar Smith provides those who still oppose nuclear power with a valuable text filled with arguments and facts designed to convince any thinking citizen of earth as to nuclear energy’s intrinsic manifestation of Thanatos and his kingdom. Furthermore, the collection of facts, figures and overall documentation of the industry’s lies, foibles, miscalculation and just plain duplicity should insure the addition of more to the ranks of the anti-nuclear forces. If one adds the truths of what they have seen regarding the industry (most recently in Fukushima, Japan), the hopes for a revived movement in the streets opposed to nuclear power seem legitimate. Indeed, as I write this, news of a massive protest against the restarting of Japan’s nuclear plants is reaching my newsfeed.

Like other books of its kind, Smith’s book Nuclear Roulette: The Truth About the Most Dangerous Energy Source on Earth,  provides an unrelenting litany of accidents and near catastrophe hidden, falsified and supported by the agencies supposedly set up to protect the public from nuclear power’s inherent dangers. What is presented here is the story of these agencies’ longtime collusion with and intentional lying for the industry. The health and environmental reasons to oppose nuclear energy are manifold. Even if some can never be proven, there are enough instances available to make any argument for continuing this folly moot. Unfortunately, as I noted before, this has not been the case. So, to those who would deny the negative effects to health and environment, it would seem that the cozy and corrupt relationship between the nuclear industry, the war machine and elected US officials would be reason enough to oppose (or at least critically examine) the reasons this expensive, wasteful and anti-democratic energy product continues to receive taxpayers money.

Nuclear Roulette does a great job enumerating this dynamic. The payoffs to politicians in the form of campaign contributions and subsequent legislation creating a liability cap for the industry are but the most obvious ways in which the energy industry has seduced and simultaneously reduced the role of the NRC to one that goes beyond sycophancy and into the realm of subservience. Even when state governments have demanded the shutdown of plants inside their borders, the federal government has overridden those decisions. If that isn’t a denial of the people’s will, then nothing is.   Smith enumerates other instances of the government not doing its job when it comes to overseeing the industry. As Smith writes when discussing the NRC, “If you don’t look for problems, you won’t find them.” In essence, this is the approach the NRC has taken for decades. Of course, such an approach creates a false sense of security and enhances any potential dangers that might be present.

One of the more interesting aspects of Nuclear Roulette is when the author discusses the costs of nuclear energy in relation to the cost of solar, wind and other alternative forms. It is Smith’s contention that we are near (if not at) the point where alternative forms are more cost effective, even in the short run. In other words, even when one leaves out the long-term environmental costs of nuclear energy, the cost to build and maintain non-nuclear alternative forms is equal or less than those required for nuclear. This is good news. The bad news is that the industry opposes the best solution—decentralized power such as rooftop panels and turbines—precisely because it is decentralized. Although the book focuses primarily on the United States, there are plenty of words devoted to Japan and Europe.

If Nuclear Roulette were a fiction book, it would be classified somewhere between crime and horror fiction. Unfortunately, it is all too real. However, the reality it discusses is still both a crime and a horror.

Ron Jacobs is the author of the just released novel All the Sinners, Saints. He is also the author of The Way the Wind Blew: a History of the Weather Underground and Short Order Frame Up and The Co-Conspirator’s Tale. Jacobs’ essay on Big Bill Broonzy is featured in CounterPunch’s collection on music, art and sex, Serpents in the Garden. His third novel All the Sinners Saints is a companion to the previous two and is due out in April 2013.  He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion, published by AK Press. He can be reached at: ronj1955@gmail.com.

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

Surveillance USA

0

Ever since The Patriot Act came into being, the body of liberties citizens cherish have been chipped away by a bloated security state keen to find nourishment. When rights and liberties are deferred to the voyeurs, the monitors, and the paranoid, a bill of rights starts looking like a bill of words, easily sidestepped and disregarded.

A series of outlets have been chasing up the story that the NSA has been keeping track of every single US Verizon customer’s phone activity since the Boston bombing. Complicity with tech companies in this enterprise is also rampant — Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Apple — have been recipients of tapping efforts by the NSA and FBI, something they have been doing since 2007.

More specifically, The Guardian has managed to secure access to records of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court about the specifics of Verizon’s networks and government access. In the document, the NSA compels Verizon to hand over “an electronic copy of the following tangible things: all call detail records or ‘telephony metadata’ created by Verizon for communications (i) between the United States and abroad; or (ii) wholly within the United States, including local telephone calls.” The document further states that disclosure of that fact — that the FBI and NSA sought or obtained such “tangible” things under the order — is prohibited except to appropriate authorities. Gagging is de rigueur.

The classified program under which such activities are taking place is called PRISM, which involves the security agencies extracting audio and video chats, photographs, documents, e-mails, and connection logs (The Washington Post, Jun 7). What is troubling about the program is that it was the devil spawn of something equally insidious — the warrantless surveillance of the Bush administration. Given that such behaviour earned the judicial ire of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the new presidency sought other sources to legitimise mass surveillance programs.

As is typical with the Obama administration, the law is something to twist and turn, a matter of rhetorical play rather than substantive realities. Legality is the spice of the new surveillance state. The Protect America Act of 2007 and the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 were olive branches to the new presidency, affirming that data mining was well on its way to becoming standard practice.

The document which wound its way to The Washington Post reveals the existence of what many have feared — that the government is merrily going about its business of keeping tabs on you in virtually every conceivable way. The document itself features “Collection directly from the servers of these U.S. Service Providers: Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, PayTalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube, Apple.” The Guardian has similarly obtained access to the 41 PowerPoint slides of the leaked NSA document detailing the PRISM program in all its inglorious intrusiveness.

Corporations from the Silicon Valley set have denied being free with the information of their users when it comes to the spooks and the analysts of the NSA. A spokesman for Apple claimed that the company had “never heard of PRISM. We do not provide any government agency with direct access to our servers and any agency requesting customer data must get a court order” (The Guardian, Jun 7). Similarly, an emphatic Joe Sullivan, chief security officer for Facebook, claimed that, “We do not provide any government organisation with direct access to Facebook servers.”

Being high and mighty about legality, as we know, is not necessarily Facebook’s forte. For years now, the company has been at the forefront of a social media revolution that has one vital pitch: privacy is dead and deeply buried. Despite this, Sullivan is clear that any request for data and information “about specific individuals” is carefully scrutinised within the framework of the law. We can all rest easy that Mark Zuckerberg is not playing second fiddle to the American empire and the security perverts.

Constitutions are often needed to guard against political excess, the conscience of a state when its representatives have ceased to have any. The responses from the Washington elite suggest the anaesthetised state they have fallen into — liberties need to be shredded to protect liberties; legality demands bouts of illegality and so forth. Nothing to be surprised about, claimed Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga). “This has been going on for seven years under the auspices of the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act] authority, and every member of the United States Senate has been advised of this” (Forbes, Jun 6).

Even more striking of the amoral numbness of such surveillance activities is Chambliss’ remark that “we have not had any citizen who has registered a complaint relative to the gathering of this information, and its simply what we call ‘meta data’.” Give it a cryptic, functional label, and people are bound to go along with it. That’s if they even know about it.

Senator Diane Feinstein, head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, has again made it clear that the mass surveillance of public chatter and communications is entirely appropriate. The Republic is besieged by enemies external and internal. “As far as I know, this is the exact three-month renewal of what has been in place for the last seven years.” The message: This is normal. Stop being so wet about it.

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

'Syria pillar of anti-Israel resistance'

0

A man carries the Syrian flag, in the town of Qusayr in Syria’s Homs Province, on June 6, 2013.

Former Lebanese Defense Minister Ghazi Zaiter has lauded Syriaâ„¢s campaign against global hegemony and the Israeli regime, saying the West is plotting to overthrow the Damascus government because of its role as a main pillar of the anti-Israeli resistance front.

Syria is both geographically well-located in the Middle East, and politically, it has also been a regional flag-bearer of the campaign against bullying powers, Zaiter said in an interview with IRNA on Thursday.

He added that Syria has made great contribution to the victories of the regional resistance front, particularly in Lebanon and Palestine.

The West and certain regional countries have hatched a plot to overthrow the Syrian government, the former Lebanese minister said.

Following Lebanonâ„¢s victory against Israel in 2000, Syria turned into a main pillar of resistance and now it has become the target of terrorist attacks by the West and Arab-backed militants and extremist groups because it stands up to Israeli-US conspiracies, Zaiter said.

He pointed to the recent triumph of the Syrian troops in the strategic town of al-Qusayr, and said Syria led by President Bashar al-Assad has scored numerous victories in the battle with extremist groups in the town and has managed to thwart plots by hegemonic powers led by the US.

He stressed that the Syrian government would continue to fight against enemy plots in order to safeguard the countryâ„¢s sovereignty, independence and dignity.

The Syrian Army managed to fully recapture the western town of al-Qusayr, an important center and supply route for the foreign-sponsored militants fighting against the Arab state, following three weeks of combat, Syriaâ„¢s state television reported on Wednesday.

Many of the foreign-backed militants and members of the armed groups were reportedly killed or injured during the Syrian Army operation to clean Qusayr from terrorists.

Syria has been in crisis since March 2011, and many people, including large numbers of Syrian security forces, have been killed in the unrest.

AR/NN/HMV

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Sexual abuse rampant at US juvenile jails

0

[unable to retrieve full-text content]A US government study has confirmed that hundreds of American teenagers are repeatedly raped or sexually assaulted while detained in juvenile detention centers across the country.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Massive protests in France over skinhead attack that killed activist

0

Tens of thousands of enraged protesters gathered across France on Thursday in homage to a teenage activist who died after being attacked by skinheads. Police have arrested seven suspects in connection with an attack deemed “politically motivated.”

(FILES) This photo taken on April 17, 2013, in Paris, shows Clement Meric. (AFP Photo / Jaques Demarthon)

More than 15,000 people took to the streets across France
following the death of 18-year-old left-wing activist Clement
Meric.

At least 6,000 demonstrated in Paris, calling on the government
to ban extreme right-wing groups that have become bolder
following the legalization of same-sex marriage in the country.

Protesters carried banners emblazoned with “Don’t forget,
don’t forgive,”
and chanted anti-fascist slogans in the
French capital’s 5th and 6th districts, near Notre Dame
Cathedral.

“Fascism is gangrene, we either destroy it or it will destroy
us,”
chanted members of Action Antifasciste Paris-Banlieue, a
group in which Clement had been a member.

In Toulouse, demonstrators held banners that read “As some
protest, others kill”
and “Where is the humanity?”

The teenager was severely beaten by a group of skinheads on
Wednesday afternoon and was subsequently rushed to hospital with
serious injuries. He passed away on Thursday after being declared
brain dead by doctors.

Conflicting reports regarding the attack have emerged, but police
said that a group of skinheads exchanged insults and jostled with
Meric and a few of his friends in a Paris clothes shop.

The skinheads then waited outside the shop and waylaid the
18-year-old and his compatriots; some reports claimed that the
assailants were armed with brass knuckles.

Meric’s death was decried as a “despicable act” by the
French government. Several left-wing French parties called for
the “dissolution of ultra-violent far-right groups.”
Leftist groups also urged French citizens to take action and
protest the “horrendous” murder.

In response to allegations that the incident was “politically
motivated,”
Marine Le Pen, the leader of the far-right
National Front, issued a statement saying there was “no
link”
between her party and the skinhead attack.

French political left-wing members hold a banner at the Saint-Michel fountain in Paris to pay homage to Clement Meric on June 6, 2013. (Reuters / Charles Platiau)

This article originally appeared on: RT

Ethiopia summons Egypt envoy over dam

0

A picture taken on May 28, 2013 shows the Blue Nile in Guba, Ethiopia, during its diversion ceremony.

Ethiopia has summoned Egyptâ„¢s ambassador to Addis Ababa over Ëœhostile remarksâ„¢ by Egyptian politicians about a dam project on the Nile River.

Egyptian Ambassador to Ethiopia Tarek Ghoneim was summoned to give an official explanation regarding the Å“hostile remarks,” Dina Mufti, a spokesman for the Ethiopian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said on Thursday.

Earlier in the week, Egyptian politicians warned against a diminished share of the Nile River, while proposing a plan to sabotage or aid rebels against the Addis Ababa government, which started work on the dam last week.

On June 6, Egyptian Foreign Minister Mohammed Kamel Amr said that Egyptâ„¢s water security cannot be ignored, while recommending steps to coordinate a peaceful resolution with its neighboring countries, Sudan and Ethiopia.

Å“There is a large window for dialogue and discussion between Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan to arrive at the ideal form for the dam that ensures safeguarding Egyptâ„¢s water interests, realizing the development objectives of all three nations and avoiding any negative effects that may hurt downstream nations,” Amr said.

On the same day, Egyptian presidential advisor Ayman Ali also warned that Å“all options are open” if the dam affects Egyptâ„¢s water supply.

Last month, Ethiopia said it had begun diverting the flow of the Blue Nile for the construction of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance dam – a $4.2-billion hydroelectric plant.

A ten-man panel of experts has found that the dam will not significantly affect Egypt or Sudan.

On June 2, Egyptians gathered outside the Ethiopian embassy in Cairo, calling for a halt to the construction process.

Egypt faces a water crisis as its population increases. In the 1960s, the average water share per person was 2,800 cubic meters. Now, the figure has dropped to 600 cubic meters, much below the poverty line, which is 1,000 cubic meters per person.

GMA/HSN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Three Things Young People Should Know to Save the World

0

Of course, old people should know these things too, and some small percentage does know them, but energy seems better invested in trying to teach them to young people who have less to unlearn in the process.

1. Obedience is extremely dangerous.

This seems like it must be either wrong or misleadingly incomplete. And that would be true if we were talking about children. If a two-year-old is about to run in front of a car, please do yell “stop!” and hope for as much obedience as possible.

But I’m talking to young people, not children.

When you grow up, your obedience should always be conditional. If a master chef appears to be instructing you to prepare a revoltingly bad dinner but wants you to obey his or her instructions on faith, you might very well choose to do so, considering the risk to be tolerable. If, however, the chef tells you to chop off your little finger, and you do it, that will be a sure sign that you’ve got an obedience problem.

This is not a trivial or comical danger. The majority of volunteers in experiments are willing to inflict severe pain or death on other human beings when a scientist tells them to do so for the good of science. Watch this video of such an experiment.

Had the actor in this experiment who pretended to be a scientist told the participants to cut off their little fingers, I bet they wouldn’t have done it. But they were willing to do far worse to someone else. The good old Golden Rule is a counter to this deficiency, but so is resistance to blind obedience. Most suffering in the world is not created by independent individuals, but by large numbers of people obeying when they should be resisting.

Here’s a story in the news right now about a man deeply upset that he sat at a desk and obeyed orders and killed over 1,600 people. This was not an experiment, but tragically real. Watch this video:

We should think about how not to put ourselves in positions in which we are expected to blindly obey. It is possible to find jobs that don’t include that unhealthy expectation. And we should prepare ourselves to refuse immoral instructions whenever we receive them. As we’ll see below, we all do receive them all the time.

2. People in power manipulate us into acceptance

Several years ago a lot of people were protesting the U.S. war in Iraq. The president and most of Congress and most of the big media outlets were busy giving out the impression that such protests were ignored or even counter-productive. But former president George W. Bush’s memoirs recall the Republican Senate Majority Leader secretly telling him the pressure was becoming too great and they’d need to end the war. Bush signed an agreement with the government of Iraq to leave in three years.

In 1961 the USSR was withdrawing from a moratorium on nuclear testing. A protest at the White House urged President Kennedy not to follow suit. Posters read “Kennedy, Don’t Mimic the Russians!” One protester recalled their action for decades as having been pointless and futile, until he found an oral history interview with Adrian Fisher, deputy director of the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. Fisher said that Kennedy had delayed resuming testing because of the protest.

A delay in a policy we oppose is not as good as a permanent ban, but if those protesters had known they were being listened to they would have come back day after day and brought their friends and possibly achieved that permanent ban. That they imagined they weren’t being listened to appears ridiculous if you read enough history. People are always listened to, but those in power go to great lengths to give the impression of not paying any serious attention.

Lawrence Wittner interviewed Robert “Bud” McFarlane, President Ronald Reagan’s former national security advisor, asking him whether the White House had paid much attention to protests demanding a “freeze” in nuclear weapons building. “Other administration officials had claimed that they had barely noticed the nuclear freeze movement,” Wittner said. “But when I asked McFarlane about it, he lit up and began outlining a massive administration campaign to counter and discredit the freeze – one that he had directed . . . . A month later, I interviewed Edwin Meese, a top White House staffer and U.S. attorney general during the Reagan administration. When I asked him about the administration’s response to the freeze campaign, he followed the usual line by saying that there was little official notice taken of it. In response, I recounted what McFarlane had revealed. A sheepish grin now spread across this former government official’s face, and I knew that I had caught him. ‘If Bud says that,’ he remarked tactfully, ‘it must be true.’”

It’s funny: even when protesting government lies or government secrecy, people tend to fall for the lie that the government is ignoring you. Yet, in 2011, when a relatively tiny movement began to take to the streets under the banner of “Occupy,” the government rolled out a massive effort of infiltration, eavesdropping, harassment, brutality, and propaganda – while, of course, claiming to have noticed nothing and done nothing about something so unworthy of notice.

Those in power don’t restrict themselves to directing you toward inaction. They also work on moving you toward doing lots of things that seem effective but aren’t. The way to keep the nation safe, they say, is to go shopping! Or lobby for this watered-down pathetic piece of legislation! Or devote all your activist energy to election campaigning, and then go home and collapse in exhaustion as soon as the election is over – exactly when you should be gearing up to demand actions out of whoever won the election. These activities that have little impact are depicted as serious and effective, while activities that historically have had tremendous real impact (organizing, educating, demonstrating, protesting, lobbying, heckling, shaming, nonviolently resisting, producing art and entertainment, creating alternative structures) are depicted as disreputable and ineffective and lacking in seriousness.

Of course, being active is much more fun than not. Of course, the influence you have is always possible even if undetected (you might inspire a child who goes on to do great things years later, or slightly win over an opponent who takes a few more years to see the light). Of course, we have a moral duty to do everything we can regardless of the ease of success. But I’m convinced we’d see a lot more activism if people knew how much they are listened to. So tell them! And let’s remember to keep telling ourselves.

3. Doing nothing is obeying a deadly order

Imagine writing a story about a village that faces possible destruction, and for the most part the people don’t do anything to prevent it.

That’s not how stories are written.

That’s the world we live in and fail to recognize.

We are being instructed to sit at a desk and zap the earth to death, and we’re compliantly zapping away. Only the zapping doesn’t look like zapping, it looks like living. We work and eat and sleep and play and garden and buy junk at the store and watch movies and go to baseball games and read books and make love, and we don’t imagine we can possibly be destroying a planet. What are we, the Death Star?

But a sin of omission is morally and effectively equivalent to a sin of commission. We need to be saving the earth and we’re not doing so. We’re allowing global warming and other major environmental destruction to roll ahead. We’re allowing militarization and warmaking to advance. We’re watching the concentration of wealth. We see the division of society into castes. We know we’re building prisons and drones and highways and pipelines while closing schools and condemning our grandparents to poverty. We are aware that we’re funding multi-billionaires with our hard work while fueling mass suffering, bitterness, rage, frustration, and violence.

We see these worsening cycles and we sit still.

Don’t sit still.

Sitting still is mass-murder.

Don’t obey anyone who tells you to sit still.

Don’t search for a leader.

Don’t sell your conscience to a group or a slogan or a political party.

Don’t listen to me unless something I say makes sense.

David Swanson is author of War is a Lie. He lives in Virginia.

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

The Chechen Wars Made Human

0

I confess to a fascination with bibliographies and acknowledgments that often appear at the end of contemporary novels. What leapt out at me at the conclusion of Anthony Marra’s debut novel were two titles in the author’s research list, though I should not have been surprised by the time I’d finished reading his haunting narrative: “Amputations of the Lower Extremity: Treatment and Management,” by Dr. Janos Ertl; and “Osteomyoplastic Transtibial Amputation: Technique and Tips,” by Dr. Benjamin Taylor. Given the current number of conflicts spread across the world, amputations have become a growth industry.

In an unsettling scene filled with tension, two of the main characters in Marra’s novel use a saw to perform an amputation on the victim of a landmine (another growth industry, in spite of international restrictions). Sonja, a Russian woman and the remaining doctor in a hospital in Volchansk, instructs Akhmed how to perform the operation. He’s more squeamish than the reader and described as “the most incompetent doctor in Chechnya, the single least distinguished physician ever to graduate Volchansk State University Medical School….” Later, he will confess to Sonja that he was at the bottom ten percent of his class because he was more interested in becoming an artist than a doctor. The two of them will parry for the several days of the story’s brief narrative, though eventually be drawn together by their mutual needs.

Sonja’s the more complex character, a Russian who stayed in Chechnya after the wars begin, in part because of guilt. Her family lived in Chechnya–part of the Russian elite. She did some of her training in London. Marra describes her as plain, much less attractive than her sister, Natasha, who for a time also worked in the hospital as a self-trained midwife (also from a sense of atonement). After the wars began, Natasha tried to flee to London to be with her sister but her only means of escape was by sex traffickers. In her months of misery, she became a heroine addict. One of the major quests of this chilling novel is the two sisters’ attempts to be reunited with one another, complicated by their ambiguous relationship as children.

The war in ubiquitous.  When the story begins, Akhmed’s neighbor, Dokka, has been carted off in the middle of the night by the Feds. Dokka’s eight-year-old daughter, Havaa, managed to escape; and once Akhmed realizes that he must protect her, he decides to take her to the hospital in Volchansk, eleven kilometers away, and that brings him in contact with Sonja. She’s not very happy about taking care of a child; she’s totally overwhelmed by the needs of the hospital’s patients, particularly the endless numbers who need amputations. In order to avoid the roadblocks, Akhmed has to trek through fields and back roads–dangerous because of the trigger-happy soldiers at the check points and the landmines almost everywhere else. When Sonja learns that Akhmed is a trained doctor, she says that the only way she will harbor Havaa is if Akhmed will help her in the hospital. It’s at that stage when she learns how unskilled he is. Akhmed also has to return home each night to his bedridden wife and attend to her needs, and that means continual days and nights of skirting the soldiers and watching where he walks.

The closely-knit community that Akhmed resides in before he became embroiled in taking care of Havaa includes his neighbor Klassan, who is diabetic and needs insulin (no easy item to acquire in the midst of continued turmoil), and Klassan’s son, Ramzan. Daily life has become almost impossible, whether it’s scrounging for food or medicine, as well as the uncertainties of neighbors whose loyalties are such that no one knows whom to trust. For a variety of reasons–namely, his own survival, and the procurement of insulin for his father–Ramzan has become an informer, turning in his neighbors (including Havaa’s father) to the Feds. Marra remarks of his characters, “Whether eating scavaged food or selling an old friend, they had all shamed themselves to survive.” And the title of this superb first novel–beautifully written, carefully orchestrated with numerous flashbacks into his main characters’ lives, and replete with dark humor in the midst of such carnage and uncertainty–“a constellation of vital phenomena” becomes the novel’s moral center. The words first appear mid-way through the narrative when Sonja opens her copy of The Medical Dictionary of the Union of Soviet Physicians: “Life: a constellation of vital phenomena–organization, irritability, movement, growth, reproduction, adaptation.” That’s pretty good, especially the last word. And much later, when she thinks of what Akhmed has taught her (not what she had taught him), she looks at the passage again–this time her epiphany, connecting everything, instead of looking at life as exclusion, yet bearing witness to what little we can control or understand.

Anthony Marra: A Constellation of Vital Phenomena

Hogarth, 384 pp., $26

Charles R. Larson is Emeritus Professor of Literature at American University in Washington, D.C. Email: clarson@american.edu.

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

"I’ve Been Put in Prison for Opposing the War in Afghanistan"

0

Photo Credit: Shutterstock.com/Oleg Zabielin

June 4, 2013
 |

Like this article?

Join our email list:

Stay up to date with the latest headlines via email.

The following is an excerpt from Soldier Box: Why I Won’t Return to the War on Terror. Reprinted with permission of Verso Press, Brooklyn, NY.

It’s December. I’ve been put in prison for opposing the war in Afghanistan. Lots of other people disagree with it, lots of people think it is variously a stupid or illegal or unjustified or doomed war. The problem is that I am not supposed to say these things because I am a soldier; and yet I keep saying them.

Remand is when you are held in prison awaiting trial. Sometimes it is for those considered a flight risk and at other times it is for those not yet tried and convicted but considered too dangerous to be out in the world — I belong to the latter category. What I have said damages the ‘war effort’ and I have said it with that intention. Remand is purgatory. They tell us it’s not a prison, but we can’t go out. We ’re held in a centre for corrections. I find irony in that idea and in the idea that the individuals who’ve sent me here actually believe it is me who needs adjustment. The Military Correctional Training Centre (MCTC) claims to improve soldiers or discharge them as good citizens. To me it’s a funny idea — funny ha-ha, and funny strange.

I share my room in the remand wing with three others. It is here that we play cards at a table in the centre of the room. The others are regularly distracted by reality television, which they love and I hate equally. Summers comes from a Scottish regiment. I knew him briefly at the Defence School of Transport when he had been a trainee vehicle mechanic. He later switched trades to the infantry and now he has an Afghan medal, three counts of AWOL (five, eight and 133 days) and post-traumatic stress disorder. In line with unofficial tri-service policy, it would not be diagnosed, treated or taken into account for his court martial, despite his history and symptoms. After returning from a harrowing six months in Helmand he drowned himself in drink and drugs. His teenage girlfriend and his parents had posted him as a missing person when he disappeared for several days, sleeping off some chemical stupor. His unit posted him AWOL. Returning to duty, he claims, his sergeant major told him not to go sick with his condition because mental illness ruins careers. Tommy is an Ulsterman. He has an English father and an Ulster-born mother and claims he is a militant. He talks passionately about flute bands — which he pronounces flute ‘bohnds’ — and paramilitaries like Johnny Adair and ‘Top Gun’ McKeag. He is heavily tattooed and has a star inked underneath one eye that signifies an illicit deed carried out for the paramilitaries. He is in the logistics corps, like me. Tommy has attracted charges for ABH, AWOL, Drunkenness and Stealing a German Army General’s Bicycle While Drunk. In between playing hands of Shithead, Tommy draws vibrant loyalist images on the back of a notepad: A5 sectarian murals, like the sides of tiny Irish houses. He flips it over occasionally to tally scores.

Trevor is the final player. He is small, muscular and loud. He argues with the screws at every opportunity and is the serial door-kicker during lockdown. He is a Kingsman (a private in the Duke of Lancaster’s Regiment), and is in for AWOL and GBH, which he hopes will be dropped to Affray. He and Summers have shaved their heads completely, and for this crime they have been given extra duties, mopping and buffering the floors with an ancient, unwieldy buffing machine. Regulations say that a grade 2 is the shortest cut allowed without a medical chit.

Summers was a veteran of Afghanistan, Tommy has been here twice and Trevor has done Iraq. Two of them have young children, but these men drift from mature and robust to infantile and mischievous, always irreverent. They talk about shots fired in anger, IEDs, RPGs, ambushes, natives and mortars that missed them and sometimes hit someone else. Near misses and drunken brawling are favourite topics. They laugh often.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

It's Not Just Monsanto's Genetically Engineered Wheat: You May Already Be Eating Rogue GE Crops

0

Photo Credit: Thomas Bethge/ Shutterstock.com

June 6, 2013
 |

Like this article?

Join our email list:

Stay up to date with the latest headlines via email.

Of the four major crops grown in the U.S., genetically engineered (GE) seeds are available for three: corn, soybeans and alfalfa. But a farmer growing the fourth major crop, wheat, could not (legally) plant GE seeds even if he wanted to. The biotech giant Monsanto did develop a variety of GE wheat years ago, but never sold it commercially because the wheat industry felt its customers did not want it.

In theory, the last of this GE wheat ever planted in Oregon, where Monsanto carried out some of its field trials, was in 2001. But an Oregon farmer just discovered that same wheat growing in his field this year.

The discovery of the unauthorized wheat has thrown the industry into chaos. Japan and South Korea suspended their wheat imports from the Pacific Northwest. A Kansas farmer is suing Monsanto for harming the entire wheat industry with its negligence. What no one can explain is how the GE wheat got into the farmer’s field — although Monsanto assures us that this is an “isolated event.”

But is it?

The discovery of genetically engineered wheat in Oregon poses an important question: Can humans control and contain genetically engineered crops?

Jack Heinemann, a professor of molecular biology at the University of Canterbury in New Zealand and the director of the Center for Integrated Research in Biosafety, says we can’t. “I think there is a way for humans to determine if [genetically engineered crops] are safe enough to be used, which is different from saying that they can be contained,” he says. “There’s no evidence that they can be contained, and there is considerable evidence that we cannot contain them.”

With that, he lists several famous incidents of GE crops popping up where they are not supposed to, like the incident with Liberty Link Rice, a GE rice variety that showed up in rice exported to France in 2006 even though it was never commercialized. Or there’s the StarLink Corn fiasco, when a type of GE corn unapproved for human consumption was found in Taco Bell taco shells. And genes from rogue GE corn have even reached the birthplace of corn: Mexico.

Heinemann is familiar with Monsanto’s escaped GE wheat. Anticipating it would commercialize the GE wheat within a few years, Monsanto had applied to the governments of Australia and New Zealand to approve it in their countries back in 2004. Heinemann worked on a risk assessment for the wheat in New Zealand, until Monsanto withdrew the application. Monsanto ended field trials for the wheat in 2005, and no safety determination was ever made on the wheat.

Here in the U.S., the FDA concluded that Monsanto concluded its GE wheat was safe. Yes, you read that right. (According to the FDA “It is Monsanto’s continued responsibility to ensure that foods marketed by the firm are safe, wholesome, and in compliance with all applicable legal and regulatory requirements.”) But now that the escaped wheat has come to light, Monsanto assures us that “The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) confirmed the food and feed safety of Roundup Ready wheat more than a decade ago.”

Clearly, a more honest statement would be “We told the FDA that our wheat was safe and they believed us.”

After the field trials for the GE wheat ended, “This thing should have gone away,” says Heinemann. “For it to appear in Oregon years after [Monsanto] pulled it from development is concerning. Because it says we don’t know how many field trials — and there have been thousands of field trials of genetically modified crops that have never come to market — that might be circulating in the food supply.” Nor do we know if they are safe.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

The Trouble With Bread: What I Discovered When I Tried to Get to the Bottom of My Gluten Intolerance

0

June 6, 2013
 |

Like this article?

Join our email list:

Stay up to date with the latest headlines via email.

When I eat standard sliced American bread, I may as well be hung over. I get a stomachache, nausea and become generally exhausted, as if my body is trying to fight off the bread. But the symptoms vary in severity. Because of this, after intermittently giving up bread, I will think I have imagined it all, try to eat bread again, and get sick all over again.

It’s a delirious cycle of love and abuse, a drug I can’t give up. I often find the succulent morsels of a toasted honey wheat or raspberry jam-slathered brioche worth an evening holding my stomach, rocking on my bed.

I love bread so much, I allow myself to forget how bad I feel after eating it. But after about two blissful years of this denial, I finally decided to do something about it.

Until recently, the idea of not being able to eat wheat was preposterous. Bread has been a staple of human life for 10,000 years, since the ancient Sumerians and Egyptians discovered its ability to literally rise above other grains, thanks to this little protein called gluten.

“Gluten is the reason that wheat was able to conquer the planet,” food writer Michael Pollan, who explores the wonders of gluten in his most recent book, Cooked, told me. Gluten, which is a combination of the proteins gliadin and glutenin, gives wheat flour a certain elasticity when mixed with water that makes it easy to work with and helps hold pockets of air within the dough, allowing it to rise.

But gluten intolerance has become a significant health concern in just the past decade or so. Celiac disease, an extreme autoimmune reaction to gluten, has increased fourfold since the 1950s. And whereas wheat counts for one-fifth of the calories in the American diet, fully a third of American adults think they should stop eating it.

Which led me to the Gluten & Allergen Free Expo at a Marriott in South San Francisco. The place was circus-like, with vendors pulling acrobatic tricks with their words to draw in the expectant consumer crowd.

“This won our national Sophie award,” says one fiercely smiling woman, gripping a box of cookies and talking close to the face of a semi-interested passerby. “So for 2012, best snack food in the organic, gluten-free product line.”

Hordes of well-fed families pushed their way from booth to booth, brochures in hand and kids in tow. They shifted weight on weekend sneakers as vendors lured them with their unusual wares: Tapioca flour. Potato starch. Rice flour.

The “gluten-free” label has become one of the best ways to sell a product. The industry is worth upward of $4 billion, and is expected to exceed $6.6 billion by 2017. Many books, diets and self-proclaimed medical specialists have taken advantage of this new trend. It has become so trendy, in fact, that even gallons of milk, that contain no gluten to begin with, have started to get the “gluten-free” stamp.

If nothing else, the gluten-free industry has shown me where I am apt to find the notorious substance, which is often used as an additive or filler in otherwise wheat-less foods: salad dressings, soy sauce and other condiments, beer, some ice creams, even deodorant. But it is most common in wheat, barley and rye, and some say, oats.

But “gluten-free” doesn’t mean healthy. Cutting down on carbs can be great in general, but transitioning to these ultra-sweet, other refined flours, as wheat replacements often are, can actually be worse for you than the wheat itself (which, at least in its whole grain form, can be quite good for you).

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

Why the Raw, Animalistic Female Libido Is Repressed

0

Photo Credit: Shutterstock.com

June 6, 2013
 |

Like this article?

Join our email list:

Stay up to date with the latest headlines via email.

My friend Dan Bergner has a book out covering recent and in some ways possibly startling research on women’s sexuality, specifically libido. Dan is a journalist, with previous books on the civil war in Sierra Leone and life inside Angola State Penitentiary; in this one, he interviews and brings to life a number of women reporting various kinds of sexual dissatisfaction and distress, as well as a number of research scientists developing new theories of the true nature of female desire.

The book ranges through a wide variety of experience and science, so I won’t try to summarize it or hype it. (A review is here.) What interested me especially in this book are what I see as some of its more radical psychological and social ramifications. It won’t come as news to a lot of readers, male and female alike, I hope, that femaleness involves sexual intensity, or that a woman can possess a sex drive at least as strong as a man’s. What the book really gets into and makes a case for debunking is the widespread idea – which has been advanced partly by conclusions of “evolutionary psychology” – that female sexual drive and intensity are linked, ineluctably, and supposedly in contrast to male libido, with closeness, intimacy, and monogamy.

Some of the research Dan covers suggests that female drive is if anything less discriminating and more promiscuous than male drive. From which I draw the tentative conclusion that if women weren’t restrained by punitive social norms, they’d stop all the “nesting,” and the getting men to nest, and they’d be out relentlessly seeking as much sex as they could possibly get from as many different partners.

And of course, unlike men, when women go out looking for sex, they’re pretty much sure to find it. So we can imagine that without those punitive social norms, families, and thus society, would collapse in a spree of sexual immediacy. When men yield to their libidinous imperatives and go on a spree, there are some self-limiting qualities in play – and anyway, their “good” women are meanwhile keeping the home fires burning and feeling betrayed, hurt, abandoned, and morally superior, as we all (i.e., men and women) evidently think they’re supposed to; sooner or later, the lowlife slinks home. Life goes on.

But if women yielded to urges that might, the book suggests, be at least as strong, all hell would break loose. We’ve long harbored various versions of the notion that women’s sexual connection to monogamy stands as a bulwark against male-induced chaos. But we’ve long wanted to believe that the connection to monogamy is innate to women. This book suggests the opposite: women’s sexual self-restraint in maintaining civilization is far greater than men’s. Because a) the stakes are higher and b) the promiscuity of her libido is greater. [UPDATE: Which goes some way to explaining the roots of patriarchy.]

And the particular kind of discontent demanded of women by civilization is something worse than discontent. It’s dissociation. [UPDATE: I.e., patriarchy is predicated not only on outright suppression but also on an insidious process of female dissociation? OK, maybe we did know this. But I think few have forthrightly connected that idea to the existence of a promiscuous female libido. Once you start thinking of it that way, you realize you may have known it all along — I only now realize I’ve known it since high school (!) — and that’s what makes for an exciting book.] Men are allowed and indeed encouraged to feel the pain of restraining a promiscuous libido often described as naturally almost insurmountable. Men can stay faithful and pat themselves on the back for having inner strength and/or fall off the wagon and feel bad; either way, they know how they feel. But women – according to some of the conclusions I draw from Dan’s book – are not supposed to know they’re restraining a massive force. They have to deny it. Because it’s not only that if they gave in to it, civilization would crumble – it’s that even feeling it would have that effect.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

Beyond Protest: First Nations Community Seeks Alternatives to Tar Sands Destruction

0

June 6, 2013
 |

Like this article?

Join our email list:

Stay up to date with the latest headlines via email.

A couple years ago I was asked by the Keepers of the Athabasca t o be the Master of Ceremonies for a very different kind of event. It took place in the region of the most controversial energy project on earth, the Canadian tar sands. The idea was not to have a protest, but instead to engage in a meaningful ceremonial action to pray for the healing of Mother Earth, which has been so damaged by the tar sands industry. Community members of the five First Nations of the Athabasca region and the town of Fort McMurray, tired of the consistent negativity and never ending fight with big oil and government, had made a conscientious choice to find another source of power in the struggle to protect their way of life. This was done by turning to ceremony and asking through prayer and the physical act of walking on the earth so that the hearts of those harming her (Mother Earth) through extreme energy extraction could be healed.

My journey started in to Fort McMurray, Alberta, also known as tar sands boom town. Many have described this place as the land of milk and honey, a place were you can trade five years of your life (and soul) and be financially “set up.” I met with a motley crew of activists, sovereigntists, elders and youth from Fort Chipewyan, Fort McKay, Anzac and the metro-areas of Calgary and Edmonton, as well as some allies who had traveled from as far as British Columbia, and beyond.

The plan was to take vehicles to the beginning of the infamous Highway 63 ring through the tar sands. This 60km stretch of road has gained a notorious reputation of being the highway of death, due to the tremendous amount of people who have died in horrific auto accidents inrecent years. It is always busy with peak traffic rivalling that of downtown New York, the traffic gets especially heavy during two daily shift changes. Then, our plan was to pray, make offerings to the four directions and walk through the heart of tar sands development as concerned Elders, parents, youth and grandchildren.

Healing Walk PSA: This video is made of scenes from the film “Occupy Love” directed by Velcrow Ripper. Music in these scenes by Christen Lien and Zoe Keating. Learn more at http://www.occupylove.org  

Highway 63 is the only road to Fort McKay Cree Nation, one of Canada’s most polluted, yet richest First Nations, where water needs to be trucked in daily to meet the communities needs. The 63 loops past vast human made deserts in the form of tailings ponds wet and dry, and then past an archaic Suncor/Petro-Canada facility with black carbon stained cracking towers, belching hellfire into the morning sky. The highway finally meets the junction to get to Fort McKay and continues onward past the industrial metropolis that is Syncrude, Canada’s largest tar sands operator, operated laregly by Exxon Oil .The Syncrude site is like something straight out of a science fiction movie.

From the road, you can see glimmering stainless steel cracking towers, which separate bitumen into synthetic oil, a massive tank farm, lego-like worker sleeping facilities stacked upon one another, and half-built pyramids of sulfur (a waste by-product of the bitumen upgrading process) being built toward the sky like two biblical towers of Babel. Then comes the last major and probably most absurd element of insanity on the Highway 63 loop: the buffalo demonstration project and reclamation site.

Yeah, you heard right. Some executive from Syncrude got it into their head that having live buffalo, living under the stacks of their tar sands upgrader would be a good thing for the image of the tar sands industry. A herd of the most symbolic animals of our native heritage is subject to a slow poisonous death, its members grazing in toxic fields with an apocalyptic backdrop of tailings ponds and smoke stacks billowing white clouds of toxic death overhead.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

NSA Whistleblowers: "All U.S. Citizens" Are Targeted by Surveillance Program, Not Just Verizon Customers

0

The following is a transcript of a Democracy Now! segment.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: A leaked top-secret order has revealed the Obama administration is conducting a massive domestic surveillance program by collecting telephone records of millions of Verizon Business customers. Last night The Guardian newspaper published a classified order issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court directing Verizon’s Business Network Services to give the National Security Agency electronic data, including all calling records on a, quote, “ongoing, daily basis.” The order covers each phone number dialed by all customers along with location and routing data, and with the duration and frequency of the calls, but not the content of the communications. The order expressly compels Verizon to turn over records for both international and domestic records. It also forbids Verizon from disclosing the existence of the court order. It is unclear if other phone companies were ordered to hand over similar information.

AMY GOODMAN: According to legal analysts, the Obama administration relied on a controversial provision in the USAPATRIOT Act, Section 215, that authorizes the government to seek secret court orders for the production of, quote, “any tangible thing relevant to a foreign intelligence or terrorism investigation.” The disclosure comes just weeks after news broke that the Obama administration had been spying on journalists from the Associated Press and James Rosen, a reporter from Fox News.

We’re now joined by two former employees of the National Security Agency, Thomas Drake and William Binney. In 2010, the Obama administration charged Drake with violating the Espionage Act after he was accused of leaking classified information to the press about waste and mismanagement at the agency. The charges were later dropped. William Binney worked for almost 40 years at the NSA. He resigned shortly after the September 11th attacks over his concern over the increasing surveillance of Americans. We’re also joined in studio here by Shayana Kadidal, senior managing attorney at the Center for Constitutional Rights.

First, for your legal opinion, Shayana, can you talk about the significance of what has just been revealed?

SHAYANA KADIDAL: Sure. So I think, you know, we have had stories, including one in USA Todayin May 2006, that have said that the government is collecting basically all the phone records from a number of large telephone companies. What’s significant about yesterday’s disclosure is that it’s the first time that we’ve seen the order, to really appreciate the sort of staggeringly broad scope of what one of the judges on this Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court approved of, and the first time that we can now confirm that this was under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act, which, you know, has been dubbed the libraries provision, because people were mostly worried about the idea that the government would use it to get library records. Now we know that they’re using it to get phone records. And just to see the immense scope of this warrant order, you know, when most warrants are very narrow, is really shocking as a lawyer.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Well, some might argue that the Obama administration at least went to the FISA court to get approval for this, unlike the Bush administration in the past.

SHAYANA KADIDAL: Right. Well, we don’t know if the Bush administration was, you know, getting these same orders and if this is just a continuation, a renewal order. It lasted for only–it’s supposed to last for only three months, but they may have been getting one every three months since 2006 or even earlier. You know, when Congress reapproved this authority in 2011, you know, one of the things Congress thought was, well, at least they’ll have to present these things to a judge and get some judicial review, and Congress will get some reporting of the total number of orders. But when one order covers every single phone record for a massive phone company like Verizon, the reporting that gets to Congress is going to be very hollow. And then, similarly, you know, when the judges on the FISA court are handpicked by the chief justice, and the government can go to a judge, as they did here, in North Florida, who was appointed by Ronald Reagan, who’s 73 years old and is known as a draconian kind of hanging judge in his sentencing, and get some order that’s this broad, I think both the judicial review and the congressional oversight checks are very weak.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

Be Prepared for the Inevitable and Unpredictable Mass Movement

0

Photo Credit: Shutterstock.com/Mohamed Elsayyed

June 6, 2013
 |

Like this article?

Join our email list:

Stay up to date with the latest headlines via email.

The surprise events in Turkey show how unpredictable mass movements are. Turkey, which is in a difficult geographic neighborhood, with economically distressed Greece and Cypress nearby and Syria and Iraq on its border, seemed to be fairly stable with five percent economic growth in recent years. But, obviously that was not the whole story.

In recent years there has been growing opposition to the commercialization of Turkey and the crackdown on freedom as well arrests of journalists. So, when Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan announced the development of a park, in a city of declining green spaces, into a shopping area, the people revolted. The government’s response has been brutal with 1,700 injured and 1,900 arrested, but it has led to larger revolts.

The unions joined and many civil-political groups have joined as well. A coalition of 180 groups now call themselves Taksim Solidarity and are starting to form demands. There are protests in 67 cities involving hundreds of thousands of people. A protester told Sky News: “This is no longer about these trees.”Turkish protesters sought international solidarity through a twitter campaign to overcome the lack of mass media coverage (TV continued to broadcast regular content such as the Turkish Beauty Pageant). There were at least 2 million tweets, sometimes at 3,000 every minute. Prime Minister Erdogan called tweeting “a menace” and people were arrested for tweeting. International solidarity followed with Occupy protesters in New York, Boston, Seattle, Chicago, Austin and other cities around the world as well such as in London, Amsterdam, Germany, Egypt, Canada, Helsinki and Cyprus. On Reddit people posted helpful advice such as how to respond to tear gas.

The eruption in Turkey seemed spontaneous, as most uprisings do. But the reality is that in case after case momentum builds for a while, sometimes under the surface, until it reaches a tipping point and an event lights the spark that sets off mass protest. Nobody can predict what the event will be or when it will occur.

So often, people who seek economic and social justice and an end to militarism feel like they are laboring in relative obscurity organizing seemingly unnoticed actions, but at some point a wave of mass resistance arises. We sense the United States is at that stage once again. Protests on various issues are occurring throughout the country, more people are getting active, and the undercurrent is once again forming a wave. What will grow that wave to a tidal force? We don’t know. But, we can prepare for it so when it does, the people are more effective.

One key to building the movement is rejoicing in our successes. There were two we want to highlight this week. First, protesters in Canada scored a major victory against the Alberta Tar Sands shutting off their route to the Pacific when the British Columbia government rejected the pipeline because of the dangers of oil spills. The second victory came against Monsanto, which has given up plans to bring its products to Europe. These victories remind us once again of something that has been shown throughout history — people organized, acting strategically with uncompromising pressure can win against the power structure, today in the United States it is a conflict between the people and planet and concentrated corporate power.

The long history of social movements and transformation guide our philosophy of how we can win which we describe on PopularResistance.org and plan to write about in detail next week.  One of the goals of PopularResistance.org is to provide tools so that as people’s anger grows and as they become ready to get active, they are able to do so more easily and be as effective as possible. We also hope to provide encouragement by showing that we are not alone in our anger at the mistaken direction of government and the economy. There is a growing movement that seeks an end to the rule of money so people and planet come before profits.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

Obama’s Unparalleled Spy State

0

US President Barack Obama walks down the West Wing Colonnade in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington, DC, June 5, 2013. Obama called for “meaningful reform” and respect for universal rights in Bahrain, during talks with Crown Prince Salman at

June 6, 2013
 |

Like this article?

Join our email list:

Stay up to date with the latest headlines via email.

Now we know for sure: The Obama administration has presided over the most thorough expansion of the domestic surveillance state of any U.S. presidency. Even as the nation was still absorbing the news, broken by Glenn Greenwald at the Guardian on Wednesday night, that the National Security Agency has been routinely collecting phone call records for millions of Americans, the Washington Post and the Guardian published articles revealing even broader government snooping powers: Since 2007, the NSA and the FBI have had the power to watch nearly every aspect of our online life as well.

The National Security Agency and the FBI are tapping directly into the central servers of nine leading U.S. Internet companies, extracting audio, video, photographs, e-mails, documents and connection logs that enable analysts to track a person’s movements and contacts over time.

The nine companies are Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, PalTalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube, Apple. (PalTalk, according to the Post, “hosted significant traffic during the Arab Spring and in the ongoing Syrian civil war.”)

The program is code-named PRISM, and while it was created during the administration of George W. Bush, the Post reports that it has experienced “exponential growth” under Obama.

A blistering, brutal editorial published by the New York Times before the Washington Post article broke noted the contradiction between Obama’s words and deeds, recalling “when he said in 2007 that the Bush administration’s surveillance policy ‘puts forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we provide.’” The Washington Post story, in conjuction with the Guardian give the lie to such rhetoric. The Obama administration has trampled over the liberties we cherish.

It’s one thing to suspect and assume, as many privacy experts and government watchdogs have for years, that government intelligence agencies enjoy essentially unlimited access to all our electronic communications. It’s another to have it confirmed in black and white. It’s fair to say that very few of the people who voted for Barack Obama expected that one of his legacies was the effective end of privacy from government snooping.

But even this dark surveillance cloud has its silver lining.

First, kudos have to go to whoever leaked the information about both of the secret surveillance programs to the press. In a climate in which the government has made clear its intent to prosecute both whistle-blowers and the press, the decision to go public took guts.

Second, there’s a notable absence in the list of nine Internet companies participating in the PRISM program: Twitter. The Washington Post article reports that Twitter “has cultivated a reputation for aggressive defense of its users’ privacy.” There is now some real meat on the bones of that reputation. Can we hope for other Internet companies to follow Twitter’s example?

UPDATE: Google, Facebook, and Apple are all denying that the government has “direct access” to their servers.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

Screening the Working Class

0

From “Bee Movie” to “Office Space,” the definition of labor movies has come a long way from “Salt of the Earth” and “Norma Rae.” Dozens of Labor Notes readers responded to our call for your favorite recent feature films (since 2000) about workers, work, and the workplace.

As director of the D.C. Labor FilmFest–now in our 13th year–I spend a lot of time looking for new movies that show us how central work is to our culture.

While there are many wonderful documentaries, one of the most exciting things that’s happened to labor movies in recent years has been the proliferation of feature films. Not just dramas but comedies, thrillers, and even science fiction movies with work and workers at their centers have hit the silver screen.

Sympathetic, mainstream portrayals of the lives of workers are an important weapon in our ongoing struggles. But just as important, this latest batch of movies is astoundingly entertaining. They’re not only films you want to see as an activist, but ones your family and friends come out smiling and talking about.

Before a screening of “Office Space” in Dublin a few years ago, a moviegoer spent 15 minutes telling me why he hated unions. After the screening, he stopped to tell me how much he enjoyed the film–and how it had made him begin to think maybe unions might be necessary, after all.

With a warning that this list is far short of complete, here’s what we’ve been watching, with Labor Notes readers’ comments. (For a searchable list of 2,000 films about work, workers, and workers’ issues, check out the Labor Film Database. It includes a “Highly Recommended” shortlist.)

Comedy

Labor comedy sounds like the ultimate oxymoron, but Office Space (1999) has been such a hit for the D.C. Labor FilmFest that it’s the only film we show every year. “It captures the absurdity of work life for so many of us,” says Mark Piotrowski, speaking for millions of beleaguered cubicle-dwellers.

I’d include Steven Soderbergh’s The Informant (2009) in this category as well. Matt Damon–in one of his most nuanced performances–blows the whistle on price fixing at Archer Daniels Midland. Based on a true story, “The Informant” is simultaneously hugely comedic and terribly tragic.

Kenny is a 2006 Australian mockumentary starring Shane Jacobson as a Portajohn “engineer.” “Funny, based on real situations, and poignant,” says Bill Yund. “The struggling life of a working man in one of the most necessary and thankless jobs there is. You’ll never lift your nose at a porta-potty worker again.”

Also check out the surprisingly feisty Morning Glory (2010). Rachel McAdams stars as the hard-working producer of a New York morning talk show.

The Trotsky (2009) is “a great flick about a kid who thinks he’s the reincarnation of Leon Trotsky and organizes a union at his high school,” says John Tucker. “Funny and very relevant.” Tucker notes that the film is available on Netflix; in the Labor Film Database we include an Available Online category, which currently has some 74 entries.

Sci-Fi

Skip Oblivion and instead check out the mesmerizing Moon (2009), which the new Tom Cruise vehicle rips off shamelessly. Sam Rockwell plays a lonely miner, completing a three-year contract on the moon, who discovers things are not at all what he thought. “An excellent, allegorical depiction of the alienated character of laborers and labor-processes,” says Will Meyrowitz. “Embedded in that movie,” adds Leonard Stoehr, “is a critique of the modern workplace.”

Alex Rivera’s Sleep Dealer (2008) is a prophetic sci-fi thriller that beautifully weaves together immigration issues and drones. “The main character is a worker in Mexico who beams his labor to the U.S. over the Net and works in construction, erecting a skyscraper in California,” writes Rivera. “The secondary character is a drone pilot who is physically in the U.S. but who sends his energy to the global south in the form of a military drone, expressing his telepresence in the destruction of buildings.”

And several readers picked up on the labor issues implicit in Andrew Niccol’s haunting 2011 filmIn Time, starring Justin Timberlake. Will Meyrowitz says it contains a “subtle representation of the equation of time and money and its effects on the lives of labor and the poor.” Kate Spaulding praises the film’s treatment of “the horrible effects of income inequality and revolutionizing society.”

Ken Loach

You could fill an entire labor film festival with the films of British director Ken Loach (and in fact, one year, we did just that in D.C.). His eyes, ears, and heart are always attuned to ordinary people.

Top of the list for many is Bread and Roses (2000), a moving drama set in the Justice for Janitors organizing campaign, featuring terrific performances by Adrien Brody, Pilar Padilla, and Elpidia Carrillo. You see an organizing drive up close, you see some warts on the union, and you see a relationship between sisters that will knock your socks off.

In It’s A Free World (2007), an ambitious, working-class British woman, frustrated after being fired from yet another dead-end job, sets up her own staffing agency for immigrants. This is one of my favorite recent Loach films, managing to win our sympathy for a lead character even as she slips deeper and deeper into a moral abyss.

The Irish struggle for independence is intertwined with the Irish labor movement, so it’s no surprise that The Wind that Shakes the Barley (2006) also attracted readers’ attention. It’s set during the Irish War of Independence and the Irish Civil War, in the early 20th century.

Though Loach’s 1991 film Riff-Raff is before our 2000 cut-off, in light of the Iron Lady’s recent demise, Aaron Brenner notes that it’s “a great look at work and working-class life in Thatcherite England.”

And let me add a plug for Loach’s latest, a terrific comedy-drama called The Angel’s Share, in which a young Glasgow lad and his friends from a community service group find a way out of their troubles through a trip to a whisky distillery. It’s touching, funny, and true.

Kids’ Movies

In the animated feature Bee Movie (2007), Jerry Seinfeld stars as Barry B. Benson, a bee who has just graduated from college. He’s disillusioned at his lone career choice (making honey) and winds up suing humans for stealing the bee’s honey. Thin premise and not a great movie, but hey, the field of pro-worker cartoons is pretty sparse, so we’ll take it.

Much better is Chicken Run (2000), with Mel Gibson and Julia Sawalha organizing chickens to rebel against evil farm owners and escape from the farm of doom. “Great organizing film hiding as a children’s story,” says reader Robert Lindquist.

Laurence Cantet

French director Laurence Cantet’s films offer a “complex look into the competing pressures on workers and bosses,” says Aaron Brenner, “while leaving no doubt that capitalism is a brutal system that has to go.”

Human Resources (1999) is one of my favorites. Frank, a business school graduate enthralled with the idea of “employee involvement,” returns to his provincial hometown to take a management position in the factory where his father has worked for 30 years. After Frank makes the mistake of asking assembly line workers for their opinions, and management manipulates his findings to lay off employees–creating a huge rift not only between labor and management but between father and son. It’s a human morality tale that illustrates the personal risk behind political ideas.

Time Out (2001) is based on a true story about an executive who fabricates an imaginary job so that his family and friends won’t know he’s out of work. At first this pantomime of work registers as sad, even pathetic. Slowly and unnervingly, it becomes terrifying.

Other Cantet must-see films include Heading South (2005), about sex tourism in Haiti, and The Class (2008), a drama about a middle-school teacher in Paris that stars the actual teacher, François Bégaudeau.

Given the much greater class consciousness in Europe, it’s no surprise that a lot of the best labor films hail from there–but that’s really a whole other list. A few of my recent favorites include The Women on the 6th Floor (Les femmes du 6ème étage) (2010, France), the films of Michael Glawogger from Austria (especially Workingman’s Death and Whores’ Glory), and My Piece of the Pie (Ma part du gâteau) (2011, France).

Other Faves

Michael Pollak picked one of my personal favorites, Ramin Bahrani’s 2005 gem Man Push Cart, set in New York.

“The long silent passages seem to perfectly capture the work of working a cart,” Pollak says. “And I loved the reverse point of view. I had simply never thought about the view from inside the cart, the work necessary to haul it to the spot.”

Pollak also appreciated the immigrant perspective, “where the most disparate people hang together and feel they have more in common than the natives”–both in “Man Push Cart” and inDirty Pretty Things (2003), Steven Frears’s brilliant and shocking film, in which an illegal Nigerian immigrant discovers the ugly underside of London life.

North Country (2005) is a brutal portrait of sexual harassment on the job, though nothing beats Craig Zobel’s chilling 2012 Compliance for addressing this issue.

Up In the Air (2010) “sends a strong message on downsizing and how the workforce is regarded as expendable, no matter how much of their labor they contributed to building profit for a corporation,” says Kit Rafferty.

And Made in Dagenham (2010) vividly brought to life an unlikely–and largely forgotten–1968 strike by women workers at a car plant in England. It also brought cheering audiences around the world to their feet, showing that basic workplace justice issues are timeless.

Chris Garlock is the director of the DC Labor FilmFest. Check out the Labor Film Database for a searchable list of 2,000 films about work, workers, and workers’ issues.

This article originally appeared on LaborNotes.

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

French protesters slam death of activist

0

Left-wing protesters gather at the Saint-Michel fountain in Paris to pay homage to Clement Meric, a teenage activist who was beaten by skinheads on June 5, 2013, and died at the hospital a day later.

Left-wing demonstrators in the French capital, Paris, have condemned the death of a teenage activist in an attack blamed on skinheads.

French officials said Clement Meric, a left winger, was Å“hit extremely violently” by a group of men described as Å“skinhead types” during a fight in central Paris on June 5. The student was placed on life support at the hospital but was declared brain dead and died on Thursday.

The demonstrators chanted slogans and laid flowers on the ground near the place where the fight took place to pay homage to Meric.

Another demonstration was also staged in the heart of the Latin Quarter, which is the French capitalâ„¢s traditional student neighborhood.

In addition, separate protests were held at Sciences Po undergraduate school where Meric studied, and in some other cities.

Paris prosecutorâ„¢s office stated that three men and a woman were arrested on Thursday afternoon in connection with the attack. Police also detained three others later.

The perpetrators of the assault appeared to be members of a fringe far-right group called the Revolutionary Nationalist Youths (JNR), police said. However, Serge Ayoub, the head of the JNR said his group was not involved in the attack.

Police added that the incident happened when the skinheads found themselves in a shop with another group that involved Meric, sparking insults and jostling.

The skinheads got out of the shop afterwards and waited for the group. The victim Å“was hit by one of the skinheads who wore a knuckleduster and fell on the pavement, hitting a bollard,” police said.

French Interior Minister Manuel Valls told reporters that Å“an extreme right group is behind this murder.”

Meanwhile, French President Francois Hollande also denounced the June 5 assault, and Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault said the government would step up measures against far-right groups.

MR/HSN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Lessons from Chicago on the Violence of Inequality

0

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/lessons_from_chicago_on_the_violence_of_inequality_20130607/

Posted on Jun 6, 2013

This article originally appeared on: TruthDig

‘UK austerity hits women the hardest’

0

Dagenham sewing-machinists strike in 1968.

Britainâ„¢s largest unions body the Trades Union Congress (TUC) has criticized the British government austerity measures, saying the policies are y taking women back years.

TUC general secretary Frances O’Grady argued the coalition governmentâ„¢s plans to tackle the deficit through spending cuts, tax rises and benefit reforms, threaten progress of women in workplace and society.

Speaking at the 45th anniversary of the Dagenham sewing machinists’ strike, O’Grady said, Å“There’s a real risk of going backwards, not just in terms of women’s jobs, but in terms of the pay gap and the vital public services that allow women to work in the first place”.

On 7 June 1968, 187 women sewing-machinists at Ford Dagenham in east London struck against sex discrimination in job grading.

This comes as the Office for Budget Responsibility said the public sector workforce, including women, is expected to decline by 1.2 million between 2011 and 2018.

According to an earlier study by consumer group Which? on how people are coping with their finances, British women tend to be not only the worst hit but also less optimistic about the prospects of the wider economy.

SSM/MOS/HE

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Iranian president congratulates Sharif

0

The Iranian president has congratulated the Pakistani people and Nawaz Sharif on his recent election as Pakistanâ„¢s prime minister.

In a message, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad expressed confidence that the brotherly relations between the two countries would flourish under Sharifâ„¢s leadership, Pakistani Foreign Ministry reported on Thursday.

In a separate message, Iranâ„¢s Majlis Speaker Ali Larijani also congratulated the new Pakistani premier, saying the peaceful and democratic transition of power to Pakistan’s Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) was indicative of the Pakistani peopleâ„¢s great confidence in Sharif and his party.

Larijani expressed hope that Tehran and Islamabad would improve their parliamentary ties in the future.

In a message to all heads of Pakistani missions abroad after taking the oath of office, Sharif expressed the desire to deepen relations with Islamabadâ„¢s friends in the Middle East, East Asia and elsewhere.

The Pakistani prime minister stated that Iran is a friendly country with which Islamabad shall continue to pursue close cooperation.

On Wednesday, Pakistani lawmakers endorsed Sharif as the countryâ„¢s new prime minister, electing him to an unprecedented third term more than a decade after Sharif was ousted in a coup.

During general elections held on May 11, Sharifâ„¢s center-right party secured 176 seats of the 342-member lower house of the assembly. Sharif received 244 votes to become prime minister.

SF/NN/HMV

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Labour donation avoided millions of tax

0

UK Labour party has helped its financial supporter avoid tax worth up to £1.65 million.

Britainâ„¢s Labour party has helped one of its financial supporters, avoiding tax worth up to £1.65 million.

The party’s biggest donor, John Mills, admitted the donation was given in the form of shares in January in attempts to reduce the amount of tax he would have to pay.

If he had given £1.65?million from his own income he would have had to pay almost half of that sum to the taxman, Mills told the Daily Telegraph.

This comes as the donation in the form of shares would increase the income to the Labour party and reduce the amount of money given to HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC).

Mills, a former councillor in Camden, said that the idea of donating in shares came following discussions with the Labour, adding that the decision Å“came out of a discussion” he had with them Å“about the best way of doing it”.

In a letter to Labour leader Ed Miliband, British Chancellor George Osborne said the move appeared “directly at odds” with Miliband’s previous remarks about tax paid by giant corporations.

MOS/SSM/HE

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Labour donation avoided millions of tax

0

UK Labour party has helped its financial supporter avoid tax worth up to £1.65 million.

Britainâ„¢s Labour party has helped one of its financial supporters, avoiding tax worth up to £1.65 million.

The party’s biggest donor, John Mills, admitted the donation was given in the form of shares in January in attempts to reduce the amount of tax he would have to pay.

If he had given £1.65?million from his own income he would have had to pay almost half of that sum to the taxman, Mills told the Daily Telegraph.

This comes as the donation in the form of shares would increase the income to the Labour party and reduce the amount of money given to HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC).

Mills, a former councillor in Camden, said that the idea of donating in shares came following discussions with the Labour, adding that the decision Å“came out of a discussion” he had with them Å“about the best way of doing it”.

In a letter to Labour leader Ed Miliband, British Chancellor George Osborne said the move appeared “directly at odds” with Miliband’s previous remarks about tax paid by giant corporations.

MOS/SSM/HE

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Russia slams US peculiarity on Syria

0

Russiaâ„¢s foreign minister has censured the US Department of State officials for their Ëœpeculiar commentâ„¢ on the results of a trilateral meeting over Syria in Geneva.

The trilateral meeting on Wednesday was held with the participation of UN-Arab League Special Representative for Syria Lakhdar Brahimi and representatives from Russia and the United States. It served as a preparatory move to pave the way for the Geneva 2 talks on the issue of Syria.

During a Thursday press conference, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said, Å“I have heard that officials from the US Department of State have given a very peculiar comment on the results of yesterdayâ„¢s meeting in Geneva between Russia, US, and UN.”

The US Department of State has said that the three sides talked about Å“a transition government to which the current Syrian authorities will give all powers,” Lavrov stated.

Å“If a Department of State official really said that, itâ„¢s a very distorted representation of what was discussed,” the Russian foreign minister added.

He made the remarks in response to an earlier statement by Jennifer Psaki, a spokesperson for the US Department of State, claiming that participants in the preparatory meeting had agreed that the forthcoming talks on Syria should focus on the formation of a transitional government, to which the current administration should give up all powers.

Lavrov further reiterated that Moscow would continue to push for Iranâ„¢s participation in the upcoming Geneva meeting despite opposition from some Western states.

Meanwhile, Brahimi has expressed hope that the Geneva conference would convene in July, as the preparatory meeting failed to set a date.

MKA/HSN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

The Pentagon pivoting dance

0
<!–Pepe Escobar–>

Pepe Escobar is the roving correspondent for Asia Times/Hong Kong, an analyst for RT and TomDispatch, and a frequent contributor to websites and radio shows ranging from the US to East Asia.

When Pentagon head Chuck Hagel dropped into Southeast Asia this past weekend to spin Washington’s pivoting, no one was exactly expecting a Moses-like moment.

At the Shangri-la Dialogue in Singapore — Southeast Asia’s top
annual security conference — the usual cascade of euphemisms
adorned the perennial notion of the US as a benign superpower.
Something as crude as “pivoting” was hardly mentioned; it was
rather a matter of “strategic balance”, or “rebalancing”
involving the “Indo-Pacific”. 

The fact remains that the Pentagon up to 2020 will transfer more
air power, including tactical aircraft and bombers; US Army
troops and Marines; and a variety of high-tech weaponry to the
Asia-Pacific — no matter its downsized budget. And then there’s
60% of the US Navy, which translates as eight large vessels more
than the current deployment. It seems oh so harmless when such
fire power is dissolved into a Hagel-esque “we prioritize
developments of our most advanced platforms to the Pacific.”

Anybody visiting Changi Naval Base would have been able to see
the tip of the “rebalancing”; the USS Freedom, an April arrival,
the first of four Littoral class combat ships to be permanently
stationed in Singapore.

The rebalancing is being spun as Washington “resuming” its
Asia-Pacific “role” after a draw down from the spectacular
defeats at both Iraq and Afghanistan. It should not be
interpreted as containment of China, of course; according to
Hagel, this is only happening because “the arc of the 21st
century will be shaped by events here in Asia.”

That should explain the Pentagon being so gung-ho on “new
concepts” and “game-changing capabilities” to ensure “freedom of
action”. The question is, freedom for whom.

US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel (C) is piped off the USS Freedom (LCS 1) in Singapore, June 2, 2013.(AFP Photo / Erin A. Kirk-Cuomo)

China was present at the Shangri-La dialogue, via Major General
Qi Jianguo, deputy chief of the general staff of the People’s
Liberation Army (PLA). He did not mince his words; “China is not
convinced” the pivoting is not about containment. “How can you
assure China? How can you balance the two different objectives –
to assure allies, and to build a positive relationship with
China?”

Hagel did not answer, resorting to the cliché-laden “US welcomes
a strong and emerging and responsible China”. He did evoke
dialogue, to reduce “the risk of miscalculation, particularly
between our militaries.”

But Qi Jianguo was forceful — insisting bilateral dialogue
between China and individual Southeast Asian nations was always
on, and dismissing the possibility of UN arbitration to solve
territorial disputes with the Philippines, as advocated by
Filipino Defense Minister Voltaire Gazmin. Both Philippines and
Vietnam forcefully reject Beijing’s mapping of the South China
Sea in terms of future oil and gas exploration. 

Beijing can clearly identify how Washington is frantically
turbo-militarizing relations with most Association of Southeast
Asian Nations (ASEAN), even Myanmar. No wonder the US will host
its first meeting with ASEAN defense ministers next year in
Hawaii.

The day Hagel landed in Singapore I was at another conference at
the Four Seasons, hosted by the Middle East Institute of the
National University of Singapore. That’s where I pivoted into an
insightful conversation with Professor Wu Bingbing, a
vice-director of the School of Foreign Languages at Peking
University and a top Chinese Middle East expert. 

US ‘Think Tank land’ revolves around a consensus regarding the
pivoting, which is supposed to accomplish three objectives. 1) To
allow an “open highway” from the Indian Ocean to the South China
Sea (that’s already the case). 2) To “defend the chokepoints”
(assuming “evil” Iran will try to close Hormuz, which it won’t).
3) To prevent one power to become a hegemon (a not so veiled jab
at China and to a lesser extent India; only the US is allowed to
be a hegemon.)

L-R: Warships from Thailand HTMS Rattanakosin (FSG-441) – Rattanakosin class Corvette, France FNS Vendémiaire (F734) – Floreal class Frigate and Britain HMS Richmond (F239) – Type 23 class Frigate line up along the dock at Changi Naval Base during the 8th International Maritime Defence Exhibition & Conference (IMDEX) Asia 2011 in Singapore.(AFP Photo / Roslan Rahman)

Against all that hype, Professor Bingbing detailed how the
Beijing leadership sees the pivoting — as aggressive as it may be
– essentially as a diversionary tactic; Washington, he said, will
never pivot away from the Middle East.

Bingbing stressed how, in the near future, China, India, Japan
and South Korea will, among them, become the largest energy
importers from the GCC ‘petro-monarchies’. Beijing regards the
Middle East as “a strategic platform to reshape is relations with
the West”, including political/diplomatic interests as in
Xinjiang and Taiwan. And it’s important commercially because it’s
a large market for China.

As much in the Middle East as in Southeast Asia, Beijing intends
to develop these relations based on “sovereignty,
non-intervention, development and peace; regime change does not
solve anything.” As far as the West is concerned, Beijing wants
to increase “strategic trust” and “more cooperation in
international affairs.” Yet he warned “confrontation is
inevitable if the pivoting accelerates.”

He detailed how Beijing, unlike Washington, considers Iran a
“legitimate government”. He stressed, “sanctions don’t work. They
hurt the Iranian population, but they won’t make the economy
collapse. And they are even helpful to develop Iran’s non-oil
sector.” On the nuclear issue, Beijing “acknowledges Iran’s right
to enrich uranium”, as well as its “fundamental role in the
larger Middle East.” A military attack would be “a disaster”; it
would only enable an “axis of chaos”.

Washington would better listen to Bingbing’s clear message; “We
cannot give up on Iran. Iran is essential for stability in
Central Asia and South Asia. An attack on Iran will create
a new paradigm. To defend Iran is a matter of China’s
dignity”.   

One can already picture Chinese President Xi Jinping delivering
the same message to a pivot-obsessed Barack Obama this Friday
during their California summit. Will Obama listen?

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Britain to boost security in Tajikistan

0

UK govt. signs agreement to enhance security in Tajikistan

British government has signed an agreement to enhance security along the border shared by Tajikistan and Afghanistan, the British Embassy in Tajikistan says.

British Ambassador to Tajikistan Robin Ord-Smith and Chief of Mission of the Organization for Migration (IOM) in Tajikistan Tajma Kurt agreed to operate a program to boost Tajik-Afghan border security.

The program, which will cost $1.8 (£1.2 million), is expected to run until March 2015.

The deal includes stepping up cross-border cooperation, tackling drugs and human trafficking, and improving local livelihoods.

Å“By enhancing the capabilities of Border Services in this way we hope to contribute to the governmentsâ„¢ desire to effectively tackle the illegal movement of narcotics, migrants and potential extremists and contribute to stability across the region,” said Ord-Smith.

Earlier in April, the UK government signed an agreement with Tajikistan to use the country as a route for returning its military hardware from Afghanistan.

The two countries inked a deal in Dushanbe, allowing the transit of UK military equipment and weaponry, currently in use in the war-torn Asian country, via Tajikistanâ„¢s airspace and ground.

SSM/MOS/HE

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Watch Nancy Pelosi Lie Through Her Teeth: “I Don’t Remember Saying that Everybody in the Country Would Have a Lower Premium”

0


Just a few weeks ago the honorable Congresswoman from San Francisco, Nancy Pelosi, made the stunning claim that health insurance in America would be cheaper than ever before. “Many of the initiatives that he passed are what are coming to bear now, including the Affordable Care Act,” she said at a recent press conference about legislation championed by the President. “The Affordable Care Act is bringing the cost of health care in our country down in both the public and private sector.”

Of course, days later we found out what the future of  ”affordable” health care and lower costs actually meant, when the IRS admitted that prices would top $20,000 per year for the average American family.

It seems that these are the ramifications for passing a sweeping overhaul of the U.S. health care industry without having first read the bill to find out what was in it.

Now that we know government mandated ObamaCare will actually cost Americans at all income levels significantly more than was promised by the President and Congressional democrats, Nancy Pelosi is back peddling on her statements, claiming that she and the bill’s supporters never said there’d be lower premiums.

Well, some people don’t have health insurance and they’ll certainly have their health insurance premiums go up [laughs] because they don’t have any health insurance now, so they don’t have any premiums now.

But for anyone that that is a challenge, there are subsidies in the exchanges.

And, it’s also about what you get for your money. In other words, people will be getting no lifetime or annual limits on their coverage, no discrimination because of pre-existing medical conditions… it has a whole array of quality that is in the legislation.

But if you don’t have health insurance and you don’t qualify for a subsidy… and you’re mandated to have health insurance, you won’t have an increase.

We’re very sensitive to what it means to young people, especially to young singles. And, umm, there are policies that people can get.

I don’t remember saying that everybody in the country will have a lower premium, because everybody in the country doesn’t have health insurance so how could it be lower.

But the fact is, the value of what you get for the cost that you pay, is a reduction in cost to you.

…for everybody it is going to be a liberation, a freedom.

…and if you’re a small business. What this means for small business. It is… it is…umm… it’s uh… it’s a solution for the American people. It lowers cost.

Nancy Pelosi is absolutely right.

Obamacare, which will be enforced at the barrel of a gun, is freedom!

It’s a liberation… of your money from your wallet, to be spent on Nancy’s mile high booze-it-up plane junkets and subsidies for her district that will enrich her colleague Diane Feinstein’s personal net worth.

What’s worse is that the people of San Francisco and the greater United States remain oblivious to how they just got raped by this woman, her cronies in Congress and the health care industrial complex.

Nancy Pelosi belongs in prison, not on the floor of the United States Congress.

Watch the video — if you’ve got the stomach for it:

Please Spread The Word And Share This Post



Author:
Mac Slavo
Views:
Read by 153 people
Date: June 6th, 2013
Website: www.SHTFplan.com


Copyright Information: Copyright SHTFplan and Mac Slavo. This content may be freely reproduced in full or in part in digital form with full attribution to the author and a link to www.shtfplan.com. Please contact us for permission to reproduce this content in other media formats.

This article originally appeared on: SHTF Plan

UK teachers to go on strike over pay

0

UK teachers’ unions are planning to stage a strike action over pay, pensions and conditions.

Hundreds of British teachers are planning to stage a strike action over the British governmentâ„¢s policies on pay, pensions and conditions.

The National Union of Teachers (NUT) and the National Association of Schoolmasters Union of Women Teachers (NASUWT) said their members will start coordinated action in the North West of England at the end of this month as part of a long-running dispute with the UK government over working conditions.

Å“The move to strike action is a manifestation of the anger and frustration of teachers at the failure of the government to seek to address the deep concerns of the profession,” said NASUWT general secretary Chris Keates.

NUT general secretary Christine Blower also said the UK governmentâ„¢s proposed changes leave teachers with no other choice.

Recent studies revealed that morale among British teachers has declined dramatically as they do not trust the governmentâ„¢s education policies.

According to a survey by YouGov for NUT released on January, more than half of British teachers -about 55 percent- described their morale as low or very low.

MOS/SSM/HE

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Secret Records Seizures Called "Critical Tool" in Protecting America

0

In what President Obama has called “the most transparent administration in history” a secret order from a secret court, authorizing the secret collection of untold millions of Americans’ phone records, was defended Thursday by a White House official speaking anonymously. As Kevin O’Brien observed in the Plain Dealer, the Obama administration “is giving transparency a bad alias.”

A “senior administration official” defended the National Security Agency’s collecting of the telephone records of Verizon’s U.S. customers for a three-month period under a “TOP SECRET” order issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. News of the order was published Wednesday night by the Guardian of London.

“Information of the sort described in the Guardian article has been a critical tool in protecting the nation from terrorist threats to the United States,” the official said, “as it allows counter-terrorism personnel to discover whether known or suspected terrorists have been in contact with other persons who may be engaged in terrorist activities, particularly people located inside the United States.”

The court order, issued April 25, requires Verizon to turn over the records of each day’s calls until the order expires on July 19. The information to be turned over to the NSA daily includes the phone numbers of both parties to a call, along with data revealing the time, location and duration of the calls, and “comprehensive communication routing information.” The order applies to calls made in the United States or between the United States and other countries. It does not apply to calls that originate and terminate in foreign countries. The contents of the conversations are not covered, the Guardian said.

“As we have publicly stated before, all three branches of government are involved in reviewing and authorising intelligence collection under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act,” the White House official said. “Congress passed that act and is regularly and fully briefed on how it is used, and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court authorises such collection. There is a robust legal regime in place governing all activities conducted pursuant to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.”

The order was issued in response to an application by the FBI under a provision of FISA that authorizes domestic surveillance for national security purposes, including demands for businesses of customer records. The provision was expanded by the controversial Section 215, the “business records” section, of the PATRIOT Act, passed by Congress shortly after the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, D.C. on September 11, 2001. After 9-11, the Bush administration collected call logs, or “metadata,” from telecommunications without a court order. But the April 25 order, a copy of which was obtained by the Guardian, is the first public evidence that “under the Obama administration the communication records of millions of US citizens are being collected indiscriminately and in bulk – regardless of whether they are suspected of any wrongdoing,” the newspaper said.

While the order obtained by the Guardian covers a specific period of just under three months, that is but one segment of an ongoing operation, said Dianne Feinstein, (D-Calif.) “As far as I know this is the exact three-month renewal of what has been the case for the past seven years,” said Feinstein” The renewal is authorized by the FISA court “under the business records section of the Patriot Act. Therefore it is lawful” Feinstein said. ” It has been briefed to Congress.”

Under the FISA law, the records seized and search need not pertain to an individual suspected of a crime, but they are supposed to be related to an investigation of “foreign intelligence information” exchanged between “foreign powers” and “agents of foreign powers” in the United States. Agents of foreign powers may include citizens or permanent residents of the United States suspected of espionage or terrorism. FISA does not apply to investigations conducted outside the United States.

Under the Fourth Amendment, a warrant for a search must be “particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons of things to be seized.” The seizure and search of the call records of a telecommunications company’s millions of customers every day hardly fits that description.  

“This type of secret bulk data collection is an outrageous breach of Americans’ privacy,” said Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore). “Can the FBI or the NSA really claim that they need data scooped up on tens of millions of Americans?”

Senators Ron Wyden of Oregon and Mark Udall of Colorado, both Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee, have often warned of how broadly the government has been interpreting its powers under the business records section of the PATRIOT Act. In a March 15, 2012 letter to Attorney General Eric Holder, they noted those powers have been “the subject of secret legal interpretations” contained in “classified opinions issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.”

The opinions are “so highly classified that most members of Congress do not have any staff who are cleared to read them,” they wrote. “As a result, we can state with confidence that most of our colleagues in the House and Senate are unfamiliar with the documents, and that many of them would be surprised and angry to learn how the Patriot Act has been interpreted in secret.” The general public might be alarmed as well, they said.

“We believe most Americans would be stunned to learn the details of how these secret court opinions have interpreted Section 215 of the Patriot Act. As we see it, there is a significant gap between what most Americans think the law allows and what the government secretly claims the law allows.” (Emphasis in the original.) Wyden and Udall reminded the attorney general that they and other senators had repeatedly asked in vain for the administration to “declassify these interpretations so that Congress and the public can have an informed debate about the purpose and scope of the law.”

The National Security Agency was established by a June 1952 order of President Harry Truman in a letter that was itself classified and the existence of the agency was not generally known. While its mandate is to investigate foreign intelligence operations, the agency has become increasingly focused on domestic communications. A 30-year employee of the agency, William Binney, resigned from the NSA shortly after 9/11 in protest at the agency’s focus on domestic activities, the Guardian reported. 

Though amended many times, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was originally passed in 1978, following hearings in 1975 by a Senate select committee on the domestic surveillance activities of government agencies: The late Sen. Frank Church (D-Idaho) who chaired the committee, warned at the end of its investigations:

“The NSA’s capability at any time could be turned around on the American people, and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything: telephone conversations, telegrams, it doesn’t matter.”

Photo of U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court order to Verizon: AP Images

This article originally appeared on: The New American

Venezuela’s Maduro reaches out to big business and Washington

0

 

By
Bill Van Auken

7 June 2013

After three months in office, Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, the handpicked successor of the late Hugo Chavez, has put aside left rhetoric to seek accommodation with Venezuela’s biggest capitalists as well as with the Obama administration in Washington.

Maduro has repeatedly charged in recent months that US imperialism was conspiring to bring down his government and was the guiding hand behind a wave of political violence that followed his narrow election victory against right-wing candidate Henrique Capriles in April. Yet Venezuela’s Foreign Minister Elias Jaua was all smiles Wednesday, following a 40-minute meeting in Guatemala with US Secretary of State John Kerry.

The two, who met privately on the sidelines of the Organization of American States General Assembly meeting in Antigua, Guatemala, declared their commitment to, in Kerry’s words, “establish a more constructive and positive relationship.” This is to include resuming the exchange of ambassadors, which has been suspended since late 2010. It was Venezuela that requested the meeting.

“We agreed today there will be an ongoing, continuing dialogue between the State Department and the Foreign Ministry, and we will try to set out an agenda by which we agree on things we can work together,” said Kerry.

For his part, Jaua declared that “A good relationship between the government of President Nicolas Maduro and the government of President Barack Obama is what suits both peoples, it’s the guarantee of peace and stability for our peoples.”

Just last month, Maduro referred to Obama in a public speech as “the big boss of the devils” and accused him of backing the “fascist right” in attacking the Venezuelan people.

In Guatemala, Jaua said that he had presented Kerry with a report on the violence that followed the April 14 election to choose Chavez’s successor in which 11 people were killed and 80 injured, most of them Maduro supporters. He gave the US secretary of state an extract of the report prepared on the incidents by Venezuela’s Public Advocate’s office.

He said that the discussion had “alerted Kerry to the actions of anti-democratic groups in Venezuela, which threaten Venezuelan democracy, stability and which often are being supported by political and economic sectors of other countries.”

In point of fact, the most significant “sectors” seeking to destabilize the Venezuelan regime have long been the CIA and the US State Department.

Maduro’s turn toward accommodation with US imperialism has been accompanied by a similar approach to both foreign and domestic capital.

Among the most significant deals in terms of foreign capital was reached late last month with Chevron Corp. Chevron is providing $2 billion in financing for Petroboscan, a joint venture between the US oil giant and Venezuela’s state-owned oil company, PDVSA, to boost heavy crude production in the northwestern state of Zulia. Shortly beforehand, PDVSA secured a $1 billion credit line with Houston-based Schlumberger Ltd., the world’s largest oilfield services company.

While oil exports to the US have declined to about 900,000 barrels a day, it remains Venezuela’s chief customer for oil, responsible for 95 percent of the country’s export earnings and roughly half of its federal budget revenue.

From the standpoint of the US-based energy conglomerates, securing dominance over Venezuela’s oil reserves, the largest in the world, remains a strategic objective. The investments by Chevron and Schlumberger make clear that they see the potential for major profits, the Venezuelan government’s rhetoric about “Bolivarian socialism” notwithstanding.

Domestically, after charging for months that major Venezuelan capitalists, backed by the US, were waging an “economic war” against his government, Maduro invited the country’s second-richest individual, Lorenzo Mendoza, the head of the country’s largest food company, Polar, to meet with him last month at the Miraflores presidential palace in Caracas.

Both Chavez and Maduro had singled out Polar and Mendoza for attack over the country’s increasingly severe shortages and rising food prices. Holding them responsible for hoarding and waging an “economic war,” they threatened to nationalize the firm.

For his part, Mendoza, who is worth some $4.5 billion, was an enthusiastic supporter of the US-backed coup that briefly unseated Chavez in April 2002. This history had contributed to his keeping a fairly low profile under Chavez, but it was noted in the Venezuelan media that he mounted a vigorous public defense of his company in the face of Maduro’s recent charges.

Mendoza described the meeting as “very cordial, direct, sincere,” adding, “The president was very kind in listening to us and communicating the need to keep investing, producing and supplying markets. That is our lifelong commitment, passion and vocation.” He said that the two had reached an agreement “not to politicize” the issue of food.

Vice President Jorge Arreaza provided a similar description of the encounter between the “working class” president and the billionaire. “The problem’s been overcome,” he said.

The meeting with Mendoza was only the most visible of a series of talks between the government and prominent Venezuelan capitalists. Among the deals reached is the lifting of certain price controls and the easing of currency restrictions.

“In another sign of the rapprochement, the hallways of the finance ministry for the first time in years are filled with businessmen in sharp suits,” Reuters reported. “Many carry folders stuffed with requests for greater flexibility in the currency control system and an easing of price controls.”

The news agency quoted Finance Minister Nelson Merentes stating after one meeting with business executives: “We’ve entered a phase of creating closer ties with the private sector, without ignoring the new socialist economy.”

After months of charging the big bourgeoisie in Venezuela with “sabotage,” the Maduro government is now currying its favor and begging it to increase production. This turn is driven by a deepening economic crisis characterized by a decline in growth, soaring inflation and widespread shortages.

Venezuela’s inflation rate is now near 30 percent, with the bulk of it reflecting the sharp rise in the price of food. Meanwhile, the growth rate for the first quarter of 2013 amounted to just 0.7 percent. This overall figure, however, masks the severity of the situation.

Venezuela’s financial sector, which continues to enjoy some of the highest profit rates in the world, saw a 31 percent growth during this period, while manufacturing declined by 3.6 percent and construction by 1.2 percent. The scarcity index, which tracks the amount of products missing from store shelves, has hit its highest level since the Central Bank began tracking these figures.

The accommodation between the Maduro government and Venezuelan capitalists, on the one hand, and Washington, on the other, has taken the political wind out of the sails of the rightist candidate Henrique Capriles, who has continued to charge electoral fraud and condemn Maduro as an illegitimate president. While the Obama administration has yet to formally recognize Maduro’s close election victory, it has turned a cold shoulder to demands for OAS sanctions against Venezuela. And Mendoza’s visit to Miraflores indicates that the billionaire accepts Maduro as legitimate.

Clearly, both domestic and foreign capital recognize that behind the left rhetoric and the limited social reforms of “Bolivarian Socialism,” Maduro’s government defends capitalism and they can do business with it. More fundamentally, continued agitation by the right wing and a further weakening of the government under conditions of deepening economic crisis and rising popular discontent poses the danger of provoking a social explosion in the working class.



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

Venezuela’s Maduro reaches out to big business and Washington

0

 

By
Bill Van Auken

7 June 2013

After three months in office, Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, the handpicked successor of the late Hugo Chavez, has put aside left rhetoric to seek accommodation with Venezuela’s biggest capitalists as well as with the Obama administration in Washington.

Maduro has repeatedly charged in recent months that US imperialism was conspiring to bring down his government and was the guiding hand behind a wave of political violence that followed his narrow election victory against right-wing candidate Henrique Capriles in April. Yet Venezuela’s Foreign Minister Elias Jaua was all smiles Wednesday, following a 40-minute meeting in Guatemala with US Secretary of State John Kerry.

The two, who met privately on the sidelines of the Organization of American States General Assembly meeting in Antigua, Guatemala, declared their commitment to, in Kerry’s words, “establish a more constructive and positive relationship.” This is to include resuming the exchange of ambassadors, which has been suspended since late 2010. It was Venezuela that requested the meeting.

“We agreed today there will be an ongoing, continuing dialogue between the State Department and the Foreign Ministry, and we will try to set out an agenda by which we agree on things we can work together,” said Kerry.

For his part, Jaua declared that “A good relationship between the government of President Nicolas Maduro and the government of President Barack Obama is what suits both peoples, it’s the guarantee of peace and stability for our peoples.”

Just last month, Maduro referred to Obama in a public speech as “the big boss of the devils” and accused him of backing the “fascist right” in attacking the Venezuelan people.

In Guatemala, Jaua said that he had presented Kerry with a report on the violence that followed the April 14 election to choose Chavez’s successor in which 11 people were killed and 80 injured, most of them Maduro supporters. He gave the US secretary of state an extract of the report prepared on the incidents by Venezuela’s Public Advocate’s office.

He said that the discussion had “alerted Kerry to the actions of anti-democratic groups in Venezuela, which threaten Venezuelan democracy, stability and which often are being supported by political and economic sectors of other countries.”

In point of fact, the most significant “sectors” seeking to destabilize the Venezuelan regime have long been the CIA and the US State Department.

Maduro’s turn toward accommodation with US imperialism has been accompanied by a similar approach to both foreign and domestic capital.

Among the most significant deals in terms of foreign capital was reached late last month with Chevron Corp. Chevron is providing $2 billion in financing for Petroboscan, a joint venture between the US oil giant and Venezuela’s state-owned oil company, PDVSA, to boost heavy crude production in the northwestern state of Zulia. Shortly beforehand, PDVSA secured a $1 billion credit line with Houston-based Schlumberger Ltd., the world’s largest oilfield services company.

While oil exports to the US have declined to about 900,000 barrels a day, it remains Venezuela’s chief customer for oil, responsible for 95 percent of the country’s export earnings and roughly half of its federal budget revenue.

From the standpoint of the US-based energy conglomerates, securing dominance over Venezuela’s oil reserves, the largest in the world, remains a strategic objective. The investments by Chevron and Schlumberger make clear that they see the potential for major profits, the Venezuelan government’s rhetoric about “Bolivarian socialism” notwithstanding.

Domestically, after charging for months that major Venezuelan capitalists, backed by the US, were waging an “economic war” against his government, Maduro invited the country’s second-richest individual, Lorenzo Mendoza, the head of the country’s largest food company, Polar, to meet with him last month at the Miraflores presidential palace in Caracas.

Both Chavez and Maduro had singled out Polar and Mendoza for attack over the country’s increasingly severe shortages and rising food prices. Holding them responsible for hoarding and waging an “economic war,” they threatened to nationalize the firm.

For his part, Mendoza, who is worth some $4.5 billion, was an enthusiastic supporter of the US-backed coup that briefly unseated Chavez in April 2002. This history had contributed to his keeping a fairly low profile under Chavez, but it was noted in the Venezuelan media that he mounted a vigorous public defense of his company in the face of Maduro’s recent charges.

Mendoza described the meeting as “very cordial, direct, sincere,” adding, “The president was very kind in listening to us and communicating the need to keep investing, producing and supplying markets. That is our lifelong commitment, passion and vocation.” He said that the two had reached an agreement “not to politicize” the issue of food.

Vice President Jorge Arreaza provided a similar description of the encounter between the “working class” president and the billionaire. “The problem’s been overcome,” he said.

The meeting with Mendoza was only the most visible of a series of talks between the government and prominent Venezuelan capitalists. Among the deals reached is the lifting of certain price controls and the easing of currency restrictions.

“In another sign of the rapprochement, the hallways of the finance ministry for the first time in years are filled with businessmen in sharp suits,” Reuters reported. “Many carry folders stuffed with requests for greater flexibility in the currency control system and an easing of price controls.”

The news agency quoted Finance Minister Nelson Merentes stating after one meeting with business executives: “We’ve entered a phase of creating closer ties with the private sector, without ignoring the new socialist economy.”

After months of charging the big bourgeoisie in Venezuela with “sabotage,” the Maduro government is now currying its favor and begging it to increase production. This turn is driven by a deepening economic crisis characterized by a decline in growth, soaring inflation and widespread shortages.

Venezuela’s inflation rate is now near 30 percent, with the bulk of it reflecting the sharp rise in the price of food. Meanwhile, the growth rate for the first quarter of 2013 amounted to just 0.7 percent. This overall figure, however, masks the severity of the situation.

Venezuela’s financial sector, which continues to enjoy some of the highest profit rates in the world, saw a 31 percent growth during this period, while manufacturing declined by 3.6 percent and construction by 1.2 percent. The scarcity index, which tracks the amount of products missing from store shelves, has hit its highest level since the Central Bank began tracking these figures.

The accommodation between the Maduro government and Venezuelan capitalists, on the one hand, and Washington, on the other, has taken the political wind out of the sails of the rightist candidate Henrique Capriles, who has continued to charge electoral fraud and condemn Maduro as an illegitimate president. While the Obama administration has yet to formally recognize Maduro’s close election victory, it has turned a cold shoulder to demands for OAS sanctions against Venezuela. And Mendoza’s visit to Miraflores indicates that the billionaire accepts Maduro as legitimate.

Clearly, both domestic and foreign capital recognize that behind the left rhetoric and the limited social reforms of “Bolivarian Socialism,” Maduro’s government defends capitalism and they can do business with it. More fundamentally, continued agitation by the right wing and a further weakening of the government under conditions of deepening economic crisis and rising popular discontent poses the danger of provoking a social explosion in the working class.



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

Venezuela’s Maduro reaches out to big business and Washington

0

 

By
Bill Van Auken

7 June 2013

After three months in office, Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, the handpicked successor of the late Hugo Chavez, has put aside left rhetoric to seek accommodation with Venezuela’s biggest capitalists as well as with the Obama administration in Washington.

Maduro has repeatedly charged in recent months that US imperialism was conspiring to bring down his government and was the guiding hand behind a wave of political violence that followed his narrow election victory against right-wing candidate Henrique Capriles in April. Yet Venezuela’s Foreign Minister Elias Jaua was all smiles Wednesday, following a 40-minute meeting in Guatemala with US Secretary of State John Kerry.

The two, who met privately on the sidelines of the Organization of American States General Assembly meeting in Antigua, Guatemala, declared their commitment to, in Kerry’s words, “establish a more constructive and positive relationship.” This is to include resuming the exchange of ambassadors, which has been suspended since late 2010. It was Venezuela that requested the meeting.

“We agreed today there will be an ongoing, continuing dialogue between the State Department and the Foreign Ministry, and we will try to set out an agenda by which we agree on things we can work together,” said Kerry.

For his part, Jaua declared that “A good relationship between the government of President Nicolas Maduro and the government of President Barack Obama is what suits both peoples, it’s the guarantee of peace and stability for our peoples.”

Just last month, Maduro referred to Obama in a public speech as “the big boss of the devils” and accused him of backing the “fascist right” in attacking the Venezuelan people.

In Guatemala, Jaua said that he had presented Kerry with a report on the violence that followed the April 14 election to choose Chavez’s successor in which 11 people were killed and 80 injured, most of them Maduro supporters. He gave the US secretary of state an extract of the report prepared on the incidents by Venezuela’s Public Advocate’s office.

He said that the discussion had “alerted Kerry to the actions of anti-democratic groups in Venezuela, which threaten Venezuelan democracy, stability and which often are being supported by political and economic sectors of other countries.”

In point of fact, the most significant “sectors” seeking to destabilize the Venezuelan regime have long been the CIA and the US State Department.

Maduro’s turn toward accommodation with US imperialism has been accompanied by a similar approach to both foreign and domestic capital.

Among the most significant deals in terms of foreign capital was reached late last month with Chevron Corp. Chevron is providing $2 billion in financing for Petroboscan, a joint venture between the US oil giant and Venezuela’s state-owned oil company, PDVSA, to boost heavy crude production in the northwestern state of Zulia. Shortly beforehand, PDVSA secured a $1 billion credit line with Houston-based Schlumberger Ltd., the world’s largest oilfield services company.

While oil exports to the US have declined to about 900,000 barrels a day, it remains Venezuela’s chief customer for oil, responsible for 95 percent of the country’s export earnings and roughly half of its federal budget revenue.

From the standpoint of the US-based energy conglomerates, securing dominance over Venezuela’s oil reserves, the largest in the world, remains a strategic objective. The investments by Chevron and Schlumberger make clear that they see the potential for major profits, the Venezuelan government’s rhetoric about “Bolivarian socialism” notwithstanding.

Domestically, after charging for months that major Venezuelan capitalists, backed by the US, were waging an “economic war” against his government, Maduro invited the country’s second-richest individual, Lorenzo Mendoza, the head of the country’s largest food company, Polar, to meet with him last month at the Miraflores presidential palace in Caracas.

Both Chavez and Maduro had singled out Polar and Mendoza for attack over the country’s increasingly severe shortages and rising food prices. Holding them responsible for hoarding and waging an “economic war,” they threatened to nationalize the firm.

For his part, Mendoza, who is worth some $4.5 billion, was an enthusiastic supporter of the US-backed coup that briefly unseated Chavez in April 2002. This history had contributed to his keeping a fairly low profile under Chavez, but it was noted in the Venezuelan media that he mounted a vigorous public defense of his company in the face of Maduro’s recent charges.

Mendoza described the meeting as “very cordial, direct, sincere,” adding, “The president was very kind in listening to us and communicating the need to keep investing, producing and supplying markets. That is our lifelong commitment, passion and vocation.” He said that the two had reached an agreement “not to politicize” the issue of food.

Vice President Jorge Arreaza provided a similar description of the encounter between the “working class” president and the billionaire. “The problem’s been overcome,” he said.

The meeting with Mendoza was only the most visible of a series of talks between the government and prominent Venezuelan capitalists. Among the deals reached is the lifting of certain price controls and the easing of currency restrictions.

“In another sign of the rapprochement, the hallways of the finance ministry for the first time in years are filled with businessmen in sharp suits,” Reuters reported. “Many carry folders stuffed with requests for greater flexibility in the currency control system and an easing of price controls.”

The news agency quoted Finance Minister Nelson Merentes stating after one meeting with business executives: “We’ve entered a phase of creating closer ties with the private sector, without ignoring the new socialist economy.”

After months of charging the big bourgeoisie in Venezuela with “sabotage,” the Maduro government is now currying its favor and begging it to increase production. This turn is driven by a deepening economic crisis characterized by a decline in growth, soaring inflation and widespread shortages.

Venezuela’s inflation rate is now near 30 percent, with the bulk of it reflecting the sharp rise in the price of food. Meanwhile, the growth rate for the first quarter of 2013 amounted to just 0.7 percent. This overall figure, however, masks the severity of the situation.

Venezuela’s financial sector, which continues to enjoy some of the highest profit rates in the world, saw a 31 percent growth during this period, while manufacturing declined by 3.6 percent and construction by 1.2 percent. The scarcity index, which tracks the amount of products missing from store shelves, has hit its highest level since the Central Bank began tracking these figures.

The accommodation between the Maduro government and Venezuelan capitalists, on the one hand, and Washington, on the other, has taken the political wind out of the sails of the rightist candidate Henrique Capriles, who has continued to charge electoral fraud and condemn Maduro as an illegitimate president. While the Obama administration has yet to formally recognize Maduro’s close election victory, it has turned a cold shoulder to demands for OAS sanctions against Venezuela. And Mendoza’s visit to Miraflores indicates that the billionaire accepts Maduro as legitimate.

Clearly, both domestic and foreign capital recognize that behind the left rhetoric and the limited social reforms of “Bolivarian Socialism,” Maduro’s government defends capitalism and they can do business with it. More fundamentally, continued agitation by the right wing and a further weakening of the government under conditions of deepening economic crisis and rising popular discontent poses the danger of provoking a social explosion in the working class.



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

US threatens Iran, Hezbollah for backing Syria

0

 

By
Chris Marsden

7 June 2013

The White House issued its most threatening statement yet yesterday, denouncing Iran and the Lebanese Shia movement Hezbollah as “partners in tyranny” for their support of the Assad regime in Syria.

This week, Syrian government forces claimed victory in the battle for the strategic town of Qusayr, near the Lebanese border, after weeks of fighting beginning May 19. Qusayr lies along a land corridor linking Damascus and the Mediterranean coastal area that is home to Assad’s Alawite sect and is, at the same time, key to maintaining opposition supply lines to Lebanon.

The battle involved Lebanon’s Shia Hezbollah militants in support of Assad, pitched against the numerous Sunni groups such as the Al Qaeda-affiliated Al Nusra Front and other foreign fighters backed by the region’s Sunni states.

White House spokesman Jay Carney responded by condemning “in the strongest possible terms the Assad regime’s assault on Qusayr,” adding: “It is clear that the regime is unable to contest the opposition’s control of a place like Qusayr on their own, and that is why they are dependent on Hezbollah and Iran to do their work for them.”

After being routed from Qusayr, the leader of the Supreme Military Council of the Free Syrian Army, Gen. Salim Idris, told the BBC that Hezbollah fighters were “invading” Syria, and “when they continue to do that and the Lebanese authorities don’t take any action to stop them coming to Syria, I think we are allowed to fight Hezbollah fighters inside [Lebanese] territory.”

He made good on his word Wednesday night, as a dozen rockets fired from Syria hit areas in and around the Lebanese city of Baalbek, injuring a number of people. Lebanon’s National News Agency said 11 rockets hit various locations, including the city centre.

In another effort to escalate the war, opposition fighters seized the Syrian-controlled section of the Quneitra crossing in the Golan Heights bordering Israel. Austria announced that it was withdrawing its 380 troops from the 1,000-strong United Nations force monitoring a ceasefire between Syria and Israel. Tel Aviv declared the border area a closed military zone, shut the main road link and evacuated farmers. The border area was reclaimed by the Syrian Army, but not before three mortars had landed in Israeli territory.

Tensions have been whipped up throughout the week by the US and its allies. The past days were dominated by allegations emanating from France and Britain of chemical weapon use by the Assad regime, in a transparent effort to supply a pretext for stepped-up military aggression.

In Paris Tuesday, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said he had passed analyses to identify military toxins to the head of a United Nations inquiry into chemical weapon use in Syria. “These analyses demonstrate the presence of sarin gas,” he claimed. “In view of this evidence, France is now certain that sarin gas has been used in Syria several times and in a localised manner.”

President Francois Hollande later echoed Fabius, declaring, “We have elements of proof and we urge the international community to act.”

Both stressed that France would not act unilaterally and would hold talks with Washington. Their concern is that peace negotiations planned to be held in Geneva should not be too openly exposed as a fiction, given the stress being placed by the Obama administration on neutralising Russian opposition to the fall of its main Middle East ally.

“A line has been indisputably breached,” said Fabius and France and its allies must decide “whether to react, including in an armed manner… But at the same time we must not block an eventual peace conference.”

The conference will not now take place this month, as planned, and will meet in July, if at all.

France’s announcement was meant to reinforce the more tentative findings of a UN commission of enquiry on human rights abuses that cited “reasonable evidence” of chemical weapons being used in Syria on four occasions in March and April but without attributing blame.

Britain’s Foreign Office also said that body fluids collected from victims of one or more attacks in Syria were found by scientists at its Porton Down facility to contain evidence of sarin use.

There is every reason to question any claim made by France or the UK, given their record of lies to justify wars in the Balkans and Iraq–more so because the claims made now are insubstantial and without independent verification.

Some of the blood samples used by France were smuggled out of Syria by Le Monde journalists and reportedly supplied by local doctors. There were no details on how France obtained other samples used. In only one case has Fabius claimed that the use of sarin is directly attributed to government forces, saying there was “no doubt that it was the regime and its accomplices.”

A UK spokesman was more equivocal, stating that there could be no “100 percent certainty” that the Assad regime had used chemical weapons. The FCO would not even confirm where or when its samples were collected. Mark Lyall Grant, Britain’s ambassador to the United Nations, stated only that they revealed evidence suggesting use of a number of different chemical agents, “sometimes including sarin, sometimes not.”

Ake Sellstrom, who heads the UN investigation, issued a statement cautioning that “the validity of the information is not ensured in the absence of convincing evidence of the chain of custody of the data collected.”

Ultimately, what happens next will not be decided in Paris or London, but in Washington.

President Barack Obama has warned that use of chemical weapons crosses a “red line,” but there are divisions over how far and how fast to proceed against Syria.

After discussing France’s and Britain’s claims Tuesday evening at a meeting of NATO defence ministers in Brussels, Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel told reporters that he had not seen the evidence and that NATO’s role continues to be to help protect alliance members such as Turkey. “[B]eyond that we didn’t get into any additional war plans regarding Syria,” he said.

There is no popular support in the US for war against Syria, and a great deal to lose if things go wrong for the ruling class. That is why, to date, the Obama administration has preferred to proceed through local intermediaries–the FSA and its regional backers, Turkey and Gulf States such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar. It wants to eliminate Assad as an ally of Iran, without unduly provoking Russia, and is seeking to cook up a replacement regime that is acceptable to Moscow.

There is in addition mounting concern that the conflict is rapidly spreading out of control, dragging in neighbouring Lebanon and Iraq and even Israel. There are divisions over how to respond, with Republicans such as Senator John McCain and former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice lobbying hard for Obama to make good on his “red line” threat.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Tuesday that Moscow had so far refrained from supplying the powerful S-300 surface-to-air missile systems to Damascus he had earlier said would be a “stabilising factor” and would deter foreign intervention in Syria.

After talks Tuesday with European Union leaders in Yekaterinburg, Putin said the contract signed several years ago had not yet “been realised” because, “We do not want to upset the balance in the region.”

He warned, however, that, “Any attempts to influence the situation by force through direct military action is doomed to fail and would unavoidably bring about large humanitarian casualties.”



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

US threatens Iran, Hezbollah for backing Syria

0

 

By
Chris Marsden

7 June 2013

The White House issued its most threatening statement yet yesterday, denouncing Iran and the Lebanese Shia movement Hezbollah as “partners in tyranny” for their support of the Assad regime in Syria.

This week, Syrian government forces claimed victory in the battle for the strategic town of Qusayr, near the Lebanese border, after weeks of fighting beginning May 19. Qusayr lies along a land corridor linking Damascus and the Mediterranean coastal area that is home to Assad’s Alawite sect and is, at the same time, key to maintaining opposition supply lines to Lebanon.

The battle involved Lebanon’s Shia Hezbollah militants in support of Assad, pitched against the numerous Sunni groups such as the Al Qaeda-affiliated Al Nusra Front and other foreign fighters backed by the region’s Sunni states.

White House spokesman Jay Carney responded by condemning “in the strongest possible terms the Assad regime’s assault on Qusayr,” adding: “It is clear that the regime is unable to contest the opposition’s control of a place like Qusayr on their own, and that is why they are dependent on Hezbollah and Iran to do their work for them.”

After being routed from Qusayr, the leader of the Supreme Military Council of the Free Syrian Army, Gen. Salim Idris, told the BBC that Hezbollah fighters were “invading” Syria, and “when they continue to do that and the Lebanese authorities don’t take any action to stop them coming to Syria, I think we are allowed to fight Hezbollah fighters inside [Lebanese] territory.”

He made good on his word Wednesday night, as a dozen rockets fired from Syria hit areas in and around the Lebanese city of Baalbek, injuring a number of people. Lebanon’s National News Agency said 11 rockets hit various locations, including the city centre.

In another effort to escalate the war, opposition fighters seized the Syrian-controlled section of the Quneitra crossing in the Golan Heights bordering Israel. Austria announced that it was withdrawing its 380 troops from the 1,000-strong United Nations force monitoring a ceasefire between Syria and Israel. Tel Aviv declared the border area a closed military zone, shut the main road link and evacuated farmers. The border area was reclaimed by the Syrian Army, but not before three mortars had landed in Israeli territory.

Tensions have been whipped up throughout the week by the US and its allies. The past days were dominated by allegations emanating from France and Britain of chemical weapon use by the Assad regime, in a transparent effort to supply a pretext for stepped-up military aggression.

In Paris Tuesday, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said he had passed analyses to identify military toxins to the head of a United Nations inquiry into chemical weapon use in Syria. “These analyses demonstrate the presence of sarin gas,” he claimed. “In view of this evidence, France is now certain that sarin gas has been used in Syria several times and in a localised manner.”

President Francois Hollande later echoed Fabius, declaring, “We have elements of proof and we urge the international community to act.”

Both stressed that France would not act unilaterally and would hold talks with Washington. Their concern is that peace negotiations planned to be held in Geneva should not be too openly exposed as a fiction, given the stress being placed by the Obama administration on neutralising Russian opposition to the fall of its main Middle East ally.

“A line has been indisputably breached,” said Fabius and France and its allies must decide “whether to react, including in an armed manner… But at the same time we must not block an eventual peace conference.”

The conference will not now take place this month, as planned, and will meet in July, if at all.

France’s announcement was meant to reinforce the more tentative findings of a UN commission of enquiry on human rights abuses that cited “reasonable evidence” of chemical weapons being used in Syria on four occasions in March and April but without attributing blame.

Britain’s Foreign Office also said that body fluids collected from victims of one or more attacks in Syria were found by scientists at its Porton Down facility to contain evidence of sarin use.

There is every reason to question any claim made by France or the UK, given their record of lies to justify wars in the Balkans and Iraq–more so because the claims made now are insubstantial and without independent verification.

Some of the blood samples used by France were smuggled out of Syria by Le Monde journalists and reportedly supplied by local doctors. There were no details on how France obtained other samples used. In only one case has Fabius claimed that the use of sarin is directly attributed to government forces, saying there was “no doubt that it was the regime and its accomplices.”

A UK spokesman was more equivocal, stating that there could be no “100 percent certainty” that the Assad regime had used chemical weapons. The FCO would not even confirm where or when its samples were collected. Mark Lyall Grant, Britain’s ambassador to the United Nations, stated only that they revealed evidence suggesting use of a number of different chemical agents, “sometimes including sarin, sometimes not.”

Ake Sellstrom, who heads the UN investigation, issued a statement cautioning that “the validity of the information is not ensured in the absence of convincing evidence of the chain of custody of the data collected.”

Ultimately, what happens next will not be decided in Paris or London, but in Washington.

President Barack Obama has warned that use of chemical weapons crosses a “red line,” but there are divisions over how far and how fast to proceed against Syria.

After discussing France’s and Britain’s claims Tuesday evening at a meeting of NATO defence ministers in Brussels, Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel told reporters that he had not seen the evidence and that NATO’s role continues to be to help protect alliance members such as Turkey. “[B]eyond that we didn’t get into any additional war plans regarding Syria,” he said.

There is no popular support in the US for war against Syria, and a great deal to lose if things go wrong for the ruling class. That is why, to date, the Obama administration has preferred to proceed through local intermediaries–the FSA and its regional backers, Turkey and Gulf States such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar. It wants to eliminate Assad as an ally of Iran, without unduly provoking Russia, and is seeking to cook up a replacement regime that is acceptable to Moscow.

There is in addition mounting concern that the conflict is rapidly spreading out of control, dragging in neighbouring Lebanon and Iraq and even Israel. There are divisions over how to respond, with Republicans such as Senator John McCain and former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice lobbying hard for Obama to make good on his “red line” threat.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Tuesday that Moscow had so far refrained from supplying the powerful S-300 surface-to-air missile systems to Damascus he had earlier said would be a “stabilising factor” and would deter foreign intervention in Syria.

After talks Tuesday with European Union leaders in Yekaterinburg, Putin said the contract signed several years ago had not yet “been realised” because, “We do not want to upset the balance in the region.”

He warned, however, that, “Any attempts to influence the situation by force through direct military action is doomed to fail and would unavoidably bring about large humanitarian casualties.”



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

The Ford closures, the market and the fight for socialism

0

 

By
Nick Beams–SEP Senate candidate for NSW

7 June 2013

From the moment Ford announced the October 2016 closure of its Australian manufacturing plants a well-oiled propaganda machine sprang into action.

The company insisted that, because it had become uncompetitive on global markets, its Australian operations were no longer viable. Prime Minister Julia Gillard voiced her sympathy for the Ford workers and their communities, before quickly passing on to next business.

For their part the trade union leaders, who had long before entered into agreements with the company to ensure an “orderly transition,” declared their focus would be firmly fixed on organising redundancy payouts.

The basic premise of this campaign is that, for Ford workers, there is simply no alternative–the market has spoken and that is that. The factories will shut down and their jobs will be destroyed. This comes after more than three decades of the unions insisting that the workforce had no choice but to accept round after round of layoffs and productivity speedups, all in the name of ensuring the company’s market “competitiveness.”

Like the millions of other workers around the world facing corporate “restructuring”, pay cuts and job destruction, Ford employees have expressed anger, fear, sadness, and deeply felt concern, not only for their own future, but for their communities and the fate of the younger generation just entering the workforce. At the same time, however, there is a widespread feeling that nothing can be done to prevent the plants’ slated closure and defend jobs.

This sentiment is the product of an ideological straitjacket that the trade unions have assiduously promoted for years. In order to break out of it, workers need to subject the concept of the “market” itself to critical analysis.

Early last century, the Polish-German Marxist, Rosa Luxemburg, explained that the great ideological power of the “market” derived from the fact that it appeared to function like the laws of the natural world. Commercial and financial crises, she wrote were “looked upon and treated by all concerned, by all of society, as something beyond the sphere of human volition and beyond human control.”

Luxemburg’s analysis has lost none of its relevance. The mystifications of the market can only be dispelled by laying bare its operations.

According to the “common sense” definition provided by Wikipedia, the market “facilitates trade and the distribution of the resources of society.” This definition covers over the fact that the market operates, not in society in general, but in a very specific form of socio-economic organisation, capitalism.

The essential, and defining, feature of capitalist society is its fundamental division into two major classes: the working class, which has no access to the means of production and is forced to sell its labour power or capacity to work in order to live; and the capitalist class, the owners of the means of production, whose wealth is now embodied in giant corporations.

Markets existed before capitalism. But the market only became the dominant form of socio-economic organisation with the rise of capitalism, where the mode of production is characterised by the sale and purchase of labour power.

Wage labour is the essential social relation of capitalism, because it is the means by which the capitalist class, the owners of the means of production, appropriate the surplus created by the labour of the working class in the form of profit. The origins of this surplus lie in the difference between the wages paid to workers for the sale of their labour power, and the value of the commodities they produce in the course of the labour process.

Society is not, therefore, a unified whole, but is comprised of two social classes with fundamentally antagonistic class interests.

The labour of the working class produces all the wealth and resources in society. But the working class, comprising the overwhelming majority of the population, has absolutely no control over the distribution of the products of its own labour.

The wealth workers have produced does not belong to them. It belongs to the companies–in the case of the auto industry, giant transnational corporations–that employ them. What these corporations do is not determined by the drive to allocate socially-produced wealth to meet society’s needs, but by the struggle to appropriate the largest possible private profit.

The market is one of the key economic mechanisms through which this struggle is waged.

Each corporation fights in the market to maximise its profits against its rivals. The “winners” in this war of each against all are those best able to reduce their production costs below those of their rivals, or to develop new products, so that their market share, and therefore profit, increases. But the war is never ending. As soon as one round of cost-cutting is put in place, rival corporations develop new measures to intensify their efforts to recapture lost positions.

This struggle has characterised the capitalist mode of production from its birth. It is embedded, so to speak in its socio-economic DNA, at the core of which is the wage-labour system. During the past thirty years, however, it has become ever-more frenzied.

For almost three decades after World War II, during the post-war economic “boom”, profits, markets and employment continued to grow. This was the heyday of the car industry in Australia, as in many other countries.

But from the end of the 1960s, the rate of profit began to fall, driving a major restructuring of industry and a transformation in the global capitalist economy, which took its sharpest form in the increasingly dominant role of finance capital.

From the 1980s onwards, leveraged buyouts, mergers, takeovers and other forms of what became known as asset stripping assumed greater significance in the accumulation of profit. The pressure of financial markets drove the globalisation of production in the auto industry, as in many others, in the push for ever-cheaper sources of labour.

Corporations no longer operate as multi-national organisations, but have assumed a transnational form. Production is now organised and integrated across borders and continents. The national-based Ford operations in Australia, producing for a small, domestic market, have become unprofitable and therefore unviable, as far as the corporate elite is concerned, within this global corporate framework.

The rise and rise of finance capital has increasingly concentrated corporate ownership in the hands of major banks, hedge funds, investment funds and other financial institutions. Whereas in the past, their main sources of revenue were the profits of the corporations in which they had invested, now they are increasingly to be found in trading and speculation on financial markets in the shares of those companies. This is what lies behind the new paradigm based on increasing “shareholder value.” Profits are accumulated through financial transactions, speculation and parasitism, rather than through productive activities, such as making cars.

The ownership structure of Ford is a striking example. Listed among its major shareholders are the Evercore Trust Company, with $34 billion under its administration, Barclays Global Investors, the Bank of New York Mellon and the hedge fund investor Blackrock.

In this, Ford is typical of the world’s major corporations, forming part of a global network.

In October 2011, a major study provided a detailed analysis of this network. Its results were published in the New Scientist. After examining some 43,000 transnational corporations and the interconnections of their ownership structures, it found that the world economy was dominated by just 147 of them. In effect, the study concluded, “less than 1 percent of the companies were able to control 40 percent of the network.” Of the top 50 corporations, it found that 45 were banks, including such names as Barclays, JP Morgan Chase and UBS.

The domination of the world economy by finance has far-reaching implications. In essence, as Marx noted, finance capital represents the compelling motive of capital as a whole in its clearest form–money-making, in which “the process of production appears merely as an unavoidable link, as a necessary evil” for the achievement of this purpose.

In their ownership structures, the transnational corporations that dominate the world economy are simply a particular combination of various investment funds and banks. They enforce their demands for ever-increasing “shareholder value”, through the threat that those corporations that fail to deliver will be taken over and “restructured.”

These demands, which have been enormously intensified as a result of the global financial crisis that erupted in 2008, form the basis of the job-destruction, wage cutting, and closures now being carried out by Ford and other transnational corporations.

Only those firms that increase their international competitiveness against their rivals, through accessing cheaper labour and resources and intensifying the exploitation of their employees will be “rewarded” by the market.

Far from the capitalist market being a natural, democratic form of socio-economic organisation, which rationally allocates resources and wealth to society as a whole, it is the mechanism by which capital, spearheaded by global finance, exercises a dictatorship over the working class and the mass of the world’s people.

How is this dictatorship to be overturned? That is the key question confronting workers at Ford and around the world in the face of the social devastation now being unleashed against them.

Here it is necessary to recall a very decisive insight of Karl Marx. No historical problem, he explained, ever arises without, at the same time, the material conditions for its resolution also arising.

This insight points to the way forward. The very same processes that have led to the dictatorship of financial capital have, at the same time, created a potentially even more powerful force, an international working class, whose objective unity has been developed to the highest level in history by the globalisation of production and finance over the past three decades.

While the betrayals of the old organisations of the working class, the trade unions, the Labor, Stalinist and social democratic parties, have created great confusion and a deep-going crisis of perspective, the accelerating crisis of global capitalism will inevitably spark far-reaching social and class upheavals.

These struggles must be guided by a new perspective, corresponding to the global character of capitalist production itself. It must be based on the fight for the international unification of the working class in the struggle for political power, the overturn of the profit system and the establishment of socialism.

This perspective requires a conscious political break from the Labor and trade union leaderships, which seek to split the working class on national lines as they impose corporate demands for “international competitiveness.” The globalisation of production has completely shattered their old program of seeking reforms and concessions within the framework of the national state. They are no longer workers’ organisations in any meaningful sense of the term, but agencies of corporate management–the enforcers of the demands of the “market.”

In opposition to the dictates of finance capital and its agencies, workers must turn to the building of a revolutionary party that will lead the struggle for the working class to take political power into its own hands, establish a workers’ government and end the private ownership of the major banks and corporations. This will open the way for the complete re-organisation of world economy on socialist foundations. The alternative to the destructive and anarchic capitalist market is a democratically organised socialist economy, with production planned and organised to meet the needs of society and its members.

The fight for this perspective lies at the centre of the Socialist Equality Party’s 2013 election campaign. We urge Ford workers, and workers and young people around the country, to support our campaign, attend our public meetings and apply to join the SEP.

Authorised by Nick Beams, 113/55 Flemington Rd, North Melbourne 3051



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

The Ford closures, the market and the fight for socialism

0

 

By
Nick Beams–SEP Senate candidate for NSW

7 June 2013

From the moment Ford announced the October 2016 closure of its Australian manufacturing plants a well-oiled propaganda machine sprang into action.

The company insisted that, because it had become uncompetitive on global markets, its Australian operations were no longer viable. Prime Minister Julia Gillard voiced her sympathy for the Ford workers and their communities, before quickly passing on to next business.

For their part the trade union leaders, who had long before entered into agreements with the company to ensure an “orderly transition,” declared their focus would be firmly fixed on organising redundancy payouts.

The basic premise of this campaign is that, for Ford workers, there is simply no alternative–the market has spoken and that is that. The factories will shut down and their jobs will be destroyed. This comes after more than three decades of the unions insisting that the workforce had no choice but to accept round after round of layoffs and productivity speedups, all in the name of ensuring the company’s market “competitiveness.”

Like the millions of other workers around the world facing corporate “restructuring”, pay cuts and job destruction, Ford employees have expressed anger, fear, sadness, and deeply felt concern, not only for their own future, but for their communities and the fate of the younger generation just entering the workforce. At the same time, however, there is a widespread feeling that nothing can be done to prevent the plants’ slated closure and defend jobs.

This sentiment is the product of an ideological straitjacket that the trade unions have assiduously promoted for years. In order to break out of it, workers need to subject the concept of the “market” itself to critical analysis.

Early last century, the Polish-German Marxist, Rosa Luxemburg, explained that the great ideological power of the “market” derived from the fact that it appeared to function like the laws of the natural world. Commercial and financial crises, she wrote were “looked upon and treated by all concerned, by all of society, as something beyond the sphere of human volition and beyond human control.”

Luxemburg’s analysis has lost none of its relevance. The mystifications of the market can only be dispelled by laying bare its operations.

According to the “common sense” definition provided by Wikipedia, the market “facilitates trade and the distribution of the resources of society.” This definition covers over the fact that the market operates, not in society in general, but in a very specific form of socio-economic organisation, capitalism.

The essential, and defining, feature of capitalist society is its fundamental division into two major classes: the working class, which has no access to the means of production and is forced to sell its labour power or capacity to work in order to live; and the capitalist class, the owners of the means of production, whose wealth is now embodied in giant corporations.

Markets existed before capitalism. But the market only became the dominant form of socio-economic organisation with the rise of capitalism, where the mode of production is characterised by the sale and purchase of labour power.

Wage labour is the essential social relation of capitalism, because it is the means by which the capitalist class, the owners of the means of production, appropriate the surplus created by the labour of the working class in the form of profit. The origins of this surplus lie in the difference between the wages paid to workers for the sale of their labour power, and the value of the commodities they produce in the course of the labour process.

Society is not, therefore, a unified whole, but is comprised of two social classes with fundamentally antagonistic class interests.

The labour of the working class produces all the wealth and resources in society. But the working class, comprising the overwhelming majority of the population, has absolutely no control over the distribution of the products of its own labour.

The wealth workers have produced does not belong to them. It belongs to the companies–in the case of the auto industry, giant transnational corporations–that employ them. What these corporations do is not determined by the drive to allocate socially-produced wealth to meet society’s needs, but by the struggle to appropriate the largest possible private profit.

The market is one of the key economic mechanisms through which this struggle is waged.

Each corporation fights in the market to maximise its profits against its rivals. The “winners” in this war of each against all are those best able to reduce their production costs below those of their rivals, or to develop new products, so that their market share, and therefore profit, increases. But the war is never ending. As soon as one round of cost-cutting is put in place, rival corporations develop new measures to intensify their efforts to recapture lost positions.

This struggle has characterised the capitalist mode of production from its birth. It is embedded, so to speak in its socio-economic DNA, at the core of which is the wage-labour system. During the past thirty years, however, it has become ever-more frenzied.

For almost three decades after World War II, during the post-war economic “boom”, profits, markets and employment continued to grow. This was the heyday of the car industry in Australia, as in many other countries.

But from the end of the 1960s, the rate of profit began to fall, driving a major restructuring of industry and a transformation in the global capitalist economy, which took its sharpest form in the increasingly dominant role of finance capital.

From the 1980s onwards, leveraged buyouts, mergers, takeovers and other forms of what became known as asset stripping assumed greater significance in the accumulation of profit. The pressure of financial markets drove the globalisation of production in the auto industry, as in many others, in the push for ever-cheaper sources of labour.

Corporations no longer operate as multi-national organisations, but have assumed a transnational form. Production is now organised and integrated across borders and continents. The national-based Ford operations in Australia, producing for a small, domestic market, have become unprofitable and therefore unviable, as far as the corporate elite is concerned, within this global corporate framework.

The rise and rise of finance capital has increasingly concentrated corporate ownership in the hands of major banks, hedge funds, investment funds and other financial institutions. Whereas in the past, their main sources of revenue were the profits of the corporations in which they had invested, now they are increasingly to be found in trading and speculation on financial markets in the shares of those companies. This is what lies behind the new paradigm based on increasing “shareholder value.” Profits are accumulated through financial transactions, speculation and parasitism, rather than through productive activities, such as making cars.

The ownership structure of Ford is a striking example. Listed among its major shareholders are the Evercore Trust Company, with $34 billion under its administration, Barclays Global Investors, the Bank of New York Mellon and the hedge fund investor Blackrock.

In this, Ford is typical of the world’s major corporations, forming part of a global network.

In October 2011, a major study provided a detailed analysis of this network. Its results were published in the New Scientist. After examining some 43,000 transnational corporations and the interconnections of their ownership structures, it found that the world economy was dominated by just 147 of them. In effect, the study concluded, “less than 1 percent of the companies were able to control 40 percent of the network.” Of the top 50 corporations, it found that 45 were banks, including such names as Barclays, JP Morgan Chase and UBS.

The domination of the world economy by finance has far-reaching implications. In essence, as Marx noted, finance capital represents the compelling motive of capital as a whole in its clearest form–money-making, in which “the process of production appears merely as an unavoidable link, as a necessary evil” for the achievement of this purpose.

In their ownership structures, the transnational corporations that dominate the world economy are simply a particular combination of various investment funds and banks. They enforce their demands for ever-increasing “shareholder value”, through the threat that those corporations that fail to deliver will be taken over and “restructured.”

These demands, which have been enormously intensified as a result of the global financial crisis that erupted in 2008, form the basis of the job-destruction, wage cutting, and closures now being carried out by Ford and other transnational corporations.

Only those firms that increase their international competitiveness against their rivals, through accessing cheaper labour and resources and intensifying the exploitation of their employees will be “rewarded” by the market.

Far from the capitalist market being a natural, democratic form of socio-economic organisation, which rationally allocates resources and wealth to society as a whole, it is the mechanism by which capital, spearheaded by global finance, exercises a dictatorship over the working class and the mass of the world’s people.

How is this dictatorship to be overturned? That is the key question confronting workers at Ford and around the world in the face of the social devastation now being unleashed against them.

Here it is necessary to recall a very decisive insight of Karl Marx. No historical problem, he explained, ever arises without, at the same time, the material conditions for its resolution also arising.

This insight points to the way forward. The very same processes that have led to the dictatorship of financial capital have, at the same time, created a potentially even more powerful force, an international working class, whose objective unity has been developed to the highest level in history by the globalisation of production and finance over the past three decades.

While the betrayals of the old organisations of the working class, the trade unions, the Labor, Stalinist and social democratic parties, have created great confusion and a deep-going crisis of perspective, the accelerating crisis of global capitalism will inevitably spark far-reaching social and class upheavals.

These struggles must be guided by a new perspective, corresponding to the global character of capitalist production itself. It must be based on the fight for the international unification of the working class in the struggle for political power, the overturn of the profit system and the establishment of socialism.

This perspective requires a conscious political break from the Labor and trade union leaderships, which seek to split the working class on national lines as they impose corporate demands for “international competitiveness.” The globalisation of production has completely shattered their old program of seeking reforms and concessions within the framework of the national state. They are no longer workers’ organisations in any meaningful sense of the term, but agencies of corporate management–the enforcers of the demands of the “market.”

In opposition to the dictates of finance capital and its agencies, workers must turn to the building of a revolutionary party that will lead the struggle for the working class to take political power into its own hands, establish a workers’ government and end the private ownership of the major banks and corporations. This will open the way for the complete re-organisation of world economy on socialist foundations. The alternative to the destructive and anarchic capitalist market is a democratically organised socialist economy, with production planned and organised to meet the needs of society and its members.

The fight for this perspective lies at the centre of the Socialist Equality Party’s 2013 election campaign. We urge Ford workers, and workers and young people around the country, to support our campaign, attend our public meetings and apply to join the SEP.

Authorised by Nick Beams, 113/55 Flemington Rd, North Melbourne 3051



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

The Ford closures, the market and the fight for socialism

0

 

By
Nick Beams–SEP Senate candidate for NSW

7 June 2013

From the moment Ford announced the October 2016 closure of its Australian manufacturing plants a well-oiled propaganda machine sprang into action.

The company insisted that, because it had become uncompetitive on global markets, its Australian operations were no longer viable. Prime Minister Julia Gillard voiced her sympathy for the Ford workers and their communities, before quickly passing on to next business.

For their part the trade union leaders, who had long before entered into agreements with the company to ensure an “orderly transition,” declared their focus would be firmly fixed on organising redundancy payouts.

The basic premise of this campaign is that, for Ford workers, there is simply no alternative–the market has spoken and that is that. The factories will shut down and their jobs will be destroyed. This comes after more than three decades of the unions insisting that the workforce had no choice but to accept round after round of layoffs and productivity speedups, all in the name of ensuring the company’s market “competitiveness.”

Like the millions of other workers around the world facing corporate “restructuring”, pay cuts and job destruction, Ford employees have expressed anger, fear, sadness, and deeply felt concern, not only for their own future, but for their communities and the fate of the younger generation just entering the workforce. At the same time, however, there is a widespread feeling that nothing can be done to prevent the plants’ slated closure and defend jobs.

This sentiment is the product of an ideological straitjacket that the trade unions have assiduously promoted for years. In order to break out of it, workers need to subject the concept of the “market” itself to critical analysis.

Early last century, the Polish-German Marxist, Rosa Luxemburg, explained that the great ideological power of the “market” derived from the fact that it appeared to function like the laws of the natural world. Commercial and financial crises, she wrote were “looked upon and treated by all concerned, by all of society, as something beyond the sphere of human volition and beyond human control.”

Luxemburg’s analysis has lost none of its relevance. The mystifications of the market can only be dispelled by laying bare its operations.

According to the “common sense” definition provided by Wikipedia, the market “facilitates trade and the distribution of the resources of society.” This definition covers over the fact that the market operates, not in society in general, but in a very specific form of socio-economic organisation, capitalism.

The essential, and defining, feature of capitalist society is its fundamental division into two major classes: the working class, which has no access to the means of production and is forced to sell its labour power or capacity to work in order to live; and the capitalist class, the owners of the means of production, whose wealth is now embodied in giant corporations.

Markets existed before capitalism. But the market only became the dominant form of socio-economic organisation with the rise of capitalism, where the mode of production is characterised by the sale and purchase of labour power.

Wage labour is the essential social relation of capitalism, because it is the means by which the capitalist class, the owners of the means of production, appropriate the surplus created by the labour of the working class in the form of profit. The origins of this surplus lie in the difference between the wages paid to workers for the sale of their labour power, and the value of the commodities they produce in the course of the labour process.

Society is not, therefore, a unified whole, but is comprised of two social classes with fundamentally antagonistic class interests.

The labour of the working class produces all the wealth and resources in society. But the working class, comprising the overwhelming majority of the population, has absolutely no control over the distribution of the products of its own labour.

The wealth workers have produced does not belong to them. It belongs to the companies–in the case of the auto industry, giant transnational corporations–that employ them. What these corporations do is not determined by the drive to allocate socially-produced wealth to meet society’s needs, but by the struggle to appropriate the largest possible private profit.

The market is one of the key economic mechanisms through which this struggle is waged.

Each corporation fights in the market to maximise its profits against its rivals. The “winners” in this war of each against all are those best able to reduce their production costs below those of their rivals, or to develop new products, so that their market share, and therefore profit, increases. But the war is never ending. As soon as one round of cost-cutting is put in place, rival corporations develop new measures to intensify their efforts to recapture lost positions.

This struggle has characterised the capitalist mode of production from its birth. It is embedded, so to speak in its socio-economic DNA, at the core of which is the wage-labour system. During the past thirty years, however, it has become ever-more frenzied.

For almost three decades after World War II, during the post-war economic “boom”, profits, markets and employment continued to grow. This was the heyday of the car industry in Australia, as in many other countries.

But from the end of the 1960s, the rate of profit began to fall, driving a major restructuring of industry and a transformation in the global capitalist economy, which took its sharpest form in the increasingly dominant role of finance capital.

From the 1980s onwards, leveraged buyouts, mergers, takeovers and other forms of what became known as asset stripping assumed greater significance in the accumulation of profit. The pressure of financial markets drove the globalisation of production in the auto industry, as in many others, in the push for ever-cheaper sources of labour.

Corporations no longer operate as multi-national organisations, but have assumed a transnational form. Production is now organised and integrated across borders and continents. The national-based Ford operations in Australia, producing for a small, domestic market, have become unprofitable and therefore unviable, as far as the corporate elite is concerned, within this global corporate framework.

The rise and rise of finance capital has increasingly concentrated corporate ownership in the hands of major banks, hedge funds, investment funds and other financial institutions. Whereas in the past, their main sources of revenue were the profits of the corporations in which they had invested, now they are increasingly to be found in trading and speculation on financial markets in the shares of those companies. This is what lies behind the new paradigm based on increasing “shareholder value.” Profits are accumulated through financial transactions, speculation and parasitism, rather than through productive activities, such as making cars.

The ownership structure of Ford is a striking example. Listed among its major shareholders are the Evercore Trust Company, with $34 billion under its administration, Barclays Global Investors, the Bank of New York Mellon and the hedge fund investor Blackrock.

In this, Ford is typical of the world’s major corporations, forming part of a global network.

In October 2011, a major study provided a detailed analysis of this network. Its results were published in the New Scientist. After examining some 43,000 transnational corporations and the interconnections of their ownership structures, it found that the world economy was dominated by just 147 of them. In effect, the study concluded, “less than 1 percent of the companies were able to control 40 percent of the network.” Of the top 50 corporations, it found that 45 were banks, including such names as Barclays, JP Morgan Chase and UBS.

The domination of the world economy by finance has far-reaching implications. In essence, as Marx noted, finance capital represents the compelling motive of capital as a whole in its clearest form–money-making, in which “the process of production appears merely as an unavoidable link, as a necessary evil” for the achievement of this purpose.

In their ownership structures, the transnational corporations that dominate the world economy are simply a particular combination of various investment funds and banks. They enforce their demands for ever-increasing “shareholder value”, through the threat that those corporations that fail to deliver will be taken over and “restructured.”

These demands, which have been enormously intensified as a result of the global financial crisis that erupted in 2008, form the basis of the job-destruction, wage cutting, and closures now being carried out by Ford and other transnational corporations.

Only those firms that increase their international competitiveness against their rivals, through accessing cheaper labour and resources and intensifying the exploitation of their employees will be “rewarded” by the market.

Far from the capitalist market being a natural, democratic form of socio-economic organisation, which rationally allocates resources and wealth to society as a whole, it is the mechanism by which capital, spearheaded by global finance, exercises a dictatorship over the working class and the mass of the world’s people.

How is this dictatorship to be overturned? That is the key question confronting workers at Ford and around the world in the face of the social devastation now being unleashed against them.

Here it is necessary to recall a very decisive insight of Karl Marx. No historical problem, he explained, ever arises without, at the same time, the material conditions for its resolution also arising.

This insight points to the way forward. The very same processes that have led to the dictatorship of financial capital have, at the same time, created a potentially even more powerful force, an international working class, whose objective unity has been developed to the highest level in history by the globalisation of production and finance over the past three decades.

While the betrayals of the old organisations of the working class, the trade unions, the Labor, Stalinist and social democratic parties, have created great confusion and a deep-going crisis of perspective, the accelerating crisis of global capitalism will inevitably spark far-reaching social and class upheavals.

These struggles must be guided by a new perspective, corresponding to the global character of capitalist production itself. It must be based on the fight for the international unification of the working class in the struggle for political power, the overturn of the profit system and the establishment of socialism.

This perspective requires a conscious political break from the Labor and trade union leaderships, which seek to split the working class on national lines as they impose corporate demands for “international competitiveness.” The globalisation of production has completely shattered their old program of seeking reforms and concessions within the framework of the national state. They are no longer workers’ organisations in any meaningful sense of the term, but agencies of corporate management–the enforcers of the demands of the “market.”

In opposition to the dictates of finance capital and its agencies, workers must turn to the building of a revolutionary party that will lead the struggle for the working class to take political power into its own hands, establish a workers’ government and end the private ownership of the major banks and corporations. This will open the way for the complete re-organisation of world economy on socialist foundations. The alternative to the destructive and anarchic capitalist market is a democratically organised socialist economy, with production planned and organised to meet the needs of society and its members.

The fight for this perspective lies at the centre of the Socialist Equality Party’s 2013 election campaign. We urge Ford workers, and workers and young people around the country, to support our campaign, attend our public meetings and apply to join the SEP.

Authorised by Nick Beams, 113/55 Flemington Rd, North Melbourne 3051



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

Philadelphia building collapse kills six

0

 

By
Matthew MacEgan

7 June 2013

On Wednesday, June 5, a vacant four-story building being demolished on Market Street on the western edge of downtown Philadelphia collapsed, raining debris onto a neighboring Salvation Army thrift store and the surrounding pedestrian areas. Six people were killed, 14 others were trapped under the wreckage. For weeks, witnesses of the demolition practices had predicted the collapse.

The building once housed a first-floor sandwich shop and apartments above, but authorities report that the building housed a pornographic book and video shop. While the Salvation Army store sat upon one side of the wrecked building, the other side formerly saw another adult book store and Philadelphia’s last remaining X-rated movie theater, both of which were also demolished during the last few months.

The property owner to which the demolition permit was issued, STB Investments Corp., is linked to prominent business man and developer Richard Basciano, who was formerly best known as a “porn king” in New York. The block and surrounding area have been targeted for extensive renovation plans including the introduction of several new retail stores and apartments.

At 10:45 a.m., bystanders reported hearing a thunderous boom that shook the ground and knocked pedestrians off of their feet. One person reported that he could hear screams coming from inside the Salvation Army building as an entire wall of debris and bricks plummeted down through the roof, destroying it. A man in his office across the street reported hearing “a rumbling, a very unusual sound.” All he could see was a plume of dust rising from the debris when he reached his window. Others reported hearing two large bangs or explosions.

One woman was rescued from the rubble two hours after the destruction when rescuers heard her voice coming from within. The search for survivors continued into the night, with rescuers using buckets and their bare hands to move bricks and other building materials. The last survivor, a 61-year-old woman, was pulled from the scene after 12 long hours trapped under the wreckage. She was reportedly able to squeeze one of the rescuing hands as they were digging before she was rushed to a nearby hospital. Officials from the Department of Labor and Occupational Safety and Health Administration were also on the scene.

While the names of the victims have not yet been released, authorities stated that five men and one 35-year-old woman were killed. Survivors were taken to hospitals with mostly minor injuries. Five were treated and released by Wednesday evening. Police used the nearby Mutter Museum, a popular tourist attraction that houses medical oddities, as a staging area for the rescue operation.

Witnesses had been watching the site for weeks, questioning the methods being used by the demolition team. Patrick Glynn, a roofer, told reporters that he had felt that a collapse was inevitable. “For weeks they’ve been standing on the edge, knocking bricks off,” he reported. “You could just see it was ready to go at any time.” Glynn and his coworker were among the first responders to the scene, helping to pull out three survivors from the rubble. A window washer, Steve Cramer, working across the street for several days, claimed that the demolition crew had left 30 feet of a dividing wall standing without any kind of support or braces, compromising the integrity of the building.

Evidence that has emerged from the scene strongly suggests that the cause of the tragedy is due to cost-cutting by the building’s owner, who hired a third-rate contractor that recklessly dug into the building. The city, which granted the permits for the demolition and made no effort to monitor the methods being used, is also to blame.

Stephen Estrin, a Florida contractor who has testified as an expert at several trials involving building collapses, told the Associated Press that the demolition of an inner-city masonry building such as this “would normally be done manually because of the inherent risk–predictable if things are not done very slowly and very carefully–of a collapse.”

Estrin pointed out the fact that a claw device was reported on the scene, noting, “One of the problems with claw work is it sets up a vibration in the walls.” A construction worker across the street reported that he saw a crane remove a supporting beam from the front of the building just as the wall gave way. Another witness stated that a backhoe hit the rear side of the building at about the same time.

Police have described the collapse as an “industrial accident,” and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration has also referred to the scene as an accident. The building had no existing violations, and Campbell Construction, which was handling the demolition, had permits for the work it was doing. “No violations, no complaints that we’re aware of, and all permits were valid,” Philadelphia mayor Michael Nutter told reporters Thursday.

However, demolition firm owner Griffin Campbell does not have a clean record. Evidence has surfaced of Campbell’s many legal and financial troubles. He was charged in 2005 with dealing crack cocaine near a playground. Reportedly, that charge was dismissed after prosecutors misplaced the evidence. In 2009, he pleaded guilty to insurance fraud, and in 2007, he was acquitted of aggravated assault and related offenses. He also filed for bankruptcy protection twice in 2010, the first of which was dismissed after he failed to follow through on a repayment plan.

Building owner Richard Basciano was an associate and friend and one-time estate executor of slumlord Sam Rappaport. Following Rappaport’s lead, Basciano bought up several buildings on Market Street, investing nothing and waiting for a big payday. A reply to a local online news source reads: “Basciano is a piece of garbage.”



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

Philadelphia building collapse kills six

0

 

By
Matthew MacEgan

7 June 2013

On Wednesday, June 5, a vacant four-story building being demolished on Market Street on the western edge of downtown Philadelphia collapsed, raining debris onto a neighboring Salvation Army thrift store and the surrounding pedestrian areas. Six people were killed, 14 others were trapped under the wreckage. For weeks, witnesses of the demolition practices had predicted the collapse.

The building once housed a first-floor sandwich shop and apartments above, but authorities report that the building housed a pornographic book and video shop. While the Salvation Army store sat upon one side of the wrecked building, the other side formerly saw another adult book store and Philadelphia’s last remaining X-rated movie theater, both of which were also demolished during the last few months.

The property owner to which the demolition permit was issued, STB Investments Corp., is linked to prominent business man and developer Richard Basciano, who was formerly best known as a “porn king” in New York. The block and surrounding area have been targeted for extensive renovation plans including the introduction of several new retail stores and apartments.

At 10:45 a.m., bystanders reported hearing a thunderous boom that shook the ground and knocked pedestrians off of their feet. One person reported that he could hear screams coming from inside the Salvation Army building as an entire wall of debris and bricks plummeted down through the roof, destroying it. A man in his office across the street reported hearing “a rumbling, a very unusual sound.” All he could see was a plume of dust rising from the debris when he reached his window. Others reported hearing two large bangs or explosions.

One woman was rescued from the rubble two hours after the destruction when rescuers heard her voice coming from within. The search for survivors continued into the night, with rescuers using buckets and their bare hands to move bricks and other building materials. The last survivor, a 61-year-old woman, was pulled from the scene after 12 long hours trapped under the wreckage. She was reportedly able to squeeze one of the rescuing hands as they were digging before she was rushed to a nearby hospital. Officials from the Department of Labor and Occupational Safety and Health Administration were also on the scene.

While the names of the victims have not yet been released, authorities stated that five men and one 35-year-old woman were killed. Survivors were taken to hospitals with mostly minor injuries. Five were treated and released by Wednesday evening. Police used the nearby Mutter Museum, a popular tourist attraction that houses medical oddities, as a staging area for the rescue operation.

Witnesses had been watching the site for weeks, questioning the methods being used by the demolition team. Patrick Glynn, a roofer, told reporters that he had felt that a collapse was inevitable. “For weeks they’ve been standing on the edge, knocking bricks off,” he reported. “You could just see it was ready to go at any time.” Glynn and his coworker were among the first responders to the scene, helping to pull out three survivors from the rubble. A window washer, Steve Cramer, working across the street for several days, claimed that the demolition crew had left 30 feet of a dividing wall standing without any kind of support or braces, compromising the integrity of the building.

Evidence that has emerged from the scene strongly suggests that the cause of the tragedy is due to cost-cutting by the building’s owner, who hired a third-rate contractor that recklessly dug into the building. The city, which granted the permits for the demolition and made no effort to monitor the methods being used, is also to blame.

Stephen Estrin, a Florida contractor who has testified as an expert at several trials involving building collapses, told the Associated Press that the demolition of an inner-city masonry building such as this “would normally be done manually because of the inherent risk–predictable if things are not done very slowly and very carefully–of a collapse.”

Estrin pointed out the fact that a claw device was reported on the scene, noting, “One of the problems with claw work is it sets up a vibration in the walls.” A construction worker across the street reported that he saw a crane remove a supporting beam from the front of the building just as the wall gave way. Another witness stated that a backhoe hit the rear side of the building at about the same time.

Police have described the collapse as an “industrial accident,” and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration has also referred to the scene as an accident. The building had no existing violations, and Campbell Construction, which was handling the demolition, had permits for the work it was doing. “No violations, no complaints that we’re aware of, and all permits were valid,” Philadelphia mayor Michael Nutter told reporters Thursday.

However, demolition firm owner Griffin Campbell does not have a clean record. Evidence has surfaced of Campbell’s many legal and financial troubles. He was charged in 2005 with dealing crack cocaine near a playground. Reportedly, that charge was dismissed after prosecutors misplaced the evidence. In 2009, he pleaded guilty to insurance fraud, and in 2007, he was acquitted of aggravated assault and related offenses. He also filed for bankruptcy protection twice in 2010, the first of which was dismissed after he failed to follow through on a repayment plan.

Building owner Richard Basciano was an associate and friend and one-time estate executor of slumlord Sam Rappaport. Following Rappaport’s lead, Basciano bought up several buildings on Market Street, investing nothing and waiting for a big payday. A reply to a local online news source reads: “Basciano is a piece of garbage.”



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

Philadelphia building collapse kills six

0

 

By
Matthew MacEgan

7 June 2013

On Wednesday, June 5, a vacant four-story building being demolished on Market Street on the western edge of downtown Philadelphia collapsed, raining debris onto a neighboring Salvation Army thrift store and the surrounding pedestrian areas. Six people were killed, 14 others were trapped under the wreckage. For weeks, witnesses of the demolition practices had predicted the collapse.

The building once housed a first-floor sandwich shop and apartments above, but authorities report that the building housed a pornographic book and video shop. While the Salvation Army store sat upon one side of the wrecked building, the other side formerly saw another adult book store and Philadelphia’s last remaining X-rated movie theater, both of which were also demolished during the last few months.

The property owner to which the demolition permit was issued, STB Investments Corp., is linked to prominent business man and developer Richard Basciano, who was formerly best known as a “porn king” in New York. The block and surrounding area have been targeted for extensive renovation plans including the introduction of several new retail stores and apartments.

At 10:45 a.m., bystanders reported hearing a thunderous boom that shook the ground and knocked pedestrians off of their feet. One person reported that he could hear screams coming from inside the Salvation Army building as an entire wall of debris and bricks plummeted down through the roof, destroying it. A man in his office across the street reported hearing “a rumbling, a very unusual sound.” All he could see was a plume of dust rising from the debris when he reached his window. Others reported hearing two large bangs or explosions.

One woman was rescued from the rubble two hours after the destruction when rescuers heard her voice coming from within. The search for survivors continued into the night, with rescuers using buckets and their bare hands to move bricks and other building materials. The last survivor, a 61-year-old woman, was pulled from the scene after 12 long hours trapped under the wreckage. She was reportedly able to squeeze one of the rescuing hands as they were digging before she was rushed to a nearby hospital. Officials from the Department of Labor and Occupational Safety and Health Administration were also on the scene.

While the names of the victims have not yet been released, authorities stated that five men and one 35-year-old woman were killed. Survivors were taken to hospitals with mostly minor injuries. Five were treated and released by Wednesday evening. Police used the nearby Mutter Museum, a popular tourist attraction that houses medical oddities, as a staging area for the rescue operation.

Witnesses had been watching the site for weeks, questioning the methods being used by the demolition team. Patrick Glynn, a roofer, told reporters that he had felt that a collapse was inevitable. “For weeks they’ve been standing on the edge, knocking bricks off,” he reported. “You could just see it was ready to go at any time.” Glynn and his coworker were among the first responders to the scene, helping to pull out three survivors from the rubble. A window washer, Steve Cramer, working across the street for several days, claimed that the demolition crew had left 30 feet of a dividing wall standing without any kind of support or braces, compromising the integrity of the building.

Evidence that has emerged from the scene strongly suggests that the cause of the tragedy is due to cost-cutting by the building’s owner, who hired a third-rate contractor that recklessly dug into the building. The city, which granted the permits for the demolition and made no effort to monitor the methods being used, is also to blame.

Stephen Estrin, a Florida contractor who has testified as an expert at several trials involving building collapses, told the Associated Press that the demolition of an inner-city masonry building such as this “would normally be done manually because of the inherent risk–predictable if things are not done very slowly and very carefully–of a collapse.”

Estrin pointed out the fact that a claw device was reported on the scene, noting, “One of the problems with claw work is it sets up a vibration in the walls.” A construction worker across the street reported that he saw a crane remove a supporting beam from the front of the building just as the wall gave way. Another witness stated that a backhoe hit the rear side of the building at about the same time.

Police have described the collapse as an “industrial accident,” and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration has also referred to the scene as an accident. The building had no existing violations, and Campbell Construction, which was handling the demolition, had permits for the work it was doing. “No violations, no complaints that we’re aware of, and all permits were valid,” Philadelphia mayor Michael Nutter told reporters Thursday.

However, demolition firm owner Griffin Campbell does not have a clean record. Evidence has surfaced of Campbell’s many legal and financial troubles. He was charged in 2005 with dealing crack cocaine near a playground. Reportedly, that charge was dismissed after prosecutors misplaced the evidence. In 2009, he pleaded guilty to insurance fraud, and in 2007, he was acquitted of aggravated assault and related offenses. He also filed for bankruptcy protection twice in 2010, the first of which was dismissed after he failed to follow through on a repayment plan.

Building owner Richard Basciano was an associate and friend and one-time estate executor of slumlord Sam Rappaport. Following Rappaport’s lead, Basciano bought up several buildings on Market Street, investing nothing and waiting for a big payday. A reply to a local online news source reads: “Basciano is a piece of garbage.”



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

Obama administration collecting phone records of tens of millions of Americans

0

 

By
Joseph Kishore

7 June 2013

The Obama administration is engaged in a secret and illegal dragnet to accumulate detailed phone records of tens and perhaps hundreds of millions of US residents in a program organized by the National Security Agency (NSA).

On Wednesday, the British Guardian newspaper published a secret court order, issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, instructing a branch of the telecommunications giant Verizon to turn over, on an ongoing and daily basis, all “metadata” relating to the calls of all of its customers. Verizon has some 121 million customers, and the branch specifically targeted–Verizon Business Services–has 10 million lines.

The metadata of phone calls includes the phone numbers of the caller and the recipient, location data (such as the nearest cell phone tower or GPS data), and the time and duration of the call. This information would allow the government to construct a detailed picture of the social, professional and political connections and gain insight into the daily activities of everyone whose phone number was covered by the order.

The order published by the Guardian applies for three months, from its date of issue in April of this year through July 19. According to the Washington Post, “An expert in this aspect of the law said Wednesday night that the order appears to be a routine renewal of a similar order first issued by the same court in 2006.”

In defending the spying program, Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein, the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, made a similar statement, saying that the order is “as far as I know… the exact three-month renewal of what has been the case for the past seven years.”

The official rational–apparently developed in secret legal memoranda prepared by the Obama administration–is that the program is authorized under the “business records” section of the Patriot Act. That act, signed into law less than a month after the 9/11 attacks, gives the government, with a rubber stamp from secret courts operating within the framework of the Foreign Intelligence Security Act (FISA), the power to require companies, libraries and other entities to turn over any “tangible things (including books, records, papers, documents and other items) “required” for an investigation to protect against international terrorism.”

The argument of the Obama administration is essentially that all telephone data is potentially relevant to investigations of “international terrorism” and should be seized.

There is no doubt that many more companies besides Verizon are involved. In 2012 alone, there were 212 “business records” requests to FISA courts, though the content of these requests is not known.

In 2006, USA Today first revealed that the NSA under the Bush administration had launched a secret program to collect phone data from Verizon, AT&T and BellSouth, which together account for some 224 million customers–80 percent of landlines and 50 percent of wireless users in the US. This program was one in a series of illegal spying actions, including a warrantless wiretapping program targeting US citizens, also run by the NSA.

In response to public opposition, the Bush administration was forced to nominally end parts of the NSA program, while continuing them in different forms. In 2008, then-Senator Barack Obama was among those who voted for legislation that modified the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to codify authority for these illegal actions.

It is evident that the earlier NSA program has continued and has likely been expanded under the Obama administration.

The accumulation of a vast database of phone records is only part of a systematic drive to gather as much information as possible on everyone, US citizens and non-citizens alike. On Thursday, the Washington Post reported that the NSA and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) “are tapping directly into the central servers of nine US Internet companies, extracting audio, video, photographs, e-mails, documents and connection logs that enable analysts to trace a person’s movements and contacts over time.”

According to the Post, the companies involved in handing over information include Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, Paltalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube and Apple.

It must be assumed that the government has access to every electronic Internet and phone communication, including the actual content of calls, which are not included in the “metadata.” The Guardian cited Russell Tice, a retired NSA intelligence analyst turned whistleblower, as saying, “What is going on is much larger and more systemic than anything anyone has ever suspected or imagined.”

Tice said he believes the NSA now has the ability to record the content of calls. “I figured it would probably be about 2015” before the agency had the capacity “to collect all digital communications word for word. But I think I’m wrong. I think they have it right now.”

All of this is being carried out in flagrant violation of constitutional prohibitions against unreasonable searches and seizures (the Fourth Amendment). The fact that these programs have been implemented in secret, behind the backs of the American people, is itself evidence that those responsible are well aware that they are illegal and massively unpopular.

The entire political establishment, Democratic and Republican, along with the mass media, is complicit in a conspiracy against the American people. There can be little doubt that the major media outlets in the US knew about the program and kept it concealed at the request of the Obama and Bush administrations. It is significant that the newspaper that leaked the FISA court order was not American, but British.

In response to the Guardian revelations, administration officials and leading figures in both political parties moved quickly to defend the program.

A senior administration official insisted that “all three branches of government are involved” in approving the spying and that Congress “is regularly and fully briefed on how it is used.” He declared that there is a “robust legal regime in place governing all activities conducted pursuant to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.”

Claims of a “robust legal regime” are a fraud. The FISA courts simply rubber stamp government requests for spying, approving virtually every submission.

Feinstein and Saxby Chambliss, the top Democrat and Republican, respectively, on the Senate Intelligence Committee, hastily organized a press conference Thursday morning. “This is just metadata,” Feinstein declared. “There is no content involved. In other words, no content of a communication.” She insisted that the program was “lawful” and that “it has been briefed to Congress.”

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat, urged everyone to “calm down and understand this isn’t anything that is brand new. It’s been going on for some seven years.”

The claim that the population should not be surprised, that there is “nothing to see here,” is belied by the fact that as recently as two months ago, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who oversees the NSA, was asked at a congressional hearing if the NSA collects data on Americans. “No sir… not wittingly,” he replied. NSA Director General Keith Alexander said last year, “We don’t hold data on US citizens.”

US Attorney General Eric Holder, in previously scheduled testimony Thursday before the Senate Justice Department Oversight and Budget Committee, brushed aside mildly-worded questions from some of the senators, declaring that he would answer questions on the NSA program and other recent spying scandals only behind closed doors.

The leaked court order on phone records is only the latest in a series of developments over the past six months exposing the advanced state of preparations for an American police state and the domination of the military-intelligence apparatus over political affairs in the US. These include:

* The leaked “White Paper” in February arguing that the president has the right to unilaterally and secretly order the assassinations of US citizens, along with statements from Holder indicating that such assassinations could be carried out within the country.

* The response to the Boston Marathon bombing in April, including the shut-down of the city under conditions of de facto martial law, followed by the FBI assassination of a key witness in the case.

* The revelation in May that the government has secretly seized the phone records of Associated Press reporters, followed by the report that the administration seized the emails of a Fox News reporter, having charged in a warrant request that he was criminally complicit in the leaking of classified information.

* The opening this week of the court martial of Bradley Manning, who is being prosecuted under the Espionage Act for leaking documents exposing war crimes committed by the US in Iraq and Afghanistan that had been covered up by the media.

As with every attack on democratic rights, the administration is seeking to justify its dragnet of phone records as a necessary part of the “war on terror.” The real target of these actions, however, is not “international terrorism,” but the working class. These police state measures will be employed against social and political opposition to the American financial aristocracy’s policies of austerity, poverty and war.



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

Obama administration collecting phone records of tens of millions of Americans

0

 

By
Joseph Kishore

7 June 2013

The Obama administration is engaged in a secret and illegal dragnet to accumulate detailed phone records of tens and perhaps hundreds of millions of US residents in a program organized by the National Security Agency (NSA).

On Wednesday, the British Guardian newspaper published a secret court order, issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, instructing a branch of the telecommunications giant Verizon to turn over, on an ongoing and daily basis, all “metadata” relating to the calls of all of its customers. Verizon has some 121 million customers, and the branch specifically targeted–Verizon Business Services–has 10 million lines.

The metadata of phone calls includes the phone numbers of the caller and the recipient, location data (such as the nearest cell phone tower or GPS data), and the time and duration of the call. This information would allow the government to construct a detailed picture of the social, professional and political connections and gain insight into the daily activities of everyone whose phone number was covered by the order.

The order published by the Guardian applies for three months, from its date of issue in April of this year through July 19. According to the Washington Post, “An expert in this aspect of the law said Wednesday night that the order appears to be a routine renewal of a similar order first issued by the same court in 2006.”

In defending the spying program, Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein, the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, made a similar statement, saying that the order is “as far as I know… the exact three-month renewal of what has been the case for the past seven years.”

The official rational–apparently developed in secret legal memoranda prepared by the Obama administration–is that the program is authorized under the “business records” section of the Patriot Act. That act, signed into law less than a month after the 9/11 attacks, gives the government, with a rubber stamp from secret courts operating within the framework of the Foreign Intelligence Security Act (FISA), the power to require companies, libraries and other entities to turn over any “tangible things (including books, records, papers, documents and other items) “required” for an investigation to protect against international terrorism.”

The argument of the Obama administration is essentially that all telephone data is potentially relevant to investigations of “international terrorism” and should be seized.

There is no doubt that many more companies besides Verizon are involved. In 2012 alone, there were 212 “business records” requests to FISA courts, though the content of these requests is not known.

In 2006, USA Today first revealed that the NSA under the Bush administration had launched a secret program to collect phone data from Verizon, AT&T and BellSouth, which together account for some 224 million customers–80 percent of landlines and 50 percent of wireless users in the US. This program was one in a series of illegal spying actions, including a warrantless wiretapping program targeting US citizens, also run by the NSA.

In response to public opposition, the Bush administration was forced to nominally end parts of the NSA program, while continuing them in different forms. In 2008, then-Senator Barack Obama was among those who voted for legislation that modified the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to codify authority for these illegal actions.

It is evident that the earlier NSA program has continued and has likely been expanded under the Obama administration.

The accumulation of a vast database of phone records is only part of a systematic drive to gather as much information as possible on everyone, US citizens and non-citizens alike. On Thursday, the Washington Post reported that the NSA and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) “are tapping directly into the central servers of nine US Internet companies, extracting audio, video, photographs, e-mails, documents and connection logs that enable analysts to trace a person’s movements and contacts over time.”

According to the Post, the companies involved in handing over information include Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, Paltalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube and Apple.

It must be assumed that the government has access to every electronic Internet and phone communication, including the actual content of calls, which are not included in the “metadata.” The Guardian cited Russell Tice, a retired NSA intelligence analyst turned whistleblower, as saying, “What is going on is much larger and more systemic than anything anyone has ever suspected or imagined.”

Tice said he believes the NSA now has the ability to record the content of calls. “I figured it would probably be about 2015” before the agency had the capacity “to collect all digital communications word for word. But I think I’m wrong. I think they have it right now.”

All of this is being carried out in flagrant violation of constitutional prohibitions against unreasonable searches and seizures (the Fourth Amendment). The fact that these programs have been implemented in secret, behind the backs of the American people, is itself evidence that those responsible are well aware that they are illegal and massively unpopular.

The entire political establishment, Democratic and Republican, along with the mass media, is complicit in a conspiracy against the American people. There can be little doubt that the major media outlets in the US knew about the program and kept it concealed at the request of the Obama and Bush administrations. It is significant that the newspaper that leaked the FISA court order was not American, but British.

In response to the Guardian revelations, administration officials and leading figures in both political parties moved quickly to defend the program.

A senior administration official insisted that “all three branches of government are involved” in approving the spying and that Congress “is regularly and fully briefed on how it is used.” He declared that there is a “robust legal regime in place governing all activities conducted pursuant to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.”

Claims of a “robust legal regime” are a fraud. The FISA courts simply rubber stamp government requests for spying, approving virtually every submission.

Feinstein and Saxby Chambliss, the top Democrat and Republican, respectively, on the Senate Intelligence Committee, hastily organized a press conference Thursday morning. “This is just metadata,” Feinstein declared. “There is no content involved. In other words, no content of a communication.” She insisted that the program was “lawful” and that “it has been briefed to Congress.”

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat, urged everyone to “calm down and understand this isn’t anything that is brand new. It’s been going on for some seven years.”

The claim that the population should not be surprised, that there is “nothing to see here,” is belied by the fact that as recently as two months ago, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who oversees the NSA, was asked at a congressional hearing if the NSA collects data on Americans. “No sir… not wittingly,” he replied. NSA Director General Keith Alexander said last year, “We don’t hold data on US citizens.”

US Attorney General Eric Holder, in previously scheduled testimony Thursday before the Senate Justice Department Oversight and Budget Committee, brushed aside mildly-worded questions from some of the senators, declaring that he would answer questions on the NSA program and other recent spying scandals only behind closed doors.

The leaked court order on phone records is only the latest in a series of developments over the past six months exposing the advanced state of preparations for an American police state and the domination of the military-intelligence apparatus over political affairs in the US. These include:

* The leaked “White Paper” in February arguing that the president has the right to unilaterally and secretly order the assassinations of US citizens, along with statements from Holder indicating that such assassinations could be carried out within the country.

* The response to the Boston Marathon bombing in April, including the shut-down of the city under conditions of de facto martial law, followed by the FBI assassination of a key witness in the case.

* The revelation in May that the government has secretly seized the phone records of Associated Press reporters, followed by the report that the administration seized the emails of a Fox News reporter, having charged in a warrant request that he was criminally complicit in the leaking of classified information.

* The opening this week of the court martial of Bradley Manning, who is being prosecuted under the Espionage Act for leaking documents exposing war crimes committed by the US in Iraq and Afghanistan that had been covered up by the media.

As with every attack on democratic rights, the administration is seeking to justify its dragnet of phone records as a necessary part of the “war on terror.” The real target of these actions, however, is not “international terrorism,” but the working class. These police state measures will be employed against social and political opposition to the American financial aristocracy’s policies of austerity, poverty and war.



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

Obama administration collecting phone records of tens of millions of Americans

0

 

By
Joseph Kishore

7 June 2013

The Obama administration is engaged in a secret and illegal dragnet to accumulate detailed phone records of tens and perhaps hundreds of millions of US residents in a program organized by the National Security Agency (NSA).

On Wednesday, the British Guardian newspaper published a secret court order, issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, instructing a branch of the telecommunications giant Verizon to turn over, on an ongoing and daily basis, all “metadata” relating to the calls of all of its customers. Verizon has some 121 million customers, and the branch specifically targeted–Verizon Business Services–has 10 million lines.

The metadata of phone calls includes the phone numbers of the caller and the recipient, location data (such as the nearest cell phone tower or GPS data), and the time and duration of the call. This information would allow the government to construct a detailed picture of the social, professional and political connections and gain insight into the daily activities of everyone whose phone number was covered by the order.

The order published by the Guardian applies for three months, from its date of issue in April of this year through July 19. According to the Washington Post, “An expert in this aspect of the law said Wednesday night that the order appears to be a routine renewal of a similar order first issued by the same court in 2006.”

In defending the spying program, Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein, the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, made a similar statement, saying that the order is “as far as I know… the exact three-month renewal of what has been the case for the past seven years.”

The official rational–apparently developed in secret legal memoranda prepared by the Obama administration–is that the program is authorized under the “business records” section of the Patriot Act. That act, signed into law less than a month after the 9/11 attacks, gives the government, with a rubber stamp from secret courts operating within the framework of the Foreign Intelligence Security Act (FISA), the power to require companies, libraries and other entities to turn over any “tangible things (including books, records, papers, documents and other items) “required” for an investigation to protect against international terrorism.”

The argument of the Obama administration is essentially that all telephone data is potentially relevant to investigations of “international terrorism” and should be seized.

There is no doubt that many more companies besides Verizon are involved. In 2012 alone, there were 212 “business records” requests to FISA courts, though the content of these requests is not known.

In 2006, USA Today first revealed that the NSA under the Bush administration had launched a secret program to collect phone data from Verizon, AT&T and BellSouth, which together account for some 224 million customers–80 percent of landlines and 50 percent of wireless users in the US. This program was one in a series of illegal spying actions, including a warrantless wiretapping program targeting US citizens, also run by the NSA.

In response to public opposition, the Bush administration was forced to nominally end parts of the NSA program, while continuing them in different forms. In 2008, then-Senator Barack Obama was among those who voted for legislation that modified the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to codify authority for these illegal actions.

It is evident that the earlier NSA program has continued and has likely been expanded under the Obama administration.

The accumulation of a vast database of phone records is only part of a systematic drive to gather as much information as possible on everyone, US citizens and non-citizens alike. On Thursday, the Washington Post reported that the NSA and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) “are tapping directly into the central servers of nine US Internet companies, extracting audio, video, photographs, e-mails, documents and connection logs that enable analysts to trace a person’s movements and contacts over time.”

According to the Post, the companies involved in handing over information include Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, Paltalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube and Apple.

It must be assumed that the government has access to every electronic Internet and phone communication, including the actual content of calls, which are not included in the “metadata.” The Guardian cited Russell Tice, a retired NSA intelligence analyst turned whistleblower, as saying, “What is going on is much larger and more systemic than anything anyone has ever suspected or imagined.”

Tice said he believes the NSA now has the ability to record the content of calls. “I figured it would probably be about 2015” before the agency had the capacity “to collect all digital communications word for word. But I think I’m wrong. I think they have it right now.”

All of this is being carried out in flagrant violation of constitutional prohibitions against unreasonable searches and seizures (the Fourth Amendment). The fact that these programs have been implemented in secret, behind the backs of the American people, is itself evidence that those responsible are well aware that they are illegal and massively unpopular.

The entire political establishment, Democratic and Republican, along with the mass media, is complicit in a conspiracy against the American people. There can be little doubt that the major media outlets in the US knew about the program and kept it concealed at the request of the Obama and Bush administrations. It is significant that the newspaper that leaked the FISA court order was not American, but British.

In response to the Guardian revelations, administration officials and leading figures in both political parties moved quickly to defend the program.

A senior administration official insisted that “all three branches of government are involved” in approving the spying and that Congress “is regularly and fully briefed on how it is used.” He declared that there is a “robust legal regime in place governing all activities conducted pursuant to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.”

Claims of a “robust legal regime” are a fraud. The FISA courts simply rubber stamp government requests for spying, approving virtually every submission.

Feinstein and Saxby Chambliss, the top Democrat and Republican, respectively, on the Senate Intelligence Committee, hastily organized a press conference Thursday morning. “This is just metadata,” Feinstein declared. “There is no content involved. In other words, no content of a communication.” She insisted that the program was “lawful” and that “it has been briefed to Congress.”

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat, urged everyone to “calm down and understand this isn’t anything that is brand new. It’s been going on for some seven years.”

The claim that the population should not be surprised, that there is “nothing to see here,” is belied by the fact that as recently as two months ago, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who oversees the NSA, was asked at a congressional hearing if the NSA collects data on Americans. “No sir… not wittingly,” he replied. NSA Director General Keith Alexander said last year, “We don’t hold data on US citizens.”

US Attorney General Eric Holder, in previously scheduled testimony Thursday before the Senate Justice Department Oversight and Budget Committee, brushed aside mildly-worded questions from some of the senators, declaring that he would answer questions on the NSA program and other recent spying scandals only behind closed doors.

The leaked court order on phone records is only the latest in a series of developments over the past six months exposing the advanced state of preparations for an American police state and the domination of the military-intelligence apparatus over political affairs in the US. These include:

* The leaked “White Paper” in February arguing that the president has the right to unilaterally and secretly order the assassinations of US citizens, along with statements from Holder indicating that such assassinations could be carried out within the country.

* The response to the Boston Marathon bombing in April, including the shut-down of the city under conditions of de facto martial law, followed by the FBI assassination of a key witness in the case.

* The revelation in May that the government has secretly seized the phone records of Associated Press reporters, followed by the report that the administration seized the emails of a Fox News reporter, having charged in a warrant request that he was criminally complicit in the leaking of classified information.

* The opening this week of the court martial of Bradley Manning, who is being prosecuted under the Espionage Act for leaking documents exposing war crimes committed by the US in Iraq and Afghanistan that had been covered up by the media.

As with every attack on democratic rights, the administration is seeking to justify its dragnet of phone records as a necessary part of the “war on terror.” The real target of these actions, however, is not “international terrorism,” but the working class. These police state measures will be employed against social and political opposition to the American financial aristocracy’s policies of austerity, poverty and war.



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

New York City teacher evaluation program deepens attack on public education

0

 

By
Steve Light and Philip Guelpa

7 June 2013

On May 1, the New York State Education Department (SED) announced the final version of a teacher evaluation program for New York City, the product of a two-year negotiation between the city and the United Federation of Teachers (UFT), the union which represents public school teachers in the city. The deadline for negotiations, set for June 1, was imposed by the Democratic New York Governor Andrew Cuomo to complete his campaign to impose teacher evaluation schemes throughout the state.

Teacher evaluations, which rely heavily on standardized tests, are being used to facilitate teacher dismissals. They are one component of a nationwide strategy to dismantle public education, begun under George W. Bush as “No Child Left Behind” and continued by Barack Obama under the title “Race to the Top” (RTTT).

Teachers of art, music, physical education and other subjects are also to be subjected to written tests or to be evaluated with test scores from their school even if the scores are not from the subject they teach.

In New York City, Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s administration has carried out a massive attack on public schools, which has thus far included the closure of over 160 schools, the proliferation of private charter schools, increases in class sizes, and significant budget cuts. Major opposition to these actions has been expressed by teachers, parents, and students, but they have been pushed through by the Bloomberg administration following sham public hearings (see, “Parents, teachers and students oppose New York City school closings”).

But the city’s ruling elite are determined to escalate the attack. The New York Times on Friday published an editorial opinion in support of the evaluation system, titled “Better Teachers for New York City.” The article lauds the program, writing that “[t]he new evaluation system could make it easier to fire markedly poor performers.”

From the beginning, the UFT has collaborated with the government in developing the evaluation program, only wanting to retain “a seat at the table” to demonstrate its value in keeping teachers in line. A similar role was played by the Chicago Teachers Union in the face of the largest public school closure in the country (see, “ISO whitewashes role of Chicago Teachers Union in school closures”). The UFT had supported the 2010 legislation to implement a system based on student test scores to obtain $700 million from the national RTTT competitive funding scheme. In addition, the agreement included doubling the number of charter schools, another aspect of Obama’s “reforms” aimed at privatizing education. In return for its sponsorship, the unions were granted collective bargaining rights over aspects of the agreement to be negotiated locally in districts.

Under state mandate, each local district was required to develop its own program of education cuts, including a teacher evaluation scheme, to be reviewed and approved by the SED. All but six districts, including New York City, had completed agreements by the initial January 17 deadline. The other five ultimately reached agreements by the final May 29 deadline. As a result of failing to meet the final deadline, the city lost $250 million in increased aid from RTTT and a final agreement was imposed by the state.

 The city’s delay arose over secondary details involving questions of arbitrating teacher evaluation grievances and whether an agreement would “sunset,” opening it to re-negotiation after Bloomberg is out of office. The union, in close alliance with the Democratic Party, contends that it can get a better deal from Bloomberg’s replacement, who is likely to be a Democrat. This formulation was made despite the fact that Democratic mayors across the country, including Chicago’s Rahm Emanuel, President Obama’s former Chief of Staff, have been implementing savage attacks on public education under the RTTT program initiated by Obama. And, in fact, none of the Democratic mayoral candidates have proposed any major changes in Bloomberg’s education policies.

These quibbles over details are intended to mask the larger point that UFT is in full agreement with the city and the state that public education is to be turned into nothing more than repeated standardized testing.

The new evaluation scheme will involve four classifications for teachers, replacing the previous two. Evaluations of teachers formerly labeled as satisfactory will now be rated as “highly effective,” “effective,” or “unsatisfactory,” while teachers formerly rated as unsatisfactory may be “developing” or “ineffective.” Teachers rated “developing” or “ineffective” (defined as showing little or no change in student test scores or marked as having unsatisfactory observations) are supposed to receive support to improve performance but teachers can be fired for low ratings.

Twenty percent of teachers’ evaluations are to be based on state standardized tests, asserted by proponents as “objective” measures of student growth, to be aligned with the new Common Core Standards. This fraction will rise to 25 percent when the State Board of Regents approves a controversial value-added growth model, claimed to show the knowledge added during a school year by a particular teacher. Another 20 percent of the evaluation formula, to be reduced to 15 percent when the value-added model is adopted, is for measures such as school-produced tests or portfolios of student work that can be decided within a school by a committee appointed half by the principal and half by the teachers.

While the UFT President Michael Mulgrew claims this as a victory for “an equal say” for teachers, the agreement actually states that the principal may reject the committee’s recommendation. In fact, many schools are likely to adopt the convenience of using the state test scores for all 40 percent of the objective measures, as permitted under the evaluation agreement. Furthermore, there is nothing preventing principals from exerting pressure on teacher committee members to accept the greater reliance on testing.

Standards for implementation of the new national Common Core curriculum were not available until near the end of the school year, meaning that students will be tested on material in which they have not received instruction. The City’s Department of Education has admitted that this will result in lower test scores which will nevertheless be used for teacher evaluations.

Sixty percent of a teacher’s evaluation will be based on an increased number of observations of lessons, a point which the union again claims as a victory. However, the real intention to make testing the driving force of public education is clear from the Commissioner’s stipulation that “[t]eachers rated ineffective on student performance based on objective assessments (the 20 percent based on state standardized testing) must be rated ineffective overall.” [Emphasis added.] This is even if a teacher’s work in the classroom, the 60 percent majority of the evaluation, has been judged at the highest rating.

Mayor Bloomberg revealed the actual purpose of evaluations based on test scores when he published the scores and teacher names in the press last year as a mechanism for public humiliation and witch-hunting. This practice was dropped after teacher complaints revealed that many were being graded using data on students who had changed teachers or on the scores of students they never taught.

Despite the expectation that there will be an increase in the number of appeals by teachers receiving negative ratings, the time limit for such appeals is being reduced. There will also be a 13 percent limit, a figure established by the union, on the number of appeals from teachers who are rated as ineffective for reasons other than job performance (e.g., due to harassment by the school administration or union for opposition to the evaluation program).

Meanwhile thousands of teaching positions have been left unfilled as experienced, older teachers are driven out of the schools, by closings or by administrators seeking to save money in their school’s budget. UFT President Mulgrew welcomed the decision by Governor Cuomo, backed by the state Democrat and Republican legislative leaders, to establish a binding-arbitration process to impose an evaluation system by June 1, providing the UFT with cover for its collaboration with this attack on teachers’ job security and the necessity to teach to the test.

These latest attacks on public education in New York City are a continuation the state’s long-term inadequate funding of education, which the state’s highest court had ordered reformulated in a 2007 settlement of the Campaign for Fiscal Equity suit. After an initial increase, the financial crisis that began in 2008 was used to excuse renewed budget cuts of 14 percent that have led to increases of class size for the last 5 years, according to schools advocacy group Class Size Matters.

There is growing anger over the attempt to decimate rather than improve public education. In New York State this has reached the level where over 1,500 principals, a third of the state school leaders, and 2,500 teachers and parents have signed an open letter critical of the expansion of high-stakes, standardized testing as the foundation for evaluating students, teachers, and schools. A dozen principals of New York City’s selective schools (those requiring some form of special qualification for admission) signed a declaration that they will not use the present state tests for admission to their schools. A small but growing group of hundreds of parents have had their children boycott the standardized tests given in April and there is a call for field testing of questions for the state tests to be boycotted as well.

Teachers, school workers, parents, and students can place no confidence in Democratic politicians or union leaders to defend public education. Only a united, independent movement of the working class, based on a socialist program, can guarantee that every child receives a decent education.



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

New York City teacher evaluation program deepens attack on public education

0

 

By
Steve Light and Philip Guelpa

7 June 2013

On May 1, the New York State Education Department (SED) announced the final version of a teacher evaluation program for New York City, the product of a two-year negotiation between the city and the United Federation of Teachers (UFT), the union which represents public school teachers in the city. The deadline for negotiations, set for June 1, was imposed by the Democratic New York Governor Andrew Cuomo to complete his campaign to impose teacher evaluation schemes throughout the state.

Teacher evaluations, which rely heavily on standardized tests, are being used to facilitate teacher dismissals. They are one component of a nationwide strategy to dismantle public education, begun under George W. Bush as “No Child Left Behind” and continued by Barack Obama under the title “Race to the Top” (RTTT).

Teachers of art, music, physical education and other subjects are also to be subjected to written tests or to be evaluated with test scores from their school even if the scores are not from the subject they teach.

In New York City, Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s administration has carried out a massive attack on public schools, which has thus far included the closure of over 160 schools, the proliferation of private charter schools, increases in class sizes, and significant budget cuts. Major opposition to these actions has been expressed by teachers, parents, and students, but they have been pushed through by the Bloomberg administration following sham public hearings (see, “Parents, teachers and students oppose New York City school closings”).

But the city’s ruling elite are determined to escalate the attack. The New York Times on Friday published an editorial opinion in support of the evaluation system, titled “Better Teachers for New York City.” The article lauds the program, writing that “[t]he new evaluation system could make it easier to fire markedly poor performers.”

From the beginning, the UFT has collaborated with the government in developing the evaluation program, only wanting to retain “a seat at the table” to demonstrate its value in keeping teachers in line. A similar role was played by the Chicago Teachers Union in the face of the largest public school closure in the country (see, “ISO whitewashes role of Chicago Teachers Union in school closures”). The UFT had supported the 2010 legislation to implement a system based on student test scores to obtain $700 million from the national RTTT competitive funding scheme. In addition, the agreement included doubling the number of charter schools, another aspect of Obama’s “reforms” aimed at privatizing education. In return for its sponsorship, the unions were granted collective bargaining rights over aspects of the agreement to be negotiated locally in districts.

Under state mandate, each local district was required to develop its own program of education cuts, including a teacher evaluation scheme, to be reviewed and approved by the SED. All but six districts, including New York City, had completed agreements by the initial January 17 deadline. The other five ultimately reached agreements by the final May 29 deadline. As a result of failing to meet the final deadline, the city lost $250 million in increased aid from RTTT and a final agreement was imposed by the state.

 The city’s delay arose over secondary details involving questions of arbitrating teacher evaluation grievances and whether an agreement would “sunset,” opening it to re-negotiation after Bloomberg is out of office. The union, in close alliance with the Democratic Party, contends that it can get a better deal from Bloomberg’s replacement, who is likely to be a Democrat. This formulation was made despite the fact that Democratic mayors across the country, including Chicago’s Rahm Emanuel, President Obama’s former Chief of Staff, have been implementing savage attacks on public education under the RTTT program initiated by Obama. And, in fact, none of the Democratic mayoral candidates have proposed any major changes in Bloomberg’s education policies.

These quibbles over details are intended to mask the larger point that UFT is in full agreement with the city and the state that public education is to be turned into nothing more than repeated standardized testing.

The new evaluation scheme will involve four classifications for teachers, replacing the previous two. Evaluations of teachers formerly labeled as satisfactory will now be rated as “highly effective,” “effective,” or “unsatisfactory,” while teachers formerly rated as unsatisfactory may be “developing” or “ineffective.” Teachers rated “developing” or “ineffective” (defined as showing little or no change in student test scores or marked as having unsatisfactory observations) are supposed to receive support to improve performance but teachers can be fired for low ratings.

Twenty percent of teachers’ evaluations are to be based on state standardized tests, asserted by proponents as “objective” measures of student growth, to be aligned with the new Common Core Standards. This fraction will rise to 25 percent when the State Board of Regents approves a controversial value-added growth model, claimed to show the knowledge added during a school year by a particular teacher. Another 20 percent of the evaluation formula, to be reduced to 15 percent when the value-added model is adopted, is for measures such as school-produced tests or portfolios of student work that can be decided within a school by a committee appointed half by the principal and half by the teachers.

While the UFT President Michael Mulgrew claims this as a victory for “an equal say” for teachers, the agreement actually states that the principal may reject the committee’s recommendation. In fact, many schools are likely to adopt the convenience of using the state test scores for all 40 percent of the objective measures, as permitted under the evaluation agreement. Furthermore, there is nothing preventing principals from exerting pressure on teacher committee members to accept the greater reliance on testing.

Standards for implementation of the new national Common Core curriculum were not available until near the end of the school year, meaning that students will be tested on material in which they have not received instruction. The City’s Department of Education has admitted that this will result in lower test scores which will nevertheless be used for teacher evaluations.

Sixty percent of a teacher’s evaluation will be based on an increased number of observations of lessons, a point which the union again claims as a victory. However, the real intention to make testing the driving force of public education is clear from the Commissioner’s stipulation that “[t]eachers rated ineffective on student performance based on objective assessments (the 20 percent based on state standardized testing) must be rated ineffective overall.” [Emphasis added.] This is even if a teacher’s work in the classroom, the 60 percent majority of the evaluation, has been judged at the highest rating.

Mayor Bloomberg revealed the actual purpose of evaluations based on test scores when he published the scores and teacher names in the press last year as a mechanism for public humiliation and witch-hunting. This practice was dropped after teacher complaints revealed that many were being graded using data on students who had changed teachers or on the scores of students they never taught.

Despite the expectation that there will be an increase in the number of appeals by teachers receiving negative ratings, the time limit for such appeals is being reduced. There will also be a 13 percent limit, a figure established by the union, on the number of appeals from teachers who are rated as ineffective for reasons other than job performance (e.g., due to harassment by the school administration or union for opposition to the evaluation program).

Meanwhile thousands of teaching positions have been left unfilled as experienced, older teachers are driven out of the schools, by closings or by administrators seeking to save money in their school’s budget. UFT President Mulgrew welcomed the decision by Governor Cuomo, backed by the state Democrat and Republican legislative leaders, to establish a binding-arbitration process to impose an evaluation system by June 1, providing the UFT with cover for its collaboration with this attack on teachers’ job security and the necessity to teach to the test.

These latest attacks on public education in New York City are a continuation the state’s long-term inadequate funding of education, which the state’s highest court had ordered reformulated in a 2007 settlement of the Campaign for Fiscal Equity suit. After an initial increase, the financial crisis that began in 2008 was used to excuse renewed budget cuts of 14 percent that have led to increases of class size for the last 5 years, according to schools advocacy group Class Size Matters.

There is growing anger over the attempt to decimate rather than improve public education. In New York State this has reached the level where over 1,500 principals, a third of the state school leaders, and 2,500 teachers and parents have signed an open letter critical of the expansion of high-stakes, standardized testing as the foundation for evaluating students, teachers, and schools. A dozen principals of New York City’s selective schools (those requiring some form of special qualification for admission) signed a declaration that they will not use the present state tests for admission to their schools. A small but growing group of hundreds of parents have had their children boycott the standardized tests given in April and there is a call for field testing of questions for the state tests to be boycotted as well.

Teachers, school workers, parents, and students can place no confidence in Democratic politicians or union leaders to defend public education. Only a united, independent movement of the working class, based on a socialist program, can guarantee that every child receives a decent education.



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

New York City teacher evaluation program deepens attack on public education

0

 

By
Steve Light and Philip Guelpa

7 June 2013

On May 1, the New York State Education Department (SED) announced the final version of a teacher evaluation program for New York City, the product of a two-year negotiation between the city and the United Federation of Teachers (UFT), the union which represents public school teachers in the city. The deadline for negotiations, set for June 1, was imposed by the Democratic New York Governor Andrew Cuomo to complete his campaign to impose teacher evaluation schemes throughout the state.

Teacher evaluations, which rely heavily on standardized tests, are being used to facilitate teacher dismissals. They are one component of a nationwide strategy to dismantle public education, begun under George W. Bush as “No Child Left Behind” and continued by Barack Obama under the title “Race to the Top” (RTTT).

Teachers of art, music, physical education and other subjects are also to be subjected to written tests or to be evaluated with test scores from their school even if the scores are not from the subject they teach.

In New York City, Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s administration has carried out a massive attack on public schools, which has thus far included the closure of over 160 schools, the proliferation of private charter schools, increases in class sizes, and significant budget cuts. Major opposition to these actions has been expressed by teachers, parents, and students, but they have been pushed through by the Bloomberg administration following sham public hearings (see, “Parents, teachers and students oppose New York City school closings”).

But the city’s ruling elite are determined to escalate the attack. The New York Times on Friday published an editorial opinion in support of the evaluation system, titled “Better Teachers for New York City.” The article lauds the program, writing that “[t]he new evaluation system could make it easier to fire markedly poor performers.”

From the beginning, the UFT has collaborated with the government in developing the evaluation program, only wanting to retain “a seat at the table” to demonstrate its value in keeping teachers in line. A similar role was played by the Chicago Teachers Union in the face of the largest public school closure in the country (see, “ISO whitewashes role of Chicago Teachers Union in school closures”). The UFT had supported the 2010 legislation to implement a system based on student test scores to obtain $700 million from the national RTTT competitive funding scheme. In addition, the agreement included doubling the number of charter schools, another aspect of Obama’s “reforms” aimed at privatizing education. In return for its sponsorship, the unions were granted collective bargaining rights over aspects of the agreement to be negotiated locally in districts.

Under state mandate, each local district was required to develop its own program of education cuts, including a teacher evaluation scheme, to be reviewed and approved by the SED. All but six districts, including New York City, had completed agreements by the initial January 17 deadline. The other five ultimately reached agreements by the final May 29 deadline. As a result of failing to meet the final deadline, the city lost $250 million in increased aid from RTTT and a final agreement was imposed by the state.

 The city’s delay arose over secondary details involving questions of arbitrating teacher evaluation grievances and whether an agreement would “sunset,” opening it to re-negotiation after Bloomberg is out of office. The union, in close alliance with the Democratic Party, contends that it can get a better deal from Bloomberg’s replacement, who is likely to be a Democrat. This formulation was made despite the fact that Democratic mayors across the country, including Chicago’s Rahm Emanuel, President Obama’s former Chief of Staff, have been implementing savage attacks on public education under the RTTT program initiated by Obama. And, in fact, none of the Democratic mayoral candidates have proposed any major changes in Bloomberg’s education policies.

These quibbles over details are intended to mask the larger point that UFT is in full agreement with the city and the state that public education is to be turned into nothing more than repeated standardized testing.

The new evaluation scheme will involve four classifications for teachers, replacing the previous two. Evaluations of teachers formerly labeled as satisfactory will now be rated as “highly effective,” “effective,” or “unsatisfactory,” while teachers formerly rated as unsatisfactory may be “developing” or “ineffective.” Teachers rated “developing” or “ineffective” (defined as showing little or no change in student test scores or marked as having unsatisfactory observations) are supposed to receive support to improve performance but teachers can be fired for low ratings.

Twenty percent of teachers’ evaluations are to be based on state standardized tests, asserted by proponents as “objective” measures of student growth, to be aligned with the new Common Core Standards. This fraction will rise to 25 percent when the State Board of Regents approves a controversial value-added growth model, claimed to show the knowledge added during a school year by a particular teacher. Another 20 percent of the evaluation formula, to be reduced to 15 percent when the value-added model is adopted, is for measures such as school-produced tests or portfolios of student work that can be decided within a school by a committee appointed half by the principal and half by the teachers.

While the UFT President Michael Mulgrew claims this as a victory for “an equal say” for teachers, the agreement actually states that the principal may reject the committee’s recommendation. In fact, many schools are likely to adopt the convenience of using the state test scores for all 40 percent of the objective measures, as permitted under the evaluation agreement. Furthermore, there is nothing preventing principals from exerting pressure on teacher committee members to accept the greater reliance on testing.

Standards for implementation of the new national Common Core curriculum were not available until near the end of the school year, meaning that students will be tested on material in which they have not received instruction. The City’s Department of Education has admitted that this will result in lower test scores which will nevertheless be used for teacher evaluations.

Sixty percent of a teacher’s evaluation will be based on an increased number of observations of lessons, a point which the union again claims as a victory. However, the real intention to make testing the driving force of public education is clear from the Commissioner’s stipulation that “[t]eachers rated ineffective on student performance based on objective assessments (the 20 percent based on state standardized testing) must be rated ineffective overall.” [Emphasis added.] This is even if a teacher’s work in the classroom, the 60 percent majority of the evaluation, has been judged at the highest rating.

Mayor Bloomberg revealed the actual purpose of evaluations based on test scores when he published the scores and teacher names in the press last year as a mechanism for public humiliation and witch-hunting. This practice was dropped after teacher complaints revealed that many were being graded using data on students who had changed teachers or on the scores of students they never taught.

Despite the expectation that there will be an increase in the number of appeals by teachers receiving negative ratings, the time limit for such appeals is being reduced. There will also be a 13 percent limit, a figure established by the union, on the number of appeals from teachers who are rated as ineffective for reasons other than job performance (e.g., due to harassment by the school administration or union for opposition to the evaluation program).

Meanwhile thousands of teaching positions have been left unfilled as experienced, older teachers are driven out of the schools, by closings or by administrators seeking to save money in their school’s budget. UFT President Mulgrew welcomed the decision by Governor Cuomo, backed by the state Democrat and Republican legislative leaders, to establish a binding-arbitration process to impose an evaluation system by June 1, providing the UFT with cover for its collaboration with this attack on teachers’ job security and the necessity to teach to the test.

These latest attacks on public education in New York City are a continuation the state’s long-term inadequate funding of education, which the state’s highest court had ordered reformulated in a 2007 settlement of the Campaign for Fiscal Equity suit. After an initial increase, the financial crisis that began in 2008 was used to excuse renewed budget cuts of 14 percent that have led to increases of class size for the last 5 years, according to schools advocacy group Class Size Matters.

There is growing anger over the attempt to decimate rather than improve public education. In New York State this has reached the level where over 1,500 principals, a third of the state school leaders, and 2,500 teachers and parents have signed an open letter critical of the expansion of high-stakes, standardized testing as the foundation for evaluating students, teachers, and schools. A dozen principals of New York City’s selective schools (those requiring some form of special qualification for admission) signed a declaration that they will not use the present state tests for admission to their schools. A small but growing group of hundreds of parents have had their children boycott the standardized tests given in April and there is a call for field testing of questions for the state tests to be boycotted as well.

Teachers, school workers, parents, and students can place no confidence in Democratic politicians or union leaders to defend public education. Only a united, independent movement of the working class, based on a socialist program, can guarantee that every child receives a decent education.



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

Illinois governor proposes 70 percent cut to school transportation budget

0

 

By
Shane Feratu

7 June 2013

As school districts in Illinois brace for another year of deep budget cuts, Democratic governor Pat Quinn has proposed a 3 percent cut in classroom funds and a 70 percent–or $60 million–cut to the student transportation budget. Rural districts will be the worst affected, although the safety of children in urban and suburban areas is also jeopardized.

Transportation makes up about 5 percent of overall expenses of Illinois school districts. Districts are required by law to provide safe transportation to and from school, unless the area is deemed to be safe for children to walk or bike.

Quinn’s budget spokesperson, veteran Chicago Sun-Times political reporter Abdon Pallasch, explained that school transportation cuts proposed last year by the Illinois General Assembly were put off in favor of closing state facilities, including the Murphysboro juvenile correction and Jacksonville correctional centers. Since no other state facilities are set to close this year, the previously planned school budget cuts are to go into effect.

The Plainfield school district, southwest of Chicago in Will County, has been searching for ways to compensate for the $5 million deficit expected next year if the proposed cuts go through.

“We’ve frozen pay, we’ve done all those sort of things, but at a certain point, you get to the point where the only thing left becomes programs,” said Angela Smith, assistant superintendent with the Plainfield school district. These cuts have totaled about $40 million in the last three years.

As in many other states, Illinois school districts have struggled under years of classroom cuts, pay freezes, and elimination of benefits for teachers. State leaders are also looking to cut as many bus stops and miles driven by buses as possible, which includes field trips for students. High fuel prices have also played a role in the decisions.

As a result, school districts have combined bus stops instead of picking up children in front of their homes. Children will have to walk longer distances to the next bus stop or have their parents drive them either to school or to the bus stops. Bus ride times will also increase as fewer buses cover an area.

The Lemont-Bromberek School District 113A, also in the southwest metro region, decided to cancel bus service to four areas that they have categorized as no longer hazardous for student travel since sidewalks have recently been built. About 200 students are walking to school from these areas.

Half of Illinois school districts cover 52 square miles or more. Small rural towns are having difficulty finding new ways to compensate for the cuts. If fewer buses are used to pick up a larger number of students, ride times for students will become extremely long.

Scott Kuffel, superintendent of the expansive Geneseo school district, covering 262 square miles, called the cuts “Devastating…. We’re already at 75 percent pro-ration, they’re going to drop that down all the way to 19 cents on the dollar.”

Chicago Public Schools has planned a $5 million reduction to its bus fleet. With 54 schools due to be closed this year, the city’s measure of the distance students have to travel to the new schools receiving them is from the closed school to the receiving school, not from their home to the receiving school.

School closures and inadequate transportation pose very serious dangers to students traveling longer distances to school, through dangerous neighborhoods and rival gang territories. Some communities are looking to build safety zones, areas deemed not hazardous to children, in which kids would be able to walk or bicycle to school instead of taking a bus.

Cuts to basic services like school transportation reveal the class character of the policies of Democratic and Republican officials alike, and the sharpening of the class struggle. When deep cuts to school transportation were issued in New York City, school bus drivers went on strike to retain their pay and benefits and to protect the safety of children traveling on public transportation or through gang territory. After allowing workers to blow off some steam during the strike, leaders of the bus drivers’ union sold out the rank-and-file struggle, eventually handing over to Mayor Michael Bloomberg all the concessions he had asked for. Many bus drivers were replaced by private contractors, whose drivers receive lower pay and minimal benefits.



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

Illinois governor proposes 70 percent cut to school transportation budget

0

 

By
Shane Feratu

7 June 2013

As school districts in Illinois brace for another year of deep budget cuts, Democratic governor Pat Quinn has proposed a 3 percent cut in classroom funds and a 70 percent–or $60 million–cut to the student transportation budget. Rural districts will be the worst affected, although the safety of children in urban and suburban areas is also jeopardized.

Transportation makes up about 5 percent of overall expenses of Illinois school districts. Districts are required by law to provide safe transportation to and from school, unless the area is deemed to be safe for children to walk or bike.

Quinn’s budget spokesperson, veteran Chicago Sun-Times political reporter Abdon Pallasch, explained that school transportation cuts proposed last year by the Illinois General Assembly were put off in favor of closing state facilities, including the Murphysboro juvenile correction and Jacksonville correctional centers. Since no other state facilities are set to close this year, the previously planned school budget cuts are to go into effect.

The Plainfield school district, southwest of Chicago in Will County, has been searching for ways to compensate for the $5 million deficit expected next year if the proposed cuts go through.

“We’ve frozen pay, we’ve done all those sort of things, but at a certain point, you get to the point where the only thing left becomes programs,” said Angela Smith, assistant superintendent with the Plainfield school district. These cuts have totaled about $40 million in the last three years.

As in many other states, Illinois school districts have struggled under years of classroom cuts, pay freezes, and elimination of benefits for teachers. State leaders are also looking to cut as many bus stops and miles driven by buses as possible, which includes field trips for students. High fuel prices have also played a role in the decisions.

As a result, school districts have combined bus stops instead of picking up children in front of their homes. Children will have to walk longer distances to the next bus stop or have their parents drive them either to school or to the bus stops. Bus ride times will also increase as fewer buses cover an area.

The Lemont-Bromberek School District 113A, also in the southwest metro region, decided to cancel bus service to four areas that they have categorized as no longer hazardous for student travel since sidewalks have recently been built. About 200 students are walking to school from these areas.

Half of Illinois school districts cover 52 square miles or more. Small rural towns are having difficulty finding new ways to compensate for the cuts. If fewer buses are used to pick up a larger number of students, ride times for students will become extremely long.

Scott Kuffel, superintendent of the expansive Geneseo school district, covering 262 square miles, called the cuts “Devastating…. We’re already at 75 percent pro-ration, they’re going to drop that down all the way to 19 cents on the dollar.”

Chicago Public Schools has planned a $5 million reduction to its bus fleet. With 54 schools due to be closed this year, the city’s measure of the distance students have to travel to the new schools receiving them is from the closed school to the receiving school, not from their home to the receiving school.

School closures and inadequate transportation pose very serious dangers to students traveling longer distances to school, through dangerous neighborhoods and rival gang territories. Some communities are looking to build safety zones, areas deemed not hazardous to children, in which kids would be able to walk or bicycle to school instead of taking a bus.

Cuts to basic services like school transportation reveal the class character of the policies of Democratic and Republican officials alike, and the sharpening of the class struggle. When deep cuts to school transportation were issued in New York City, school bus drivers went on strike to retain their pay and benefits and to protect the safety of children traveling on public transportation or through gang territory. After allowing workers to blow off some steam during the strike, leaders of the bus drivers’ union sold out the rank-and-file struggle, eventually handing over to Mayor Michael Bloomberg all the concessions he had asked for. Many bus drivers were replaced by private contractors, whose drivers receive lower pay and minimal benefits.



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

Illinois governor proposes 70 percent cut to school transportation budget

0

 

By
Shane Feratu

7 June 2013

As school districts in Illinois brace for another year of deep budget cuts, Democratic governor Pat Quinn has proposed a 3 percent cut in classroom funds and a 70 percent–or $60 million–cut to the student transportation budget. Rural districts will be the worst affected, although the safety of children in urban and suburban areas is also jeopardized.

Transportation makes up about 5 percent of overall expenses of Illinois school districts. Districts are required by law to provide safe transportation to and from school, unless the area is deemed to be safe for children to walk or bike.

Quinn’s budget spokesperson, veteran Chicago Sun-Times political reporter Abdon Pallasch, explained that school transportation cuts proposed last year by the Illinois General Assembly were put off in favor of closing state facilities, including the Murphysboro juvenile correction and Jacksonville correctional centers. Since no other state facilities are set to close this year, the previously planned school budget cuts are to go into effect.

The Plainfield school district, southwest of Chicago in Will County, has been searching for ways to compensate for the $5 million deficit expected next year if the proposed cuts go through.

“We’ve frozen pay, we’ve done all those sort of things, but at a certain point, you get to the point where the only thing left becomes programs,” said Angela Smith, assistant superintendent with the Plainfield school district. These cuts have totaled about $40 million in the last three years.

As in many other states, Illinois school districts have struggled under years of classroom cuts, pay freezes, and elimination of benefits for teachers. State leaders are also looking to cut as many bus stops and miles driven by buses as possible, which includes field trips for students. High fuel prices have also played a role in the decisions.

As a result, school districts have combined bus stops instead of picking up children in front of their homes. Children will have to walk longer distances to the next bus stop or have their parents drive them either to school or to the bus stops. Bus ride times will also increase as fewer buses cover an area.

The Lemont-Bromberek School District 113A, also in the southwest metro region, decided to cancel bus service to four areas that they have categorized as no longer hazardous for student travel since sidewalks have recently been built. About 200 students are walking to school from these areas.

Half of Illinois school districts cover 52 square miles or more. Small rural towns are having difficulty finding new ways to compensate for the cuts. If fewer buses are used to pick up a larger number of students, ride times for students will become extremely long.

Scott Kuffel, superintendent of the expansive Geneseo school district, covering 262 square miles, called the cuts “Devastating…. We’re already at 75 percent pro-ration, they’re going to drop that down all the way to 19 cents on the dollar.”

Chicago Public Schools has planned a $5 million reduction to its bus fleet. With 54 schools due to be closed this year, the city’s measure of the distance students have to travel to the new schools receiving them is from the closed school to the receiving school, not from their home to the receiving school.

School closures and inadequate transportation pose very serious dangers to students traveling longer distances to school, through dangerous neighborhoods and rival gang territories. Some communities are looking to build safety zones, areas deemed not hazardous to children, in which kids would be able to walk or bicycle to school instead of taking a bus.

Cuts to basic services like school transportation reveal the class character of the policies of Democratic and Republican officials alike, and the sharpening of the class struggle. When deep cuts to school transportation were issued in New York City, school bus drivers went on strike to retain their pay and benefits and to protect the safety of children traveling on public transportation or through gang territory. After allowing workers to blow off some steam during the strike, leaders of the bus drivers’ union sold out the rank-and-file struggle, eventually handing over to Mayor Michael Bloomberg all the concessions he had asked for. Many bus drivers were replaced by private contractors, whose drivers receive lower pay and minimal benefits.



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

Erdogan vows to run roughshod over continuing protests in Turkey

0

 

By
Alex Lantier

7 June 2013

Speaking yesterday in Tunis before returning to Turkey, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan vowed to continue with plans to destroy Taksim Gezi Park in Istanbul, which triggered large-scale protests against his regime last week.

His speech came as trade unions and business groups tried to wind down continuing protests, issuing a joint statement calling for “peace and stability.”

Erdogan defended his urban remodeling project, saying it would create a “very beautiful environment.” Refusing to issue a further apology–after that of Deputy Prime Minister Bulent Arinc–for the brutal repression of protesters that triggered large-scale protests last Friday, he said: “The sensitivities of the people for environmental issues have been abused. We already expressed our sorrow for the excessive use of force.”

Indicating that he would make no concessions to protesters’ demands, he said it would be “meaningless to have a race… The logic of ‘If I take this, I want this,’ ‘If you give this, I want this’ has no place in running a state.”

Apparently seeking to provide grounds for a renewed police crackdown, Erdogan said: “Among the protesters, there are extremists, some of them implicated in terrorism.”

He compared them to Ecevit Sanli, who was convicted for several terrorist attacks and held responsible for the February 1, 2013 suicide bombing at the US embassy in Ankara. Erdogan commented, “They were caught both at squares and on social media with all they had.”

Erdogan also denounced alleged foreign elements among the protesters.

Turkey’s Zaman paper reported that Turkish police had detained 11 foreign nationals with diplomatic passports–four US, two British, two Iranian, one Indian, one French, and one Greek–on “provocation” charges. The US and British embassies issued statements denying that their citizens had been detained.

A crowd of Turks and Tunisians protested Erdogan’s visit to the unpopular Islamist government of Tunisian Prime Minister Ali Laarayedh. Laarayedh’s Ennadha party, which came to power after the revolutionary working class struggles of 2011toppled President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, modeled itself on Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) regime. It has since fallen to 30 percent in the polls, due to its anti-worker and pro-business policies.

Demonstrations continued in Turkey. Protesters continued to occupy Taksim Square in Istanbul, though unlike recent days, yesterday did not see the clashes between police and supporters of the Besiktas football club.

There were heavier clashes in the capital, Ankara, where protesters faced off against police along John F. Kennedy Street near the US embassy in Ankara. There were also reports that protesters would be traveling from Istanbul to Ankara, where demonstrators have taken over Kizilay Square.

In Erdogan’s home city of Rize on the Black Sea, a crowd of AKP supporters reportedly clashed with outnumbered members of the Turkish Youth Union (TGB), who were protesting in support of the Gezi Park protesters. Police reportedly fired tear gas to break up the clashes.

Amid this politically explosive situation, a collection of trade unions and business groups issued a statement calling for calm and denouncing “marginal groups” for trying to influence the demonstrations.

They wrote, “We need peace and stability more than ever at this time when the entire world is struggling with problems and all eyes are on the rising country of Turkey. Nobody should forget that peace and safety in the streets are extremely important for the future of Turkey and our children. Violence and fighting don’t solve anything, and they make it impossible to solve problems.”

This statement speaks to the reactionary, pro-government perspective animating Turkey’s union officialdom. While the KESK public service union called a two-day strike for June 4-5, they saw it as a limited strike–aiming to shift the Erdogan regime’s policy towards one more favorable to affluent social layers from which the union bureaucracy is drawn, but not to mobilize the working class in struggle against Erdogan. Aside from reports of a symbolic strike by Turkish air-line workers, there were no more reports of organized working class action yesterday.

The union bureaucracy and the business community are both desperate to shore up the Turkish regime and foreign finance capital’s confidence in the government. Turkish capital is highly dependent on external financing, as it runs a current account deficit of 7 percent of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP).

Turkey’s Istanbul National 30 stock index fell 5.5 percent after Erdogan’s speech in Tunis. ETX Capital market strategist Ishaq Siddiqi called Erdogan’s comments “not a smart move … as his comments threaten to incite further tensions, which could prompt greater unrest and violence in the country.”

Siddiqi’s comments reflect the central fear of finance capital–that the protests against Erdogan could ignite broader popular discontent, based in the working class, with both social inequality and with Erdogan’s unpopular policy of backing the US-led proxy war in neighboring Syria.

The policy of the union bureaucracy is directed at blocking a turn to the working class and a struggle to mobilize it in a socialist struggle against the Erdogan regime and the imperialist intervention in the Middle East–which is the only way forward for the protests.

Otherwise, the Islamists aim to isolate the protests to privileged sections of the middle class and the bourgeois secular opposition and demobilize them. Erdogan and Islamist regimes abroad, such as Egypt’s right-wing Muslim Brotherhood (MB) regime, are seeking to make such points, cynically attacking the protests for not speaking to workers’ economic demands.

MB official Mourad Aly criticized the protests for having “nothing to do with daily or economic needs. It is intended to promote the idea that Islamic regimes, which have made economic achievements and proved to the world that they can stand in the face of all external challenges, have failed.”

In fact, both the Erdogan regime and the Egyptian regime, based on the MB and the army, have failed to meet the working class’ social needs, which can only be advanced through a revolutionary struggle. Both in Ankara and in Cairo, the central fear of ruling elites is of a new movement in the working class, against which regimes are preparing renewed repression.

A day after dozens of young protesters were rounded up on charges of “encouraging rebellion” with their social media posts, Turkey’s Islamist President Abdullah Gül again threatened social media users. He said that the use of “provocative expressions,” curses, or insults on social media sites would be treated as a crime.

The author also recommends:

Turkish police round up young protesters for use of social media

[6 June 2013]



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

Erdogan vows to run roughshod over continuing protests in Turkey

0

 

By
Alex Lantier

7 June 2013

Speaking yesterday in Tunis before returning to Turkey, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan vowed to continue with plans to destroy Taksim Gezi Park in Istanbul, which triggered large-scale protests against his regime last week.

His speech came as trade unions and business groups tried to wind down continuing protests, issuing a joint statement calling for “peace and stability.”

Erdogan defended his urban remodeling project, saying it would create a “very beautiful environment.” Refusing to issue a further apology–after that of Deputy Prime Minister Bulent Arinc–for the brutal repression of protesters that triggered large-scale protests last Friday, he said: “The sensitivities of the people for environmental issues have been abused. We already expressed our sorrow for the excessive use of force.”

Indicating that he would make no concessions to protesters’ demands, he said it would be “meaningless to have a race… The logic of ‘If I take this, I want this,’ ‘If you give this, I want this’ has no place in running a state.”

Apparently seeking to provide grounds for a renewed police crackdown, Erdogan said: “Among the protesters, there are extremists, some of them implicated in terrorism.”

He compared them to Ecevit Sanli, who was convicted for several terrorist attacks and held responsible for the February 1, 2013 suicide bombing at the US embassy in Ankara. Erdogan commented, “They were caught both at squares and on social media with all they had.”

Erdogan also denounced alleged foreign elements among the protesters.

Turkey’s Zaman paper reported that Turkish police had detained 11 foreign nationals with diplomatic passports–four US, two British, two Iranian, one Indian, one French, and one Greek–on “provocation” charges. The US and British embassies issued statements denying that their citizens had been detained.

A crowd of Turks and Tunisians protested Erdogan’s visit to the unpopular Islamist government of Tunisian Prime Minister Ali Laarayedh. Laarayedh’s Ennadha party, which came to power after the revolutionary working class struggles of 2011toppled President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, modeled itself on Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) regime. It has since fallen to 30 percent in the polls, due to its anti-worker and pro-business policies.

Demonstrations continued in Turkey. Protesters continued to occupy Taksim Square in Istanbul, though unlike recent days, yesterday did not see the clashes between police and supporters of the Besiktas football club.

There were heavier clashes in the capital, Ankara, where protesters faced off against police along John F. Kennedy Street near the US embassy in Ankara. There were also reports that protesters would be traveling from Istanbul to Ankara, where demonstrators have taken over Kizilay Square.

In Erdogan’s home city of Rize on the Black Sea, a crowd of AKP supporters reportedly clashed with outnumbered members of the Turkish Youth Union (TGB), who were protesting in support of the Gezi Park protesters. Police reportedly fired tear gas to break up the clashes.

Amid this politically explosive situation, a collection of trade unions and business groups issued a statement calling for calm and denouncing “marginal groups” for trying to influence the demonstrations.

They wrote, “We need peace and stability more than ever at this time when the entire world is struggling with problems and all eyes are on the rising country of Turkey. Nobody should forget that peace and safety in the streets are extremely important for the future of Turkey and our children. Violence and fighting don’t solve anything, and they make it impossible to solve problems.”

This statement speaks to the reactionary, pro-government perspective animating Turkey’s union officialdom. While the KESK public service union called a two-day strike for June 4-5, they saw it as a limited strike–aiming to shift the Erdogan regime’s policy towards one more favorable to affluent social layers from which the union bureaucracy is drawn, but not to mobilize the working class in struggle against Erdogan. Aside from reports of a symbolic strike by Turkish air-line workers, there were no more reports of organized working class action yesterday.

The union bureaucracy and the business community are both desperate to shore up the Turkish regime and foreign finance capital’s confidence in the government. Turkish capital is highly dependent on external financing, as it runs a current account deficit of 7 percent of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP).

Turkey’s Istanbul National 30 stock index fell 5.5 percent after Erdogan’s speech in Tunis. ETX Capital market strategist Ishaq Siddiqi called Erdogan’s comments “not a smart move … as his comments threaten to incite further tensions, which could prompt greater unrest and violence in the country.”

Siddiqi’s comments reflect the central fear of finance capital–that the protests against Erdogan could ignite broader popular discontent, based in the working class, with both social inequality and with Erdogan’s unpopular policy of backing the US-led proxy war in neighboring Syria.

The policy of the union bureaucracy is directed at blocking a turn to the working class and a struggle to mobilize it in a socialist struggle against the Erdogan regime and the imperialist intervention in the Middle East–which is the only way forward for the protests.

Otherwise, the Islamists aim to isolate the protests to privileged sections of the middle class and the bourgeois secular opposition and demobilize them. Erdogan and Islamist regimes abroad, such as Egypt’s right-wing Muslim Brotherhood (MB) regime, are seeking to make such points, cynically attacking the protests for not speaking to workers’ economic demands.

MB official Mourad Aly criticized the protests for having “nothing to do with daily or economic needs. It is intended to promote the idea that Islamic regimes, which have made economic achievements and proved to the world that they can stand in the face of all external challenges, have failed.”

In fact, both the Erdogan regime and the Egyptian regime, based on the MB and the army, have failed to meet the working class’ social needs, which can only be advanced through a revolutionary struggle. Both in Ankara and in Cairo, the central fear of ruling elites is of a new movement in the working class, against which regimes are preparing renewed repression.

A day after dozens of young protesters were rounded up on charges of “encouraging rebellion” with their social media posts, Turkey’s Islamist President Abdullah Gül again threatened social media users. He said that the use of “provocative expressions,” curses, or insults on social media sites would be treated as a crime.

The author also recommends:

Turkish police round up young protesters for use of social media

[6 June 2013]



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

Erdogan vows to run roughshod over continuing protests in Turkey

0

 

By
Alex Lantier

7 June 2013

Speaking yesterday in Tunis before returning to Turkey, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan vowed to continue with plans to destroy Taksim Gezi Park in Istanbul, which triggered large-scale protests against his regime last week.

His speech came as trade unions and business groups tried to wind down continuing protests, issuing a joint statement calling for “peace and stability.”

Erdogan defended his urban remodeling project, saying it would create a “very beautiful environment.” Refusing to issue a further apology–after that of Deputy Prime Minister Bulent Arinc–for the brutal repression of protesters that triggered large-scale protests last Friday, he said: “The sensitivities of the people for environmental issues have been abused. We already expressed our sorrow for the excessive use of force.”

Indicating that he would make no concessions to protesters’ demands, he said it would be “meaningless to have a race… The logic of ‘If I take this, I want this,’ ‘If you give this, I want this’ has no place in running a state.”

Apparently seeking to provide grounds for a renewed police crackdown, Erdogan said: “Among the protesters, there are extremists, some of them implicated in terrorism.”

He compared them to Ecevit Sanli, who was convicted for several terrorist attacks and held responsible for the February 1, 2013 suicide bombing at the US embassy in Ankara. Erdogan commented, “They were caught both at squares and on social media with all they had.”

Erdogan also denounced alleged foreign elements among the protesters.

Turkey’s Zaman paper reported that Turkish police had detained 11 foreign nationals with diplomatic passports–four US, two British, two Iranian, one Indian, one French, and one Greek–on “provocation” charges. The US and British embassies issued statements denying that their citizens had been detained.

A crowd of Turks and Tunisians protested Erdogan’s visit to the unpopular Islamist government of Tunisian Prime Minister Ali Laarayedh. Laarayedh’s Ennadha party, which came to power after the revolutionary working class struggles of 2011toppled President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, modeled itself on Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) regime. It has since fallen to 30 percent in the polls, due to its anti-worker and pro-business policies.

Demonstrations continued in Turkey. Protesters continued to occupy Taksim Square in Istanbul, though unlike recent days, yesterday did not see the clashes between police and supporters of the Besiktas football club.

There were heavier clashes in the capital, Ankara, where protesters faced off against police along John F. Kennedy Street near the US embassy in Ankara. There were also reports that protesters would be traveling from Istanbul to Ankara, where demonstrators have taken over Kizilay Square.

In Erdogan’s home city of Rize on the Black Sea, a crowd of AKP supporters reportedly clashed with outnumbered members of the Turkish Youth Union (TGB), who were protesting in support of the Gezi Park protesters. Police reportedly fired tear gas to break up the clashes.

Amid this politically explosive situation, a collection of trade unions and business groups issued a statement calling for calm and denouncing “marginal groups” for trying to influence the demonstrations.

They wrote, “We need peace and stability more than ever at this time when the entire world is struggling with problems and all eyes are on the rising country of Turkey. Nobody should forget that peace and safety in the streets are extremely important for the future of Turkey and our children. Violence and fighting don’t solve anything, and they make it impossible to solve problems.”

This statement speaks to the reactionary, pro-government perspective animating Turkey’s union officialdom. While the KESK public service union called a two-day strike for June 4-5, they saw it as a limited strike–aiming to shift the Erdogan regime’s policy towards one more favorable to affluent social layers from which the union bureaucracy is drawn, but not to mobilize the working class in struggle against Erdogan. Aside from reports of a symbolic strike by Turkish air-line workers, there were no more reports of organized working class action yesterday.

The union bureaucracy and the business community are both desperate to shore up the Turkish regime and foreign finance capital’s confidence in the government. Turkish capital is highly dependent on external financing, as it runs a current account deficit of 7 percent of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP).

Turkey’s Istanbul National 30 stock index fell 5.5 percent after Erdogan’s speech in Tunis. ETX Capital market strategist Ishaq Siddiqi called Erdogan’s comments “not a smart move … as his comments threaten to incite further tensions, which could prompt greater unrest and violence in the country.”

Siddiqi’s comments reflect the central fear of finance capital–that the protests against Erdogan could ignite broader popular discontent, based in the working class, with both social inequality and with Erdogan’s unpopular policy of backing the US-led proxy war in neighboring Syria.

The policy of the union bureaucracy is directed at blocking a turn to the working class and a struggle to mobilize it in a socialist struggle against the Erdogan regime and the imperialist intervention in the Middle East–which is the only way forward for the protests.

Otherwise, the Islamists aim to isolate the protests to privileged sections of the middle class and the bourgeois secular opposition and demobilize them. Erdogan and Islamist regimes abroad, such as Egypt’s right-wing Muslim Brotherhood (MB) regime, are seeking to make such points, cynically attacking the protests for not speaking to workers’ economic demands.

MB official Mourad Aly criticized the protests for having “nothing to do with daily or economic needs. It is intended to promote the idea that Islamic regimes, which have made economic achievements and proved to the world that they can stand in the face of all external challenges, have failed.”

In fact, both the Erdogan regime and the Egyptian regime, based on the MB and the army, have failed to meet the working class’ social needs, which can only be advanced through a revolutionary struggle. Both in Ankara and in Cairo, the central fear of ruling elites is of a new movement in the working class, against which regimes are preparing renewed repression.

A day after dozens of young protesters were rounded up on charges of “encouraging rebellion” with their social media posts, Turkey’s Islamist President Abdullah Gül again threatened social media users. He said that the use of “provocative expressions,” curses, or insults on social media sites would be treated as a crime.

The author also recommends:

Turkish police round up young protesters for use of social media

[6 June 2013]



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

Barack Obama’s health care counterrevolution

0

 

7 June 2013

With the deadline for the full implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) set for January 1, 2014, it is becoming increasingly clear that what has been promoted as a progressive reform in fact constitutes a sweeping attack on health care for the vast majority of the American people.

On March 21, 2010, two days before signing the health care bill into law, Barack Obama declared that it represented “another stone firmly laid in the foundation of the American Dream.” More than two years later, this statement has been exposed as a cynical lie. From the beginning, the legislation has been crafted to serve the interests of private insurers, pharmaceuticals and giant health care chains, while cutting costs for corporations and the government, all at the expense of working families and the poor.

As states and the federal government begin to establish the insurance exchanges where individuals and families without employer or government-provided insurance will be required to purchase coverage from private carriers, the Obama administration’s claims that the Affordable Care Act would expand access to quality health care for millions are being refuted on virtually a daily basis. (See “US health reform to slash care, leave millions uninsured”)

A brutal assault on Medicare has always been a central component of the ACA, which will reduce reimbursements to the government-run program by more than $700 billion over 10 years, severely limiting access to medical services for close to 50 million seniors and the disabled.

A reform that was touted by Obama and the Democrats as providing “near universal health care coverage” will leave an estimated 30 million people uninsured in 2016, according to a study released Thursday by a research team from Harvard Medical School and the City University of New York School of Public Health.

This will be the case for some 5.7 million people in the 26 US states that are refusing to expand Medicaid coverage under the ACA. Most states do not provide Medicaid for the entire poor population, and this will remain the case in those states where the program is not being expanded. In a cruel twist, due to the way the law is written, some of the very poorest of the uninsured will also be denied government subsidies to purchase insurance on the exchanges.

For those with employer-sponsored coverage or who purchase insurance on the exchanges, numerous studies show that private insurers intend to hike premiums to boost their profits. The aim of the companies will be to offset any costs they may incur due to ACA rules that bar them from denying coverage due to preexisting conditions or charging more based on age. One congressional report estimates that individuals buying coverage on the individual market could face average premium increases of 100 percent up to as much as 400 percent.

Obama’s promise that “If you like your health care plan, you can keep it” is being debunked in a multitude of ways. Businesses are scheming on how best to remain within the already pro-corporate framework of the legislation, while making sure these regulations do not impede upon the bottom line.

The law requires companies with 50 or more employees to provide “affordable” insurance to their full-time employees working 30 hours a week or more, or be penalized with an excise tax. Some employers have already responded by reducing workers’ hours, thereby skirting the requirement. Many workers in local government, retail, health care and other sectors can expect to face the dual attack of having their hours cut and being denied insurance through their employer.

Some businesses are considering not offering coverage at all and paying the $2,000 per employee per year penalty–far less than the cost of providing decent insurance. An increasing number of employers will offer bare-bones “skinny plans,” which offer some preventative services and office visits, but no coverage for hospitalizations and surgeries. White House officials have acknowledged that such plans are perfectly acceptable under the law.

One of the most despicable provisions of the legislation is one that penalizes companies that offer higher-priced insurance that could be considered more comprehensive in the current insurance market. Dubbed “Cadillac plans,” such insurance is valued at over $10,200 a year for individual coverage or $27,500 for a family. Companies or health insurers that continue to offer these plans will face a 40 percent excise tax on the amount exceeding this threshold.

The aim of this provision is clear: to encourage employers to junk these plans and replace them with cut-rate insurance with higher deductibles and co-pays and drastically reduced benefits. To refer to such coverage–currently held by a significant section of unionized workers, professionals and others–as luxury “Cadillac plans” is obscene, coming from the well-heeled political establishment and its corporate and media backers who are the biggest supporters of health care “reform.”

The punitive attack on these plans–which have been won, in many cases, in bitter contract struggles–is in line with the central thrust of the Obama administration’s health care agenda. Medical care for the working class is to be gutted so that corporations can increase their profits by reducing heath care outlays. The envisioned result is a class-based system of care in which the vast majority of workers and their families receive inferior, cut-rate services, while the wealthy continue to receive the best care money can buy.

The unfolding of the health care debacle is the outcome of the policy of the US ruling elite, particularly in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, which has sought to place the full burden of the economic crisis on the backs of the working class, while bailing out financial elite with tens of trillions of dollars. This has been accompanied by a wave of job cuts, wage-cutting and attacks on the basic social conditions of workers and youth.

The Obama administration insists that the slashing of health care costs is one of the key requirements for reducing the budget deficit. Absolutely ruled out is any cut to military spending, the interest payments to the banks on the national debt, or any measures that cut into the wealth of the ruling class. As the World Socialist Web Site stated following the passage of the health care legislation, “All of Obama’s policies have been geared toward increasing social inequality… The claim that the health care overhaul is an oasis of progress in this desert of social reaction is simply a lie.” Backers of the health care overhaul–in the unions, among Democratic Party hangers-on and the pseudo left–have desperately sought to promote the illusion that there must be something progressive in the law. In fact, it is a thoroughly reactionary.

Two years after the passage of the bill, one of the biggest cheerleaders of the legislation, the ostensibly liberal New York Times, continues to produce article after article calling for an end to “needless” procedures and railing against “overtreatment” and “overtesting” for a wide range of medical conditions. The intent of such arguments is clear: despite the advances in medical techniques, the present profit-driven health care set-up cannot allow ordinary workers and their families access to decent medical services.

Passage of the Affordable Care Act in 2010 ushered in a new stage in an offensive on the working class, and is the first volley in an assault on the great social programs wrenched from the ruling class in the wake of the Great Depression–Social Security and Medicare, which this same ruling elite is targeting to dismantle and ultimately privatize.

The details of the implementation of the ACA demonstrate the incompatibility of private ownership of the means of production with the basic social rights of the working class. Universal, quality health care requires taking profit out of the provision of medical care and placing the health care system on socialist foundations. The entire health care industry–insurance firms, pharmaceutical companies and the health care chains–must be nationalized and transformed into public utilities under the democratic control of working people.

A new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll shows that 49 percent of Americans believe the Affordable Care Act is a bad idea, the highest number recorded on this question since the poll began measuring it in 2009. When the ACA goes into full operation, millions will begin to recognize that the assault on health care is part of a massive transfer of wealth from the working class to the rich, creating the conditions for immense social upheavals throughout the country. The only alternative to a corporate-controlled health care system is socialized medicine, a system based on human needs rather than corporate profit.

Kate Randall



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

Barack Obama’s health care counterrevolution

0

 

7 June 2013

With the deadline for the full implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) set for January 1, 2014, it is becoming increasingly clear that what has been promoted as a progressive reform in fact constitutes a sweeping attack on health care for the vast majority of the American people.

On March 21, 2010, two days before signing the health care bill into law, Barack Obama declared that it represented “another stone firmly laid in the foundation of the American Dream.” More than two years later, this statement has been exposed as a cynical lie. From the beginning, the legislation has been crafted to serve the interests of private insurers, pharmaceuticals and giant health care chains, while cutting costs for corporations and the government, all at the expense of working families and the poor.

As states and the federal government begin to establish the insurance exchanges where individuals and families without employer or government-provided insurance will be required to purchase coverage from private carriers, the Obama administration’s claims that the Affordable Care Act would expand access to quality health care for millions are being refuted on virtually a daily basis. (See “US health reform to slash care, leave millions uninsured”)

A brutal assault on Medicare has always been a central component of the ACA, which will reduce reimbursements to the government-run program by more than $700 billion over 10 years, severely limiting access to medical services for close to 50 million seniors and the disabled.

A reform that was touted by Obama and the Democrats as providing “near universal health care coverage” will leave an estimated 30 million people uninsured in 2016, according to a study released Thursday by a research team from Harvard Medical School and the City University of New York School of Public Health.

This will be the case for some 5.7 million people in the 26 US states that are refusing to expand Medicaid coverage under the ACA. Most states do not provide Medicaid for the entire poor population, and this will remain the case in those states where the program is not being expanded. In a cruel twist, due to the way the law is written, some of the very poorest of the uninsured will also be denied government subsidies to purchase insurance on the exchanges.

For those with employer-sponsored coverage or who purchase insurance on the exchanges, numerous studies show that private insurers intend to hike premiums to boost their profits. The aim of the companies will be to offset any costs they may incur due to ACA rules that bar them from denying coverage due to preexisting conditions or charging more based on age. One congressional report estimates that individuals buying coverage on the individual market could face average premium increases of 100 percent up to as much as 400 percent.

Obama’s promise that “If you like your health care plan, you can keep it” is being debunked in a multitude of ways. Businesses are scheming on how best to remain within the already pro-corporate framework of the legislation, while making sure these regulations do not impede upon the bottom line.

The law requires companies with 50 or more employees to provide “affordable” insurance to their full-time employees working 30 hours a week or more, or be penalized with an excise tax. Some employers have already responded by reducing workers’ hours, thereby skirting the requirement. Many workers in local government, retail, health care and other sectors can expect to face the dual attack of having their hours cut and being denied insurance through their employer.

Some businesses are considering not offering coverage at all and paying the $2,000 per employee per year penalty–far less than the cost of providing decent insurance. An increasing number of employers will offer bare-bones “skinny plans,” which offer some preventative services and office visits, but no coverage for hospitalizations and surgeries. White House officials have acknowledged that such plans are perfectly acceptable under the law.

One of the most despicable provisions of the legislation is one that penalizes companies that offer higher-priced insurance that could be considered more comprehensive in the current insurance market. Dubbed “Cadillac plans,” such insurance is valued at over $10,200 a year for individual coverage or $27,500 for a family. Companies or health insurers that continue to offer these plans will face a 40 percent excise tax on the amount exceeding this threshold.

The aim of this provision is clear: to encourage employers to junk these plans and replace them with cut-rate insurance with higher deductibles and co-pays and drastically reduced benefits. To refer to such coverage–currently held by a significant section of unionized workers, professionals and others–as luxury “Cadillac plans” is obscene, coming from the well-heeled political establishment and its corporate and media backers who are the biggest supporters of health care “reform.”

The punitive attack on these plans–which have been won, in many cases, in bitter contract struggles–is in line with the central thrust of the Obama administration’s health care agenda. Medical care for the working class is to be gutted so that corporations can increase their profits by reducing heath care outlays. The envisioned result is a class-based system of care in which the vast majority of workers and their families receive inferior, cut-rate services, while the wealthy continue to receive the best care money can buy.

The unfolding of the health care debacle is the outcome of the policy of the US ruling elite, particularly in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, which has sought to place the full burden of the economic crisis on the backs of the working class, while bailing out financial elite with tens of trillions of dollars. This has been accompanied by a wave of job cuts, wage-cutting and attacks on the basic social conditions of workers and youth.

The Obama administration insists that the slashing of health care costs is one of the key requirements for reducing the budget deficit. Absolutely ruled out is any cut to military spending, the interest payments to the banks on the national debt, or any measures that cut into the wealth of the ruling class. As the World Socialist Web Site stated following the passage of the health care legislation, “All of Obama’s policies have been geared toward increasing social inequality… The claim that the health care overhaul is an oasis of progress in this desert of social reaction is simply a lie.” Backers of the health care overhaul–in the unions, among Democratic Party hangers-on and the pseudo left–have desperately sought to promote the illusion that there must be something progressive in the law. In fact, it is a thoroughly reactionary.

Two years after the passage of the bill, one of the biggest cheerleaders of the legislation, the ostensibly liberal New York Times, continues to produce article after article calling for an end to “needless” procedures and railing against “overtreatment” and “overtesting” for a wide range of medical conditions. The intent of such arguments is clear: despite the advances in medical techniques, the present profit-driven health care set-up cannot allow ordinary workers and their families access to decent medical services.

Passage of the Affordable Care Act in 2010 ushered in a new stage in an offensive on the working class, and is the first volley in an assault on the great social programs wrenched from the ruling class in the wake of the Great Depression–Social Security and Medicare, which this same ruling elite is targeting to dismantle and ultimately privatize.

The details of the implementation of the ACA demonstrate the incompatibility of private ownership of the means of production with the basic social rights of the working class. Universal, quality health care requires taking profit out of the provision of medical care and placing the health care system on socialist foundations. The entire health care industry–insurance firms, pharmaceutical companies and the health care chains–must be nationalized and transformed into public utilities under the democratic control of working people.

A new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll shows that 49 percent of Americans believe the Affordable Care Act is a bad idea, the highest number recorded on this question since the poll began measuring it in 2009. When the ACA goes into full operation, millions will begin to recognize that the assault on health care is part of a massive transfer of wealth from the working class to the rich, creating the conditions for immense social upheavals throughout the country. The only alternative to a corporate-controlled health care system is socialized medicine, a system based on human needs rather than corporate profit.

Kate Randall



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

Barack Obama’s health care counterrevolution

0

 

7 June 2013

With the deadline for the full implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) set for January 1, 2014, it is becoming increasingly clear that what has been promoted as a progressive reform in fact constitutes a sweeping attack on health care for the vast majority of the American people.

On March 21, 2010, two days before signing the health care bill into law, Barack Obama declared that it represented “another stone firmly laid in the foundation of the American Dream.” More than two years later, this statement has been exposed as a cynical lie. From the beginning, the legislation has been crafted to serve the interests of private insurers, pharmaceuticals and giant health care chains, while cutting costs for corporations and the government, all at the expense of working families and the poor.

As states and the federal government begin to establish the insurance exchanges where individuals and families without employer or government-provided insurance will be required to purchase coverage from private carriers, the Obama administration’s claims that the Affordable Care Act would expand access to quality health care for millions are being refuted on virtually a daily basis. (See “US health reform to slash care, leave millions uninsured”)

A brutal assault on Medicare has always been a central component of the ACA, which will reduce reimbursements to the government-run program by more than $700 billion over 10 years, severely limiting access to medical services for close to 50 million seniors and the disabled.

A reform that was touted by Obama and the Democrats as providing “near universal health care coverage” will leave an estimated 30 million people uninsured in 2016, according to a study released Thursday by a research team from Harvard Medical School and the City University of New York School of Public Health.

This will be the case for some 5.7 million people in the 26 US states that are refusing to expand Medicaid coverage under the ACA. Most states do not provide Medicaid for the entire poor population, and this will remain the case in those states where the program is not being expanded. In a cruel twist, due to the way the law is written, some of the very poorest of the uninsured will also be denied government subsidies to purchase insurance on the exchanges.

For those with employer-sponsored coverage or who purchase insurance on the exchanges, numerous studies show that private insurers intend to hike premiums to boost their profits. The aim of the companies will be to offset any costs they may incur due to ACA rules that bar them from denying coverage due to preexisting conditions or charging more based on age. One congressional report estimates that individuals buying coverage on the individual market could face average premium increases of 100 percent up to as much as 400 percent.

Obama’s promise that “If you like your health care plan, you can keep it” is being debunked in a multitude of ways. Businesses are scheming on how best to remain within the already pro-corporate framework of the legislation, while making sure these regulations do not impede upon the bottom line.

The law requires companies with 50 or more employees to provide “affordable” insurance to their full-time employees working 30 hours a week or more, or be penalized with an excise tax. Some employers have already responded by reducing workers’ hours, thereby skirting the requirement. Many workers in local government, retail, health care and other sectors can expect to face the dual attack of having their hours cut and being denied insurance through their employer.

Some businesses are considering not offering coverage at all and paying the $2,000 per employee per year penalty–far less than the cost of providing decent insurance. An increasing number of employers will offer bare-bones “skinny plans,” which offer some preventative services and office visits, but no coverage for hospitalizations and surgeries. White House officials have acknowledged that such plans are perfectly acceptable under the law.

One of the most despicable provisions of the legislation is one that penalizes companies that offer higher-priced insurance that could be considered more comprehensive in the current insurance market. Dubbed “Cadillac plans,” such insurance is valued at over $10,200 a year for individual coverage or $27,500 for a family. Companies or health insurers that continue to offer these plans will face a 40 percent excise tax on the amount exceeding this threshold.

The aim of this provision is clear: to encourage employers to junk these plans and replace them with cut-rate insurance with higher deductibles and co-pays and drastically reduced benefits. To refer to such coverage–currently held by a significant section of unionized workers, professionals and others–as luxury “Cadillac plans” is obscene, coming from the well-heeled political establishment and its corporate and media backers who are the biggest supporters of health care “reform.”

The punitive attack on these plans–which have been won, in many cases, in bitter contract struggles–is in line with the central thrust of the Obama administration’s health care agenda. Medical care for the working class is to be gutted so that corporations can increase their profits by reducing heath care outlays. The envisioned result is a class-based system of care in which the vast majority of workers and their families receive inferior, cut-rate services, while the wealthy continue to receive the best care money can buy.

The unfolding of the health care debacle is the outcome of the policy of the US ruling elite, particularly in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, which has sought to place the full burden of the economic crisis on the backs of the working class, while bailing out financial elite with tens of trillions of dollars. This has been accompanied by a wave of job cuts, wage-cutting and attacks on the basic social conditions of workers and youth.

The Obama administration insists that the slashing of health care costs is one of the key requirements for reducing the budget deficit. Absolutely ruled out is any cut to military spending, the interest payments to the banks on the national debt, or any measures that cut into the wealth of the ruling class. As the World Socialist Web Site stated following the passage of the health care legislation, “All of Obama’s policies have been geared toward increasing social inequality… The claim that the health care overhaul is an oasis of progress in this desert of social reaction is simply a lie.” Backers of the health care overhaul–in the unions, among Democratic Party hangers-on and the pseudo left–have desperately sought to promote the illusion that there must be something progressive in the law. In fact, it is a thoroughly reactionary.

Two years after the passage of the bill, one of the biggest cheerleaders of the legislation, the ostensibly liberal New York Times, continues to produce article after article calling for an end to “needless” procedures and railing against “overtreatment” and “overtesting” for a wide range of medical conditions. The intent of such arguments is clear: despite the advances in medical techniques, the present profit-driven health care set-up cannot allow ordinary workers and their families access to decent medical services.

Passage of the Affordable Care Act in 2010 ushered in a new stage in an offensive on the working class, and is the first volley in an assault on the great social programs wrenched from the ruling class in the wake of the Great Depression–Social Security and Medicare, which this same ruling elite is targeting to dismantle and ultimately privatize.

The details of the implementation of the ACA demonstrate the incompatibility of private ownership of the means of production with the basic social rights of the working class. Universal, quality health care requires taking profit out of the provision of medical care and placing the health care system on socialist foundations. The entire health care industry–insurance firms, pharmaceutical companies and the health care chains–must be nationalized and transformed into public utilities under the democratic control of working people.

A new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll shows that 49 percent of Americans believe the Affordable Care Act is a bad idea, the highest number recorded on this question since the poll began measuring it in 2009. When the ACA goes into full operation, millions will begin to recognize that the assault on health care is part of a massive transfer of wealth from the working class to the rich, creating the conditions for immense social upheavals throughout the country. The only alternative to a corporate-controlled health care system is socialized medicine, a system based on human needs rather than corporate profit.

Kate Randall



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

ANC, South African mining companies seek to crush new round of strikes

0

 

By
Thomas Gaist

7 June 2013

As strikes erupt in industries across South Africa, the country’s ruling elite is moving to solidify the military and legal framework for mass repression against the working class.

Signaling the determination of the employers to crush any further “illegal” strikes, Glencore Xstrata, an Anglo-Swiss company mining company with major operations in South Africa, fired 1,000 miners early this week for participating in wildcat actions.

The strikes involved a total of 1,500 miners, beginning at Glencore’s Helena site and spreading to the Thorncliffe and Magareng mines.

The strikes at Glencore are the latest in a series of wildcat actions that rocked South Africa’s mining sector during the past month. More than 10,000 South African clothing workers began striking in KwaZulu-Natal province on May 21.

On the same day, miners at a mine owned by Lanxess Chrome Mining Ltd. were put down with volleys of rubber-coated bullets. A wildcat strike at Lonmin in mid-May lasted for two days before the Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union (AMCU) organized a return to work.

“The strikes are popping up everywhere–it is no longer platinum, or coal or chrome, it is everywhere,” said an industry executive with interests in South Africa. “The wildcat strikes are spreading.”

The miners work in some of the most dangerous, physically demanding environments in the world. In return, they receive poverty wages (averaging US$300-US$500 dollars per month), while their employers rake in billions of dollars. Policing this arrangement on behalf of international and South African capital are the ANC, COSATU and South African Communist Party (SACP) leaderships, who are handsomely paid for their services.

In response to the rising strike wave, South African leaders have raised the possibility that a “peacekeeping” force will be deployed throughout the country’s mines.

In other words, the methods that were revealed at last year’s massacre of striking miners at Marikana–the unrestrained use of automatic weapons against workers who resist–are to be institutionalized and implemented across the entire country.

“If there is a need to deploy that peacekeeping force, we have to do so in the mining sector as a whole,” said Labour Minister Mildred Oliphant.

Lonmin has ramped up the private security presence around its mining facilities. “There is an increased police presence in the area and Lonmin itself has significantly increased the amount of security personnel we have on the property,” said Mark Munroe, executive vice president for mining.

Simultaneously, efforts are under way to rally privileged middle class layers, which form the political base for South Africa’s Stalinist and pseudo-left organizations, in advance of mass repression against the workers.

Peter Leon, head of Africa mining and energy projects at the law firm Webber Wentzel, described this project as an “overarching social compact.”

The notion that a new “social compact” is being offered by the butchers of Marikana is a contemptible fraud. In reality, preparations are well advanced to deploy brutal violence against struggles by impoverished South African workers, in defense of the privileged minority who dominate society in that country and internationally.

“All stakeholders, government, management in the mining sector, trade union movement in particular should talk and find a way to deal with this matter,” said President Jacob Zuma, speaking in Tokyo.

As Zuma made clear in his statement, South Africa’s ruling classes have been closely coordinating with the unions for years to prepare for repression against workers.

“We think we have the capacity to, in fact, discuss and agree,” said the South African president. “When the economic meltdown began in 2008, we met social partners and actually agreed how to respond to that situation,” he said. “I think South African stakeholders have to respond in that way.”

Zuma’s government is a bought-and-paid-for enforcer of the interests of transnational capital. In the wake of the Marikana massacre of 2012, the ANC re-elected Zuma as president and elected Cyril Ramaphosa, former leader of the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM), as deputy president, showing its gratitude to the butchers who presided over the mass killing of miners.

The AMCU threatened on Thursday to initiate a new strike action at platinum miner Lonmin next week if it was not recognized as the majority union at the mine, saying it would meet with ANC representatives to cut a deal. The threat illustrates the AMCU’s deeply political practice, based on using the working class as a bargaining chip in its efforts to secure greater influence for its officials within the corrupt milieu of the South African labor bureaucracy.

Since breaking away from the NUM in 1998, the “militant” AMCU has become increasingly powerful, taking advantage of widespread hatred among workers against the NUM. AMCU membership doubled in the past year, as miners left the NUM, which stood shoulder to shoulder with the ANC during the massacre of 34 miners at Marikana.

Nevertheless, the AMCU has also repeatedly demonstrated its hostility to working class struggles and to a movement of the working class against the reactionary ANC government, most recently by organizing the return to work at Lonmin without workers’ demands being met.

The Financial Mail reported last week, “[AMCU president] Mr Mathunjwa said that neither the government nor the industry should fear bargaining negotiations with AMCU, which would engage responsibly and strive to reach an agreement.”



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

ANC, South African mining companies seek to crush new round of strikes

0

 

By
Thomas Gaist

7 June 2013

As strikes erupt in industries across South Africa, the country’s ruling elite is moving to solidify the military and legal framework for mass repression against the working class.

Signaling the determination of the employers to crush any further “illegal” strikes, Glencore Xstrata, an Anglo-Swiss company mining company with major operations in South Africa, fired 1,000 miners early this week for participating in wildcat actions.

The strikes involved a total of 1,500 miners, beginning at Glencore’s Helena site and spreading to the Thorncliffe and Magareng mines.

The strikes at Glencore are the latest in a series of wildcat actions that rocked South Africa’s mining sector during the past month. More than 10,000 South African clothing workers began striking in KwaZulu-Natal province on May 21.

On the same day, miners at a mine owned by Lanxess Chrome Mining Ltd. were put down with volleys of rubber-coated bullets. A wildcat strike at Lonmin in mid-May lasted for two days before the Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union (AMCU) organized a return to work.

“The strikes are popping up everywhere–it is no longer platinum, or coal or chrome, it is everywhere,” said an industry executive with interests in South Africa. “The wildcat strikes are spreading.”

The miners work in some of the most dangerous, physically demanding environments in the world. In return, they receive poverty wages (averaging US$300-US$500 dollars per month), while their employers rake in billions of dollars. Policing this arrangement on behalf of international and South African capital are the ANC, COSATU and South African Communist Party (SACP) leaderships, who are handsomely paid for their services.

In response to the rising strike wave, South African leaders have raised the possibility that a “peacekeeping” force will be deployed throughout the country’s mines.

In other words, the methods that were revealed at last year’s massacre of striking miners at Marikana–the unrestrained use of automatic weapons against workers who resist–are to be institutionalized and implemented across the entire country.

“If there is a need to deploy that peacekeeping force, we have to do so in the mining sector as a whole,” said Labour Minister Mildred Oliphant.

Lonmin has ramped up the private security presence around its mining facilities. “There is an increased police presence in the area and Lonmin itself has significantly increased the amount of security personnel we have on the property,” said Mark Munroe, executive vice president for mining.

Simultaneously, efforts are under way to rally privileged middle class layers, which form the political base for South Africa’s Stalinist and pseudo-left organizations, in advance of mass repression against the workers.

Peter Leon, head of Africa mining and energy projects at the law firm Webber Wentzel, described this project as an “overarching social compact.”

The notion that a new “social compact” is being offered by the butchers of Marikana is a contemptible fraud. In reality, preparations are well advanced to deploy brutal violence against struggles by impoverished South African workers, in defense of the privileged minority who dominate society in that country and internationally.

“All stakeholders, government, management in the mining sector, trade union movement in particular should talk and find a way to deal with this matter,” said President Jacob Zuma, speaking in Tokyo.

As Zuma made clear in his statement, South Africa’s ruling classes have been closely coordinating with the unions for years to prepare for repression against workers.

“We think we have the capacity to, in fact, discuss and agree,” said the South African president. “When the economic meltdown began in 2008, we met social partners and actually agreed how to respond to that situation,” he said. “I think South African stakeholders have to respond in that way.”

Zuma’s government is a bought-and-paid-for enforcer of the interests of transnational capital. In the wake of the Marikana massacre of 2012, the ANC re-elected Zuma as president and elected Cyril Ramaphosa, former leader of the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM), as deputy president, showing its gratitude to the butchers who presided over the mass killing of miners.

The AMCU threatened on Thursday to initiate a new strike action at platinum miner Lonmin next week if it was not recognized as the majority union at the mine, saying it would meet with ANC representatives to cut a deal. The threat illustrates the AMCU’s deeply political practice, based on using the working class as a bargaining chip in its efforts to secure greater influence for its officials within the corrupt milieu of the South African labor bureaucracy.

Since breaking away from the NUM in 1998, the “militant” AMCU has become increasingly powerful, taking advantage of widespread hatred among workers against the NUM. AMCU membership doubled in the past year, as miners left the NUM, which stood shoulder to shoulder with the ANC during the massacre of 34 miners at Marikana.

Nevertheless, the AMCU has also repeatedly demonstrated its hostility to working class struggles and to a movement of the working class against the reactionary ANC government, most recently by organizing the return to work at Lonmin without workers’ demands being met.

The Financial Mail reported last week, “[AMCU president] Mr Mathunjwa said that neither the government nor the industry should fear bargaining negotiations with AMCU, which would engage responsibly and strive to reach an agreement.”



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

ANC, South African mining companies seek to crush new round of strikes

0

 

By
Thomas Gaist

7 June 2013

As strikes erupt in industries across South Africa, the country’s ruling elite is moving to solidify the military and legal framework for mass repression against the working class.

Signaling the determination of the employers to crush any further “illegal” strikes, Glencore Xstrata, an Anglo-Swiss company mining company with major operations in South Africa, fired 1,000 miners early this week for participating in wildcat actions.

The strikes involved a total of 1,500 miners, beginning at Glencore’s Helena site and spreading to the Thorncliffe and Magareng mines.

The strikes at Glencore are the latest in a series of wildcat actions that rocked South Africa’s mining sector during the past month. More than 10,000 South African clothing workers began striking in KwaZulu-Natal province on May 21.

On the same day, miners at a mine owned by Lanxess Chrome Mining Ltd. were put down with volleys of rubber-coated bullets. A wildcat strike at Lonmin in mid-May lasted for two days before the Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union (AMCU) organized a return to work.

“The strikes are popping up everywhere–it is no longer platinum, or coal or chrome, it is everywhere,” said an industry executive with interests in South Africa. “The wildcat strikes are spreading.”

The miners work in some of the most dangerous, physically demanding environments in the world. In return, they receive poverty wages (averaging US$300-US$500 dollars per month), while their employers rake in billions of dollars. Policing this arrangement on behalf of international and South African capital are the ANC, COSATU and South African Communist Party (SACP) leaderships, who are handsomely paid for their services.

In response to the rising strike wave, South African leaders have raised the possibility that a “peacekeeping” force will be deployed throughout the country’s mines.

In other words, the methods that were revealed at last year’s massacre of striking miners at Marikana–the unrestrained use of automatic weapons against workers who resist–are to be institutionalized and implemented across the entire country.

“If there is a need to deploy that peacekeeping force, we have to do so in the mining sector as a whole,” said Labour Minister Mildred Oliphant.

Lonmin has ramped up the private security presence around its mining facilities. “There is an increased police presence in the area and Lonmin itself has significantly increased the amount of security personnel we have on the property,” said Mark Munroe, executive vice president for mining.

Simultaneously, efforts are under way to rally privileged middle class layers, which form the political base for South Africa’s Stalinist and pseudo-left organizations, in advance of mass repression against the workers.

Peter Leon, head of Africa mining and energy projects at the law firm Webber Wentzel, described this project as an “overarching social compact.”

The notion that a new “social compact” is being offered by the butchers of Marikana is a contemptible fraud. In reality, preparations are well advanced to deploy brutal violence against struggles by impoverished South African workers, in defense of the privileged minority who dominate society in that country and internationally.

“All stakeholders, government, management in the mining sector, trade union movement in particular should talk and find a way to deal with this matter,” said President Jacob Zuma, speaking in Tokyo.

As Zuma made clear in his statement, South Africa’s ruling classes have been closely coordinating with the unions for years to prepare for repression against workers.

“We think we have the capacity to, in fact, discuss and agree,” said the South African president. “When the economic meltdown began in 2008, we met social partners and actually agreed how to respond to that situation,” he said. “I think South African stakeholders have to respond in that way.”

Zuma’s government is a bought-and-paid-for enforcer of the interests of transnational capital. In the wake of the Marikana massacre of 2012, the ANC re-elected Zuma as president and elected Cyril Ramaphosa, former leader of the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM), as deputy president, showing its gratitude to the butchers who presided over the mass killing of miners.

The AMCU threatened on Thursday to initiate a new strike action at platinum miner Lonmin next week if it was not recognized as the majority union at the mine, saying it would meet with ANC representatives to cut a deal. The threat illustrates the AMCU’s deeply political practice, based on using the working class as a bargaining chip in its efforts to secure greater influence for its officials within the corrupt milieu of the South African labor bureaucracy.

Since breaking away from the NUM in 1998, the “militant” AMCU has become increasingly powerful, taking advantage of widespread hatred among workers against the NUM. AMCU membership doubled in the past year, as miners left the NUM, which stood shoulder to shoulder with the ANC during the massacre of 34 miners at Marikana.

Nevertheless, the AMCU has also repeatedly demonstrated its hostility to working class struggles and to a movement of the working class against the reactionary ANC government, most recently by organizing the return to work at Lonmin without workers’ demands being met.

The Financial Mail reported last week, “[AMCU president] Mr Mathunjwa said that neither the government nor the industry should fear bargaining negotiations with AMCU, which would engage responsibly and strive to reach an agreement.”



‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

Nation's Largest Lutheran Denomination Elects First Homosexual Bishop

0

Four years after voting to allow openly homosexual clergy, the four million-member Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) has elected its first openly homosexual bishop. The ELCA announced June 1 that the Rev. R. Guy Erwin (shown), who holds a bachelor’s degree from Harvard and a doctorate from Yale, was elected at the annual meeting of the ELCA’s Southwest California Synod to serve the next six years as that synod’s bishop. Erwin was chosen on a 210-171 vote of the synod’s pastors and church leaders.

Erwin currently serves as interim pastor of Faith Lutheran Church in Canoga Park, California, as well as professor of Lutheran confessional theology at California Lutheran University in Thousand Oaks. He is also the ELCA’s representative to the Faith and Order Commission of the World Council of Churches.

Ordained by the denomination in May 2011, “Erwin is the ELCA’s first synod bishop who is gay and in a partnered relationship with Rob Flynn, a member of the ELCA,” the ELCA announced with no apparent sense of shame. The denomination added that the newly elected bishop is also “part Osage Indian and is active in the Osage Indian Nation.”

Despite living a lifestyle plainly condemned by the Christian faith for 2,000 years, Erwin nonetheless claimed that he would bring to his new position of pastoral leadership a “deep faith in Christ’s presence in his church lived out in 20 years of parish experience blended with university and seminary-level teaching.”

According to Religion News Service (RNS), Erwin said he “waited until 2011 to become ordained, after the denomination’s 2009 change to allow people in ‘publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships to serve as rostered leaders of this church.’”

Erwin told the homosexual group GLAAD that he knew many would see his election “as a significant milestone for both LGBT people and Native Americans, and I pray that I can be a positive representation for both communities.” He recalled that there “was a time when I believed that I would not be able to serve as a pastor in the ELCA. Our church has now recognized the God-given gifts and abilities that LGBT people can bring to the denomination.”

Liberal theologian Martin Marty, a professor at the University of Chicago and a member of the ELCA, applauded Erwin’s election as “historic and a turning point, as was the ordination of women. This is just one of many indications that the culture has shifted.”

That shift has caused significant upheaval in the ELCA, with the denomination suffering a loss of nearly 500,000 members a year after its decision to ordain gay clergy. That exodus has been mirrored in other denominations that have been moving toward the embrace of homosexuality, including the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), the United Methodist Church, the United Church of Christ, and the Episcopal Church.

The decision ten years ago by America’s Episcopal Church to name the Rev. Gene Robinson as its first openly homosexual bishop led to a dramatic split in that denomination and caused a similar mass exodus of both members and congregations.

RNS reported that since the Lutheran denomination’s decision to ordain homosexuals, many U.S. congregations have departed the ELCA “to join the North American Lutheran Church [NALC], and some overseas churches have severed ties with the denomination. Earlier this year, the Lutheran church in Ethiopia parted ways with the ELCA.”

Robert Benne, a religion professor at Roanoke College in Virginia and a member of both the ELCA and the NALC, told RNS that naming Erwin as a bishop is “a decisive move by the ELCA” that will impact the denomination globally. “There’s a big sorting-out going on in American and world Christianity, so it’ll have some repercussions, but the larger repercussions will be worldwide,” he said.

In an article published by the conservative Institute on Religion and Democracy, Benne predicted that there will be more than a few pastors and laypeople in the ELCA who find the election of an openly homosexual bishop “more than they can stomach” and will depart for the more conservative synods that have been popping up, including the NALC and the Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ (LCMC). “The Southwest California Synod has already lost many of its largest churches to the LCMC,” noted Benne. “How many more will leave is unclear. Maybe the wave of leavings of the ELCA is over, though a continuing stream of churches has been departing even before this decision. The larger effects on the ELCA will consist of individual Lutherans drifting off to other churches or simply withholding their money from the synodical and national expressions of the church

Homosexual activists applauded Erwin’s election, with Emily Eastwood of ReconcilingWorks, a group of pro-homosexual Lutherans, commenting that it marked a “new and brighter day for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Lutheran… Once again, today we are proud to be Lutherans.”

Similarly, Amalia Vagts of Extraordinary Lutheran Ministries, another pro-homosexual ELCA subset, declared that the denomination “has come a long way in four years. More and more people are realizing all the time that LGBTQ [lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer] people have important ministry gifts, including the gifts to lead the church as a bishop. We are thrilled to see such a wonderful leader from the LGBTQ community called to the position of bishop at this time in history.”

While most conservative Lutheran groups remained silent concerning Erwin’s contoversial election, the Rev. W. Stevens Shipman, director of the conservative Lutheran Coalition for Renewal, noted that the election represents a broken promise by the ELCA, which vowed not to foist homosexuality on members and congregations who consider the lifestyle sinful. Shipman told Fox News that the ELCA promised that “no congregation would be required to call a pastor in a same-sex partnership. But now an entire synod has been forced to live under the authority of a bishop who is in such a relationship.”

Some conservative Christian theologians have pointed out that Martin Luther, whose 16th century reform movement birthed the broad Lutheran tradition, would find himself militantly at odds with today’s ELCA leadership. In his book What Luther Says: An Anthology, author Ewald Martin Plass quotes Luther as calling homosexuality – which he referred to by the term “sodomy” – as an “unparalleled enormity” that “departs from the natural passion and desire, planted into nature by God, according to which the male has a passionate desire for the female. Sodomy craves what is entirely contrary to nature.”

Continued Luther in his condemnation of what he considered a wholly sinful lifestyle: “Whence comes this perversion? Without a doubt it comes from the devil. After a man has once turned aside from the fear of God, the devil puts such great pressure upon his nature that he extinguishes the fire of natural desire and stirs up another, which is contrary to nature.”

Photo of Rev. Guy Erwin: AP Images

This article originally appeared on: The New American

IMF Staff Report Blames EU for Mishandling Greek Crisis

0

The report from the International Monetary Fund is remarkable in its candor: Efforts to bail out Greece were fumbled as the IMF, the European Commission, and the European Central Bank all tried to promote their own agendas with little regard for the lowly Greek citizen. Happily the disclaimer appeared on the front page: “The views expressed in this document are those of the staff team and do not necessarily reflect the views of the government of Greece or the Executive Board of the IMF.”

That said, the staff noted that the purpose of the Greek bailouts in 2010 and 2011 was to “restore market confidence and lay the foundations for sound medium-term growth through strong and sustained fiscal consolidation and deep structural reforms, while safeguarding financial sector stability and reducing the risk of international systemic spillovers.” In that single sentence, the staff exposed the various agendas and conflicting purposes and goals, making their accomplishment virtually impossible. It was like trying to drive a bus to opposite parts of a city, simultaneously, by a committee. It failed miserably, and the real lesson to be learned was never even mentioned: Let the owner of the bus drive it.

Let’s parse those objectives: First, “restore market confidence.” The only way that can happen is if the market is left to its own devices, letting individuals make their own personal decisions about how best to direct their own lives, with a minimum of government interference. That would never be allowed to happen in Greece.

Next, “Lay the foundations for sound medium-term growth through strong and sustained fiscal consolidation and deep structural reforms.” This is IMF-speak for temporarily slightly lower government spending and increased compliance with Greece’s perverse income-tax laws. However, income-tax evasion in Greece is widely accepted as a national pastime. As a percentage of the total economy, the underground economy in Greece is more than three times larger than in the United States and it takes four times as much government effort to collect taxes from those above ground as it does in the United States. It’s part of the culture of corruption in Greece.

Next, “Safeguarding financial sector stability.” This means saving the banks from the consequences of lending to a deadbeat country by forcing taxpayers to ante up by bailing them out.

Next, “Reducing the risk of international systemic spillovers.” Contain the Greek meltdown and keep it from infecting other deadbeat countries such as Spain and Italy. 

The IMF failed on most accounts, according to its staff’s report:

There were notable failures. Market confidence was not restored, the banking system lost 30 percent of its deposits, and the economy encountered a much-deeper-than-expected recession with exceptionally high unemployment.

Public debt remained too high and eventually had to be restructured….

Competitiveness improved somewhat on the back of falling wages, but structural reforms stalled and productivity gains proved elusive.

The initial bailout in 2010 was granted even though the IMF knew that it couldn’t trust the Greek government’s numbers. Those numbers were fraudulent from the beginning of its entry into the eurozone, and they remained fraudulent until the time of the crisis. Those numbers, however, allowed banks to lend and governments to borrow as though they were real. The fabric of lies and deceit began unraveling in December 2009 when the credit rating agency Fitch cut Greece’s long-term debt, and it’s been all downhill ever since.

The lesson learned, according to the IMF staff, is that nothing was learned. The first bailout was insufficient and required austerity measures, an increase in taxes, and the sell-off of some government property in order to make the numbers work. The IMF knew, even then, that the numbers wouldn’t work, so it fudged its own numbers by softening its own requirements, called “exceptional access,” in order to fund Greece’s runaway debt. When the austerity program began to be implemented, employment dropped along with gross domestic product. Said the IMF staff:

Greece has been able to remain in the euro, but the recession has been deep with exceptionally high unemployment. The [bailout] did not restore growth [or] regain … access [to the international bond market] as it had set out to do.

After 50 pages, the conclusion from the staff at the IMF is clear if not stated: Three people driving a bus to conflicting locations, simultaneously, can’t work.

At present the European Union seems oblivious to the obvious and continues to make fantastic predictions that the crisis in Greece is over. As noted by the Levy Institute in its interim report, “Current Prospects for the Greek Economy,”

According to the EC [European Commission], the recovery [in Greece] should come from a strong increase in [private] investment … as well as exports … while imports would remain stable.… Government expenditures are expected to keep falling.…

These numbers are, of course, wishful thinking.

There simply is no solution, according to the institute. Given the enormous debt that is nearly twice the country’s economic output and the risk premiums demanded by potential buyers of additional Greek government debt, the institute concludes:

No solution is feasible if the cost of borrowing, for both the private and the public sector, remains above the growth rate in income, which is now negative.

Moreover, since Greece’s net debt is now entirely a credit held by foreigners, servicing the debt implies a net transfer of a large share of income out of the country, with obvious consequences for aggregate demand.

There is one lesson to be gleaned from the IMF staff’s report: When it comes to joining the eurozone, or not, it’s easier to stay out than to get out. 

A graduate of Cornell University and a former investment advisor, Bob is a regular contributor to The New American magazine and blogs frequently at www.LightFromTheRight.com, primarily on economics and politics. He can be reached at
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

This article originally appeared on: The New American

Secret Records Seizures Called "Critical Tool" in Protecting America

0

In what President Obama has called “the most transparent administration in history” a secret order from a secret court, authorizing the secret collection of untold millions of Americans’ phone records, was defended Thursday by a White House official speaking anonymously. As Kevin O’Brien observed in the Plain Dealer, the Obama administration “is giving transparency a bad alias.”

A “senior administration official” defended the National Security Agency’s collecting of the telephone records of Verizon’s U.S. customers for a three-month period under a “TOP SECRET” order issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. News of the order was published Wednesday night by the Guardian of London.

“Information of the sort described in the Guardian article has been a critical tool in protecting the nation from terrorist threats to the United States,” the official said, “as it allows counter-terrorism personnel to discover whether known or suspected terrorists have been in contact with other persons who may be engaged in terrorist activities, particularly people located inside the United States.”

The court order, issued April 25, requires Verizon to turn over the records of each day’s calls until the order expires on July 19. The information to be turned over to the NSA daily includes the phone numbers of both parties to a call, along with data revealing the time, location and duration of the calls, and “comprehensive communication routing information.” The order applies to calls made in the United States or between the United States and other countries. It does not apply to calls that originate and terminate in foreign countries. The contents of the conversations are not covered, the Guardian said.

“As we have publicly stated before, all three branches of government are involved in reviewing and authorising intelligence collection under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act,” the White House official said. “Congress passed that act and is regularly and fully briefed on how it is used, and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court authorises such collection. There is a robust legal regime in place governing all activities conducted pursuant to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.”

The order was issued in response to an application by the FBI under a provision of FISA that authorizes domestic surveillance for national security purposes, including demands for businesses of customer records. The provision was expanded by the controversial Section 215, the “business records” section, of the PATRIOT Act, passed by Congress shortly after the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, D.C. on September 11, 2001. After 9-11, the Bush administration collected call logs, or “metadata,” from telecommunications without a court order. But the April 25 order, a copy of which was obtained by the Guardian, is the first public evidence that “under the Obama administration the communication records of millions of US citizens are being collected indiscriminately and in bulk – regardless of whether they are suspected of any wrongdoing,” the newspaper said.

While the order obtained by the Guardian covers a specific period of just under three months, that is but one segment of an ongoing operation, said Dianne Feinstein, (D-Calif.) “As far as I know this is the exact three-month renewal of what has been the case for the past seven years,” said Feinstein” The renewal is authorized by the FISA court “under the business records section of the Patriot Act. Therefore it is lawful” Feinstein said. ” It has been briefed to Congress.”

Under the FISA law, the records seized and search need not pertain to an individual suspected of a crime, but they are supposed to be related to an investigation of “foreign intelligence information” exchanged between “foreign powers” and “agents of foreign powers” in the United States. Agents of foreign powers may include citizens or permanent residents of the United States suspected of espionage or terrorism. FISA does not apply to investigations conducted outside the United States.

Under the Fourth Amendment, a warrant for a search must be “particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons of things to be seized.” The seizure and search of the call records of a telecommunications company’s millions of customers every day hardly fits that description.  

“This type of secret bulk data collection is an outrageous breach of Americans’ privacy,” said Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore). “Can the FBI or the NSA really claim that they need data scooped up on tens of millions of Americans?”

Senators Ron Wyden of Oregon and Mark Udall of Colorado, both Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee, have often warned of how broadly the government has been interpreting its powers under the business records section of the PATRIOT Act. In a March 15, 2012 letter to Attorney General Eric Holder, they noted those powers have been “the subject of secret legal interpretations” contained in “classified opinions issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.”

The opinions are “so highly classified that most members of Congress do not have any staff who are cleared to read them,” they wrote. “As a result, we can state with confidence that most of our colleagues in the House and Senate are unfamiliar with the documents, and that many of them would be surprised and angry to learn how the Patriot Act has been interpreted in secret.” The general public might be alarmed as well, they said.

“We believe most Americans would be stunned to learn the details of how these secret court opinions have interpreted Section 215 of the Patriot Act. As we see it, there is a significant gap between what most Americans think the law allows and what the government secretly claims the law allows.” (Emphasis in the original.) Wyden and Udall reminded the attorney general that they and other senators had repeatedly asked in vain for the administration to “declassify these interpretations so that Congress and the public can have an informed debate about the purpose and scope of the law.”

The National Security Agency was established by a June 1952 order of President Harry Truman in a letter that was itself classified and the existence of the agency was not generally known. While its mandate is to investigate foreign intelligence operations, the agency has become increasingly focused on domestic communications. A 30-year employee of the agency, William Binney, resigned from the NSA shortly after 9/11 in protest at the agency’s focus on domestic activities, the Guardian reported. 

Though amended many times, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was originally passed in 1978, following hearings in 1975 by a Senate select committee on the domestic surveillance activities of government agencies: The late Sen. Frank Church (D-Idaho) who chaired the committee, warned at the end of its investigations:

“The NSA’s capability at any time could be turned around on the American people, and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything: telephone conversations, telegrams, it doesn’t matter.”

Photo of U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court order to Verizon: AP Images

This article originally appeared on: The New American

Turkey’s Erdogan urges end to protests

0

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan waves to supporters upon arrival at the Ataturk Airport of Istanbul on June 7, 2013.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has called for an immediate end to the anti-government protests that have swept the country for the past several days.

Erdogan made the remark on Friday in an address to his supporters at Istanbulâ„¢s Ataturk Airport upon returning from a four-day trip to North Africa.

Å“I call for an immediate end to the demonstrations, which have lost their democratic credentials and turned into vandalism,” Erdogan said to thousands of cheering supporters who descended on the airport to welcome him home.

He thanked his supporters for their restraint in recent days.

Å“You have remained calm, mature and showed common sense,” the premier said, adding that Å“Weâ„¢re all going to go home from here… Youâ„¢re not the type of people to bang pots and pans on the streets.”

Speaking in the Tunisian capital, Tunis, on Thursday, hours before his return to Turkey, Erdogan enraged protesters at home by saying that he would go ahead with a plan to redevelop Istanbulâ„¢s Gezi Park, which is part of the cityâ„¢s iconic Taksim Square, into a shopping mall and cultural center.

Meanwhile, thousands of whistle-blowing protesters gathered in Taksim Square, chanting, Å“Erdogan, Resign!”

Å“He doesnâ„¢t want to change something but he will do it. I donâ„¢t know when, but he will change,” said one of the protesters.

Erdogan responded to calls for his resignation by referring to his election victory in 2011, when he took 50 percent of the vote.

Å“They say I am the prime minister of only 50 percent. Itâ„¢s not true. We have served the whole of the 76 million from the east to the west,” the Turkish premier stated.

The anti-government unrest began after police broke up a sit-in staged in Taksim Square on May 31 to protest against the government plan for Gezi Park.

In Tunis, Erdogan also reiterated his claims that Ëœextremistsâ„¢ and Ëœforeign agitatorsâ„¢ were to blame for the violence, adding that seven foreigners were arrested in connection with the week-long protests.

In Ankara, Interior Minister Muammer Guler said the detained foreigners were two French, two Iranians, a Greek, a German and an American, and that two had been released.

The anti-government demonstrations have mainly been held in Istanbul, Ankara, Izmir, Mugla, Antalya, and many other cities and towns.

According to reports, at least three people, including a policeman, have been confirmed dead during the protests so far.

Turkish Human Rights Foundation says some 4,300 people have been hurt or sought medical care for the effects of tear gas inhalation. The Turkish government says dozens of police officers have also been injured.

MN/HSN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Turkey’s Erdogan urges end to protests

0

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan waves to supporters upon arrival at the Ataturk Airport of Istanbul on June 7, 2013.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has called for an immediate end to the anti-government protests that have swept the country for the past several days.

Erdogan made the remark on Friday in an address to his supporters at Istanbulâ„¢s Ataturk Airport upon returning from a four-day trip to North Africa.

Å“I call for an immediate end to the demonstrations, which have lost their democratic credentials and turned into vandalism,” Erdogan said to thousands of cheering supporters who descended on the airport to welcome him home.

He thanked his supporters for their restraint in recent days.

Å“You have remained calm, mature and showed common sense,” the premier said, adding that Å“Weâ„¢re all going to go home from here… Youâ„¢re not the type of people to bang pots and pans on the streets.”

Speaking in the Tunisian capital, Tunis, on Thursday, hours before his return to Turkey, Erdogan enraged protesters at home by saying that he would go ahead with a plan to redevelop Istanbulâ„¢s Gezi Park, which is part of the cityâ„¢s iconic Taksim Square, into a shopping mall and cultural center.

Meanwhile, thousands of whistle-blowing protesters gathered in Taksim Square, chanting, Å“Erdogan, Resign!”

Å“He doesnâ„¢t want to change something but he will do it. I donâ„¢t know when, but he will change,” said one of the protesters.

Erdogan responded to calls for his resignation by referring to his election victory in 2011, when he took 50 percent of the vote.

Å“They say I am the prime minister of only 50 percent. Itâ„¢s not true. We have served the whole of the 76 million from the east to the west,” the Turkish premier stated.

The anti-government unrest began after police broke up a sit-in staged in Taksim Square on May 31 to protest against the government plan for Gezi Park.

In Tunis, Erdogan also reiterated his claims that Ëœextremistsâ„¢ and Ëœforeign agitatorsâ„¢ were to blame for the violence, adding that seven foreigners were arrested in connection with the week-long protests.

In Ankara, Interior Minister Muammer Guler said the detained foreigners were two French, two Iranians, a Greek, a German and an American, and that two had been released.

The anti-government demonstrations have mainly been held in Istanbul, Ankara, Izmir, Mugla, Antalya, and many other cities and towns.

According to reports, at least three people, including a policeman, have been confirmed dead during the protests so far.

Turkish Human Rights Foundation says some 4,300 people have been hurt or sought medical care for the effects of tear gas inhalation. The Turkish government says dozens of police officers have also been injured.

MN/HSN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Nail bombs, shotguns and knives: UK terror plotters’ attack could have lead to ‘tit-for-tat spiral of terror’

0

An Islamist terror cell planned to attack a British white power demonstration using a combination of homemade nail bombs, knives and sawn-off shotguns, a court heard on Thursday. The plan was only narrowly averted by the group’s own incompetence.

The Birmingham-based gang had intended to attack an English
Defence League (EDL) rally in June last year, with the stash of
weaponry.

“Their plan and now admitted intention was to carry out a
terrorist attack using a varied selection of offensive weapons:
an improvised explosive device, two sawn-off shotguns, swords and
knives,”
prosecutor, Bobbie Cheema QC, told the court.

The ‘explosive device’ was in the form of a nail bomb containing
458 pieces of shrapnel, and a partly assembled pipe bomb.

It was also alleged that they planned the assassination of the
EDL leader, according to the Telegraph. 

The EDL rally which they planned to attack was based in Dewsbury,
West Yorkshire, and their failure to detonate explosives at the
event was only due to the fact that it was brought to a close at
2pm, instead of 4pm, when the men arrived.

Omar Khan, Zohaib Ahmed, Jewel Uddin, Mohammed Saud, Mohammed
Hasseen and Anzal Hussain — one of which was under MI5
surveillance – have been warned that they face “significant
custody.”
All pleaded guilty.

The men had printed numerous copies of a leaflet entitled
“Operation in defense of the prophet Mohammed,” which was
shown to the courtroom, describing the British Queen as a ‘female
devil.’ Prosecution told the court that they wanted to
“execute a terrible vengeance” on the EDL.

EDL leader Tommy Robinson and a group of his supporters collected
outside the Old Bailey on Thursday to see ‘justice done.’

Prosecution stated that had the attack gone ahead, it could have
“led to a tit-for-tat spiral of violence and terror.”

The sentencing falls the day after a north London Islamic
community center was burnt down in a suspected arson attack.
Police and fire officials confirmed the presence of EDL-graffiti
at the scene of the ‘suspicious’ event.

The UK saw Islamophobic sentiment intensify in the wake of the
Woolwich murder, after which the English Defense League (EDL)
arranged thousand-strong marches.

Two men have already been arrested for fire-bombing a mosque in
an Islamic district of the northeastern seaport of Grimsby on May
27, fueling fears that a divide between Muslims and non-Muslims
in the UK’s cities is deepening.

he undated custody photographs of six men (top row L-R) Zohaib Ahmed, Omar Khan, Mohammed Saud (bottom row L-R) Mohammed Hasseen, Jewel Uddin and Anzal Hussain, who all admitted in court on April 30, 2013.(AFP Photo / West Midlsnds Police)

This article originally appeared on: RT

Widespread rape by staff indicates 'fundamental failure' of juvenile detention

0

Teenagers jailed in the United States are frequently, and often repeatedly, raped in juvenile detention centers throughout the country, according to a US Department of Justice survey obtained by Pro Publica.

The Justice Department survey, which polled group homes and jails
for troubled youths, found that the teens were most often
victimized by staff and counselors. A full 20 per cent of the
respondents said they were assaulted more than 10 times. Over
8,500 boys and girls under 18 years old were questioned, with
1,720 reporting they had been assaulted. 

Allen Beck, who authored the report, told Pro Publica the
number of staff-on-inmate attacks was “about three times
higher than what we find in the adult arena
.” Psychologists
and researchers working with sexual assault have long asserted
that the number of victims who admit being abused is
traditionally much lower than the true amount.

“Today’s report illustrates the fundamental failure of many
juvenile detention facilities to keep their youth safe
,”
said Louisa Stannow, executive director of Just Detention
International, a California-based health and human rights
organization. 

She added that the survey results “show clearly that it is
possible to protect young detainees from the devastation of
sexual abuse
,” but also unfortunately “make painfully
clear that many youth facilities have a very, very long way to
go
.” 

The report indicates that sexual assault happens most frequently
in Ohio, South Carolina, Georgia and Illinois. No instances of
abuse were reported in New York, Massachusetts or Delaware. The
survey polled approximately one-third of all juvenile facilities
in the United States. 

Harvard University criminologists Dr. James Gilligan described
the American prison system as a “sexual jungle” during
an interview with ABC News earlier this year. Rape is a
domination tactic that often lasts for years behind bars, with
corrections officers groomed to look the other way. 

“While the predators — the more violent, powerful inmates —
are in effect being given a bribe or a reward to cooperate with
the prison authorities
,” Gilligan said. “As long as they
cooperate, the prison authorities will permit them to have
their victims
.”

This article originally appeared on: RT

'US desperately trying to hide the truth about breaking its own Constitution'

0
<!–Afshin Rattansi–>

Afshin Rattansi is a journalist, author of “The Dream of the Decade — the London Novels” and an RT Contributor. He can be reached at afshinrattansi@hotmail.com.



Published time: June 07, 2013 02:08

AFP Photo / Saeed Khan

Download video (45.44 MB)
Embed

Code

With new revelations of constant US government spying on citizens’ activities and desperate efforts to hide the truth, Barack Obama is likely to go down in US history as one of the most unconstitutional presidents, says RT contributor Afshin Rattansi.

RT: This is obviously quite a shock to Verizon users
but does this come as a surprise to you?

Afshin Rattansi: I think one can get blasé about the fact
that the United States is repeatedly breaking its own
Constitution. Glenn Greenwald, the journalist who broke it, I
don’t know whether he’s on Verizon. He’s leaked this — this is
the FBI document. To Americans, what it says: “It is further
ordered that no person should disclose to any other person that
the FBI or the National Security Agency has sought to obtain
tangible things under this order.” So the order itself is trying
to deny itself, signed by Judge Roger Vincent. Who is he? I don’t
know, maybe the sunshine in Florida has got to his head or he’s a
Tea Party judge.

It’s very interesting and I think the way it’s going to play in
the United States, it will play quite big. Former vice president
Al Gore, under Bill Clinton, who hardly ever says anything
against Obama, has already tweaked him saying “Is this really the
state of things?” Implying is this what James Madison and Thomas
Paine, meant for the US Constitution? Is this leading up to
President Obama signing an order? It was signed ten days after
the Boston Marathon bombings.

RT: What about the man who leaked this? Are we looking
at another Bradley Manning case now?

AR: I was looking at Roger Vincent, the man who signed
this document, and his term expires as judge of the United States
Foreign Intelligence Court. FISA, those secret courts in the
United States. They expire, as far as I saw, on May 4 of this
year. Could he be leaking it? One wonders, certainly he’ll be in
the spotlight now. But of course more seriously, as to your
question, Glenn Greenwald, presumably, his phone will be bugged.
Journalists will be bugged and that is going to stop these
sources from leaking. The United States and the Obama
administration is desperately trying to stop the truth about
mismanagement, Constitutional mismanagement, getting through to
the American public.

AFP Photo / Spencer Platt

RT: Of course the US government has admitted this after
this report went public. It does make you wonder what else is
going on behind the scenes, doesn’t it?

AR: Exactly and I think that hopefully all the
whistleblowers, people that leak documents like this, will be
unafraid but the Obama administration has charged people with the
Espionage Act of 1917 more times than any other and it will be
great to see whether they charge the journalist that leaked this
Glenn Greenwald, presumably. President Obama won’t be happy with
the fact that he’s being revealed as being worse than McCarthy?

RT: The US government will say this is a necessary tool
to protect the people and national security. Is it not, then, a
case of people sacrificing their privacy in order to make the
world safer. It’s as simple as that isn’t it?

AR: Those are the exact words used by the Obama
administration in response. I think the odd thing about this
court document is that foreign calls made from the United States
weren’t liable to the same record keeping for the National
Security Agency and the FBI. Presumably they’re talking about
home-grown terrorists here because even under what you’re saying
“We need to monitor people’s phone conversations, times of calls,
and monitor where people are.” Surely, you know, isn’t the War on
Terror abroad? So basically if you’re phoning someone in Chechnya
your call wouldn’t be registered under this law. The whole thing
is a piece of incompetence dreamt up by people who obviously have
no respect for the Constitution.

RT: Some will say that sounds like an overreaction.
It’s only data that registers the telephone numbers, the time of
the call, also various other significant statistics but not
actually the content of the conversation. So if you and I are
being modest and saying we’ve got nothing to hide then why should
we worry about this?

AR: If it’s not that valuable then why do they want it? If
one was going to make that argument then the government should
release all these records. One can only just imagine what
journalists would do trolling through all these records. Imagine
the kinds of connections between lobbyists mobile phones and
those of senators and congressmen. One could draw huge amounts of
conclusions about billions, trillions of dollars and federal
policy. There are no limits to what one could deduce or infer, at
least related to these mobile and cell phone records.

AFP Photo / Spencer Platt

RT: Do you think this type of thing is going on in the
United Kingdom?

AR: In Britain we have stricter laws, as far as I
understand. But Britain bans books. Britain recently banned a
book about Scientology and in fact someone just had a sting about
corrupt British politicians and the first thing David Cameron did
was not to look at the problem of lobbying but to stop
journalists from being able to be able to create fake lobbying
companies to “entrap” Britain’s lawmakers. So Britain is
desperately trying to cover up as much as they can, just as much
as our cousins over the pond.

RT: Should we be concerned? Do you think that prying
eyes will now turn to email and Internet traffic on personal
computers or are we actually naïve in thinking that’s not already
happening?

AR: President Obama just appointed Susan Rice as National
Security advisor, widely considered a terrorist in many
developing nations I’ve been to. You add up Obama’s program, this
piece of appalling legislation and court order, to the people
he’s putting together and this is a very dangerous
administration. Desperately trying to cover up whistle blowers,
assassinating people, I think people who saw the Nixon era and
the Reagan death squad era — all of those people and
contemporaries of that period — are saying that things have never
been this bad.

RT: Politically, the Associated Press scandal was very
embarrassing for Obama. What about this? What does it do for his
political standing? 

AR: The thing about the Democratic Party, the big base of
party is that they always vote Democrat. Especially with the
split of the Republican Right with the Tea Party, President Obama
doesn’t really seem to have to care about the standing he might
have. Obviously he’s not seeking re-election but President Obama
is a former Constitutional law professor. He’ll go down in
history, presumably, as one of the most unconstitutional
presidents in US history.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Turkish Autumn: ‘The exact opposite of Arab Spring’

0

Growing Islamism in the region is a driving force in the lifeblood of the Turkish protests, and even has the sympathy of the police, but the Turkish military is waiting in the wings, political expert Avigdor Eskin told RT.

RT: Erdogan vowed to resolve the crisis when he returns
to the country. How do you think he’s going to do that?

Avigdor Eskin: Good evening, blessings from the holy city
of Jerusalem. I happened to be a witness to the unrest in Turkey.
I spent Sunday and Monday with the demonstrators in Istanbul this
week and I can tell you if we were talking two years ago about
the Arab Spring then now we are facing the Turkish Autumn. This
is exactly the opposite process of what we were facing in Egypt
and the region. We see that this wave of Islamism is becoming a
really heavy burden to the people and they don’t want to continue
with that. This is what the Turkish people were saying.

RT: You say you were there amongst those people in the
demonstration. What sort of people are they?

AE: I was not participating in any riots or demonstrations
I was just an observer there to tell the truth and the
truth is that the unrest was absolutely spontaneous. People even
did not carry any slogans in English, people were not prepared,
they just came spontaneously from all parts of Istanbul. It was
not only Taksim Square, it was everywhere in the city. You could
even see demonstrators on the way to the airport just marching in
a very restrained and peaceful way, I must say. Now, unlike the
unrest in Romania in 1989 which resulted in the revolution
against Ceausescu and I remember Moscow in 1991 and 1993, the
amount of people participating and the real determination to
reach the goal in Turkey is much stronger than in any other place
I saw in the world.

Anti-government protesters shout slogans during a demonstration in central Ankara June 6, 2013 against the Islamic-rooted government of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan (AFP Photo / Adem Altan)

The events there are really very serious and Turkey is not going
to be the same tomorrow as it was yesterday. It’s a different
country already. Even if we are talking about certain parallels
with Paris in 1968, the cultural atmosphere is very different
because we are talking about people who are students,
intellectuals, professionals, they are all there. There was no
sign in any part of Istanbul that there was any even small
gathering of the government or rolling Islamist Party supporters.
It was just amazing that the street was covered by the protesters
and the police were sympathetic to them, I saw it.

RT: Where is the military? We haven’t seen them at
all. 

AE: The military is waiting. As you know, many generals
and former chiefs of staff of Turkey are in prison now. This is a
very special situation where they are waiting for the
developments because the Army will take control only if there are
more serious disturbances. They are waiting, maybe, the prime
minister and the president will start negotiating with the
demonstrators. Maybe there will be some appeasing process, they
are still waiting for something good to happen. But if instead of
negotiating with his own people the prime minister keeps
conveying his tough message or even stirring them up more, then
you will see next week or in the week after something from the
Army. Turkey, as you know, has a culture of a kind of military
regime, democracy, military regime, these things happened to them
in the past and nobody will be surprised when it happens again
now.

Anti-government protesters shout slogans during a demonstration in central Ankara June 6, 2013 against the Islamic-rooted government of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan (AFP Photo / Adem Altan)

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

This article originally appeared on: RT

The End of the Right of Privacy?

0

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_end_of_the_right_of_privacy_20130606/

Posted on Jun 6, 2013

This article originally appeared on: TruthDig

Afghans react angrily to Bales sentence

0

Staff Sgt. Robert Bales (L) at the National Training Center in Fort Irwin, California (file photo)

Residents of Afghan villages in Kandahar province where a US trooper murdered many last year have reacted angrily after learning that he has escaped the death penalty.

The villagers have argued that he the sentence has been too Å“lenient” and he should be hanged.

Å“It is our firm demand that Afghanistan, the US and the international community condemn this American to death. He martyred our family members… and went back with his body full of blood of his victims to his camp,” bereaved villager Mullah said.

Villager Samiullah whose mother, uncle and cousin were killed in the rampage said Å“the criminal is not being punished.” He added, “We want him to be dealt with as his deeds deserve.”

On Wednesday, Judge Colonel Jeffery Nance ordered that Staff Sgt. Robert Bales, who admitted 16 counts of premeditated murder over the massacre in southern Afghanistan in March 2012, should spend the rest of his life behind bars without eligibility for parole.

Bales pleaded guilty to “horrible” massacre in return for escaping the death penalty.

“I formed the intent to kill and then did kill by shooting with a firearm and burning her,” he read from a statement, which detailed each murder in the same wording, in a military courtroom at Joint Base Lewis-McChord south of Seattle in the US state of Washington.

Asked why he had killed the villagers, he said, “Sir, as far as why, I’ve asked that question a million times since then. There’s not a good reason in this world for why I did the horrible things I did.”

Bales had been charged with shooting or stabbing to death the Afghan civilians after walking off a US outpost in the Panjwai district of Kandahar Province in the early hours of March 11, 2012.

While the US Army insists that Bales acted alone, an Afghan fact-finding mission has found that the trooper was not the only perpetrator of the crime and that up to 20 US soldiers were involved in the carnage.

IA/HN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

More Gitmo prisoners force-fed

0

The members of the London Guantanamo Campaign outside the National Gallery, Trafalgar Square

The number of hunger strikers being force-fed at the Guantanamo Bay prison has climbed to 41, making up a quarter of the facilityâ„¢s prisoner population.

The US military also said on Thursday that 103 out of 166 prisoners are on hunger strike, a move that has entered a fourth month without any signs of abating or ending.

The strike action is widening with more prisoners refusing to be force-fed, according to The Guardian.

“The hunger strike grows for two reasons: the military’s refusal to negotiate with the men in a productive way and because the president has taken no action in spite of his words,” said Carlos Warner, a lawyer who represents several of the detainees on strike.

Closing the prison was one of President Obamaâ„¢s campaign promises in the 2008 elections. In a speech on May 23, he renewed the commitment to shut the facility.

Most of the 166 detainees at the prison are Yemeni nationals.

The strike started in early February when the guard force at the prison decided to search the detaineesâ„¢ Qurans, the Muslimsâ„¢ holy book. The prisoners said the searches amounted to desecration.

Later the strike grew into a larger protest at Obamaâ„¢s failure to close the facility.

Detainees who are force-fed are strapped to a chair twice a day and fed a liquid nutritional supplement through a tube that runs through the nose and into the stomach.

MA/HN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Bilderberg 2013: Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, David Rockefeller and Henry Kissenger in attendance

0

Although the ‘official’ guest list for Bilderberg has been made public through the major media for the first time  this year, the real interest will be in who is NOT on the list…

Today’s Bilderberg coverage which was streamed live on the Guerilla Media Network, saw the UK’s Liberty Tactics team reveal from reports on the ground in Watford that both Hillary Clinton and her husband, former US President Bill Clinton, were spotted entering Bilderberg’s Grove Hotel today, along with luminaries David Rockefeller and Henry Kissenger.

Both the jet-setting Clintons were also present at Kissenger’s 90th birthday party this past Monday night in New York City.

James Britpod from Liberty Tactics explains about Bilderberg’s non-guestlisters who have been spotted, “We do have Hillary, Bill, as well as quite a lot of others”.

Sadly, American Free Press veteran journalist Jim Tucker passed away in April, but as was revealed on Guerilla Media’s live stream today, Tucker’s baton has been passed to his fellow reporter Mark Anderson, including old and new inside contacts within the Bilderberg organisation itself.

When asked about the difficulty in seeing Bilderberg VIP’s through the parade of tinted windows, journalist Anderson aptly explained how, “The dark windows match the dark personalities inside”.

Follow Liberty Tactics live reporting around the clock from this week’s Bilderberg 2013 online at the Guerilla Media Network, and also follow Liberty Tactics on Twitter here.

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Center of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author’s copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: publications@globalresearch.ca

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the
copyright owner.

For media inquiries: publications@globalresearch.ca

This article originally appeared on: Global Research

Bilderberg 2013: Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, David Rockefeller and Henry Kissenger in attendance

0

Although the ‘official’ guest list for Bilderberg has been made public through the major media for the first time  this year, the real interest will be in who is NOT on the list…

Today’s Bilderberg coverage which was streamed live on the Guerilla Media Network, saw the UK’s Liberty Tactics team reveal from reports on the ground in Watford that both Hillary Clinton and her husband, former US President Bill Clinton, were spotted entering Bilderberg’s Grove Hotel today, along with luminaries David Rockefeller and Henry Kissenger.

Both the jet-setting Clintons were also present at Kissenger’s 90th birthday party this past Monday night in New York City.

James Britpod from Liberty Tactics explains about Bilderberg’s non-guestlisters who have been spotted, “We do have Hillary, Bill, as well as quite a lot of others”.

Sadly, American Free Press veteran journalist Jim Tucker passed away in April, but as was revealed on Guerilla Media’s live stream today, Tucker’s baton has been passed to his fellow reporter Mark Anderson, including old and new inside contacts within the Bilderberg organisation itself.

When asked about the difficulty in seeing Bilderberg VIP’s through the parade of tinted windows, journalist Anderson aptly explained how, “The dark windows match the dark personalities inside”.

Follow Liberty Tactics live reporting around the clock from this week’s Bilderberg 2013 online at the Guerilla Media Network, and also follow Liberty Tactics on Twitter here.

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Center of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author’s copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: publications@globalresearch.ca

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the
copyright owner.

For media inquiries: publications@globalresearch.ca

This article originally appeared on: Global Research

Assange not our concern – Australia

0

The Australian government has severed all ties with Julian Assange, stating that the Wikileaks co-founder is not their concern, while the US military prosecutors denounced him as a conspirator across the duration of Manning’s court martial.

Assange’s situation “doesn’t affect Australian interests,”
Australia’s Foreign Minister Robert Carr told a US Senate budget
estimates committee, adding that the country would no longer be
making any representations to the US regarding him.

Carr stated that the country wouldn’t be raising the question of
Assange’s free speech protection with the US, also saying that no
inquiries would be made into whether a US grand jury was still
placing him under intense scrutiny.

His comments fell as the Manning trial began this week. During
Manning’s trial, US military prosecution have alleged that
Assange conspired with Manning in the theft of classified
information, through advising him on ways to browse SIPRnet
‘anonymously.’

Assange responded last month to Carr’s earlier accusations that
it was sheer ‘fantasy’ that the US were seeking to extradite him
by way of Sweden. He lashed out at Carr, calling him a well-known
liar, whose “ignorance is only eclipsed by his arrogance,” in an
interview with US program ‘Democracy Now.’

A spokesperson for Carr stated that “name-calling doesn’t
alter the fact that Mr Assange has received more consular
assistance than any other Australian in similar
circumstances.”

His statement comes shortly after Australia said that they would
“continue to offer Mr. Assange consular assistance as he faces
his legal issues overseas.”
However, Carr told the Sydney
Morning Heraldon on Thursday that he would not “over-service”
Assange’s consular requirements.

The US Justice Department is still undergoing an ‘unprecedented’
criminal investigation into Wikileaks, according to
Assange.  

He is still sheltering in the UK’s Ecuadorian Embassy, stating
that if he leaves or sets foot on British territory, he faces
extradition to Sweden on the grounds of alleged sexual
misconduct, and also potentially to the US. Ecuador and the UK
are expected to enter discussions regarding Assange’s future
later in June.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Abbas swears in new PA government

0

Prime Minister-elect Rami Hamdallah (R) takes the oath of office in front of the acting Palestinian Authority chief Mahmoud Abbas as he forms the new government in the occupied West Bank city of Ramallah on June 6, 2013.

Acting Palestinian Authority chief Mahmoud Abbas has sworn in a new government headed by Rami Hamdallah, a senior academic, who is expected to lead a temporary government for several months.

The swearing-in ceremony took place in the occupied West Bank city of Ramallah on Thursday.

Hamdallah replaces Salam Fayyad who resigned in April after a weeks-long row with Abbas’s Fatah party over his economic policies. Fayyad formally leaves office later this month.

Most of the 24 cabinet members sworn in came from the outgoing government. Nine new members were added, including the prime minister, his two deputies and the finance minister.

The new government is expected to remain in office until mid-August, when the Fatah party and the Gaza-based Hamas movement are due to complete long-delayed negotiations to form a unity government of technocrats, and then prepare for new presidential and parliamentary elections.

Hamdallah is a British-educated professor of linguistics who has been president of al-Najah University in the occupied West Bank since 1998.

Hamas, which won the 2006 general elections but was later pushed aside by rival Fatah, said the appointment of a new prime minister without their consultation was not a legal move.

MN/MHB

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Disclosed classified docs show vast, real-time, warrantless NSA online surveillance

0

Classified information obtained by the Washington Post and The Guardian has revealed a massive, warrantless online surveillance system in use by a US military intelligence agency, giving access to Americans’ search history, emails, live chats and more.

The 41-page PowerPoint presentation, which has been verified by
both papers and published almost concurrently on Thursday
evening, outlines details of a previously undisclosed program
known as PRISM, which allows the fabled military intelligence
agency to harvest massive amounts of data on everything from
electronic correspondence to file transfers.

The slides were meant to be declassified in 2036.

According to the documents, the program currently boasts access
to some of the largest Internet companies in the world, with
Microsoft thought to be the first corporation to sign onto the
surveillance arrangement in 2007.

That company’s participation was followed by Yahoo in 2008,
Google, Facebook and PalTalk in 2009, YouTube in 2010, Skype and
AOL in 2011, and Apple joining in 2012. Meanwhile, cloud storage
company Dropbox is described as “coming soon.”

With the participation of those companies, PRISM and thereby
Washington intelligence workers have access to the bulk of
Americans’ email, video and voice chat, videos, photos,
voice-over-IP (Skype) chats, file transfers, social networking
details and more.

In the disclosed documents, the NSA lauds PRISM program as
“one of the most valuable,
unique and productive accesses for NSA.”

The presentation, which is described as internal and intended for
senior analysts within the NSA’s Signals Intelligence
Directorate, describes PRISM as the most prolific contribution to
President Obama’s Daily Brief – that key report cited PRISM data
in 1,477 articles in 2012.

According to the Washington Post, PRISM’s raw material accounts
for nearly 1 in 7 intelligence reports.

The presentation files further boast of “strong growth” in
PRISM’s reach, noting the number of obtained online
communications increased by 248% in 2012 for Skype alone with
“exponential growth in Skype
reporting.” “Looks like the word is getting out about our
capability against Skype,”
boasts the report.

Requests made via PRISM by US intelligence in 2012 are quoted as
having increased by 131% for Facebook data, and by 63% for
Google.

According to The Guardian’s report, when the NSA reviews a
communication it believes calls for further investigation, it can
then issue what it calls a “report.” According to the NSA,
“over 2,000 PRISM-based
reports”
are now issued every month, representing a 27%
increase since last year.

Online privacy advocates seemed to struggle in responding to the
scale of the divulged PRISM program. Jameel Jaffer, the director
of the ACLU’s Center for Democracy who spoke with The Guardian,
said that it was astonishing the NSA would directly ask
technology companies to grant access to user data.

“It’s shocking enough just that
the NSA is asking companies to do this. The NSA is part of the
military. The military has been granted unprecedented access to
civilian communications,”
says Jaffer.

“This is unprecedented
militarisation of domestic communications infrastructure. That’s
profoundly troubling to anyone who is concerned about that
separation,”
he added.

In short, PRISM allows for deep, in-depth surveillance over both
live and stored online communications. The program also allows
the intelligence community to target any customer of a
participating company, within or outside of the US.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Gharazi vows to abide by Constitution

0

Iranian presidential candidate Mohammad Gharazi has promised to abide by the Constitution, especially in the economic sphere, if elected president.

In a televised speech on Thursday, Gharazi said Iranâ„¢s Constitution has adequate potential for various issues and suggested that previous presidents turned a blind eye to such legal capacities, especially when it comes to the economic issues.

Regarding economic issues, he went on to say that the Constitution stipulates that the administration should serve the people and should not have an eye to the public and private properties.

The former Telecommunications Minister also stated that he has never faced any constitutional problems in the implementation of his plans, adding that the potential of the Constitution and the Iranian nation can practically satisfy the administrationâ„¢s needs.

He also indicated that he would allow his governors to be elected through popular vote to decentralize power and allow people to manage their affairs themselves.

In Iranâ„¢s June 14 presidential election, Gharazi will be competing against former Foreign Minister Ali-Akbar Velayati, Supreme National Security Council Secretary Saeed Jalili, Hassan Rohani, who is the director of the Strategic Research Center of the Expediency Council, MP Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, Tehran Mayor Mohammad-Baqer Qalibaf, Expediency Council Secretary Mohsen Rezaei, and former First Vice President Mohammad-Reza Aref.

Iranians will cast their ballots at over 66,000 polling stations across the country in the nationâ„¢s 11th presidential election. Expatriates will also be able to vote at 285 polling stations that will be set up in foreign countries.

The president of Iran is elected for a four-year term in a national election.

IA/MHB

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Ore. Senate passes bill to regulate tracking devices for kids

0

Infowars.com
June 6, 2013

Oregon senators took a major step in affirming school students’ rights to privacy Wednesday.

Photo by Joe Mabel, via Wikimedia Commons

An Oregon bill aimed at making it a requirement for schools to inform parents, students and the state Board of Education before implementing and distributing privacy invading radio frequency identification technology passed the Senate with a 28-2 vote yesterday, reports the Associated Press.

Citing a story Infowars helped urge into the mainstream, the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Phil Barnhart, said he became interested in securing students’ privacy rights against RFID technology after learning the story of one San Antonio student’s refusal to wear an RFID tracking name tag on the basis of religion and the Fourth Amendment.

“You can certainly imagine a whole lot of very beneficial and useful reasons for being able to know where students are,” Rep. Barnhart reportedly stated in testimony, adding, “but I can also think of a whole lot of difficult ones that would be a serious detriment.”

According to the Associated Press, a lobbyist representing the Security Industry Association argued in May, however, that it’s imperative we “know who is inside our schools at all times,” and that the devices would merely aid functions already being carried out on a routine basis.

“This is no different than asking a person to submit a state-issued ID, taking roll call at the start of class or scanning a barcode. The only difference is that (an RFID) allows all of this to be done quickly and automatically,” said Jim Gingo, president and founder of TransTech Systems, a company that boasts numerous industrial identifying solutions.

Wednesday’s vote comes days after parents in Polk County, Florida learned that students’ irises were being scanned without their permission as part of a controversial new security program.

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t

As is the case with most school security programs — which are primarily geared to condition young citizens into blindly obeying authority figures and indoctrinate them into accepting a life under constant surveillance — the iris scan tech was sold as a time-saving and safety-enhancing tool. “The EyeSwipe-Nano is an ideal replacement for the card based system since your child will not have to be responsible for carrying an identification card,” stated Rob Davis, the school board’s senior director of support services, in a letter to parents.

Similarly, schools in South Carolina began rolling out finger scan technology in alleged efforts to speed up lunchroom lines, because we all know how much of a problem those are.

Furthermore, schools across the nation have already moved to install comprehensive video surveillance systems that keep a watchful eye on anyone entering and leaving school premises, but in the past some schools have gone to extraordinary lengths to keep tabs on students.

In 2010, for instance, a school district in Pennsylvania was reportedly using school-issued laptops to spy on kids in their own homes. “The controversy ignited after student Blake Robbins was disciplined for ‘improper behavior in his home.’ It turned out that school officials had installed software on the laptops that used the computer’s webcam to send images back to the school server every 15 seconds,” we wrote last August.

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 4:15 pm

Tags: , , ,






<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

A Password So Secret, You Don’t Consciously Know It

0

Rachel Metz
Technology Review
June 6, 2013

Some efforts to replace traditional letter-and-number passwords rely on gestures, wearable devices, or biometrics. An approach in the works from research-and-development company SRI International and Stanford and Northwestern takes a different tack: passwords that you know but don’t know you know.

Patrick Lincoln, director of SRI’s computer science laboratory and a researcher on the project, calls this “rubber-hose resistant authentication” in reference to rubber-hose cryptanalysis, in which a user is coerced or physically forced to give up, say, the passcode to a secure building. Lincoln says the approach relies on implicit learning–the sort of learning that occurs through sheer repetition, such as learning to ride a bike, that the learner can’t verbally explain–to prevent passwords from being compromised.

So far, the project has used a game interface, resembling a rudimentary version of Guitar Hero, that trains the user to enter a unique pattern. Users press a key, corresponding to a column, each time a falling ball hits the bottom of one of the columns, but because the sequence of falling balls changes each time, users can’t consciously determine what is their unique sequence, and what is simply added noise. Later, the user is authenticated by playing the game, which contains parts of the learned pattern, and the user’s superior skill at this task proves his or her identity.

Read full article

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 5:51 pm

Tags: ,






<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

DRC rebels say will return to talks

0

The March 23 Movement (M23) rebels say they will return to peace negotiations with Democratic Republic of Congoâ„¢s government.

According to a statement released by a spokesman for the rebels on Thursday, a delegation will be sent to neighboring Uganda on June 9 to resume the peace talks with Congolese government.

Rene Abandi will lead the M23 delegation to Kampala, the statement added.

The most recent round of the peace negotiations between the Congolese government and the M23 rebels, convened by the Conference on the Great Lakes Region under the chairmanship of Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni, broke down in April.

On May 27, the leader of the M23 said holding negotiations would be the only way to end the war in the east of the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Å“The government can’t beat us. They have no choice but to negotiate,” General Sultani Makenga said.

The rebels say the government does not want to negotiate and is just stalling for time until the United Nation intervention brigade arrives in summer.

On May 21, fighting broke out between the Congolese army and the M23 rebels near Goma, after a hiatus of nearly six months.

In February, 11 African countries signed a UN-mediated peace agreement to end the crisis in the east of the DRC, which led to the establishment of a special brigade of UN peacekeepers with a mandate to attack rebel groups.

Several armed groups, including the M23 rebels, are active in the east of the DRC and fighting for control of the countryâ„¢s vast mineral resources, such as gold, the main tin ore cassiterite, and coltan (columbite-tantalite), which is used to make many electronic devices, including cell phones.

The M23 rebels defected from the Congolese army in April 2012 in protest over alleged mistreatment in the Armed Forces of the Democratic Republic of Congo (FARDC) had previously been integrated into the Congolese army under a peace deal signed in 2009.

MAM/HN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

‘I-P pipeline should be rapidly built’

0

A senior Pakistani legislator has emphasized the necessity for the rapid construction of Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline project which is expected to carry Iran’s gas to the South Asian nation.

On Wednesday, the opposition leader from Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) and member of Pakistan’s National Assembly, Makhdoom Amin Fahim, called on Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to complete Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline project in its scheduled time.

“The previous government of my party had finalized the agreement of import of gas from Iran,” Fahim said.

On March 11, Iranâ„¢s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his Pakistani counterpart Asif Ali Zardari inaugurated the final construction phase of the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline at the shared border region in Iran’s southeastern city of Chabahar, intended to carry natural gas from Iran to its eastern neighbor.

The 2700-kilometer-long pipeline will begin from Iran’s Assalouyeh Energy Zone in the south and stretch over 1,100 kilometers through Iran. The joint multi-billion-dollar pipeline is designed to help Pakistan overcome its growing energy needs at a time when the country of over 180 million people is grappling with serious energy shortages.

On May 20, in telephone conversation with the leader of Pakistanâ„¢s Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), Sharif, Iranian Vice President Mohammad-Reza Rahimi expressed hope Tehran and Islamabad would further improve relations during the new Pakistani governmentâ„¢s mandate.

Sharif, for his part, said Pakistan is ready to enhance the level of its relations with Iran and added that the Pakistani government would make serious efforts to achieve this goal.

IA/HN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

‘1 killed, 7 wounded in Lebanon clash’

0

Lebanese army tanks deploy in the Bab al-Tabbaneh and Jabal Mohsen neighborhoods of the northern Lebanese city of Tripoli. (file photo)

One person has been killed and seven others wounded in a clash between supporters and opponents of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in the city of Tripoli in northern Lebanon, a security official has said.

The clash between the rival groups occurred on Thursday in Tripoliâ„¢s Old Souk area, AFP reported.

The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said two of the wounded were soldiers, though the identity of the man killed in the exchange of gunfire in the markets of central Tripoli had not been confirmed.

The battle was the latest in a string of Syria-related incidents in the city and came after some three weeks of sectarian fighting in the flashpoint Jabal Mohsen and Bab al-Tebbaneh neighborhoods, during which around 40 people were killed.

The Army says its units have been deployed on the streets of Tripoli in a bid to restore calm to the city.

The Syria crisis began in March 2011, and many people, including large numbers of soldiers and security personnel, have been killed in the violence.

The Syrian government says that the chaos is being orchestrated from outside the country, and there are reports that a very large number of the militants are foreign nationals.

Damascus says the West and its regional allies, such as Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey, are supporting the militants.

MN/HN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Noam Chomsky: Ronald Reagan's Secret, Genocidal Wars

0

June 6, 2013
 |

Like this article?

Join our email list:

Stay up to date with the latest headlines via email.

On Mother’s Day, May 12, The Boston Globe featured a photo of a young woman with her toddler son sleeping in her arms.

The woman, of Mayan Indian heritage, had crossed the U.S. border seven times while pregnant, only to be caught and shipped back across the border on six of those attempts. She braved many miles, enduring blisteringly hot days and freezing nights, with no water or shelter, amid roaming gunmen. The last time she crossed, seven months pregnant, she was rescued by immigration solidarity activists who helped her to find her way to Boston.

Most of the border crossers are from Central America. Many say they would rather be home, if the possibility of decent survival hadn’t been destroyed. Mayans such as this young mother are still fleeing from the wreckage of the genocidal assault on the indigenous population of the Guatemalan highlands 30 years ago.

The main perpetrator, Gen. Efrain Rios Montt, the former dictator who ruled Guatemala during two of the bloodiest years of the country’s decades-long civil war, was convicted in a Guatemalan court of genocide and crimes against humanity, on May 10.

Then, 10 days later, the case was overturned under suspicious circumstances. It is unclear whether the trial will continue.

Rios Montt’s forces killed tens of thousands of Guatemalans, mostly Mayans, in the year 1982 alone.

As that bloody year ended, President Reagan assured the nation that the killer was “a man of great personal integrity and commitment,” who was getting a “bum rap” from human-rights organizations and who “wants to improve the quality of life for all Guatemalans and to promote social justice.” Therefore, the president continued, “My administration will do all it can to support his progressive efforts.”

Ample evidence of Rios Montt’s “progressive efforts” was available to Washington, not only from rights organizations, but also from U.S. intelligence.

But truth was unwelcome. It interfered with the objectives set by Reagan’s national security team in 1981. As reported by the journalist Robert Parry, working from a document he discovered in the Reagan Library, the team’s goal was to supply military aid to the right-wing regime in Guatemala in order to exterminate not only “Marxist guerrillas” but also their “civilian support mechanisms” — which means, effectively, genocide.

The task was carried out with dedication. Reagan sent “nonlethal” equipment to the killers, including Bell helicopters that were immediately armed and sent on their missions of death and destruction.

But the most effective method was to enlist a network of client states to take over the task, including Taiwan and South Korea, still under U.S.-backed dictatorships, as well as apartheid South Africa and the Argentine and Chilean dictatorships.

At the forefront was Israel, which became the major arms supplier to Guatemala. It provided instructors for the killers and participated in counterinsurgency operations.

The background bears restating. In 1954, a CIA-run military coup ended a 10-year democratic interlude in Guatemala — “the years of spring,” as they are known there — and restored a savage elite to power.

In the 1990s, international organizations conducting inquiries into the fighting reported that since 1954 some 200,000 people had been killed in Guatemala, 80 percent of whom were indigenous. The killers were mostly from the Guatemalan security forces and closely linked paramilitaries.

The atrocities were carried out with vigorous U.S. support and participation. Among the standard Cold War pretexts was that Guatemala was a Russian “beachhead” in Latin America.

The real reasons, amply documented, were also standard: concern for the interests of U.S. investors and fear that a democratic experiment empowering the harshly repressed peasant majority “might be a virus” that would “spread contagion,” in Henry Kissinger’s thoughtful phrase, referring to Salvador Allende’s democratic socialist Chile.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

Weather weapons have existed for over 15 years, testified U.S. Secretary of Defense

0

J. D. Heyes
NaturalNews.com
June 6, 2013

The development of so-called “weather weapons” has been dismissed by many as paranoid hyperbole, the work of science fiction movie script writers and conspiracy theorists, but the fact is they have existed, at least in the laboratory, for decades.

None other than former U.S. Defense Secretary William Cohen, in fact, has talked about the development of weather-related weaponry — or, more specifically, techniques to create weather events to support offensive military operations. During a question-and-answer session at the Conference on Terrorism, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and U.S. Strategy at the Georgia Center in Athens, Ga., in 1997, Cohen addressed them:

There are some reports, for example, that some countries have been trying to construct something like an Ebola Virus, and that would be a very dangerous phenomenon, to say the least. Alvin Toeffler has written about this in terms of some scientists in their laboratories trying to devise certain types of pathogens that would be ethnic specific so that they could just eliminate certain ethnic groups and races; and others are designing some sort of engineering, some sort of insects that can destroy specific crops. Others are engaging even in an eco-type of terrorism whereby they can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves.

So there are plenty of ingenious minds out there that are at work finding ways in which they can wreak terror upon other nations. It’s real, and that’s the reason why we have to intensify our efforts, and that’s why this is so important.

What about ‘chemtrails?’
Shortly after Cohen’s testimony reports began to surface about contrails — plumes of condensation trailing behind aircraft that allegedly contain chemicals which made some people sick. From WorldNetDaily, which reported on the phenomenon in February 1999:

Specifically, the focus of this mysterious “sickness” is centered around the observance of contrails — trails of gaseous substances — left in the wake of jet planes flying high above certain areas of the country. Observers on the ground have discovered, after several “patterns” of contrails have been produced by numerous planes making dozens of passes over an area, that a colorless web-like sticky substance falls from the sky, often generating sickness for many who come in contact with it. In other areas no such substance is reported, but scores of people have become ill nonetheless, presumably because the planes forming the contrail patterns are literally spraying some sort of chemical in the air.

Word was these chemicals were part of an Air Force operation to “seed clouds” as part of weather modification experimentation. Officially, of course, the Air Force denied such allegations, but a number of residents in heavily “seeded” areas reported on several occasions that heavy rains would follow such seeding operations.

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t

In addition to contrails, other reports have mentioned the Air Force’s HAARP initiative — High Altitude Auroral Research Project, located in Alaska in 1990 (http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/). According to the project’s website, “HAARP is a scientific endeavor aimed at studying the properties and behavior of the ionosphere, with particular emphasis on being able to understand and use it to enhance communications and surveillance systems for both civilian and defense purposes.”

‘Something is out there’
The Air Force has denied that the project aims to modify weather, but is instead primarily focused on research. And yet, links between HAARP and weather control continue to crop up. From TheWeatherSpace.com website May 30:

HaarpStatus Facebook Page has released a statement claiming to be testing a tornado experiment on Oklahoma today. Their experiment states that frequencies have been turned up to the highest level and that people need to be aware.

Sounds like something out of science fiction. Can we really control the weather? No one knows exactly where and when tornadoes will strike, but this group is claiming that if deadly tornadoes strike Oklahoma today then HAARP was responsible for it. Now the question remains … Is the group secretly the actual HAARP facility?

Answers about HAARP’s real purpose, and those of weather weapons in general, remain elusive, but with Cohen’s admission more than 15 years ago that such technology exists is proof enough, even if we don’t know all of the details.

Yet.

Sources for this article include:

http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=674

http://www.wnd.com/1999/02/1765/

http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/

http://www.theweatherspace.com

Learn more:

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 5:05 pm

Tags: , , ,






<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Judge Napolitano: Obama’s Unprecedented Violation of the 4th Amendment

0

Infowars.com
June 6, 2013

Shep Smith and Judge Napolitano cover yet another attack on the Bill of Rights.

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 5:11 pm

Tags: ,






<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Naomi Klein: 'Anti-Shock Doctrines' Show the Way to Resist

0

In the midst of the current “final colonial pillage” for natural resources and a bombardment of “there is no alternative” to austerity messages, Shock Doctrine author Naomi Klein urged the left to seize this “crucial moment” to build real resistance movements that offer a “message of critical hope.”

Naomi Klein (Photo: Jonathan Dy/cc/flickr) Speaking this week at the Vio.Me worker-run factory in Thessaloniki, Greece, Klein, who is in the country doing research for a book and film, said the building materials factory was the perfect place to be speaking as it is “known in resistance movements around the world” and provides an example of what she said is “the anti-Shock doctrine”–a situation where rather than bowing down to the forces at hand, the crisis has put a fast-forward on coming up with creative alternatives, where workers “refused to have their lives and livelihoods sacrificed on the altar of economic crisis, and instead found reserves of power and ingenuity.”

Describing Vio.Me, economist Marjolein van der Veen explained:

In May 2011 when the owners could no longer pay their bills and walked away, the workers decided to occupy the factory. By February 2013, after raising enough funds and community support, the workers started democratically running the company on their own. (They do not intend to buy out the owners, since the company owed the workers a significant amount of money when it abandoned the factory.) They established a worker board, controlled by workers’ general assemblies and subject to recall, to manage the factory. They also changed the business model, shifting to different suppliers, improving environmental practices, and finding new markets. Greek law currently does not allow factory occupations, so the workers are seeking the creation of a legal framework for the recuperated factory, which may enable more such efforts in the future. Vio.Me has received support from SYRIZA and the Greek Green party, from workers at recuperated factories in Argentina, as well as from academics and political activists worldwide.

In Greece, Klein said, “alternatives to austerity are presented by media as apocalypse.”

“Our environment is under vicious attack.”But the Vio.Me factory is an example of an alternative “that must be known, must be disseminated .. because many factories are now being closed as the crisis unfolds, and workers are not being given the opportunity to reshape the ownership, when in fact the workers should be the first ones asked if they want to be the creditors and run the factories themselves.”

Klein slammed the Greek media for “not doing its job” in letting the people know an such alternatives do exist, instead repeating the mantra: there is no alternative (TINA), showing that “Margaret Thatcher is alive and well and living in Greece and working for the mainstream media.”

In addition to the toll austerity has taken on people and communities, nature is on the chopping block as well. “It’s not only people who are being attacked,” said Klein, “it’s also the natural systems on which we all depend.”

The Skouries forest in Halkidiki preparing for “growth.” (Photo: Iosifsk Team/cc/flickr)“Our environment is under vicious attack,” she said.

Case in point: Canadian company ElDorado Gold’s mining plans in the Halkidiki region of Greece.

Such projects are portrayed as necessary during crises; nature must take a back seat to “growth,” Klein explained, so that nature and natural resources can be sold to the highest bidder.

“We really are in the midst of what I’ve come to think of as a final colonial pillage for the hardest to reach natural resources in some of the most beautiful protected parts of the world using some of the most dangerous and damaging extractive practices.”

It is in this context that projects like the Eldorado mine should be seen, one that allows economic growth to trump entire communities’ needs.

This is the same logic that sacrifices human lives in the name of austerity, she continued.

Sharing observations from time she just spent in Halkidiki, an area she said was so militarized and filled with checkpoints it reminded her of Gaza, Klein noticed the juxtaposition of two models–one of taker, the other of caretaker.

In the “extractivist point of view,” it takes an outside force to create “wealth”–wealth from extracting natural resources even at the expense of water and other essential resources, essentially “mining for money.”

This kind of system is so violent, Klein said, “it needs the repression of the state to back it up.” In contrast, the other model in Halkidiki looks inward, at wealth that is not created, but is already there–in soil, water, even people’s hands. This is truly “the wealth of life,” she said.

To confront this assault is to confront not just the mine but the mindset that there is no alternative.

What we need, Klein said, is an “interweaving of resistance” movements–seen in moments like when the farmers from Halkidiki sell at the market in Thessaloniki–building a bridge between those in the city and those more rooted in the land.

“Only when the alternatives look tangible, look real, look credible and inspiring will the fear of saying no, of standing up to the troika begin to fade.”Importantly, resistance “now can’t just be about saying no, no to austerity, no to privatization.” Those who have accepted it have been “terrorized” into doing so by fear, and it has made people feel “utterly powerless.”

Now, it “is a crucial moment for the left.”

What we must offer, she said, is a “message of critical hope”. We must say no, but also “show the yes.”

We must counter the “hypnosis” performed by the TINA pushers “with an array” of other options for people.

“Only when the alternatives look tangible, look real, look credible and inspiring will the fear of saying no, of standing up to the troika begin to fade.” Moving forward, we must reach for real transformation, and not let the crises be decided for us.

We need to have our ideas ready to move forward in a new way, she said.

It’s time to build.

* * *

Videos of Klein speaking in Thessaloniki were posted by Youtube user teacherdude and can be seen below:

__________________________

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

This article originally appeared on: Common Dreams

‘Mali army has reinforced N positions’

0

Malian military officials say the countryâ„¢s army has reinforced its positions in the northern part of the West African country following a day of deadly fighting in the area.

According to a statement released by Army Spokesman Lieutenant-Colonel Souleymane Maiga on Thursday, Å“We are reinforcing and consolidating our positions at Anefis.”

On Wednesday, at least ten people were killed in an operation launched by the Malian army against Tuareg rebels in Anefis village situated some 113 kilometers (70 miles) south of the provincial capital Kidal.

During the Wednesday fighting against the rebels of the National Movement for the Liberation of Azawad (MNLA), government troops succeeded to retake control of the village.

The Thursday statement also added that Malian soldiers were waiting for favorable conditions to pursue the operation towards the provincial capital.

This was the first time that the Malian army has engaged in war with the Tuareg rebels since the militant group invaded northern Mali last year, forcing the military to retreat from more than half of the country’s territory.

Chaos broke out in the West African country after Malian President Amadou Toumani Toure was toppled in a military coup on March 22, 2012. The coup leaders said they mounted the coup in response to the government’s inability to contain the Tuareg rebellion in the north of the country, which had been going on for two months.

However, in the wake of the coup d’état, the Tuareg rebels took control of the entire northern desert region, but the Ansar Dine extremists then pushed them aside and took control of the region, which is larger than France or Texas.

France also launched a war in Mali on January 11, 2013 under the pretext of halting the advance of fighters in the country.

MAM/HN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

‘Young voters against political dispute’

0

Presidential candidate Ali-Akbar Velayati says young voters do not like to see political disputes among the branches of government, and has pledged to establish closer relations with the Judiciary and the Parliament (Majlis) if elected president.

In a televised speech on Thursday, the principlist candidate said the country can be managed well if the legislative, judiciary and executive branches of the government interact well.

Å“No chief executive can succeed without first forging close relations and co-operation with the Parliament and the Judiciary. They should act as if they are a soul in three bodies,” he stated.

Velayati said the youth of the country are more sensitive than others and get disappointed when they see disagreements instead of cooperation and interaction among the branches of government.

The candidate also stated that those who do not forgive and forget, or take criticism badly, will lose credibility among the people, especially young voters.

Å“Once the three branches of government are involved in political disputes, they will have no time to resolve all the outstanding issues in society,” said the former foreign minister.

In Iranâ„¢s June 14 presidential election, Velayati will be competing against Supreme National Security Council Secretary Saeed Jalili, Hassan Rohani, who is the director of the Strategic Research Center of the Expediency Council, MP Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, Tehran Mayor Mohammad-Baqer Qalibaf, Expediency Council Secretary Mohsen Rezaei, former First Vice President Mohammad-Reza Aref, and former Telecommunications Minister Mohammad Gharazi.

Iranians will cast their ballots at over 66,000 polling stations across the country in the nationâ„¢s 11th presidential election. Expatriates will also be able to vote at 285 polling stations that will be set up in foreign countries.

The president of Iran is elected for a four-year term in a national election.

IA/MHB

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Naomi Klein: 'Anti-Shock Doctrines' Show the Way to Resist

0

In the midst of the current “final colonial pillage” for natural resources and a bombardment of “there is no alternative” to austerity messages, Shock Doctrine author Naomi Klein urged the left to seize this “crucial moment” to build real resistance movements that offer a “message of critical hope.”

Naomi Klein (Photo: Jonathan Dy/cc/flickr) Speaking this week at the Vio.Me worker-run factory in Thessaloniki, Greece, Klein, who is in the country doing research for a book and film, said the building materials factory was the perfect place to be speaking as it is “known in resistance movements around the world” and provides an example of what she said is “the anti-Shock doctrine”–a situation where rather than bowing down to the forces at hand, the crisis has put a fast-forward on coming up with creative alternatives, where workers “refused to have their lives and livelihoods sacrificed on the altar of economic crisis, and instead found reserves of power and ingenuity.”

Describing Vio.Me, economist Marjolein van der Veen explained:

In May 2011 when the owners could no longer pay their bills and walked away, the workers decided to occupy the factory. By February 2013, after raising enough funds and community support, the workers started democratically running the company on their own. (They do not intend to buy out the owners, since the company owed the workers a significant amount of money when it abandoned the factory.) They established a worker board, controlled by workers’ general assemblies and subject to recall, to manage the factory. They also changed the business model, shifting to different suppliers, improving environmental practices, and finding new markets. Greek law currently does not allow factory occupations, so the workers are seeking the creation of a legal framework for the recuperated factory, which may enable more such efforts in the future. Vio.Me has received support from SYRIZA and the Greek Green party, from workers at recuperated factories in Argentina (see box), as well as from academics and political activists worldwide.

In Greece, Klein said, “alternatives to austerity are presented by media as apocalypse.”

“Our environment is under vicious attack.”But the Vio.Me factory is an example of an alternative “that must be known, must be disseminated .. because many factories are now being closed as the crisis unfolds, and workers are not being given the opportunity to reshape the ownership, when in fact the workers should be the first ones asked if they want to be the creditors and run the factories themselves.”

Klein slammed the Greek media for “not doing its job” in letting the people know an such alternatives do exist, instead repeating the mantra: there is no alternative (TINA), showing that “Margaret Thatcher is alive and well and living in Greece and working for the mainstream media.”

In addition to the toll austerity has taken on people and communities, nature is on the chopping block as well. “It’s not only people who are being attacked,” said Klein, “it’s also the natural systems on which we all depend.”

The Skouries forest in Halkidiki preparing for “growth.” (Photo: Iosifsk Team/cc/flickr)“Our environment is under vicious attack,” she said.

Case in point: Canadian company ElDorado Gold’s mining plans in the Halkidiki region of Greece.

Such projects are portrayed as necessary during crises; nature must take a back seat to “growth,” Klein explained, so that nature and natural resources can be sold to the highest bidder.

“We really are in the midst of what I’ve come to think of as a final colonial pillage for the hardest to reach natural resources in some of the most beautiful protected parts of the world using some of the most dangerous and damaging extractive practices.”

It is in this context that projects like the Eldorado mine should be seen, one that allows economic growth to trump entire communities’ needs.

This is the same logic that sacrifices human lives in the name of austerity, she continued.

Sharing observations from time she just spent in Halkidiki, an area she said was so militarized and filled with checkpoints it reminded her of Gaza, Klein noticed the juxtaposition of two models–one of taker, the other of caretaker.

In the “extractivist point of view,” it takes an outside force to create “wealth”–wealth from extracting natural resources even at the expense of water and other essential resources, essentially “mining for money.”

This kind of system is so violent, Klein said, “it needs the repression of the state to back it up.” In contrast, the other model in Halkidiki looks inward, at wealth that is not created, but is already there–in soil, water, even people’s hands. This is truly “the wealth of life,” she said.

To confront this assault is to confront not just the mine but the mindset that there is no alternative.

What we need, Klein said, is an “interweaving of resistance” movements–seen in moments like when the farmers from Halkidiki sell at the market in Thessaloniki–building a bridge between those in the city and those more rooted in the land.

“Only when the alternatives look tangible, look real, look credible and inspiring will the fear of saying no, of standing up to the troika begin to fade.”Importantly, resistance “now can’t just be about saying no, no to austerity, no to privatization.” Those who have accepted it have been “terrorized” into doing so by fear, and it has made people feel “utterly powerless.”

Now, it “is a crucial moment for the left.”

What we must offer, she said, is a “message of critical hope”. We must say no, but also “show the yes.”

We must counter the “hypnosis” performed by the TINA pushers “with an array” of other options for people.

“Only when the alternatives look tangible, look real, look credible and inspiring will the fear of saying no, of standing up to the troika begin to fade.” Moving forward, we must reach for real transformation, and not let the crises be decided for us.

We need to be ready have our ideas ready to move forward in a new way, she said.

It’s time to build.

* * *

Videos of Klein speaking in Thessaloniki were posted by Youtube user teacherdude and can be seen below:

__________________________

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

This article originally appeared on: Common Dreams

US criticizes Erdogan comments

0

The United States has criticized Å“unhelpful comments” by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who once again said Å“extremists” and Å“terrorists” are stoking violence in his country.

State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said on Thursday that Washington would support peaceful demonstrations in Turkey, but it “would encourage any official there to refrain from unhelpful rhetoric and unhelpful comments that will not help calm the actions… happening in Turkey.”

Erdogan made the remarks in Tunisiaâ„¢s capital Tunis on Thursday as he wrapped up his North African tour, upending the demonstratorsâ„¢ expectation who had hoped for a sign of compromise.

A week of unprecedented protests in the Turkish cities began as a campaign against the redevelopment of a park in Istanbul but turned into anti-government demonstrations with angry protesters calling for the resignation of the countryâ„¢s three-term prime minister over what they called the authoritarianism of Erdogan and his Justice and Development Party.

Erdoganâ„¢s latest comments brought more wood to the fire that had been ignited by the policeâ„¢s heavy-handed response to the protests from day one.

The prime minister also said that plans to redevelop the park would go ahead. Reports say a large protest group has called for more demonstrations in response to Erdoganâ„¢s comments.

The Associated Press reported that many protesters had gathered at Istanbul airport to greet him.

MA/HN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Alleged Anonymous hacker raided by FBI after exposing Ohio rape scandal

1

A 26-year-old Kentucky man says the FBI raided his home earlier this year in an attempt to investigate two hacker groups and the role they played in exposing the players linked to a controversial rape case in Steubenville, Ohio.

An aspiring rapper from Winchester, KY named Deric Lostutter
revealed Thursday that agents with the Federal Bureau of
Investigation conducted a search of his home two months ago and
seized computers, electronics and other items pursuant to a
warrant signed April 15 by a federal judge for the Eastern
District of Kentucky.

Lostutter has not been charged with any crime yet, but the FBI
combed through his house in search for items pertaining to the
hacktivist group Anonymous and an offshoot, KnightSec.

According to the warrant, Lostutter is likely the target of an
investigation into KnightSec’s online campaign earlier this year
to collect, analyze and distribute information about the sexual
assault of a teenage girl the previous summer in the town of
Steubenville, around 400 miles away from Winchester near Ohio’s
border with Pennsylvania and West Virginia.

The 16-year-old victim, whose name has not been published due to
her age and the nature of the crime, testified in court that she
didn’t even know she had been assaulted until she learned about
the incident on social media the following day last August.
Images began circulating the next morning of a seemingly lifeless
body being dragged by teenagers across the room of a party, and
several witnesses tweeted accounts of a high school rager that
went terribly awry.

“Everybody was drinking,” one of the two men later
convicted of the assault told ABC News earlier this year.

Two athletes from the Steubenville High School “Big Red” football
team were arrested and charged with the sexual assault, but
KnightSec said there was more to the story. Even though evidence
surfaced online showing that there were more than just two high
school students privy to the assault on the night it occurred,
authorities only charged two Big Red athletes, and the media made
little note of the event. That changed in late 2012 when
KnightSec suddenly emerged and began to engage “Op RedRoll” in an
effort to draw attention to the assault and what some called an
orchestrated cover-up to keep the case under wraps. Before long,
the group began publishing emails, videos, images and other media
that they said tied more than just two perpetrators to the crime.

Then in January KnightSec released a video of another
Steubenville High athlete mocking the assault only moments after
it occurred. The clip quickly circulated around the Web and the
previously ignored rape case gained the attention of the
mainstream media. The judge in the case later noted the role of
KnightSec and Anonymous in exposing the story, and a number of
articles and investigative pieces were launched by outlets across
the United States.

Trent Mays, 17, and Ma’Lik Richmond, 16, were convicted in March
after a court agreed that they digitally penetrated the girl,
first in a car and then in a house, and they stand to stay in
detention until they both turn 21. Op RedRoll and KnightSec both
relaxed operations after, but now it’s been revealed that the FBI
wasn’t ready to call it quits.

Lostutter wrote online this week that authorities stormed his
house in April in search of, among other items, information about
the hacking of rollredroll.com, an unofficial website for the
football team that was compromised earlier this year during the
KnightSec campaign. When asked to identify himself during the
raid, Lostutter said he did so by stating the moniker used by the
hacktivist who spearheaded the operation.

Lostutter said he went to answer his door when around a dozen FBI
Swat Team agents jumped out of a truck and pointed assault
riddles at his head.

“I was handcuffed and detained outside while they cleared my
house. My brother soon emerged later with his new girlfriend,
both bewildered that the FBI was at my house seeing as I have no
prior criminal history, both of them in handcuffs as well
,”
he wrote. “The Swat team left my belongings in the floor, my
dogs shocked, my family nervous, my garage door battered open
with a ram though I stated I had a key and the RV camper window
broken for entry though I stated to pull hard on the door
.”

“They said, ‘Who are you?’ I responded, ‘KYAnonymous,’” he
wrote.

In February, a hacker using the alias “Batcat” told the
Steubenville Herald-Star that he hacked Rollredroll.com after
being approached by KYAnonymous. When Lostutter’s home was
searched two months later, he said the FBI showed him emails
allegedly sent between himself at Noah McHugh, the hacker said by
authorities to have compromised the football team fan site using
the Batcat alias.

The search warrant executed authorized the FBI to seize records
and information relating to conspiracy to gain authorized access
of Rollredroll.com, an associated email account registered to the
site’s webmaster and other information that could have been
obtained by gaining access to those servers. They also attempted
to see “any and all accounts used to communicate with the
online ‘hacker’ groups KnightSec and/or Anonymous
,” as well
as malicious software and Guy Fawkes masks – the disguise that
has become synonymous with the hacktivist collective.

Lostutter has not been charged yet, but believes an indictment is
being penned in secrecy right now.

“I was emailed their intent to send out a ‘Target Letter’
which means they are going to try to indict me for a federal
offense, (most likely a felony and two misdemeanors) to a secret
grand jury of 23 individuals, for which I cannot be present to
state my side, nor state my innocence
,” he wrote.

Jason Flores-Williams of the Whistleblower’s Defense League said
he will be representing Lostutter if the indictment is filed, and
spoke Thursday of the matter to Adrian Chen of Gawker.

“We certainly hope the United States comes to its senses and
decides not to indict, and if they do we will aggressively
litigate the incident
,” said Flores-Williams. “What’s
unique here to me is that it’s not a national security issue.
This isn’t at the forefront at the NSA or the CIA. This comes out
of the heartland of the country, and this is a person who is just
trying to do what is right for the heartland
.”

On the Whistleblower’s Defense League website, a page for case
says Flores-Williams will represent Lostutter pro bono. “Deric
had the courage to stand up against rape – should we not now have
the courage to stand with him
?” the page asks. The WDL was
formed earlier this year by Flores-Williams and Jay Leiderman, a
California-based attorney who previously represented a man
accused of being the Anonymous hacker known as Commander X.

A spokesman for the FBI’s Cincinnati office, Todd Lindgren, said
in an email to Gawker, “we are unable to confirm or deny the
existence of any potential investigation into this matter
.”

This article originally appeared on: RT

Debbie Stabenow Pledges To Oppose Monsanto Protection Act Extension Without Full Debate

0

Ryan Grim
huffingtonpost.com
June 6, 2013

Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), the chairwoman of the Agriculture Committee, pledged to oppose the extension of the so-called the Monsanto Protection Act, a victory for advocates who have been pressing for its repeal.

Stabenow made her pledge in a conversation with Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), who has been pushing the Senate to vote on an amendment to the farm bill that would repeal the provision. That vote was blocked by Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) and on Thursday morning the Senate voted to end debate and move to final passage.

When two senators have a pre-arranged public conversation on the Senate floor, it’s known as a colloquy and is typically the bow that ties up a deal struck beforehand. While Merkley was unable to get a repeal vote, the colloquy is a significant win for him, with Stabenow promising she will oppose any attempt to extend the Monsanto Protection Act in backroom negotiations.

Read more

'US must send missiles to Syria militants'

0

US Senator John McCain speaks at the Brookings Institution on June 6, 2013.

Influential American Senator John McCain says if the US does not expand its engagement in Syria by sending missiles to militants, it would see the Middle East slide into Å“extremism.”

McCain told the Brookings Institution think-tank on Thursday that “the Syrian state is disintegrating in much of the country, leaving vast ungoverned spaces that are being filled by extremists, many aligned with Al-Qaeda.”

Since meeting militant commanders in Syria more than a week ago, it is the second time McCain calls for arming the anti-Syria groups. Earlier in the week, the senator said the government of President Bashar al-Assad has Å“the upper hand” in Syria now and the failure to send weapons to the militants would make any future peace talks with Damascus tough.

“We could use our stand-off weapons, such as cruise missiles, to target Assad’s aircraft and ballistic missile launchers on the ground,” McCain said.

“We could enable a provisional government to establish itself in a safe zone in Syria that we could help to protect with Patriot missiles. And we could organize a full-scale operation to train and equip Syrian opposition forces.”

McCainâ„¢s call came on the same day that Syrian forces liberated the Quneitra Crossing, which is situated between Syria and the Golan Heights, after heavy clashes with anti-government gunmen.

This came after the Syrian Army recaptured the strategic town of Qusayr on Wednesday following three weeks of fighting with the militants.

MA/MHB

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

GOP Sen. Graham says he’s ‘glad’ NSA is collecting phone records

0

Seth McLaughlin
washingtontimes.com
June 6, 2013

Sen. Lindsey Graham said Thursday that he is “glad” that the National Security Agency is collecting millions of telephone records – including his own – from one of the nation’s largest telecommunications companies in an attempt to combat terrorism.

Mr. Graham said that he is a Verizon customer and has no problem with the company turning over records to the government if it helps it do its job. The South Carolina Republican said that people who have done nothing wrong have nothing to worry about because the NSA is mining the phone records for people with suspected ties to terrorism.

“We are very much under threat. Radical Islam is on the rise throughout the region. Homegrown terrorism is one of my biggest concerns. It is happening in our own backyard, and I am glad that NSA is trying to find out what terrorists are up to overseas and inside the country,” Mr. Graham said during an appearance on “Fox and Friends.”

Mr. Graham said that the NSA will paw through the information and will then monitor the telephone conversations of those its deems a threat to national security.
Mr. Graham’s comments came shortly after the White House broke its silence on a news report in the Guardian, a newspaper in the United Kingdom, that said the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court granted the FBI a highly classified court order that requires that Verizon turn over on an “ongoing, daily basis” information on all telephone calls in the system to the NSA, including those calls made in the US as well as those between the U.S. and other countries.
“Information of the sort described in the Guardian article has been a critical tool in protecting the nation from terrorist threats to the United States, as it allows counterterrorism personnel to discover whether known or suspected terrorists have been in contact with other persons who may be engaged in terrorist activities, particularly people located inside the United States,” the senior Obama administration official said.
The court order runs from April 25 until July 19 and shows the the Obama administration has been gathering found records of millions of Verizon customers, regardless of whether or not they are suspected of wrong doing.
“On its face, the order reprinted in the article does not allow the government to listen in on anyone’s telephone calls,” the senior administration official said Thursday. “The information acquired does not include the content of any communications or the name of any subscriber. It relates exclusively to metadata, such as a telephone number or the length of a call.”

The official said that Congress passed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and is regularly briefed on the information collected under it.

US defends secret phone record collection

0

The White House has defended the gathering of phone records of millions of Americans by the National Security Agency (NSA) as an effort to fight terrorism and security threats.

The admission came on Thursday, a day after The Guardian revealed a top secret court order in the US that allows the NSA to collect data on millions of Americans who are customers of Verizon Communications.

The British paper added that the court order was granted by the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court on April 25.

According to the order, a copy of which the British daily had obtained, Verizon should, Å“on a daily basis,” give the NSA data, including phone numbers of both parties, location, the time and duration of all phone calls in its systems, both in the US and between the US and other countries.

Neither the NSA nor the American telecommunications company had any comment on the publication of the court order.

The Obama administration was already under fire for secretly obtaining the phone records of Associated Press journalists as well as the emails and phone records of a Fox News Channel reporter.

Senator Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont, took a swipe at the order, saying, “The United States should not be accumulating phone records on tens of millions of innocent Americans. That is not what democracy is about.”

MA/MHB

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

IMF Staff Report Blames EU for Mishandling Greek Crisis

0

The report from the International Monetary Fund is remarkable in its candor: Efforts to bail out Greece were fumbled as the IMF, the European Commission, and the European Central Bank all tried to promote their own agendas with little regard for the lowly Greek citizen. Happily the disclaimer appeared on the front page: “The views expressed in this document are those of the staff team and do not necessarily reflect the views of the government of Greece or the Executive Board of the IMF.”

That said, the staff noted that the purpose of the Greek bailouts in 2010 and 2011 was to “restore market confidence and lay the foundations for sound medium-term growth through strong and sustained fiscal consolidation and deep structural reforms, while safeguarding financial sector stability and reducing the risk of international systemic spillovers.” In that single sentence, the staff exposed the various agendas and conflicting purposes and goals, making their accomplishment virtually impossible. It was like trying to drive a bus to opposite parts of a city, simultaneously, by a committee. It failed miserably, and the real lesson to be learned was never even mentioned: Let the owner of the bus drive it.

Let’s parse those objectives: First, “restore market confidence.” The only way that can happen is if the market is left to its own devices, letting individuals make their own personal decisions about how best to direct their own lives, with a minimum of government interference. That would never be allowed to happen in Greece.

Next, “Lay the foundations for sound medium-term growth through strong and sustained fiscal consolidation and deep structural reforms.” This is IMF-speak for temporarily slightly lower government spending and increased compliance with Greece’s perverse income-tax laws. However, income-tax evasion in Greece is widely accepted as a national pastime. As a percentage of the total economy, the underground economy in Greece is more than three times larger than in the United States and it takes four times as much government effort to collect taxes from those above ground as it does in the United States. It’s part of the culture of corruption in Greece.

Next, “Safeguarding financial sector stability.” This means saving the banks from the consequences of lending to a deadbeat country by forcing taxpayers to ante up by bailing them out.

Next, “Reducing the risk of international systemic spillovers.” Contain the Greek meltdown and keep it from infecting other deadbeat countries such as Spain and Italy. 

The IMF failed on most accounts, according to its staff’s report:

There were notable failures. Market confidence was not restored, the banking system lost 30 percent of its deposits, and the economy encountered a much-deeper-than-expected recession with exceptionally high unemployment.

Public debt remained too high and eventually had to be restructured….

Competitiveness improved somewhat on the back of falling wages, but structural reforms stalled and productivity gains proved elusive.

The initial bailout in 2010 was granted even though the IMF knew that it couldn’t trust the Greek government’s numbers. Those numbers were fraudulent from the beginning of its entry into the eurozone, and they remained fraudulent until the time of the crisis. Those numbers, however, allowed banks to lend and governments to borrow as though they were real. The fabric of lies and deceit began unraveling in December 2009 when the credit rating agency Fitch cut Greece’s long-term debt, and it’s been all downhill ever since.

The lesson learned, according to the IMF staff, is that nothing was learned. The first bailout was insufficient and required austerity measures, an increase in taxes, and the sell-off of some government property in order to make the numbers work. The IMF knew, even then, that the numbers wouldn’t work, so it fudged its own numbers by softening its own requirements, called “exceptional access,” in order to fund Greece’s runaway debt. When the austerity program began to be implemented, employment dropped along with gross domestic product. Said the IMF staff:

Greece has been able to remain in the euro, but the recession has been deep with exceptionally high unemployment. The [bailout] did not restore growth [or] regain … access [to the international bond market] as it had set out to do.

After 50 pages, the conclusion from the staff at the IMF is clear if not stated: Three people driving a bus to conflicting locations, simultaneously, can’t work.

At present the European Union seems oblivious to the obvious and continues to make fantastic predictions that the crisis in Greece is over. As noted by the Levy Institute in its interim report, “Current Prospects for the Greek Economy,”

According to the EC [European Commission], the recovery [in Greece] should come from a strong increase in [private] investment … as well as exports … while imports would remain stable.… Government expenditures are expected to keep falling.…

These numbers are, of course, wishful thinking.

There simply is no solution, according to the institute. Given the enormous debt that is nearly twice the country’s economic output and the risk premiums demanded by potential buyers of additional Greek government debt, the institute concludes:

No solution is feasible if the cost of borrowing, for both the private and the public sector, remains above the growth rate in income, which is now negative.

Moreover, since Greece’s net debt is now entirely a credit held by foreigners, servicing the debt implies a net transfer of a large share of income out of the country, with obvious consequences for aggregate demand.

There is one lesson to be gleaned from the IMF staff’s report: When it comes to joining the eurozone, or not, it’s easier to stay out than to get out. 

A graduate of Cornell University and a former investment advisor, Bob is a regular contributor to The New American magazine and blogs frequently at www.LightFromTheRight.com, primarily on economics and politics. He can be reached at
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

This article originally appeared on: The New American

Florida Sheriff Arrested After Defending Second Amendment

0

Sheriff Nicholas Finch said he “believed in Second Amendment rights” after releasing a man arrested on a gun charge.

Kit Daniels
Infowars.com
June 6, 2013

A Florida sheriff who believes in the Second Amendment was charged Tuesday for removing the arrest file of a suspect held on an unconstitutional gun charge but later released.

Sheriff Nicholas Finch
Source: Liberty County Florida Commissioners

Liberty County Sheriff Nicholas Finch, 50, was booked in his own jail Tuesday with one count of official misconduct by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. The FDLE accuses Finch covering up the arrest of Floyd Eugene Parrish after releasing him from the Liberty County Jail. Parrish had been arrested for carrying a concealed firearm without a license, a third-degree felony in Florida.

On March 8, Sgt. James Joseph Hoagland of the Liberty County Sheriff’s Office arrested Parrish during a traffic stop after finding a .25 automatic pistol in Parrish’s pocket and a holstered revolver in the front seat, according to court records. Parrish was then taken to the county jail.

Finch arrived at the jail with Parrish’s brother and spoke to Parrish, after which Finch took the arrest file and told correctional officers Parrish would be released with no charges, according to investigators. Finch also ordered both the pistol and revolver be returned to Parrish.

Hoagland told FDLE investigators that several days later, he spoke to Finch about Parrish’s release and Finch told him he “believed in Second Amendment rights.”

The FDLE crime lab analyzed the jail log sheet and discovered white-out had been applied over Parrish’s name.

Investigators also noted that Hoagland’s copy of the arrest affidavit and a computer record are the only known existing documentation of Parrish’s arrest. Neither the affidavit nor the computer record are recognized in court because they are not considered usable originals.

Finch’s attorney does not refute the story as told by investigators. “The records at the jail show exactly what happened in this case and the records speak the truth,” said Finch’s attorney Jimmy Judkins. “The sheriff looked at the facts and said ‘I believe in the Second Amendment and we’re not going to charge him.’ That is not misconduct at all. That is within the Sheriff’s prerogative whether to charge someone or not.”

Samuel Coover, a Liberty County resident, said that because Finch was not from Liberty County, people considered him an outsider and finally railroaded him out. “In my personal opinion he was doing his job and people didn’t like it,” said Coover.

Another long-time county resident also supported Finch. “I hope it’s all a misunderstanding,” said 88-year-old Alma Sanders. “We need a good sheriff.”

An official misconduct charge is a third-degree felony in Florida, punishable by up to five years in prison if convicted. The charge is covered under Florida Statutes 838.022, which says it is unlawful for a public servant to “conceal, cover up, destroy, mutilate, or alter any official record or official document.”

Finch was released shortly after his arrest on his own recognizance. He was elected sheriff seven months prior in the Florida panhandle county of approximately 8,000 residents.

Source articles:
Update: Liberty County Sheriff Finch Arrested in Alleged Jail Coverup
Florida Sheriff Arrested On Governor’s Orders for Defending Second Amendment
Liberty County Sheriff Arrested

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 4:17 pm

Tags: , ,






<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Bomb kills 2 security forces in Pakistan

0

A Pakistani policeman receives treatment at a hospital after being injured in a roadside bomb attack in Peshawar on June 6, 2013.

At least two security forces have been killed and three others injured in a roadside bomb attack in Pakistan.

Å“It was an improvised explosive device (IED) blast, two policemen have been killed and three injured. Condition of one of them is critical,” senior police official Shafiullah Khan said in a statement issued on Thursday.

The security forces were on patrol in the Daudzai suburb of Peshawar when the explosion took place, the statement added.

There has been no claim of responsibility for the attack so far, but pro-Taliban militant groups are often blamed for bomb attacks in Pakistan.

On May 24, at least nine police officers were killed in two separate attacks carried out by militants in Peshawar.

The fresh attacks underline the challenge of militant violence faced by newly sworn-in Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif.

The Pakistani Army has launched several operations in the troubled northwest in a bid to flush out militants from the tribal zone.

Thousands of Pakistanis have lost their lives in bombings and other militant attacks since the US-led war in Afghanistan began in October 2001.

Thousands more have been displaced by the wave of violence and militancy sweeping across the country.

Since late 2009, there has been a surge in militant attacks in Pakistan.

MAM/MHB

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Turkey protests gain momentum

0

Riot police use tear gas to disperse demonstrators during an anti-government protest at Taksim Square in central Istanbul on June 1, 2013.

Anti-government protests in Turkey gain momentum after Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan vowed to push ahead with a controversial Istanbul development plan.

Speaking in the Tunisian capital Tunis on Thursday just hours before his return to Turkey, Erdogan enraged protesters at home by saying that he would go ahead with the plan to develop Istanbul’s Gezi Park, which is part of Taksim Square, into a shopping mall and cultural center, AFP reported.

Thousands of flag-waving, chanting demonstrators packed the iconic square to demand that Erdogan step down.

“He doesn’t want to change something but he will do it. I don’t know when, but he will change,” said one of the protesters.

In Tunis, Erdogan reiterated his claims that extremists and foreign agitators were to blame for the violence, adding that seven foreigners were arrested in connection with the week-long protests.

He did not specify the nationalities of the detainees.

Later in Ankara, Interior Minister Muammer Guler said the foreigners detained were two French, two Iranians, a Greek, a German and an American, and that two had been released.

Since Friday, tens of thousands of anti-government demonstrations have been held in Istanbul, Ankara, Izmir, Mugla, Antalya, and many other cities and towns.

The death toll from the protests has risen to five following the death of a police officer. Officials said he died after falling into an underpass while trying to break up a protest in the southern city of Adana.

Turkish Human Rights Foundation says some 4,300 people have been hurt or sought medical care for the effects of tear gas inhalation. The Turkish government says dozens of police officers have been injured.

The anti-government unrest began after police broke up a sit-in staged in Taksim Square on May 31 to protest against the demolition of Gezi Park.

The protesters say the park, which is a traditional gathering point for rallies and demonstrations as well as a popular tourist destination, is the city’s last green public space.

Amnesty International has censured the Turkish police for the tactics they have used to control the protests.

MN/HN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

IRS Scandals? The IRS Is the Scandal

2

It is now well known that the Internal Revenue Service discriminated against conservative and Tea Party groups – i.e. the enemies of Barack Obama and his party. The IRS’s abuse of power is being treated as a “scandal.”  

But it is not a scandal.

And while there is no low to which Obama wouldn’t resort in order to advance his “transformative” agenda, it would be a grave mistake for anyone to think that abuses of this kind are peculiar to his administration.

The point is this: It is of the very essence of an agency like the IRS to abuse the vast power at its disposal, for both in quantity and quality, the existence of that sort of power is itself an abuse.

The IRS, in other words, is inimical to liberty. Its very existence is a scandal to a liberty-loving people.

First, the IRS is an agency of the federal government. 

American liberty consists in a wide dispersion or decentralization of power and authority. More specifically, at least as our Founders conceived it, the federal government is a federal – as opposed to a national – government precisely because the individual states are regarded as sovereign. 

Yet the IRS is just one signifier, albeit a profound one, of the ominous power that the federal government has managed to annex to itself since the time of the Founding. It is emblematic of the fact that it has long ago subverted its federal character, that it can run roughshod over the states.

Second, the IRS has the authority to collect, not just taxes, but taxes on income. When we consider the implications of this, it is nothing less than bewildering – and nothing more than tragic – that a once liberty-loving people could have ever permitted such an abomination to have come into existence. 

The money a person legally earns is his. There is no morally conceivable justification, none whatsoever, for anyone else to touch one cent of his earnings without his consent. And there is certainly no justification for allotting anyone, like the IRS, the authority and power to confiscate a person’s wages before he sees one dime of them.

There is no liberty unless property is dispersed wide and far. And it is only under a set of arrangements in which individuals are permitted to acquire as much property as their talents and good fortune enable that this situation can be secured.

In short, liberty presupposes the old Lockean notion of “self-ownership.”

But the income tax, to a far greater extent than any other kind of tax – for that matter, to a far greater extent than anything else the government does – undermines both the concept and practice of self-ownership. It undermines liberty. Indeed, matters can’t be otherwise, for as Walter E. Williams once said, the only thing that “fundamentally distinguishes” a free man from a slave is that the latter labors under coercion so that the fruits of his labor can be used to gratify someone else’s desires.

Whether the slave labors to satisfy the needs of one master or those of 300 million, and whether he lives on his master’s estate or thousands of miles away from it does nothing to change the fact that as long as portions of his property are confiscated to subsidize the desires of others, he remains a slave.

This isn’t hyperbole. When a person’s material assets are forcefully taken from him, it isn’t just his material assets that he loses. Taken from him as well are his resources in time and labor. Put another way, man does not live by bread alone. Work is as much of a psychological, and even spiritual, necessity as it is an economic and physical one. When a person is deprived of his bread, his sense of wholeness, his integrity, is assaulted as well. 

Yet there is more.

To tax income, the IRS also has to know a whole lot of other information about those whom it taxes. In a nation devoted to liberty, it is unacceptable that the federal government should be privy to the hours citizens work, the names of their employers, exactly how much they make, etc.

Finally, it is a no brainer that those endowed with awesome power to confiscate possess equally awesome political power – the power to reward allies and punish enemies. That is, they have the power to erode the rule of law and the equity that it insures.

The IRS is an affront to every lover of liberty. Hopefully, the current controversy in which it is embroiled will raise the public’s awareness of the fact that it, along with the income tax, needs to be eliminated once and for all.    

This article originally appeared on: The New American

Nation's Largest Lutheran Denomination Elects First Homosexual Bishop

0

Four years after voting to allow openly homosexual clergy, the four million-member Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) has elected its first openly homosexual bishop. The ELCA announced June 1 that the Rev. R. Guy Erwin (shown), who holds a bachelor’s degree from Harvard and a doctorate from Yale, was elected at the annual meeting of the ELCA’s Southwest California Synod to serve the next six years as that synod’s bishop. Erwin was chosen on a 210-171 vote of the synod’s pastors and church leaders.

Erwin currently serves as interim pastor of Faith Lutheran Church in Canoga Park, California, as well as professor of Lutheran confessional theology at California Lutheran University in Thousand Oaks. He is also the ELCA’s representative to the Faith and Order Commission of the World Council of Churches.

Ordained by the denomination in May 2011, “Erwin is the ELCA’s first synod bishop who is gay and in a partnered relationship with Rob Flynn, a member of the ELCA,” the ELCA announced with no apparent sense of shame. The denomination added that the newly elected bishop is also “part Osage Indian and is active in the Osage Indian Nation.”

Despite living a lifestyle plainly condemned by the Christian faith for 2,000 years, Erwin nonetheless claimed that he would bring to his new position of pastoral leadership a “deep faith in Christ’s presence in his church lived out in 20 years of parish experience blended with university and seminary-level teaching.”

According to Religion News Service (RNS), Erwin said he “waited until 2011 to become ordained, after the denomination’s 2009 change to allow people in ‘publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships to serve as rostered leaders of this church.’”

Erwin told the homosexual group GLAAD that he knew many would see his election “as a significant milestone for both LGBT people and Native Americans, and I pray that I can be a positive representation for both communities.” He recalled that there “was a time when I believed that I would not be able to serve as a pastor in the ELCA. Our church has now recognized the God-given gifts and abilities that LGBT people can bring to the denomination.”

Liberal theologian Martin Marty, a professor at the University of Chicago and a member of the ELCA, applauded Erwin’s election as “historic and a turning point, as was the ordination of women. This is just one of many indications that the culture has shifted.”

That shift has caused significant upheaval in the ELCA, with the denomination suffering a loss of nearly 500,000 members a year after its decision to ordain gay clergy. That exodus has been mirrored in other denominations that have been moving toward the embrace of homosexuality, including the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), the United Methodist Church, the United Church of Christ, and the Episcopal Church.

The decision ten years ago by America’s Episcopal Church to name the Rev. Gene Robinson as its first openly homosexual bishop led to a dramatic split in that denomination and caused a similar mass exodus of both members and congregations.

RNS reported that since the Lutheran denomination’s decision to ordain homosexuals, many U.S. congregations have departed the ELCA “to join the North American Lutheran Church [NALC], and some overseas churches have severed ties with the denomination. Earlier this year, the Lutheran church in Ethiopia parted ways with the ELCA.”

Robert Benne, a religion professor at Roanoke College in Virginia and a member of both the ELCA and the NALC, told RNS that naming Erwin as a bishop is “a decisive move by the ELCA” that will impact the denomination globally. “There’s a big sorting-out going on in American and world Christianity, so it’ll have some repercussions, but the larger repercussions will be worldwide,” he said.

Homosexual activists applauded Erwin’s election, with Emily Eastwood of ReconcilingWorks, a group of pro-homosexual Lutherans, commenting that it marked a “new and brighter day for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Lutheran… Once again, today we are proud to be Lutherans.”

Similarly, Amalia Vagts of Extraordinary Lutheran Ministries, another pro-homosexual ELCA subset, declared that the denomination “has come a long way in four years. More and more people are realizing all the time that LGBTQ [lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer] people have important ministry gifts, including the gifts to lead the church as a bishop. We are thrilled to see such a wonderful leader from the LGBTQ community called to the position of bishop at this time in history.”

While most conservative Lutheran groups remained silent concerning Erwin’s contoversial election, the Rev. W. Stevens Shipman, director of the conservative Lutheran Coalition for Renewal, noted that the election represents a broken promise by the ELCA, which vowed not to foist homosexuality on members and congregations who consider the lifestyle sinful. Shipman told Fox News that the ELCA promised that “no congregation would be required to call a pastor in a same-sex partnership. But now an entire synod has been forced to live under the authority of a bishop who is in such a relationship.”

Some conservative Christian theologians have pointed out that Martin Luther, whose 16th century reform movement birthed the broad Lutheran tradition, would find himself militantly at odds with today’s ELCA leadership. In his book What Luther Says: An Anthology, author Ewald Martin Plass quotes Luther as as calling homosexuality – which he referred to by the term “sodomy” – as an “unparalleled enormity” that “departs from the natural passion and desire, planted into nature by God, according to which the male has a passionate desire for the female. Sodomy craves what is entirely contrary to nature.”

Continued Luther in his condemnation of what he considered a wholly sinful lifestyle: “Whence comes this perversion? Without a doubt it comes from the devil. After a man has once turned aside from the fear of God, the devil puts such great pressure upon his nature that he extinguishes the fire of natural desire and stirs up another, which is contrary to nature.”

Photo of Rev. Guy Erwin: AP Images

This article originally appeared on: The New American

7 Georgian soldiers killed in Afghanistan

0

Georgian soldiers attend a departure ceremony before deployment to Afghanistan at the Vaziani military base outside Tbilisi, Georgia. (file photo)

Seven Georgian soldiers serving with the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) have been killed in a bomb attack on their base in the southern Afghan province of Helmand.

The incident took place in the Nawzad district on Thursday when a bomber detonated an explosives-laden truck outside the military base.

According to Georgiaâ„¢s army chief General Irakli Dzneladze, at least nine other soldiers were also wounded in the bombing.

The Taliban have claimed responsibility for the attack, claiming to have killed as many as twenty foreign soldiers.

Following the attack, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili issued a statement, offering his Å“deepest condolences… to all of Georgia.”

On May 13, three Georgian soldiers were killed in a similar attack in the Musa Qala district of the province.

Twenty-seven Georgian troops have been killed since 2004, when they joined the US-led forces in Afghanistan.

With around 1,570 troops in Helmand, Georgia is the largest non-NATO contributor to the ISAF, the Georgian Defense Ministry says.

According to the website icasualties.org, 3,330 foreign soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan since the US-led war began in 2001.

The increasing number of military casualties in Afghanistan has caused widespread anger in the US and other NATO member states, undermining public support for the Afghan war.

The offensive removed the Taliban from power, but insecurity continues to rise across Afghanistan, despite the presence of thousands of US-led troops.

MAM/MHB

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Stacy Herbert: Victim of Piers Morgan

0
  •   The Alex Jones Channel Alex Jones Show podcast Prison Planet TV Infowars.com Twitter Alex Jones' Facebook Infowars store

Infowars.com
June 6, 2013

Stacey Herbert exposes how Piers Morgan hacked her phone.

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 3:33 pm

Tags:



  • Share this article


  • facebookRecommend on Facebook
  • twitterTweet about it
  • <a target=_blank rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://digg.com/submit?url=http://www.infowars.com/stacy-herbert-victim-of-piers-morgan/&title=Stacy Herbert: Victim of Piers Morgan&bodytext=Infowars.com | Stacey Herbert exposes how Piers Morgan hacked her phone.” title=”Stacy Herbert: Victim of Piers Morgan”>
    diggDigg this post


  • redditshare via Reddit
  • emailEmail



<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Bipartisan Victory as Republicans and Democrats Agree Poor People Should Go Hungry

0

The Senate pushed its version of a Farm Bill through a procedural cloture vote on Thursday, paving the way for a full Senate debate on the massive piece of legislation that will guide agricultural and food policy over the next five years.

A worker unloads a pallet of food at a warehouse in Memphis, Tennessee. (Photo: Evelyn Hockstein/MCT) Advocates for the poor, however, are up in arms as representatives from both major political parties are readying dramatic cuts to the nation’s food assistance program that will negatively impact millions of the nation’s most vulnerable families.

As the new Farm Bill moves towards its final stage in the Senate, proposed changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) threaten to cut at least $4 billion from the key program over the next decade.

Michigan’s Democratic Senator Debbie Stabenow, who authored large portions of the Senate’s bill, has defended the slashed funding to SNAP by saying the cuts are not nearly as drastic as those put forth by the GOP-controlled House.

But anti-poverty advocates, not to mention numerous economists, say the current economy demands increased support for those living on or near the edge of hunger, not an erosion of the life-saving assistance.

According to the Food Research and Action Center (FRAC), eighty-three percent of all SNAP benefits go to households with a child, senior, or disabled person. Another 83 percent of SNAP households have gross income at or below 100 percent of the poverty guideline — that’s $19,530 for a family of three in 2013.

Following the Senate’s cloture vote, the Associated Press reports:

Food stamps have for decades been part of the farm bill in a bid by rural lawmakers to gain urban votes for the measure. But this year, food stamps have made passage more difficult. Conservatives in the House have argued that the program, which has doubled in cost since 2008, needs an overhaul. Senate Democrats have been reluctant to touch it.

Last year more around 47 million people used SNAP. The rolls rose rapidly because of the economic downturn, rising food prices and expanded eligibility under the 2009 economic stimulus law.

But, as McClatchy reports:

The anti-hunger lobbyists are especially disappointed by Democrats who in recent weeks have voted for the cuts in legislation that passed the House of Representatives and Senate agriculture committees last month, measures that also contain controversial aid to farmers.

“Food stamps have been protected for decades,” said Ellen Teller, the head of governmental affairs for [FRAC]. “This is the first time they’re being cut for deficit reduction. We think it’s wrong to pay down the deficit on the backs of the poor.”

Teller and others who work to protect low-income Americans are dismayed because food stamps were among the safety net programs that Congress exempted from the forced across-the-board cuts now in effect under the system known as sequestration.

Further reading: Congress’ Farm Bill Readies to Kick Poor Off Food Assistance

__________________________________________________

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

This article originally appeared on: Common Dreams

Unprecedented Wealth, Debt Slavery and Conditioned Consciousness

0

Introduction

Seventeen years ago, I read a book called The Evolving Self. Though I didn’t realize it at the time, it profoundly affected the direction of my life. Here’s the section of the book that became a splinter in my mind and resonated the most with me:

“In order to gain control of consciousness, we must learn how to moderate the biases built into the machinery of the brain. We allow a whole series of illusions to stand between ourselves and reality…. These distortions are comforting, yet they need to be seen through for the self to be truly liberated… to come ever closer to getting a glimpse of the universal order, and of our part in it.”

Since reading that, I have dedicated my life to coming “ever closer to getting a glimpse of the universal order, and of our part in it.” After years of research and analysis, I’ve come to hard-fought, battle-tested conclusions that I’ve been sharing with people to great effect, and will share with you now. This will not be for the faint of heart. It will hit hard and we don’t have much time, so let’s get right down to it.

At this point, if you spend much time researching power politics or the distribution of wealth, resources and basic necessities, it seems evident and undeniable, dare I say, “common sense,” that we, in fact, live in a neo-feudal society built on debt and mental slavery.

That may sound like over-the-top rhetoric, and it obviously sounds extreme to propagandized and conditioned minds, and yes, it is extreme. However, it is the unfortunate reality of the present situation. The facts are there for the rational and unbiased mind to absorb and comprehend.

If you take a few minutes of your time and read this through, it will easily be proven. We will look at how the system works, and then, hopefully, we will begin the process of evolving society together, as grandiose as that may sound.

Let’s start by giving some context and perspective on present circumstances by breaking down some economic data. As Thomas Jefferson once said, “Enlighten the people generally, and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind will vanish like evil spirits at the dawn of day.”

I: Unprecedented Wealth

For the past 35 years, with technological advancements, there has been an explosion in production and profits, in wealth creation. That unprecedented increase in wealth, as many of you know, has gone to the top economic 1%. Most of it, the lion’s share of it, went to not even the top economic 1%, but to the top one-hundredth of one percent, to the modern day aristocracy.

After analyzing the most recent data, here’s the headline: US millionaire households now have $50 trillion in wealth. They have $39 trillion in legally accounted for wealth, and an estimate of $11 trillion hidden in offshore accounts.

Let that sink in for a moment… 50 TRILLION DOLLAR$.

Most people cannot even comprehend how much $1 trillion is, let alone $50 trillion. One trillion is equal to 1000 billion, or $1,000,000,000,000.00.

Only one-tenth of one percent of the population makes one million dollars a year, and, again, most of that wealth is in the top one-hundredth of one percent.

To show how consolidated the wealth is, even in the upper most portion of the top one percentile, the richest 400 people have as much wealth as 185 million Americans combined; that’s only 400 people with as much wealth as 60% of the entire US population.

Before continuing, let me defuse the reactionary propagandized mind’s instinctive response. This is not about demonizing people just because they have money. There are many people who are using their wealth and resources to improve the human condition. It’s important to understand that the focus here is not on the people who have a mere $10 million or so in wealth. When discussing the modern day aristocracy, the main focus is on the pathological, shortsighted and greed-addicted forces that are doing much more to limit human potential than enhance it.

Broadly speaking, the aristocracy is composed of governments, political parties, policy groups, think tanks, intel factions, private military companies, large global corporations, banks and media empires. Included in that are mega-wealthy billionaires and CEOs who have unprecedented control of wealth and resources. For example, the Business Roundtable, the people who run the 147 inter-connected corporations who control half of the world economy.

However, the ultimate point here is to show people that there is presently more than enough wealth and capabilities to solve societal problems. We can truly evolve society in unprecedented fashion. At this point, there is an overwhelming majority of the population, even a majority of the mega-wealthy, who realize that our present systems are obsolete, unsustainable and unstable. We don’t need to spend our finite time and energy fighting with each other. We already have a critical mass of aware citizens, we just need to inspire and organize them to build the cultural and political will. Once we do that, we will be an unstoppable force.

Let’s get back to that 50 trillion number, because we have had an entire generation of mind-blowing wealth creation that has been systematically withheld from the population.

$50,000,000,000,000.00

Can you comprehend how much money $50 trillion is? Just to give a little context, we can end world hunger and provide clean drinking water to everyone on the planet for an estimated $40 billion. Again, one trillion is one thousand billion, and we are talking about $50 trillion.

Imagine what could be done with that amount of wealth. Imagine the implications, the possibilities. Imagine how we could evolve society, to the benefit of everyone, with modern technology and just a fraction of that staggering amount of wealth.

The average American cannot comprehend how much wealth there is because there is no frame of reference, no comparison of scale or historical precedent. If Americans had an understanding of how much wealth is being kept from them and the possibilities of what we could do with that wealth, we would have a full-blown societal evolution right now.

II: Debt Slavery

It is the denial of wealth that keeps you in check; it keeps you in debt.

Just at the point when technological advancement, production, distribution and wealth increases should have made everyone’s life much easier, just when basic necessities should have become much more affordable and easier to obtain, they became more expensive.

The cost of production dropped dramatically and efficiency of distribution skyrocketed. Housing, food, health and education costs should have plummeted dramatically. However, most basic necessities now come at a much higher price, and people are forced to take on increasing levels of debt to keep up. As most people are aware, student debt, consumer debt, medical debt and household debt have reached all-time record highs.

As an old wise person once said, “There are two ways to conquer and enslave a nation. One is by the sword. The other is by debt.”

We live in a neo-feudal system of debt slavery. The indentured servant is now the indebted consumer.

When you understand the wealth at hand, you begin to grasp the crime against humanity that is afoot. We live in the richest, most technologically advanced society humanity has ever known. Yet, here we are, in the 21st century, with an all-time record number of Americans living in poverty.

Crime Against Humanity

After careful consideration, it must be said that this is not only the greatest theft of wealth in history; it is also the greatest crime against humanity in history.

People can’t afford to pay their medical billions. Millions upon millions of American families have lost their homes, and millions more are on the verge of losing their homes. An all-time record number of children are going hungry. Meanwhile, record-breaking profits and record-breaking bonuses for the bailed out banana republic aristocracy.

How healthy is a society when 400 people have as much wealth as 185 million of their neighbors combined? What kind of a system produces a result like that? As famed social psychologist John Dewey said, “There is no such thing as the liberty or effective power of an individual, group, or class, except in relation to the liberties, the effective powers, of other individuals, groups or classes.”

Now that you are beginning to grasp the wealth at hand, and the possibilities of how that wealth can be used to evolve society, let’s take a look at how we got into this situation and how exactly it is that they got away with hoarding so much wealth.

To paraphrase a man who fought against the aristocracy, ‘The depravity and amount of suffering required for the accumulation of such a staggering magnitude of wealth, in the hands of a few, is kept out of the picture, out of the mass media, and it is not easy to make people see or understand this.’ Especially when you have an all-encompassing mainstream media propaganda system.

III: Mental Slavery — Conditioned Consciousness

“To subdue the enemy without fighting is the highest skill.”
– Sun Tzu, The Art of War, 246 BC

The mainstream media is the most effective weapon of mass oppression humanity has ever known.

Since the early 1900’s and World War I, a massive propaganda system has been in place. This is not a conspiracy theory; it is all well documented. Research Edward Bernays, Walter Lippman, Ivy Lee, George Creel and the Committee on Public Information for starters. In fact, you don’t even need a conspiracy theory; you just need a basic understanding of propaganda, social psychology and behaviorism — more on that later.

The bottom line, as Dewey once said, “We live exposed to the greatest flood of mass suggestion humanity has ever experienced.”

Speaking from personal experience, having been born and raised inside this propaganda system, and still obviously living inside it, I have come to realize that even the most independent minded among us vastly underestimates how mentally conditioned we all are. Most people are no more consciously aware of this mental domination then they are aware of gravity. It’s like the air we breathe.

For two obvious examples, let’s start with television consumption and advertising. The average American watches more than five hours of TV a day, every single day of their life. American children view more than 40,000 ads per year, every single year of their life. Think about that. That’s intensive mental domination administered on a daily basis, from the cradle to the grave.

Ultimately, as Phil Merikle summed it up, “It’s what advertisers have known all along: if we just keep the exposure rate up, people will be influenced.” Repetition, it’s all about repetition.

Repetitive messages fill our mental atmosphere. To paraphrase Philip Lesley in Managing the Human Climate, ‘When a message appears all around you, you tend to accept it and take it for granted. You find yourself surrounded by it and your subconscious mind absorbs and becomes immersed in the climate of repetitive ideas.’ They form the origins of your thoughts. It’s where your desires, opinions and perspectives are born.

To spin a McLuhan riff, the mainstream mass media is the software on which our minds run; it’s our operating system. It’s an extension of our nervous system. Repetitive mainstream propaganda creates a belief system, popular reference points, symbols, archetypes, mental patterns, a mindset and groupthink, all based on repetition — and groupthink is a highly contagious infectious disease.

It’s hard to escape groupthink. As with freedom and democracy, you must be ever vigilant to avoid the tyranny of groupthink and cultural conditioning. As Walter Lippmann said, “In the great blooming, buzzing confusion of the outer world, we pick out what our culture has already defined for us, and we tend to perceive that which we have picked out in the form stereotyped for us by our culture.”

To remix a quote from Dostoevsky, ‘Leave people alone without mass media and they will be lost and confused. They will not know what to support, what to cling to, what to love and what to hate, what to respect and what to despise.’

Malcolm X said it best, “The media’s the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that’s power. Because they control the minds of the masses.”

The mainstream media keeps everyone isolated inside a false reality, a pseudo mental environment. People are trapped in a bubble of status quo supporting reality, in a bubble of what’s good for shortsighted, short-term corporate interests.

People’s consciousness and awareness gets conditioned and contracted, they become isolated and detached from wider reality.

People are born and raised inside mass media created illusions. As Eduardo Galeano put it, “The majority must resign itself to the consumption of fantasy. Illusions of wealth are sold to the poor, illusions of freedom to the oppressed, dreams of victory to the defeated and of power to the weak.”

As Harold Lasswell said in 1927, “The new antidote to willfulness is propaganda. If the mass will be free of chains of iron, it must accept its chains of silver. If it will not love, honor, and obey, it must not expect to escape seduction.”

Now, let’s sharpen our focus a bit and look from a more practical perspective.

IV: The Spectrum of Thinkable Thought

The censorship that is most prevalent today is the most dangerous form. Not censorship of explicit words, sex or violence, but censorship of any thoughts outside of shortsighted corporate ideology. Any thoughts that lead to critical thought on the established power structure or veer outside of the spectrum of status quo supporting opinion are left out of the debate, out of mainstream public consciousness.

The mainstream press does not cover the most vital social, economic and political issues. The more important something is, the less they report on it. If mentioned at all, it’s mentioned in passing, with little, if any, in-depth reporting, discussion and debate on it.

It’s censorship by omission and bullshit on repetition.

As Noam Chomsky observed, this is how propaganda and social control posing as freedom and democracy works: “The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum…. That gives people the sense that there’s freethinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate.”

To paraphrase Alex Carey, they create ‘the spectrum of thinkable thought. They set the terms of debate, to determine the kinds of questions that will dominate public consciousness, people’s thoughts. They set the political agenda in ways that are favorable to shortsighted corporate interests. The debate is never about the curtailment of the manipulative power of entrenched global corporations.’

Imagine wall-to-wall 24/7 news coverage of the trillions of dollars in fraudulent activity that got us into this mess. Imagine in-depth coverage of the corruption of our political process through a system of bribery that makes the mafia look like amateurs.

What about the staggering consolidation of wealth? Imagine if the media kept discussing how a small percentage of the population has 50 trillion dollars, then they started debating how we could use just a fraction of that money to solve problems, create solutions and evolve society.

What if they reported on all the wealth and resources that a small number of corporations control, then debated how that wealth and those resources could be redeployed to get us onto a sustainable and thriving path?

When you understand what is possible, you see how truly corrupt, shortsighted, ignorant and obsolete our system of rule is. You then realize that our mainstream media system is pure propaganda.

When you see the reality that they don’t tell you about, it becomes all too clear. If you were to just look at what they don’t tell you, you would see. Mainstream media is the most effective weapon of mass oppression humanity has ever known. It’s hard to break free, when you are always told you are free.

As Huxley put it in Brave New World Revisited, “The victim of mind-manipulation does not know that they are a victim. To them, the walls of their prison are invisible, and they believe they are free.”

You can’t break free until you see the walls. The whips and chains have evolved into TVs and radios. As William Blum said, “Propaganda is to democracy what violence is to dictatorships.” If television was around in the 1770s, we would still be living under British rule.

In the land of propaganda, tyranny is democracy. It’s “enlightened despotism.” When it comes to oppression, it’s all cyclical yet evolutionary. Most people live in a mental cage now, they toil on mentally conditioned plantations.

V: Behaviorism & Assembly Line Intelligentsia

People reading this may try to dismiss it as a conspiracy theory. We must always be conscious of the reactionary propagandized mind and the army of paid off propagandists who uphold this system of mental domination. “Conspiracy theory” is the ultimate label to trigger dismissal without causing people to think about the content and substance of the message.

When it comes to the reactionary propagandized mind, their impulsive, instinctive dismissal further demonstrates how well they have been indoctrinated and conditioned. Once again, you don’t need a conspiracy theory to understand the system of mental conditioning; you just need to have a basic understanding of propaganda, social psychology and behaviorism. Modern indoctrinated intelligentsia have been produced like products off an assembly line. In The Genesis of the Technocratic Elite, Zoran Vidakovic breaks down how the assembly line of indoctrination works:

“Selection, education, and specific indoctrination of technical and administrative cadres are carried out first in metropolitan educational and research factories and their branches in dependent societies, under the wing of the superficially independent foundations which sustain the international projects of ‘technical aid,’ and then within the personnel policy of the transnational corporations that raise people from the local environments to responsible managerial and technical functions in their internationally located branches, or that in other ways subordinate and direct the ‘modernized’ industrial entrepreneurs, agrarian ‘reformers,’ functionaries, and leading intellectuals from the ministries and banks, universities, and public information, cultural, and scientific institutions.

The essential effect of this great factory for the almost assembly line production of dependent and emasculated ‘technocratic elites’ is that the material position, status, and professional success of the members of these groups imperatively depends on their conformity to the ideology of dependence and the interiorization of the intellectual, political, and ideological characteristics of this social type programmed in metropolitan laboratories for the technological, social, and cultural transformation of ‘developing countries.’…

The ideology of total repression unites with the ideology of technological and cultural dependency and assimilation; in this union repression gains strength as the condition of the entire dependent economic growth, technological progress, and ‘modernization of society,’ as a circle of insurmountable dependency on the import of prefabricated knowledge and technical and consumerist models is closed up by the ambitions of the protagonists of authoritarian rule.”

We live in a Skinner box. It’s classic “behavioral modification” (b-mod) within a “token economy.” We have an outdated system of incentives; you incentivize and reward certain behavior, and you punish or withdraw basic necessities for other behavior. It’s behaviorism 101.

Give people a paycheck to have certain opinions, to do certain things. You can see it everywhere, in almost all professions, not just the media. If you think a certain way, if you do certain things, you will be awarded with a paycheck. If you don’t, you lose your paycheck. Or, as Thomas Paine said in Rights of Man, “Those who do not participate in this enacting do not get fed.”

People get paid a lot of money to spew bullshit talking point propaganda on a daily basis. The truth of the matter: if you propagate the message of tyrants, and if you are good at it, you can become rich and famous. That’s what primitive self-obsessed ego-driven careerists do. They are the ultimate pawns of empire. They enrich themselves by riding the coattails of conquerors.

As W.E.H. Lecky once said, ‘The simple fact of applying certain penalties to the profession of particular opinions, and rewards to the profession of opposite opinions, while it will make many hypocrites, it will also make many converts.’

Our Skinner box society, our token economy is run by the modern day aristocracy through a system of enlightened despotism. You either bow down and play by their rules or you lose access to basic necessities. It’s the root of modern monetary enslavement — debt and wage slavery.

The fact of the matter, the truth of the matter: we are not supposed to be freethinking participatory citizens involved in the decision-making processes that guide our lives and determine our fate. We are mentally conditioned to be spectators, mindless reactionary consumers and wage slaves.

VI: Totalitarian Minds Inside the All-Consuming Cult

If you want to get wicked about it, we could quote extensively from the work of Edward Bernays, Gustave LeBon or Walter Lippman on the “bewildered herd,” but that’s too easy. Let’s drop some Jacques Ellul, from his 1965 analysis of the social mind, Propaganda: The Formation of Men’s Attitudes:

“Propaganda is today a greater danger to mankind than any of the other more grandly advertised threats hanging over the human race…. Propaganda ruins not only democratic ideas but also democratic behavior — the foundation of democracy, the very quality without which it cannot exist…. Propaganda destroys its very foundations. It creates a man who is suited to a totalitarian society….

A man who lives in a democratic society and who is subjected to propaganda is being drained of the democratic content itself — of the style of democratic life, understanding of others… he is a ‘totalitarian man with democratic convictions,’ but those convictions do not change his behavior in the least. Such contradiction is in no way felt by the individual for whom democracy has become a myth and a set of democratic imperatives, merely stimuli that activate conditioned reflexives.

The word democracy, having become a simple incitation, no longer has anything to do with democratic behavior. And the citizen can repeat indefinitely ‘the sacred formulas of democracy’ while acting like a storm trooper.”

That is as accurate a depiction of the average modern American as I have ever come across. In the same book, Ellul went on to explain the inherent danger of our two-party system and the general apathy Americans have toward politics:

“The conflicting propaganda of opposing parties is essentially what leads to political abstention. But this is not the abstention of the free spirit which asserts itself; it is the result of resignation, the external symptom of a series of inhibitions. Such a man has not decided to abstain; under diverse pressures, subjected to shocks and distortions, he can no longer (even if he wanted to) perform a political act. What is even more serious is that this inhibition not only is political, but also progressively takes over the whole of his being and leads to a general attitude of surrender….

At the same time, this crystallization closes his mind to all new ideas. The individual now has a set of prejudices and beliefs…. His entire personality now revolves around those elements. Every new idea will therefore be troublesome to his entire being.”

In Comments on the Society of the Spectacle, Guy DeBord summed up the primary function of the mainstream media, “For what is communicated are orders; and with perfect harmony, those who give them are also those who tell us what they think of them.”

For an even deeper understanding on how propaganda works, let’s return to Ellul:

“Governmental propaganda suggests that public opinion demand this or that decision; it provokes the will of a people, who spontaneously say nothing. But, once evoked, formed, and crystallized on a point, that will becomes the people’s will.

The government really acts on its own, it just gives the impression of obeying public opinion, after having first built that public opinion. The point is to make the masses demand of the government what the government has already decided to do.”

They “amputate the argument” and replace it with “engineered consensus.” As Robert Lynd wrote in Democracy In Reverse, “They operate actually to confirm the citizen’s false sense of security in totaling up ‘what the majority think’… The false sense of the public’s being ‘boss’ that they encourage operates to narcotize public awareness of the seriousness of problems and of the drastic social changes many contemporary situations require.”

In 1935, Malcolm Willey explained, “An individual may be moved to action through repetition, as, for example, in advertising; but his action is made more certain if he is made to realize that thousands, even millions, of others are thinking and feeling as he himself does. Herein lies the importance of the contemporary communication network; it not only carries its symbols to the individual, it also impresses upon him a sense of numbers.”

James Madison also realized this when he wrote Public Opinion, “The larger a country, the less easy for its real opinion to be ascertained, and the less difficult to be counterfeited.” That was written in 1791, when the US population was only about five million people.

In 1901, Gabriel Tarde wrote, “Newspapers have transformed… unified in space and diversified in time the conversations of individuals, even those who do not read papers but who, talking to those who do, are forced to follow the groove of their borrowed thoughts. One pen suffices to set off a million tongues.”

Bertrand Russell also hit at the root in Free Thought and Official Propaganda, when he said, “it is much easier than it used to be to spread misinformation, and, owing to democracy, the spread of misinformation is more important than in former times to the holders of power.”

In Taking the Risk Out of Democracy, Alex Carey summed it all up in this one sentence: “That this simple regime of thought-control should prove to have been so triumphant, with so little public resistance, must be put down to its persistent, repetitive orchestration.”

For all the discussion and focus on political and economic policy, what we really need to do on the individual level, first and foremost, is transcend conditioned consciousness. Once we do that, positive political and economic policy will be the natural byproduct and inevitable result.

VII: Free Your Mind ~*~

“You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it… Sooner or later you’re going to realize, just as I did, that there’s a difference between knowing the path, and walking the path. I’m trying to free your mind… But I can only show you the door. You’re the one that has to walk through it.”
— The Matrix

In revisiting the reactionary propagandized mind, when you confront a member of the consumer cult and expose their mental conditioning processes, the false reality and illusions that people are trapped in, they will instinctively dismiss or attack you. People will bite your hand when you try to remove the mental leash from their neck.

In The Evolving Self, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi explains further, “To prevent its annihilation, the ego forces us to be constantly on the watch for anything that might threaten the symbols on which it relies for identity. Our view of the world becomes polarized into ‘good’ and ‘bad’ — things that support the image, and those that threaten it.” This is also how the third Mayan veil works. In this case, your media created cultural programming; it distorts reality to make it congruent with conditioned views.

Anything that deviates from the conditioned norm is ridiculed and instantly, instinctively dismissed before critical thinking skills are activated. The repetitious conditioning process leads to an amputation of critical thinking faculties. That which people are not familiar with becomes odd, evil and damaging to their mental construct, to their thought patterns, to their fabricated self-image.

For instance, we tend to look for anything that confirms our pre-existing beliefs while ignoring anything that goes against them. This is how confirmation bias works, to paraphrase Bertrand Russell: ‘If people are offered a fact which goes against their instincts or their cultural programming, they will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, they are offered something which falls in accordance to their cultural programming, in accordance to their conditioning, they will accept it, even on the slightest evidence.’

Having been bred within this all-pervasive propaganda system, I understand the disbelief people feel. When our conditioned belief system is called into question and comes crashing down, it is a hard pill to swallow. No one wants to believe that they have been manipulated or taken advantage of. This will stir up an instinctive dismissal, a powerful emotional response. We are creatures of habit, and it is much easier, over the short-term, to just stay on a path of denial and ignorance. Hear no evil. See no evil.

The task upon us is to consciously counter conditioned consciousness. The most difficult and important prerequisite to freedom is the ability to see past all of your culturally programmed biases. It takes great personal inner-strength and determination to achieve this; you will inevitably have to face many facts that will go against your programmed, conditioned beliefs. If one can endure this, one will eventually come to experience true freedom.

However, even if one is strong enough to have an awareness of their conditioning, it is another level to confront and transcend it. As Nietzsche said, “Even the most courageous among us only rarely has the courage for that which they really know.”

“Are you brave enough to see?
Do you want to change it?”
—Trent Reznor

Noam Chomsky makes the ease in which you can free your mind clear, and stresses the importance of doing so:

“To take apart the system of illusions and deception which functions to prevent understanding of contemporary reality [is] not a task that requires extraordinary skill or understanding. It requires the kind of normal skepticism and willingness to apply one’s analytical skills that almost all people have and that they can exercise….

As long as some specialized class is in position of authority, it is going to set policy in the special interests that it serves, but the conditions of survival, let alone justice, require rational social planning in the interests of the community as a whole, and by now that means the global community.

The question is whether privileged elite should dominate mass communication and should use this power as they tell us they must — namely to impose necessary illusions, to manipulate and deceive…. In this possibly terminal phase of human existence, democracy and freedom are more than values to be treasured; they may well be essential to survival.”

Most Americans are aware of the fact that we are on a disastrous path. However, many of us feel powerless to change things. These feelings are only a result of our conditioning and induced delusion. We have become so propagandized that many of us do not realize the significant position that we are in. We are not poor people trapped in a third world existence. We are a mass of people who have the power to evolve society and change the course of history.

It is stunning to hear all these people, so many people saying that they can’t do anything about it. Far too many people think that we can’t create change; that is why we don’t.

Why do you think that we can’t change the world? How did you come to that conclusion? Who taught you to believe that?

The overwhelming majority feels powerless to create political change. If they would just realize that they are the overwhelming majority, they would no longer feel this way. As Ellul said, “Only when he realizes his delusion will he experience the beginning of genuine freedom — in the act of realization itself — be it only from the effort to stand back and look squarely at the phenomenon and reduce it to raw fact.”

VIII: Cyberspace Underground Railroad

Time comes and times go…

Thanks to the Internet, to the cyberspace underground railroad, people are now freeing their minds from conditioning and entrenched power censors. The Internet is to our generation what pamphlets were to our forefathers’ generation during the first American Revolution. People are going to the Internet to find out all the information that the corporate mainstream media is not letting people know about. As a result, we now have a critical mass of informed and outraged citizens who are also using the Internet to organize. They are now transcending conditioned consciousness and expanding their awareness on a scale unprecedented in human history.

A new empowering collective consciousness, built on self-sufficient and aware individuals, is quickly evolving. As William Adams Brown said, “We are developing a social conscience, and situations which would have been accepted a generation ago as a matter of course are felt as an intolerable scandal.” John Dewey continues, “Liberty in the concrete signifies release from the impact of particular oppressive forces; emancipation from something once taken as a normal part of human life but now experienced as bondage…. Today, it signifies liberation from material insecurity and from the coercions and repressions that prevent multitudes from participation in the vast cultural resources that are at hand.”

The inevitable demise of our current neo-feudal system was summed up by George Orwell when he said, “For if leisure and security were enjoyed by all alike, the great mass of human beings who are normally stupefied by poverty would become literate and would learn to think for themselves; and when once they had done this, they would sooner or later realize that the privileged minority had no function, and they would sweep it away. In the long run, a hierarchical society was only possible on a basis of poverty and ignorance.”

If you are still wondering if we can truly create change, consider this simple truth from Strobe Talbott, “All countries are basically social arrangements, accommodations to changing circumstances. No matter how permanent and even sacred they may seem at any one time, in fact they are all artificial and temporary.”

Our government was created in the time of the horse and wagon. It took days or weeks to deliver one handwritten message across state lines. Today, we have instantaneous worldwide communication and an unprecedented amount of wealth in the most technologically advanced society. The masses are now connected and aware. It’s time to evolve our obsolete system. You know it, and so does everyone else who pays attention. We will soon have new ways of living that will make our modern age like look the Stone Age.

People are throwing off their mental shackles and realizing their potential. A new renaissance and age of enlightenment has begun. Another world is happening. Humanity is rising.

Enough writing from the Underground. It’s time to contrive to be born, to transform our world. We are building a decentralized global network of self-sustaining community incubators designed to maximize the transformative energy around us and facilitate the evolution of society. If you want to join us in this effort, enlist here.

– See more at: http://daviddegraw.org/notes-from-the-underground/#sthash.bff680vP.dpuf

This article originally appeared on: Global Research

Student loan debt forgiveness? Or welfare for banks?

0

libertypulse.com
June 6, 2013

“My student loans, car payment + CC debt amounts to cost of a home in one of the more affordable cities. A Master’s degree in this economy seems to be a liability. I AM THE 99%” claimed one occupy protester. She was not alone. The occupy protesters, frequently lampooned by their detractors as having no central purpose or cause, identified student loans as a #1 concern of their movement.

A client once approached me with a problem: her student loan debt was beginning to drastically detract from her quality of life. Federally backed student loans are non-dischargeable in bankruptcy. And she found that despite being employed, her monthly student loan payments were too high. She would make payments, but the payments were not complete. Since collection attempts are charged to the debtor, and become part of the principle debt, she had noticed a troubling pattern. After each payment, she would receive a call from a debt collector. Since the bulk of the payment was against interest rather than the principle debt, the dent she was making in the principle through her partial payments was actually smaller than the additional principle that was being added, each month, by the debt collectors’ calls and subsequent letters. Though she had paid more money against her student loans than she had originally been lent, the principle debt was now larger than ever; and the servicers’ enforcement mechanisms allowed them to sidestep the usual costs of collection through tax refund garnishments, wage-garnishments and social security garnishments that were nearly self-enforcing. It didn’t make sense.

People like my client are now demanding a response to the problem of student loans, and the President has responded to their demands with a plan (which merely expands on a Bush-era plan — a staple of Obama’s presidency) that claims to meet the challenges posed by runaway student loan debt. The president’s plan would require qualifying debtors to make nominal payments against their debts in exchange for a big handout from Uncle Sam. The handout would go directly to the banks that are owed the debt. Through this plan, everyone wins: debtors see their debts erased, the banks are paid in full, and everyone gets to go to college.

The only people who lose are the American people.

The Obama debt forgiveness plan makes about as much sense as investing with Bernie Madoff: the banks offer student loans that they are assured will be repaid to them. The current easy-money Keynesian approach of our government allows it to back that assurance by borrowing money from the banks, or from foreign governments, so that they can pay down the debt of individual debtors.

Meanwhile, the price of tuition has risen exponentially over the last several decades. Explanations of that phenomenon offered by the universities themselves tend to focus on the cost, to the university, of providing an education. But the price of something is exactly what people will pay for it, rather than what it costs to produce it. How much does it cost to produce an Abercrombie and Fitch pair of pants? You don’t have to travel to Bangladesh to find out. Does the cost of production have any relationship with the value of the product, or what customers are willing to spend for it? Even Ben Bernanke would tell you no.

Market principles apply to education just like they apply to any other commodity. And the educational market has been manipulated by government for far too long. The creation of special regulations benefitting banks and lenders that provide student loans has meant that tuition prices are generated in a bubble: they do not have a true market. The consumer does not ultimately pay the price of tuition, and therefore has no incentive to negotiate a better price. Instead, students who wish to attend a college simply apply for a loan. Qualifying for a student loan is different from qualifying for a business loan. Since banks are assured of being paid back (education loans are non-dischargeable in bankruptcy, and nearly self-executing), banks do not concern themselves with details like the value of the commodity that they are financing.

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t

What is an Art History major worth? How much earning potential does a student with a Masters in Philosophy have in the real world? These are all questions that banks do not have to answer. And students aren’t acquainted enough with the real world to ask these questions — particularly while they’re studying in the bubble-world of the average American educational institution.

President Obama’s proposal further insulates tuition costs from market realities. By foreclosing whatever slight possibility there ever was for a debtor to truly default on a student loan, he would ensure that banks could loans with reckless abandon. This would cause tuition to skyrocket even faster than previously thought possible. The final result of all of this would be to make college truly and utterly unaffordable to all but the wealthiest families — without the aid of banks offering federally backed, non-dischargeable, and self-executing tuition loans.

If colleges had to compete, on the free market, for their tuition money, tuition would be forced down. Perhaps if colleges were forced to balance their checkbooks like the rest of us, they would consider producing students with similar capabilities. Perhaps not. But if we want college education to truly be accessible to everyone, college tuition needs to respond to market realities.

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 3:07 pm

Tags: ,






<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

‘Economic discontent simmers in Europe’

0

The headquarters of the European Union in the Belgian capital Brussels (file photo)

A new survey has revealed that the vast majority of citizens in major European Union states are dissatisfied with the economic situation in their countries.

The results of the opinion poll, which was conducted by the French research company Ipsos, were announced on May 23 after questioning 18,331 respondents in 24 countries around the world from April 2 to 16.

The study indicates that only three percent of the respondents in Spain describe their current economic situation as Å“good,” while in France and Italy respectively, only four and five percent of citizens are content with the issue.

Deteriorating economic situation in Europe has created growing discontent among the European public, with many nations across the continent grappling with teetering economies.

The European financial crisis began in early 2008. Insolvency now threatens heavily debt-ridden countries such as Greece, Portugal, Italy, Ireland, and Spain.

The worsening debt crisis has forced EU governments to adopt harsh austerity measures and tough economic reforms, which have triggered massive demonstrations in many European countries.

MT/ASH/MHB

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Verizon Hands Over Customer Data Daily to NSA, Top Secret Order Reveals

0

According to a court order labeled “TOP SECRET,” federal judge Roger Vinson ordered Verizon to turn over the phone records of millions of its U.S. customers to the National Security Agency (NSA).

The order, issued in April by the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and leaked on the Internet by the Guardian (U.K.), compels Verizon to provide these records on an “ongoing daily basis” to hand over to the domestic spy agency “an electronic copy” of “all call detail records created by Verizon for communications (i) between the United States and abroad; or (ii) wholly within the United States, including local telephone calls.”

This information includes the phone numbers involved, the electronic identity of the device, the calling card numbers (if any) used in making the calls, and the time and duration of the call.

In other words, if you are a Verizon customer, your detailed phone records secretly have been handed over – and will continue to be handed over – to NSA agents.

This wholesale dragnet of personal electronic communication data proves beyond dispute that the Obama administration is keeping millions of Americans under constant surveillance regardless of whether the targets are suspected of committing crimes.

In other words, millions of innocent Americans have had their call records shared with a federal spy agency in open and hostile defiance of the Fourth Amendment’s guarantee of “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.”

What is reasonable? While in the law, “the term reasonable is a generic and relative one and applies to that which is appropriate for a particular situation,” consider the following explanation of the use of the term in the constitutional context. St. George Tucker, a Founding Generation jurist, wrote:

In the administration of preventive justice, the following principles have been held sacred; that some probable ground of suspicion be exhibited before some judicial authority; that it be supported by oath or affirmation; that the party may avoid being thrown into confinement, by finding pledges or securities for his legal conduct, sufficient in the judgment of some judicial authority; that he may have the benefit of a writ of habeas corpus, and thus obtain his release, if wrongfully confined; and that he may at any time be discharged from his recognizance, or his confinement, and restored to his former liberty and rights, on the order of the proper judicial authority; if it shall see sufficient cause.

With this latest revelation it seems that the once “sacred” principles of reasonableness and probable cause have been defiled and justice is no longer a demonstrable purpose of government.

Again, the government has made no attempt to demonstrate that any of those whose phone records have been seized are suspected of committing some crime. It is a plain and simple violation of the Fourth Amendment in the hope of finding something that one day might be found to qualify as suspicious. That is putting the cart of culpability before the horse of the Constitution and it should not be abided by the American people.

How far are the citizens of this Republic willing to let the federal surveillance apparatus go toward constructing a Panopticon? At this accelerated rate of construction, how long until every call, every text, every e-mail, every online message, and every movement fall under the all-seeing eye of federal overlords?

When contacted by The New American, a spokesman for Verizon declined to comment on his company’s compliance with the order.

Such a demur is expected in light of the provision of the order which prohibits Verizon, the FBI, or the NSA from revealing to the public – including the Verizon customers whose phone records now belong to the Obama administration – that the data is being given to the government.

Glen Greenwald of the Guardian (U.K.) details the data being seized by the NSA:

The information is classed as “metadata”, or transactional information, rather than communications, and so does not require individual warrants to access. The document also specifies that such “metadata” is not limited to the aforementioned items. A 2005 court ruling judged that cell site location data – the nearest cell tower a phone was connected to – was also transactional data, and so could potentially fall under the scope of the order.

While the order itself does not include either the contents of messages or the personal information of the subscriber of any particular cell number, its collection would allow the NSA to build easily a comprehensive picture of who any individual contacted, how and when, and possibly from where, retrospectively.

Greenwald’s accurate analysis raises a couple of very important questions.

First, why would agents of the federal government willingly violate the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution by seizing phone logs of millions of innocent Americans?

Next, how long until the next TOP SECRET court order is leaked, one making the same demands on AT&T, Sprint, or other telecommunication companies?

As quoted by Greenwald, the Cato Institute’s Julian Sanchez remarked, “We’ve certainly seen the government increasingly strain the bounds of ‘relevance’ to collect large numbers of records at once – everyone at one or two degrees of separation from a target – but vacuuming all metadata up indiscriminately would be an extraordinary repudiation of any pretence [sic] of constraint or particularized suspicion.”

Can anyone doubt that?

Readers should recall that as required by provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Amendments of 2008 (FISA) and the Patriot Act (as amended in 2005), the Department of Justice revealed to Congress in April the number of applications for eavesdropping received and rejected by the FISA court.

To no one’s surprise (least of all to the architects and builders of the already sprawling surveillance state), the letter addressed to Senator Harry Reid (D-Nev.) reports that in 2012, of the 1,789 requests made by the government to monitor the electronic communications of citizens, not a single one was rejected.

That’s right. The court, established specifically to judge the merits of applications by the government to spy on citizens, gave a green light to every government request for surveillance.

Not content to be a mere formality for electronic surveillance, the FISA court (officially called the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court) also held the coats of the FBI while that agency carried out the searches and seizures set out in 212 applications.

Perhaps the most disturbing take-away from the leak of this secret court document ordering Verizon to hand over customer call logs and other data to a federal surveillance agency is the fact that the government considers the protections of the Fourth Amendment to be nothing more than a “parchment barrier” that is easily torn through. The Obama administration regards the Constitution – as did the Bush administration before it – as advisory at best, and nothing now stands between the citizens of this nation and the construction of the 21st century Panopticon.

In this country, then, every citizen is now a suspect.

As former NSA employee Thomas Drake told this reporter last July, these NSA projects began in the days after the attacks of September 11, allowed that agency to spy on Americans, and have “crossed the Rubicon” and “opened a Pandora’s box.”

With the Rubicon behind them, the federal government has declared war on the Constitution and obviously aims to disregard the reasonableness requirement and designate every American as a potential threat to the security of “the homeland.”

 

Joe A. Wolverton, II, J.D. is a correspondent for The New American and travels frequently nationwide speaking on topics of nullification, the NDAA, and the surveillance state. He can be reached at
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

This article originally appeared on: The New American

Critics Blast Military Trial of WikiLeaks Whistleblower Manning

0

After a global outcry about his prosecution and alleged torture, whistleblower Bradley Manning (shown), an Army intelligence officer accused of “aiding the enemy” by leaking hundreds of thousands of U.S. government documents exposing war crimes and countless dubious diplomatic dealings to WikiLeaks, is finally on trial this week. The secretive court-martial proceeding, widely criticized as a show trial with a predetermined outcome, began Monday and is expected to run for around three months.

If convicted, which would supposedly require prosecutors to show that Manning knew the leaked documents would be seen by enemies of the U.S. government, the defendant could spend life in military prison. The penalty could have included death, but authorities promised not to seek capital punishment amid global outrage against prosecuting somebody who tried to expose government crimes. Manning and his attorney decided that the trial should take place before a military judge rather than a full panel.

The young whistleblower, who has attracted legions of supporters to his cause despite drawing the wrath of the Obama administration, defended his actions in a February statement to the court. “I believed that if the public, especially the American public, had access to the information … this could spark a domestic debate on the role of the military and our foreign policy in general, as well as it related to Iraq and Afghanistan,” Manning said.

Commenting about the estimated 250,000 secret diplomatic cables from the U.S. State Department that he sent to WikiLeaks, Manning also said it was important for the public to know what its government was doing. According to his statement, the cables “documented backdoor deals and seemingly criminal activity.” Indeed, as The New American has reported, the documents revealed everything from U.S. authorities’ unlawful spying and lying to bribing and bullying of foreign governments.

The leaked material from the Army, meanwhile – including now-infamous footage of U.S. troops gunning down civilians from a helicopter in what analysts said was clearly a war crime – exposed the “seemingly delightful bloodlust” of those American soldiers “congratulating each other on the ability to kill in large numbers,” Manning said in the statement. Despite the charges against Manning, it was not immediately clear how exposing war crimes would aid the enemy.

Military prosecutors, however, allege that the massive leak – likely the largest in American history – jeopardized U.S. national security and endangered lives. The government also claims that al-Qaeda operatives, many of whom have been armed and funded by the Obama administration during the war on Libya and the rebellion in Syria, have seen the documents and made use of them.  

“Pfc. Manning was trained and trusted to provide intelligence,” Army prosecutor Capt. Ashden Fein was quoted as saying in transcripts from a previous hearing. “He used that training to defy our trust, to systematically and indiscriminately harm the United States during a time of war and while deployed.” Indeed, despite evidence that Manning saw himself as a whistleblower and the fact that no serious national security issues have been linked to the explosive disclosures, prosecutors are trying to paint the defendant as a man who knowingly aided terrorist groups.

In addition to supposedly “aiding the enemy,” Manning, now 25, is facing 21 charges of illegally downloading and transferring some 700,000 secret reports, videos, and other material – much of it classified but none of it “Top Secret.” He has already pleaded guilty to 10 charges of “mishandling classified information,” which could put him behind bars for 20 years even if the other allegations are thrown out. The trial is happening at Ft. Meade in Maryland outside of Baltimore.

In all, some 150 witnesses are expected to testify at the court martial, with the vast majority being called by the prosecution. The man who reported Manning to authorities, ex-computer hacker Adrian Lamo, testified on Tuesday, telling the court how the Army analyst had told him in online chats about the efforts to expose government crimes and civilian casualties in the wars. When asked whether Manning had expressed hope that the leaks exposing various problems would spark global discussions and reforms, for example, Lamo answered “yes.”

Lamo also admitted to asking Manning why he did not sell the documents to a foreign government instead. According to Lamo’s testimony, the Army private said it was because he thought the information should be available to the general public – hardly the hallmark of somebody hoping to “aid the enemy.” The former hacker, though, claimed he reported Manning because it was the “socially responsible” thing to do.

Former Manning colleagues and superiors also testified at this week’s hearings before court was recessed on Wednesday. Their testimony portrayed the Army private as a well-organized computer genius and an excellent intelligence analyst who was very interested in political and social issues. The court will be back in session next week, and numerous other witnesses will testify.

While government prosecutors attempt to demonize Manning and his motives, a growing roster of prominent supporters are speaking out on his behalf. Before the trial officially began on Monday, Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg and other activists with the Bradley Manning Support Network gathered outside of the Ft. Meade gate to protest what they see as vicious persecution of an American hero.

“We are all Bradley Manning,” demonstrators reportedly chanted. Ellsberg, the famous leaker who has been a vocal and high-profile advocate for Manning, also blasted the administration: “I’m sure that President Obama would have sought a life sentence in my case,” he said. More than a few critics noted that the administration has prosecuted more whistleblowers than any other in history.

WikiLeaks chief Julian Assange, meanwhile, released a scathing editorial on the first day of the trial, calling Manning the “most prominent political prisoner in modern U.S. history.” Among other complaints, the world famous leak master slammed the military’s “cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment” of the whistleblower “at the hands of his captors.” Assange also said the government’s behavior in the case was criminal, suggesting the trial was being conducted in a kangaroo court that refuses to let Manning defend himself and that the verdict has already been pre-determined.

Even though Manning helped provide journalists and the public around the world with a gold mine of explosive information on government corruption and lawlessness, news of the trial this week has largely been ignored or downplayed by the establishment press. In fairness, however, that might have something to do with the veil of secrecy imposed over the court martial by authorities. 

A group of organizations and attorneys filed yet another federal lawsuit last month asking that more information be made available to the public. “The press and public are unable to engage in careful observation and analysis of the issues arising during what is arguably one of the most controversial, high-profile court-martials since the trial of Lt. William Calley for the My Lai Massacre in Vietnam,” noted a coalition of lawyers and Manning advocates in a brief.

Other analysts have noted that even larger issues are also being mostly overlooked, including what critics and experts have widely described as the barbaric torture of Private Manning. Even worse, the war crimes and lawless behavior of the U.S. government that the Army analyst helped blow the whistle on have also been largely forgotten. Meanwhile, as the Obama administration desperately seeks to punish Manning, the perpetrators of the myriad real crimes exposed in the leaked documents remain at large. 

Photo of Army Pfc. Bradley Manning being escorted out of a courthouse in Ft. Meade, Maryland June 5: AP Images

Alex Newman is a correspondent for The New American, covering economics, politics, and more. He can be reached at
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
.

Related articles:

WikiLeaker Bradley Manning Pleads Guilty to 10 of 22 Charges

Judge Rules Manning Mistreated by Army; New Evidence to be Offered by Gov’t

UN: Army Private Accused in WikiLeaks Case Was Tortured by U.S.

Army Private Accused in WikiLeaks Case Charged with Aiding the Enemy

Accused Wiki-Leaker Bradley Manning Wins Discovery in Court Case

Judge in Manning Case to Obama Admin.: Hand Over the Documents

Army Admits It’s Investigating Bradley Manning Supporters

Bradley Manning Demonstrations Planned for September 6

Protests Against Treatment of Alleged Wikileaks Source Widen

Petitioners Challenge “Outrageous Secrecy” of Bradley Manning Trial

This article originally appeared on: The New American

IRS Scandals? The IRS Is the Scandal

0

It is now well known that the Internal Revenue Service discriminated against conservative and Tea Party groups – i.e. the enemies of Barack Obama and his party. The IRS’s abuse of power is being treated as a “scandal.”  

But it is not a scandal.

And while there is no low to which Obama wouldn’t resort in order to advance his “transformative” agenda, it would be a grave mistake for anyone to think that abuses of this kind are peculiar to his administration.

The point is this: It is of the very essence of an agency like the IRS to abuse the vast power at its disposal, for both in quantity and quality, the existence of that sort of power is itself an abuse.

The IRS, in other words, is inimical to liberty. Its very existence is a scandal to a liberty-loving people.

First, the IRS is an agency of the federal government. 

American liberty consists in a wide dispersion or decentralization of power and authority. More specifically, at least as our Founders conceived it, the federal government is a federal – as opposed to a national – government precisely because the individual states are regarded as sovereign. 

Yet the IRS is just one signifier, albeit a profound one, of the ominous power that the federal government has managed to annex to itself since the time of the Founding. It is emblematic of the fact that it has long ago subverted its federal character, that it can run roughshod over the states.

Second, the IRS has the authority to collect, not just taxes, but taxes on income. When we consider the implications of this, it is nothing less than bewildering – and nothing more than tragic – that a once liberty-loving people could have ever permitted such an abomination to have come into existence. 

The money a person legally earns is his. There is no morally conceivable justification, none whatsoever, for anyone else to touch one cent of his earnings without his consent. And there is certainly no justification for allotting anyone, like the IRS, the authority and power to confiscate a person’s wages before he sees one dime of them.

There is no liberty unless property is dispersed wide and far. And it is only under a set of arrangements in which individuals are permitted to acquire as much property as their talents and good fortune enable that this situation can be secured.

In short, liberty presupposes the old Lockean notion of “self-ownership.”

But the income tax, to a far greater extent than any other kind of tax – for that matter, to a far greater extent than anything else the government does – undermines both the concept and practice of self-ownership. It undermines liberty. Indeed, matters can’t be otherwise, for as Walter E. Williams once said, the only thing that “fundamentally distinguishes” a free man from a slave is that the latter labors under coercion so that the fruits of his labor can be used to gratify someone else’s desires.

Whether the slave labors to satisfy the needs of one master or those of 300 million, and whether he lives on his master’s estate or thousands of miles away from it does nothing to change the fact that as long as portions of his property are confiscated to subsidize the desires of others, he remains a slave.

This isn’t hyperbole. When a person’s material assets are forcefully taken from him, it isn’t just his material assets that he loses. Taken from him as well are his resources in time and labor. Put another way, man does not live by bread alone. Work is as much of a psychological, and even spiritual, necessity as it is an economic and physical one. When a person is deprived of his bread, his sense of wholeness, his integrity, is assaulted as well. 

Yet there is more.

To tax income, the IRS also has to know a whole lot of other information about those whom it taxes. In a nation devoted to liberty, it is unacceptable that the federal government should be privy to the hours citizens work, the names of their employers, exactly how much they make, etc.

Finally, it is a no brainer that those endowed with awesome power to confiscate possess equally awesome political power – the power to reward allies and punish enemies. That is, they have the power to erode the rule of law and the equity that it insures.

The IRS is an affront to every lover of liberty. Hopefully, the current controversy in which it is embroiled will raise the public’s awareness of the fact that it, along with the income tax, needs to be eliminated once and for all.    

This article originally appeared on: The New American

Chile Launches Search for U.S. Suspect in Alleged Neruda Poisoning

0

The government of Chile has launched an official search for a United States suspect in connection with the alleged poisoning of celebrated poet Pablo Neruda. The Chilean literary icon, who was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1971, died on September 23, 1973. His death occurred less than two weeks after a coup d’état, led by General Augusto Pinochet, toppled the democratically elected  Popular Unity government of Salvador Allende, a close friend of Neruda.

The death of the internationally acclaimed poet, who was 69 at the time, was officially attributed to prostate cancer and the effects of acute mental stress over the military coup. Earlier this year, however, an official investigation was launched into Neruda’s death following allegations that he had been murdered. The investigation was sparked by a comment made by Neruda’s personal driver, Manuel Araya, who said that the poet had been deliberately injected with poison while receiving treatment for cancer at the Clinica Santa Maria in Chilean capital Santiago.

Investigators are still awaiting the completion of a complex autopsy performed on Neruda’s remains, which were exhumed in April. But the Chilean government has already issued a search order for a medical doctor –or someone pretending to be a doctor– who was allegedly on Neruda’s bedside on the night of his death. The search was issued based on comments made recently by another medical doctor, Sergio Draper, who supervised Neruda’s hospital treatment in September of 1973. Dr. Draper told government investigators that he turned over his shift that night to a “Dr. Price”, a young doctor in his late 20s, who was with Neruda in the hours leading to the poet’s death.

According to Rodolfo Reyes, a lawyer representing the Neruda estate, Dr.Price’s identity remains a mystery. The lawyer told Chilean newspaper La Tercera back in April that Dr. Price is believed to be an American “with blue eyes and very good manners”. Some supporters of the view that Neruda was poisoned claim that the physical description of Dr. Price is very close to that of Michael Townley. Townley was an agent of the United States Central Intelligence Agency who was hired by DINA, the secret police of the Chilean dictatorship, to assassinate Orlando Letelier, a Chilean former diplomat who was a vocal opponent of the Pinochet regime.

Townley was arrested following Letelier’s 1976 assassinating in Washington, DC. He was convicted to only 62 months in prison, in return for agreeing to collaborate with US government investigators. But there is said to be unconfirmed evidence that Townley, who is currently living under the US federal witness protection program, was in Florida at the time of Neruda’s death in Santiago. Chilean government investigators say there is no entry for a “Dr. Price” in the registry of hospital staff at the Clinica Santa Maria during the time of Neruda’s death.

This article originally appeared on: Global Research

UKIP & EU Parliament Member Gerard Batten Calls For Investigation

0

Infowars.com
June 6, 2013

Gerard Batten calls for an investigation of the Bilderberg Group.

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 2:32 pm

Tags: ,






<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Bilderberg 2013: LIVE UPDATES

0

138 members of the global elite are meeting in Watford, England for the 61st Bilderberg Conference, with protesters from around the globe flocking the town to say ‘no’ to the rich and wealthy ‘deciding the planet’s fate over coffee’.

19:04 GMT: Local residents in the town of Watford are
forced to change their daily routine due to security measures at
the conference.

18:59 GMT: The lounge in the 5-star Grove hotel where the
Bilderberg meeting is taking place. The hotel itself is seen
behind the trees in the left of the picture.
Image from twitter.com @SaraFirth_RT

18:45 GMT:
The Bilderberg 2013 delegates are arriving to the
secretive meeting in blacked-out cars. The protestors meet them
booing and shouts of “Scum, burn in hell!”

Protesters shout as a vehicle arrives at the drive to the venue where it is thought the 61st annual Bilderberg Meetings is taking place in Watford, north of London, on June 6, 2013 (AFP Photo / Justin Tallis)

18:25 GMT: People in Bilderberg protest zone find creative
ways to show off their dissatisfaction with the actions of the
global elite.

18:14 GMT: Max Keiser’s co-host, Stacy Herbert, has tweets
that they have arrived in Watford.

Image from twitter.com @stacyherbert
17:20 GMT:
Every protester, who arrives at the Bilderberg
protest zone, undergoes a pat-down by the employees of the G4S
company, which provides security for the Conference.

16:02 GMT: Traditionally, thousands of protesters from
around the world are flocking to the site of the Bilderberg
Conference to say ‘no’ to the rich and wealthy shaping the
planet’s future.  

Security has been tightened around the town, with a no-fly zone
enacted over the Bilderberg meeting and concrete and wire
barriers surrounding the 300-acre premises of the Grove hotel.

15:51 GMT: The Bilderberg Group, long criticized for a
lack of transparency, has this time revealed some of the main
topics of the upcoming meeting, with cyber warfare, US foreign
policy, “developments in the Middle East” and “Africa’s
challenges”
expected to be on the agenda.

15:40 GMT: RT starts live updates from the 61st Bilderberg
meeting, which is taking place at the 5-star Grove hotel in the
English city of Watford on June 8-9.

The 138 members of the global elite — politicians, bank bosses,
billionaires, chief executives and European royalty — get
together annually to discuss the most pressing issues in global
politics and economics.

This article originally appeared on: RT

DHS defends suspicionless searches of laptops and cell phones

0

The United States government doesn’t need a reason to seize and search the cell phones, laptops and other electronic devices of Americans entering the country, according to a Department of Homeland Security document provided to the press this week.

The DHS has long insisted that border agents and immigration
officers are allowed to collect the electronics of US citizens
crossing into the country without reason or cause, but a December
2011 document made public this week once and for all shines a
light on a sparsely discussed security-measure that has attracted
the attention of privacy advocates and others who’ve equated the
practice as a constitutional violation.

The American Civil Liberties Union and the Associated Press
jointly filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the
document earlier this year after the DHS published a two-page
executive summary briefly explaining the
results of an audit conducted by the department’s Office for
Civil Rights and Civil Liberties. In that statement, the DHS
auditor concluded that Customs and Border Protection agents and
officers with Immigration and Customs Enforcement were not
violating either the First or Fourth Amendments to the US
Constitution by seizing the electronics of Americans without
clear suspicion of a crime.

“We conclude that CBP’s and ICE’s current border search
policies comply with the Fourth Amendment
,” Tamara Kessler
wrote for the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties in the
summary. “We also conclude that imposing a requirement that
officers have reasonable suspicion in order to conduct a border
search of an electronic device would be operationally harmful
without concomitant civil rights/civil liberties benefits
.”

Now with the full 23-page paper in their possession – albeit a
version that’s seen a fair share of redactions – the AP and ACLU
have published the document in order to expose a post-9/11 policy
that has remained intact under President Barack Obama, but to
little discussion.

“This is striking,” ACLU fellow Brian Hauss wrote
Wednesday, “because it is the first time, as far as we know,
that the government has explained why purely suspicionless
searches supposedly enhance security
.”

The government’s reasoning, according to the document, is that
the blanketing ability to collect and assess the devices of
anyone thought to be entering the country is crucial to thwart
high crimes. That being said, the government attests that
requiring actual probable cause before seizing a device would, in
the eyes of the DHS, hinder their ability to counter terrorism.

“[A]dding a heightened [suspicion-based] threshold requirement
could be operationally harmful without concomitant civil
rights/civil liberties benefit
,” the document found.
“First, commonplace decisions to search electronic devices
might be opened to litigation challenging the reasons for the
search. In addition to interfering with a carefully constructed
border security system, the litigation could directly undermine
national security by requiring the government to produce
sensitive investigative and national security information to
justify some of the most critical searches
.”

“Even a policy change entirely unenforceable by courts might
be problematic
,” it continued. “Under a reasonable
suspicion requirement, officers might hesitate to search an
individual’s device without the presence of articulable factors
capable of being formally defended, despite having an intuition
or hunch based on experience that justified a search
.”

Speaking to AP, ACLU staff attorney Catherine Crump said the
government’s reasoning is “just not good enough” and
demonstrates purely inadequate reasoning.

“A purely suspicionless search opens the door to ethnic
profiling,” Crump said.

Hauss, the legal fellow for the group’s Speech, Privacy and
Technology Project, said the government’s line of thought in
defending the policy is faulty for a few different reasons.
“DHS claims that giving Americans the opportunity to challenge
laptop searches in court would lead to the divulgence of national
security secrets, but this is obviously wrong
,” he wrote.
“The government has numerous resources at its disposal to
prevent the disclosure of sensitive information. The ‘state
secrets privilege,’ to take just one example that is used in
court cases, has been criticized on many grounds, but no one has
ever seriously suggested that its protections are too anemic.
Although DHS might fear the prospect of being called into open
court to explain its actions, executive accountability before the
law is the bedrock on which our system of constitutional
self-government is built
.”

Last year, the US Supreme Court upheld an earlier ruling that
legally permitted the use of suspicionless roadblocks anywhere
within 100 miles of an international border, subjecting nearly
200 million Americans around the country to spontaneous and
sporadic inspections of vehicles and their possessions.

On Tuesday, ACLU spokesperson Peter Boogaard told Bloomberg News
that a 2009 policy change restricted how long the DHS can hold on
to seized electronics. Earlier this week, though, it was
suggested that the department did not necessarily see any
problems with duplicating that information to be held on to
indefinitely.

David House, a founding member of the Bradley Manning Support
Network, sued the DHS in 2011 after his computer and cell phone
were seized after an international flight he was on landed at
O’Hare International Airport in Chicago. On behalf of the ACLU,
House sued DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano on the accusation that
his belongings were searched solely on the basis of his
association with the Support Network, an organization that has
paid in full the legal bills for the 25-year-old Army private
accused of committing espionage and aiding terrorists by sharing
sensitive files with the website WikiLeaks. House’s devices were
held for 49 days by ICE – longer than the 30 days allowed legally
– and the contents of those electronics were copied by
investigations. House dropped his lawsuit last after the DHS
agreed to delete its copy of the data.

“They’re giving us exactly what we wanted,” House told
Wired.

This article originally appeared on: RT

FSB and FBI urge ‘active and aggressive’ action in tackling terror threats online

0

The FSB and FBI have called upon world security top brass to join efforts in tackling terrorist threats on the internet and the spread of home-grown terror, during an international meeting in Russia’s Kazan.

96 delegations from 63 states and three international
organizations have been invited to the capital of Russia’s
Republic of Tatarstan by the Russian Federal Security Service
(FSB).

The task of the two-day meeting is to exchange opinions on the
international situation in the context of the growing terrorist
threat as well as coordinate positions on key areas of
counteraction to security challenges.

FSB director, Aleksandr Bortnikov, has urged the foreign partners
to join forces to prevent the promotion of terrorist ideas
through the internet.  

“The terrorists are widely using the potential of the
worldwide web for propaganda of terrorist ideology, attracting
new adepts, especially, among younger people, radicalization of
their followers, their training and incitement to undertake
terrorist attacks,”
he said.

The FSB head stressed that the security agencies must act
“more actively and aggressively”, switching from just
blocking the radical websites to a large-scale awareness-building
effort aimed at the disclosure of the flawed terrorist ideology
and the true aims of its instigators and sponsors before the
internet audience.

Only the combined effort from the intelligence services from all
around the globe in cyberspace will be able to “make a
significant contribution to the security of the global
information society,”
Bortnikov added.

FBI’s assistant director, Andrew McCabe, shared the Russian
side’s concern over the spread of terrorism in cyberspace.

He acknowledged that the internet is being used as “a channel
of communication between terrorist organizations.”

“This aspect can be effectively overcome only by uniting the
efforts of all countries,”
McCabe stressed.

The intelligence services of different countries have also been
actively sharing information on a number of specific issues in
Kazan, FBI’s representative said, including the investigation of
the Boston Marathon bombings.

The Tsarnaev brothers, who masterminded the April 15 attack, are
believed to have self-radicalized by visiting radical Islamist
sites on the web.

McCabe refused to comment on how the investigation is developing,
only saying that the “process goes on”.

The president of the Federal Criminal Police Office of Germany,
Jorg Ziercke, believes that preventing the emergence of “lone,
home-grown terrorists”
has now become as important as dealing
with international terrorist organizations.

Identifying those people and preventing them from attempting a
terrorist attack has been one of the main topics of the meetings,
he said.


“To a large extent, the process of radicalization of young people
is a matter of chance,”
Ziercke explained. “Religious and
political motives recede into the background, with personal
reasons taking central stage.”

Germany is launching a program in order to provide assistance to
such people and help them get a job as well as restore their
social contacts, he said.

Ziercke added that German security forces are going to provide
assistance to their Russian colleagues during the Kazan 2013
Universiade and Sochi 2014 Olympics.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Putin divorce: President and wife say 'their marriage is over'

0



Published time: June 06, 2013 18:00
Edited time: June 06, 2013 19:34

Download video (3.38 MB)
Embed

Code

Russia’s President Vladimir Putin and his wife Lyudmila have announced their “marriage is over”.

“It was our joint decision, our marriage is over,”
President Putin said in the interview to Russia24 state
channel. The announcement was made at the Grand Kremlin
Palace, where Vladimir and Lyudmila Putin attended the Esmeralda
ballet.

Asked to confirm if that was a divorce, Lyudmila Putina, who was
standing by the President’s side, told the media “Yes, you can
say that, this is civilized divorce.”


 

“I do not like publicity, and the flights are complicated for
me. We love our children, we are proud of them and see each other
often,”
Lyudmila Putina.

Thursday’s ballet visit is the first joint appearance in more
than a year. At the last Easter ceremony at Christ the Savior
Cathedral, President Putin was accompanied by Moscow Mayor Sergey
Sobyanin.

However, Mrs. Putina said “they will always be friends”.



“I am grateful that he supports me,” she said.

Russian President Vladimir Putin speaks to his wife Lyudmila as they pose in front of the Taj Mahal 04 October 2000. Putin is on a three-day visit to India (AFP Photo)

Vladimir and Lyudmila Putin have been married for 30 years, since
1983, three years after they first met.

Vladimir Putin and Lyudmila were introduced to each other by a
mutual friend. Lyudmila worked as a flight attendant on domestic
airlines and had come to St. Petersburg, where Vladimir was
based, (back in Soviet times it was called Leningrad) for three
days with a friend.


“I was already working in the First Main Directorate in St.
Petersburg, when a friend of mine called and invited me to the
Arkady Raikin (named after a popular Soviet actor and comedian)
theatre. He said he already had the tickets, and mentioned there
would be two young ladies joining us. So we went to the
performance and the young ladies did join us. The next day, we
went to the theatre again, but it was now my turn to buy the
tickets. And the same thing happened on the third day. I then
began dating one of the girls. I became friends with Lyudmila, my
future wife,”
Putin recalls in his biography posted on his
official website.

Three years after their first meeting, Vladimir proposed to
Lyudmila. “I knew that if I did not marry for another two or
three years, I would not marry at all. True, I was used to life
as a bachelor, but Lyudmila changed that,”
Putin admitted.

They have two daughters — Maria, 27, and Ekaterina, 26. According
to unconfirmed reports, Putin has one grandson, born in August
2012.  They both live and work in Moscow.

First Lady is a qualified linguist. In 1986 she graduated from
St. Petersburg State University. In her public activity she
dedicated efforts to preserve and develop the Russian language.

Putin’s private life has never been public. He reluctantly and
briefly answered questions about his family. 

Despite the high divorce rate in Russia, public divorces are
uncommon among the country’s top-politicians and officials.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Bipartisan Victory as Republicans and Democrats Agree Poor People Should Go Hungry

0

The Senate pushed its version of a Farm Bill through a procedural cloture vote on Thursday, paving the way for a full Senate debate on the massive piece of legislation that will guide agricultural and food policy over the next five years.

A worker unloads a pallet of food at a warehouse in Memphis, Tennessee. (Photo: Evelyn Hockstein/MCT) Advocates for the poor, however, are up in arms as representatives from both major political parties are readying dramatic cuts to the nation’s food assistance program that will negatively impact millions of the nation’s most vulnerable families.

As the new Farm Bill moves towards its final stage in the Senate, proposed changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) threaten to cut at least $4 billion from the key program over the next decade.

Michigan’s Democratic Senator Debbie Stabenow, who authored large portions of the Senate’s bill, has defended the slashed funding to SNAP by saying the cuts are not nearly as drastic as those put forth by the GOP-controlled House.

But anti-poverty advocates, not to mention numerous economists, say the current economy demands increased support for those living on or near the edge of hunger, not an erosion of the life-saving assistance.

According to the Food Research and Action Center (FRAC), eighty-three percent of all SNAP benefits go to households with a child, senior, or disabled person. Another 83 percent of SNAP households have gross income at or below 100 percent of the poverty guideline — that’s $19,530 for a family of three in 2013.

Following the Senate’s cloture vote, the Associated Press reports:

Food stamps have for decades been part of the farm bill in a bid by rural lawmakers to gain urban votes for the measure. But this year, food stamps have made passage more difficult. Conservatives in the House have argued that the program, which has doubled in cost since 2008, needs an overhaul. Senate Democrats have been reluctant to touch it.

Last year more around 47 million people used SNAP. The rolls rose rapidly because of the economic downturn, rising food prices and expanded eligibility under the 2009 economic stimulus law.

But, as McClatchy reports:

The anti-hunger lobbyists are especially disappointed by Democrats who in recent weeks have voted for the cuts in legislation that passed the House of Representatives and Senate agriculture committees last month, measures that also contain controversial aid to farmers.

“Food stamps have been protected for decades,” said Ellen Teller, the head of governmental affairs for [FRAC]. “This is the first time they’re being cut for deficit reduction. We think it’s wrong to pay down the deficit on the backs of the poor.”

Teller and others who work to protect low-income Americans are dismayed because food stamps were among the safety net programs that Congress exempted from the forced across-the-board cuts now in effect under the system known as sequestration.

Further reading: Congress’ Farm Bill Readies to Kick Poor Off Food Assistance

__________________________________________________

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

This article originally appeared on: Common Dreams

Georgian soldiers killed in S Afghanistan

0

[unable to retrieve full-text content]Seven Georgian soldiers serving with the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) have been killed in a bomb attack on their base in the southern Afghan province of Helmand.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

New York Lawmakers Want to Make It a Felony to 'Annoy' a Police Officer

0

Photo Credit: SHUTTERSTOCK

June 6, 2013
 |

Like this article?

Join our email list:

Stay up to date with the latest headlines via email.

The New York State Senate passed a bill Wednesday that would make it a felony to hit a police officer with intent to “annoy.”

Senate bill 2402 would establish the crime of “aggravated harassment,” punishable by up to four years in prison. According to the bill, a person would be guilty of “aggravated harassment” if they struck, kicked or otherwise subjected an officer to “physical contact” with intent to “harass, annoy, threaten or alarm.”

In a press release, bill sponsor Sen. Joe Griffin (R-Rome) said, “All too often persons are physically challenging police officers in the line of duty. Currently in those instances where an officer is physically attacked (short of sustaining a physical injury) the lawful charge is only a violation. The consequences are way too low for the offender and it sends the wrong message to the public.”

The bill’s vague language could have troubling implications for certain communities that already face dishonest policing practices, mostly consisting of poor, black and Latino citizens. It’s not hard to imagine a scenario where an officer could abuse the “intent” portion of the law to– as Gawker’s Max Read puts it–“arrest and convict people on a very thin pretext!”

Having passed the Senate, the bill will now go to New York’s General Assembly.

h/t Gawker

Steven Hsieh is an editorial assistant at AlterNet and writer based in Brooklyn. Follow him on Twitter @stevenjhsieh.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

Police State Takeover and Resistance Movement Highlighted in Freedom Diaries

0
  •   The Alex Jones Channel Alex Jones Show podcast Prison Planet TV Infowars.com Twitter Alex Jones' Facebook Infowars store

Infowars.com
June 6, 2013

Filmmaker and activist H.D. Stone takes a look at a post-apocalyptic future in his Operation Paul Revere contest entry where a couple documents the construction of a massive police state over the span of a few years.

All the entries for the Operation Paul Revere contest are in. We will be reviewing and posting entries until the winners are announced. Showcased videos are selected for general interest and their selection does not imply that they are finalists or have met all the contest requirements. All of the views expressed in the films are not necessarily endorsed by Infowars.com.

Pick up Police State 4: The Rise of FEMA, some of whose scenes were featured in Freedom Diaries, or the Police State Trilogy to learn how the police state isn’t coming… it’s already here.

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 1:40 pm

Tags:



  • Share this article


  • facebookRecommend on Facebook
  • twitterTweet about it
  • <a target=_blank rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://digg.com/submit?url=http://www.infowars.com/police-state-takeover-and-resistance-movement-highlighted-in-freedom-diaries/&title=Police State Takeover and Resistance Movement Highlighted in Freedom Diaries&bodytext=Infowars.com | Filmmaker depicts the construction of a massive police state over the span of a few years.” title=”Police State Takeover and Resistance Movement Highlighted in Freedom Diaries”>
    diggDigg this post


  • redditshare via Reddit
  • emailEmail



<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Obama Picks Libya War Architect for U.N. Ambassador

0

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
June 6, 2013

Samantha Power is regarded as the driving force behind the administration’s policy of “humanitarian war” in Libya. Photo: Steve Jurvetson.

Samantha Power, Obama’s Special Assistant who pushed for the slaughter over 30,000 Libyans under the guise of humanitarian intervention, may soon replace Susan Rice as U.S. ambassador at the United Nations.

Rice, scorched by the Benghazi affair, will retreat to the White House and take up the role of Obama’s national security adviser.

In a Rose Garden media event announcing a second term shuffling of Obama’s foreign policy deck, the president portrayed Rice as “a relentless advocate for American interests and values,” in other words the interests of the global elite. He added that Rice is “a fierce champion for justice and human dignity.”

Rice has the required pedigree. She is a trusted Council On Foreign Relations member. Her mentor is Clinton’s former Secretary of State, Madeline Albright, who said the premeditated murder of more than 500,000 Iraqi children was a price worth paying. Like her colleague Samantha Power, Rice is an enthusiastic champion of invading small countries. “Obama UN Ambassador Susan Rice, a far meaner junkyard dog than George Bush’s Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, is the administration’s loudest and most bellicose proponent of so-called ‘humanitarian’ intervention,” writes Glen Ford.

Power is regarded as the driving force behind the administration’s policy of “humanitarian war” in Libya. “Before joining the administration, in fact, Power flew around the world giving speeches about ‘humanitarian failures’ and the ‘responsibility to protect.’ Furthermore, her professional career began at the International Crisis Group, where she worked under the world’s foremost authority on ‘responsibility to protect,’ Gareth Evans,” write Eric Pottenger and Jeff Friesen.

The International Crisis Group (ICG) is an NGO propped up by the CIA’s Ford Foundation and George Soros’ Open Society Institute. The ICG played an instrumental role in the engineered destruction of the former Yugoslavia, a globalist project that specifically targeted civilian infrastructure and left an estimated 1,500-2,000 civilians and combatants dead. “NATO targeted not just the military apparatus of Yugoslavia, it sought to devastate and did devastate the civilian infrastructure of Yugoslavia. Electricity power stations, water supplies, schools, hospitals, roads, bridges, train tracks, factories, offices and thousands of homes and families were torn apart,” writes Vivian Martin.

Power’s advocacy for military intervention and engineered mass murder in Kosovo — along with the establishment’s kudos for a book that earned her a Pulitzer — established a cred that ultimately propelled her to the highest levels of government.

This is how Tom Hayden — a onetime anti-establishment leftist, now an establishment fixture — described Powers in 2011:

Power generalized from her Balkans experience to become an advocate of American and NATO military intervention in humanitarian crises, a position which became known as being a “humanitarian hawk.” She began to see war as an instrument to achieving her liberal, even radical, values. “The United States must also be prepared to risk the lives of its soldiers” to stop the threat of genocide, she wrote. She condemned Western “appeasement” of dictators. She believed that “the battle to stop genocide has been repeatedly lost in the realm of domestic politics.” In her mind, domestic concerns like discrimination and unemployment were secondary to foreign policy crises, a common attitude in the national security circles she was entering.

For the globalists, the idea is to keep tricking the public and bamboozling them into supporting never ending wars and interventions, be they under the sway of the neocon faction of the ruling elite or the “liberal” faction masquerading as humanitarians.

Obama’s foreign policy is almost identical to that of his predecessor. After eight years under the management of the neocons, the American people were permitted to vote for a man who was ludicrously portrayed by the corporate media as a savior. Naturally, this savior’s policies, recited straight from a teleprompter script generated by his globalist handlers, is a continuation of a policy little deviated from since the installment of national security state in the late 1940s.

The elevation of Samantha Power signals the probability of a “humanitarian intervention” in Syria in the months or weeks ahead. Like the Libya intervention, this bloody intervention will be portrayed as a principled response to the human rights abuses of Bashar al-Assad. In the aftermath, as in the aftermath of Libya, few will bother to notice the carnage wrought by the purported liberators and the ultimate fate suffered by average Syrians, a fate shared by average Libyans and Iraqis in previous humanitarian interventions.

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 1:50 pm

Tags: ,






<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Countering Imperialism: An Alternative Vision to Tyranny

1

The alternative to cockroaches 

Many of us have a vision, an alternative vision to the tyranny of those who control the world. But we are ridiculed, dismissed, put on trial (Manning), confined to a small embassy in London for months on end (Assange), called unrealistic or subversive and told to ‘get real’. Are we destined to be the ‘I told you so bunch’? 

The current wholly corrupt system is edging humanity towards the precipice of oblivion. When that happens, we (if we are still alive — if anything is still alive, apart from cockroaches) will say ‘we told you so’. If there is to be any hope, if there is to be anything better, we must remain ‘unreal’ and true to our beliefs.  

Some like to believe that the meek (or gentle) shall inherit the earth. But it is popularly suggested that cockroaches may well do so if or when humanity destroys itself through nuclear war (or depleted uranium radiation). Cockroaches have a much higher radiation resistance than vertebrates, with the lethal dose perhaps six to 15 times that for humans.

Cockroaches are regarded as pests. They feed on human food, and can leave an offensive odor. They can also passively transport microbes on their body surfaces, including those that are potentially dangerous to humans. Cockroaches have been shown to be linked with allergic reactions in humans, including asthma. 

It begs the question: is there much difference between the people that currently run the world and the cockroach? Both are pests, both feed off humanity, both cause disease and suffering. And both can end up sucking the oxygen from our lungs. The only difference is that there is no malicious intent on the part of the insect variety — it’s just the way they are. And the impact of the cockroach is minimal by comparison.

The same may not be said of the human variety that has instituted a corrupt system of ‘globalisation’. This system of US-led imperialism benefits state-corporate interests who have been able to manipulate the international system of trade and finance in their favour to shift capital around the globe at ease. Supported by militarism and secular theology masquerading as neo-liberal economic theory, the result has been big profits and environmental degradation, easy money and cheap labour, private gain and public havoc.  

The food and pharmaceuticals/healthcare industries work hand in glove to sicken and treat us; ‘big oil’ works with agribusiness to impose a system of big-dam, water intensive chemical-industrial at the expense of environmental sustainability; from Syria to Pakistan, US militarism is implemented under on behalf of powerful corporations under the lie of ‘humanitarianism’ or the ‘war on terror’; and the profiteering nuclear energy and resource extraction industries are destroying democracy, robbing people of their land and putting environments in jeopardy in places like India, where a nation’s poorest people are considered ‘surplus to requirements’, an inconvenient truth, and are beaten, raped and disposed of because they are a barrier to corporate ‘progress’ — profit and greed.

Whole populations are lied to and deceived on behalf of rich corporate interests that have succeeded in hijacking the machineries of state and media for commercial gain. Democracy is corrupted, local economies are destroyed, debt and dependency is used to assert control, science is pressed into the service of a worldwide arms industry and fraudulent corporate activities and there is endless conflict over finite resources. 

The current system is ecologically destructive and relies on perpetual war and conflict. It is both socially divisive and unsustainable and is tied to an image of the world laid down by corrupt transnational corporations and translated into policy by the IMF, WTO, World Bank and national governments. 

Projects like Navdanya in India that seek to take the control of food and agriculture back from agribusiness, or the finer elements of successful policies in places like Cuba or Venezuela, are just some of the many examples from across the world that indicate how we could address the problems we currently face. However, from Goldman Sachs, Bank of America and General Electric to Shell, Monsanto and others, there are those who seek to maintain the current system at all costs. We don’t need them, but they will be difficult to get rid of. 

“Some cockroaches have been known to live up to three months without food and a month without water. They are even resilient enough to survive occasional freezing temperatures. This makes them difficult to eradicate once they have infested an area.” — Wikipedia

These cockroaches, the financiers, industrialists and corporate funded politicians, despise transparency, dislike democracy and hate anyone trying to hold them to genuine account. These are the criminals who have quite literally got away with murder with their illegal wars, indiscriminate use of drone attacks and exploitative economic policies.

It is the likes of Bush, Blair, Obama, Cheney, Rice and their profiteering arms dealing cronies, private ‘security’ contractors and corporate billionaire puppet masters who should be standing in the dock, not the likes of Manning or Assange. They should be made to pay for the millions of deaths they have caused.

“It (the Nuremberg tribunal) defines aggression as the supreme international crime, differing from other war crimes, and it encompasses all of the evil that follows. The US and British invasion of Iraq was a textbook example of aggression, which means that we were responsible for all the evil that followed. Serious conflict arose. It spread all over the region. In fact the region is being torn to shreds by this conflict.

That’s part of the evil that follows…Take a look at the International criminal court (ICC) — Black Africans or other people the West doesn’t like. Bush and Blair ought to be up there. There is no recent crime worse than the invasion of Iraq.

Obama’s got to be there for the terror war… it’s just murder on executive whim” Noam Chomsky (1)

However, to achieve what Chomsky advocates would entail the victims of such crimes being made to sit in judgement over the perpetrators. The International Criminal Court, a criminal court in the starkest sense of the term, is based on the opposite principle. And that’s the reason for its existence.

To call these perpetrators human cockroaches does our insect friends a gross disservice.

This article originally appeared on: Global Research

We're All Under Surveillance Now: Obama's NSA Is Monitoring Verizon Calls

0

Photo Credit: Photo by Shutterstock

June 6, 2013
 |

Like this article?

Join our email list:

Stay up to date with the latest headlines via email.

The Obama Administration has continued the Bush Administration domestic spying program of ‘warrantless wiretapping’ of Americans’ phone lines, according to a top-secret federal court order obtained by The Guardian, a British news organization.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which is based in Washington, D.C., and operates inside the Justice Department, ordered Verizon to turn over to the National Security Agency daily records of: “all call detail records or ‘telephony metadata’ created for Verizon for communications (i) between the United States and abroad; or (ii) wholly within the United States, including local telephone calls.” The order does not include Verizon calls made in foreign countries.

The FISA Court said that metadata includes the phone numbers called, the identifying serial numbers for tracking mobile phones, calling card numbers, time and duration of calls, but “does not include the substantive content of any communication… or the name, address, or financial information of a subscriber or customer.”

The Guardian’s scoop confirms what many privacy rights and civil liberties groups have long suspected, that the Bush Administration’s program of data-mining American phone records for national security purposes has continued under Obama, much like his use and expansion of military drones. The FISA Court order is stamped “top secret” and is not to be declassified until April 12, 2038.

“From a civil liberties perspective, the program could hardly be any more alarming,” said Jameel Jaffer, American Civil Liberties Union Deputy Legal Director. “It’s a program in which millions of innocent people have been put under the constant surveillance of government agents. It’s analogous to the FBI stationing an agent outside every home in the country to track who goes in and who comes out. It is beyond Orwellian, and it provides further evidence of the extent to which basic democratic rights are being surrendered in secret to the demands of unaccountable intelligence agencies.”

The ‘ warrantless wiretapping’ controversy emerged in 2005, after the New York Times withheld publication of a story for a year–at the government’s request–that detailed how the National Security Agency had put data interceptors on key junction points in AT&T’s phone network. At that time, the Bush administration said the electronic surveillance was not designed to listen in on specific calls but trace calling patterns among millions of calls to fight terrorism. However, the program has always operated on the very fringes of U.S. law, with the Bush White House not telling Congress about its scope, and then Congress revising the FISA Court’s guidelines, and then the Justice Department in 2009 saying that it had over-collected data but had ‘corrected’ the problem.

It is not hard to make educated guesses about what is going on, which is that the NSA has maintained and expanded its ability to monitor all electronic communications as the Internet and ‘big data’ have grown exponentially. The agency installed data interceptors at Google’s data warehouses after China hacked into its network in 2009 to look for FBI requests to follow Chinese spies. China’s subsequent hack into RSA in 2011, the company that supposedly hardened the computer networks of American military contractors, led to the Chinese stealing detailed plans of America’s top weapons. With these massive data ‘plays’ as the backdrop, it’s hardly surprising that the NSA would be maintaining and expanding the tactics developed nearly a decade ago against al-Qaeda.

The Obama Justice Department defended allowing domestic law enforcement to track cellphones without a warrant as late as last fall, even though the U.S. Supreme Court found that action was unconstitutional in United States v. Jones ruling in January 2012. It is unclear whether the FISA Court order for Verizon would conflict with that Supreme Court ruling.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

Iran needs soft power: Rohani

0

Iranian presidential candidate Hassan Rohani says the country needs soft power in a world plagued with rivalry for greater military power.

During a televised Q&A session on Thursday, the reformist candidate said under the circumstances, the country has no other option but to boost its soft power capacities through greater public participation, privatization and competitiveness.

According to Rohani, slogans and ideals will get the country nowhere. He said Iran needs flexibility to push forward its agenda and protect its interests.

Rohani added that if he is elected president, his administration will pursue the countryâ„¢s nuclear energy program.

The presidential candidate also stated that, at the same time, he will find ways to end the Western sanctions through greater interaction, reiterating that this will not happen overnight.

Rohani is competing against Tehran Mayor Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, secretary of Iran Expediency Council Mohsen Rezaei, lawmaker Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council Saeed Jalili, former Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati, former First Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref, and former Telecommunications Minister Mohammad Gharazi.

On June 14, Iranians will go to over 66,000 polling stations across the country to cast their votes, while some 285 polling stations will be set up for Iranian nationals in other countries.

The president of Iran is elected for a four-year term in a national election.

MRS/SS/HMV

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

US econ. war on Iran fails: Haddad-Adel

0

Iranian presidential candidate Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel says the US economic war against Iran is doomed to failure due to the Iranian nationâ„¢s economic resistance.

Å“The Americans are willing to pretend that they have been successful in [exerting] economic pressure on Iran. We believe that they have not achieved even one-tenth of what they wanted,” said Haddad-Adel in a Thursday campaign speech in Tehran.

Å“After all the futile efforts they have made during these 34 years [since the victory of the 1979 Islamic Revolution], they didnâ„¢t get anywhere. [Therefore,] they resorted to sanctions and economic pressure. [Launching] eight years of imposed war [with Iraq] didnâ„¢t help them to achieve their goals. They may now have embarked on eight years of economic imposed war,” he added.

Our way is to show that as the nation resisted during the imposed war [with Iraq] and protected the country, it will also protect the country during the economic imposed war through recourse to resistance economy. We do not have any way other than this,” the principlist candidate, a former Majlis speaker, pointed out.

Å“Our enemy will only accept to logically sit at the negotiation table, and diplomacy will become meaningful, only when the US makes sure that the nation will not backtrack under economic pressure. There is no way other than this,” he said.

The United States and the European Union have used the allegation that Iran pursues non-civilian objectives in its nuclear energy program as a pretext to push the UN Security Council to impose four rounds of sanctions on the Islamic Republic between 2006 and 2010.

At the beginning of 2012, the US and the European Union imposed new sanctions on Iranâ„¢s oil and financial sectors with the goal of preventing other countries from purchasing Iranian oil and conducting transactions with the Central Bank of Iran.

Haddad-Adel called on other presidential candidates to observe ethical norms during their election campaigns, saying, Å“We should not act in such a way as to ignore all the 30-and-odd-year achievements of the [Islamic] Revolution.”

Å“[It is unfair to] overlook all these [achievements] and, to win votes, summarize [all the outcomes of] the revolution in economic problems which stem from enemyâ„¢s plots, and try to make people believe that ËœI have the key [to these problems] in my hand, and it is me that if elected will be able to solve these problems in, for example, a few days or months.â„¢ I do not think so,” he added.

The principlist candidate also called on the Iranian nation to support the domestic products in the face of the Westâ„¢s economic pressures, adding, Å“In order to solve the economic problem, we should change our lifestyle. We cannot live in the way that the West dictates to us and at the same time put up economic resistance against the West.”

Haddad-Adel is facing seven rivals in the upcoming election, including Tehran Mayor Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, President of the Center for Strategic Research of the Expediency Council Hassan Rohani, former First Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref, Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council Saeed Jalili, Secretary of Expediency Council Mohsen Rezaei, former Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati, and former Telecommunications Minister Mohammad Gharazi.

The president of Iran is elected for a four-year term in a national election.

Iranians will go to the polls in the nationâ„¢s 11th presidential election on June 14. Over 66,000 polling stations will be set up across the country. Expatriates will be also able to cast ballots at 285 polling stations that will be set up in their respective countries.

ASH/SS

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Public welfare Aref’s main concern

0

Reformist presidential candidate, Mohammad Reza Aref, says his major concern is public welfare as reforms are all about responsibility, accountability and making good on promises.

Speaking to a crowd of supporters in the city of Ilam on Thursday, Aref said the reformist camp was formed only for a single purpose, which is meeting the needs of the public.

Aref, a former first vice president, further promised that his administration would create more than 700,000 jobs a year and keep the inflation in check if he is elected president.

The candidate also stated that reformists are capable of putting an end to the current state of affairs in the economy if they win the upcoming vote.

Aref currently faces seven rivals, namely President of the Center for Strategic Research of the Expediency Council Hassan Rohani, Tehran Mayor Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, lawmaker Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council Saeed Jalili, Secretary of Expediency Council Mohsen Rezaei, former Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati, and former Telecommunications Minister Mohammad Gharazi.

Iranians will go to the polls in the nationâ„¢s 11th presidential election on June 14. Over 66,000 polling stations will be set up across the country. Expatriates will be also able to cast ballots at 285 polling stations that will be set up in their respective countries.

Nearly 50.5 million Iranians are eligible to vote in the upcoming presidential election, with more than 1.6 million first-time voters.

MKA/SS/HMV

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Guantánamo Bay hunger strike: quarter of inmates now being force-fed

0

Paul Harris
guardian.co.uk
June 6, 2013

The number of hunger-striking Guantánamo detainees being force fed by military medical teams has jumped to 41 and now makes up a quarter of the camp’s prisoner population.

The new figures reveal a continued deterioration of conditions at the camp as a hunger strike by many of Guantánamo’s 166 detainees has entered a fourth month amid little sign of it ending.

In all, 103 inmates are now on hunger strike, with four being hospitalised. The number of inmates being force fed was 31 on the eve of a speech by President Obama last month in which he promised to work towards closing the base and allow the release of many of the 86 prisoners held there who have been cleared for transfer.

Read more

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 12:46 pm

Tags: ,






<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Shocking: Rape Is Rampant in Juvenile Justice System and Most Often Perpetrated by Staff

3

Hundreds of teen-agers are raped or sexually assaulted during their stays in the country’s juvenile detention facilities, and many of them are victimized repeatedly, according to a U.S. Department of Justice survey.

The teens are most often assaulted by staff members working at the facilities, and fully 20 percent of those victimized by the men and women charged with protecting and counseling them said they had been violated on more than 10 occasions.

“Today’s report illustrates the fundamental failure of many juvenile detention facilities to keep their youth safe,” said Louisa Stannow, executive director of Just Detention International, a California-based health and human rights organization.

The Justice Department survey – covering both secure juvenile detention facilities and group homes, the less restrictive settings into which troubled youngsters are often ordered – involved more than 8,500 boys and girls. In all, 1,720 of those surveyed reported being sexually assaulted.

Allen Beck, the author of the report, said that the rates of staff-on-inmate abuse among juveniles are “about three times higher than what we find in the adult arena.”

The highest incidence of staff sexual misconduct occurred in Ohio, South Carolina, Georgia and Illinois, while other states like New York, Massachusetts and Delaware, reported no abuse. At the Paulding Regional Youth Detention Center in Georgia and the Circleville Juvenile Correctional Facility in Ohio, one in three youngsters surveyed said they’d suffered sexual abuse at the hands of staff members.

Stannow said the findings “show clearly that it is possible to protect young detainees from the devastation of sexual abuse,” but that they also “make painfully clear that many youth facilities have a very, very long way to go.”

There are roughly 70,000 youngsters in the country’s juvenile detention facilities, thousands of them 16 years old or younger. The survey examined facilities that house roughly a third of the total population in detention.

The report gives some insight into how staff members victimize the youngsters under their care and supervision. In the majority of cases, the survey found, staff members establish a personal relationship with the inmate first by sharing details of their personal lives, sharing pictures, or giving gifts. The report indicates that one instance of abuse usually leads to more.

Larry Vanderbilt, general counsel for the Department of Juvenile Justice in South Carolina, which ranks second in states with the highest reported rates of staff abuse, attributed a large part of the problem to one particular guard at its Birchwood juvenile detention center. He said the guard had been linked to at least two incidents of sex abuse and is now being criminally prosecuted.

The report will be shared with the Justice Department’s Review Panel on Prison Rape, which will eventually invite administrators with the highest and lowest sex abuse rates to testify at hearings in Washington.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

Is the Government Also Monitoring the CONTENT of Our Phone Calls?

0

Big Brother Is Watching

Yes, Government Spooks May Be Listening

The Obama administration has been caught spying on the Verizon phone calls of tens of millions of Americans.

But the government has sought to “reassure” us that it is only tracking “metadata” such as the time and place of the calls, and not the actual content of the calls.

That claim is patently absurd.

The American government is in fact collecting and storing virtually every phone call, purchases, email, text message, internet searches, social media communications, health information, employment history, travel and student records, and virtually all other information of every American.

All U.S. intelligence agencies — including the CIA and NSA — are going to spy on Americans’ finances. The IRS will be spying on Americans’ shopping records, travel, social interactions, health records and filesfrom other government investigators.

As the top spy chief at the U.S. National Security Agency — William Binney — explained, the NSA is collecting some 100 billion 1,000-character emails per day, and 20 trillion communications of all types per year.

Binney says that the government has collected all of the communications of congressional leaders, generals and everyone else in the U.S. for the last 10 years.

Binney further explains that he set up the NSA’s system so that all of the information would automatically be encrypted, so that the government had to obtain a search warrant based upon probably cause before a particular suspect’s communications could be decrypted. But the NSA now collects all data in an unencrypted form, so that no probable cause is needed to view any citizen’s information. He says that it is actually cheaper and easier to store the data in an encrypted format: so the government’s current system is being done for political — not practical — purposes.

Binney says that if anyone gets on the government’s “enemies list”, then the stored information will be used to target them. Specifically, he notes that if the government decides it doesn’t like someone, it analyzes all of the data it has collected on that person and his or her associates over the last 10 years to build a case against him. This includes whistleblowers, activists or even government insiders … like the head of the CIA.

Indeed, whistleblowers revealed years ago that the NSA was vacuuming up virtually all Internet communications.

The Other Types of Spying the Government Is Doing On Us

In addition, the amount of money and effort the government is putting into spying on Americans using a wide variety of other technologies tends to discredit any notion that the government is exercising restraint in monitoring our phone calls (which are already being tapped) for content.

For example, the government is flying drones over the American homeland to spy on us.

Senator Rand Paul correctly notes:

The domestic use of drones to spy on Americans clearly violates the Fourth Amendment and limits our rights to personal privacy.

Emptywheel notes in a post entitled “The OTHER Assault on the Fourth Amendment in the NDAA? Drones at Your Airport?”:

http://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Picture-7.png

***

As the map above makes clear—taken from this 2010 report—DOD [the Department of Defense] plans to have drones all over the country by 2015.

Many police departments are also using drones to spy on us. As the Hill reported:

At least 13 state and local police agencies around the country have used drones in the field or in training, according to the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International, an industry trade group. The Federal Aviation Administration has predicted that by the end of the decade, 30,000 commercial and government drones could be flying over U.S. skies.

***

“Drones should only be used if subject to a powerful framework that regulates their use in order to avoid abuse and invasions of privacy,” Chris Calabrese, a legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, said during a congressional forum in Texas last month.

He argued police should only fly drones over private property if they have a warrant, information collected with drones should be promptly destroyed when it’s no longer needed and domestic drones should not carry any weapons.

He argued that drones pose a more serious threat to privacy than helicopters because they are cheaper to use and can hover in the sky for longer periods of time.

A congressional report earlier this year predicted that drones could soon be equipped with technologies to identify faces or track people based on their height, age, gender and skin color.

Moreover, Wired reports:

Transit authorities in cities across the country are quietly installing microphone-enabled surveillance systems on public buses that would give them the ability to record and store private conversations….

The systems are being installed in San Francisco, Baltimore, and other cities with funding from the Department of Homeland Security in some cases ….

The IP audio-video systems can be accessed remotely via a built-in web server (.pdf), and can be combined with GPS data to track the movement of buses and passengers throughout the city.

***

The systems use cables or WiFi to pair audio conversations with camera images in order to produce synchronous recordings. Audio and video can be monitored in real-time, but are also stored onboard in blackbox-like devices, generally for 30 days, for later retrieval. Four to six cameras with mics are generally installed throughout a bus, including one near the driver and one on the exterior of the bus.

***

Privacy and security expert Ashkan Soltani told the Daily that the audio could easily be coupled with facial recognition systems or audio recognition technology to identify passengers caught on the recordings.

RT notes:

Street lights that can spy installed in some American cities

America welcomes a new brand of smart street lightning systems: energy-efficient, long-lasting, complete with LED screens to show ads. They can also spy on citizens in a way George Orwell would not have imagined in his worst nightmare.

With a price tag of $3,000+ apiece, according to an ABC report, the street lights are now being rolled out in Detroit, Chicago and Pittsburgh, and may soon mushroom all across the country.

Part of the Intellistreets systems made by the company Illuminating Concepts, they havea number of “homeland security applications” attached.

Each has a microprocessor “essentially similar to an iPhone,” capable of by Text-Enhance” href=”http://rt.com/news/big-brother-street-lamps-286/#” target=”_blank”>wireless communication. Each can capture images and count people for the police through a digital camera, record conversations of passers-by and even give voice commands thanks to a built-in speaker.

Ron Harwood, president and founder of Illuminating Concepts, says he eyed the creation of such a system after the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the Hurricane Katrina disaster. He is“working with Homeland Security” to deliver his dream of making people “more informed and safer.”

Cell towers track where your phone is at any moment, and the major cell carriers, including Verizon and AT&T, responded to at least 1.3 million law enforcement requests for cell phone locations and other data in 2011. (And — given that your smartphone routinely sends your location information back to Apple or Google — it would be child’s play for the government to track your location that way.) Your iPhone, orother brand of smartphone is spying on virtually everything you do (ProPublica notes: “That’s No Phone. That’s My Tracker“).

Fox news notes that the government is insisting that “black boxes” be installed in cars to track your location.

The TSA has moved way past airports, trains and sports stadiums, and is deploying mobile scanners to spy on people all over the place. This means that traveling within the United States is no longer a private affair.

You might also have seen the news this week that the Department of Homeland Security is going tocontinue to allow searches of laptops and phones based upon “hunches”.

What’s that about?

The ACLU published a map in 2006 showing that nearly two-thirds of the American public — 197.4 million people — live within a “constitution-free zone” within 100 miles of land and coastal borders:

The ACLU explained:

  • Normally under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the American people are not generally subject to random and arbitrary stops and searches.
  • The border, however, has always been an exception. There, the longstanding view is that the normal rules do not apply. For example the authorities do not need a warrant or probable cause to conduct a “routine search.”
  • But what is “the border”? According to the government, it is a 100-mile wide strip that wraps around the “external boundary” of the United States.
  • As a result of this claimed authority, individuals who are far away from the border, American citizens traveling from one place in America to another, are being stopped and harassed in ways that our Constitution does not permit.
  • Border Patrol has been setting up checkpoints inland – on highways in states such as California, Texas and Arizona, and at ferry terminals in Washington State. Typically, the agents ask drivers and passengers about their citizenship. Unfortunately, our courts so far have permitted these kinds of checkpoints — legally speaking, they are “administrative” stops that are permitted only for the specific purpose of protecting the nation’s borders. They cannot become general drug-search or other law enforcement efforts.
  • However, these stops by Border Patrol agents are not remaining confined to that border security purpose. On the roads of California and elsewhere in the nation — places far removed from the actual border — agents are stopping, interrogating, and searching Americans on an everyday basis with absolutely no suspicion of wrongdoing.
  • The bottom line is that the extraordinary authorities that the government possesses at the border are spilling into regular American streets.

Computer World reports:

Border agents don’t need probable cause and they don’t need a stinking warrant since they don’t need to prove any reasonable suspicion first. Nor, sadly, do two out of three people have First Amendment protection; it is as if DHS has voided those Constitutional amendments and protections they provide to nearly 200 million Americans.

***

Don’t be silly by thinking this means only if you are physically trying to cross the international border. As we saw when discussing the DEA using license plate readers and data-mining to track Americans movements, the U.S. “border” stretches out 100 miles beyond the true border. Godfather Politics added:

But wait, it gets even better! If you live anywhere in Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey or Rhode Island, DHS says the search zones encompass the entire state.

Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) have a “longstanding constitutional and statutory authority permitting suspicionless and warrantless searches of merchandise at the border and its functional equivalent.” This applies to electronic devices, according to the recent CLCR “Border Searches of Electronic Devices” executive summary [PDF]:

Fourth Amendment

The overall authority to conduct border searches without suspicion or warrant is clear and longstanding, and courts have not treated searches of electronic devices any differently than searches of other objects. We conclude that CBP’s and ICE’s current border search policies comply with the Fourth Amendment. We also conclude that imposing a requirement that officers have reasonable suspicion in order to conduct a border search of an electronic device would be operationally harmful without concomitant civil rights/civil liberties benefits. However, we do think that recording more information about why searches are performed would help managers and leadership supervise the use of border search authority, and this is what we recommended; CBP has agreed and has implemented this change beginning in FY2012.***

The ACLU said, Wait one darn minute! Hello, what happened to the Constitution? Where is the rest of CLCR report on the “policy of combing through and sometimes confiscating travelers’ laptops, cell phones, and other electronic devices–even when there is no suspicion of wrongdoing?” DHS maintains it is not violating our constitutional rights, so the ACLU said:

If it’s true that our rights are safe and that DHS is doing all the things it needs to do to safeguard them, then why won’t it show us the results of its assessment? And why would it be legitimate to keep a report about the impact of a policy on the public’s rights hidden from the very public being affected?

***

As Christian Post wrote, “Your constitutional rights have been repealed in ten states. No, this isn’t a joke. It is not exaggeration or hyperbole. If you are in ten states in the United States, your some of your rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights have been made null and void.”

The ACLU filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the entire DHS report about suspicionless and warrantless “border” searches of electronic devices. ACLU attorney Catherine Crump said “We hope to establish that the Department of Homeland Security can’t simply assert that its practices are legitimate without showing us the evidence, and to make it clear that the government’s own analyses of how our fundamental rights apply to new technologies should be openly accessible to the public for review and debate.”

Meanwhile, the EFF has tips to protect yourself and your devices against border searches. If you think you know all about it, then you might try testing your knowledge with a defending privacy at the U.S. border quiz.

Wired pointed out in 2008 that the courts have routinely upheld such constitution-free zones:

Federal agents at the border do not need any reason to search through travelers’ laptops, cell phones or digital cameras for evidence of crimes, a federal appeals court ruled Monday, extending the government’s power to look through belongings like suitcases at the border to electronics.

***

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the government, finding that the so-called border exception to the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition on unreasonable searches applied not just to suitcases and papers, but also to electronics.

***

Travelers should be aware that anything on their mobile devices can be searched by government agents, who may also seize the devices and keep them for weeks or months. When in doubt, think about whether online storage or encryption might be tools you should use to prevent the feds from rummaging through your journal, your company’s confidential business plans or naked pictures of you and your-of-age partner in adult fun.

Going further down the sci fi Big Brother rabbit hole, Verizon has applied for a patent that would allow your television to track what you are doing, who you are with, what objects you’re holding, and what type of mood you’re in. (And some folks could conceivably be spying on you through your tv using existing technology.)

And they’re probably bluffing and exaggerating, but the Department of Homeland Security claims they will soon be able to know your adrenaline level, what you ate for breakfast and what you’re thinking …from 164 feet away.

Indeed, technology has made pervasive spying more possible than ever before.

TechDirt notes:

In a radio interview, Wall Street Journal reporter Julia Angwin (who’s been one of the best at covering the surveillance state in the US) made a simple observation that puts much of this into context: the US surveillance regime has more data on the average American than the Stasi ever did on East Germans.

Postscript: This is not some “post-9/11 reality”. Spying on Americans started before 9/11. 

And the national security boys can choose to share U.S. civilian information with federal, state, local, or foreign entities for analysis of possible criminal behavior, even if there is no reason to suspect them.

And many say that the spying isn’t being done to keep us safe … but to crush dissent and to smear people who uncover unflattering this about the government … and to help the too big to fail businesses compete against smaller businesses (and here).

Note: Here’s a full report card on how well the government has been balancing civil liberties with other concerns.

Hattip Satori

This article originally appeared on: SHTF Plan

Vote demanded on arming Syria militants

0

File photos shows members of the terrorist Free Syrian Army during clashes with government forces in Aleppo, Syria.

More than 80 Conservative backbenchers have written to British Prime Minster David Cameron, demanding a Commons vote to block the supply of weapons to insurgents in Syria.

The letter, organized by Tory MP Andrew Bridgen, warned Cameron of Å“concerns among colleagues and the public about the possibility of British involvement in Syria”, adding that there should be a full debate in the Parliament before any decisions are made on the issue.

“This may be another Middle East conflict with many, many sides and no end,” Bridgen told the Huffington Post UK.

In response to the letter, Downing Street promised a free vote over moves to arm militants in Syria and said it has no immediate plans to supply weapons for the foreign-backed insurgents in the Arab country

Earlier this week, London says the decision will be delayed until after the planned Geneva talks on Syria.

Britain has played a major role in fanning the flames of unrest in the Arab country by arming and training militants fighting against the Syrian government.

Syria has been gripped by deadly unrest since March 2011, and many people, including large numbers of government forces, have been killed in the violence.

Damascus says the chaos is being orchestrated from outside the country, and there are reports that a very large number of the militants are foreign nationals.

MOS/HE

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

UN nuclear agency wraps up talks on Iran

0

The Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has wrapped up a meeting on Iranâ„¢s nuclear energy program in Vienna, Press TV reports.

The meeting on Iran’s nuclear energy program ended on Wednesday with the agency failing to provide any evidence on a potential diversion in the Islamic Republicâ„¢s nuclear activities.

During the meeting, the IAEA accused Tehran of building a reactor in the central city of Arak with a design not previously approved by the Agency.

Iranâ„¢s IAEA Ambassador Ali Asghar Soltanieh, however, rejected the accusation, arguing that the IR-40 reactor is visited by international inspectors every three months and that the Arak site produces radioactive isotopes for medical purposes.

After more than a year of talks between Iran and the IAEA, the Board expressed dissatisfaction with the negotiations that it said Å“are going around in circles.”

However, the Iranian ambassador said Tehran is very clear in its nuclear policy and calls for a depoliticized approach to its nuclear energy program. He also called for absolute confidentiality of the information given by Iran to the IAEA, as recent information leaks have raised concerns on the Iranian side.

Soltanieh also criticized the world powers for creating “destructive” political tensions among member states.

“They have to stop this trend, and let us do our work. Then the agency could report whether they have found a nuclear weapon or not,” he said, recalling how over the past 10 years, IAEA inspectors have failed to find “even one gram of uranium to be diverted toward military purposes.”

Iran has repeatedly voiced its willingness to cooperate with the IAEA under a clear framework.

The United States, Israel, and their allies have repeatedly accused Iran of pursuing non-civilian objectives in its nuclear energy program and have used the unfounded accusation as a pretext to impose illegal sanctions on the Islamic Republic.

Iran rejects the allegations, arguing that as a committed signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and a member of the IAEA, it has the right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.

MRS/SS/HMV

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Day Three at the Manning Trial

0

Captain Casey Fulton testified at the end of yesterday’s Bradley Manning’s trial proceedings that there were no specific websites, other than social media sites, that intelligence analysts knew that America’s enemies visited. Capt. Fulton deployed to Iraq with Bradley in November 2009 and was in charge of Bradley’s intelligence section.

The government’s aiding the-enemy charge relies on the claim that Bradley knew that giving intelligence to WikiLeaks meant giving it to Al Qaeda. Prosecutors have cited several times this Army Counterintelligence Special Report, which asks,

Will the Wikileaks.org Web site be used by FISS, foreign military services, foreign insurgents, or terrorist groups to collect sensitive or classified US Army information posted to the Wikileaks.org Web site?

But when defense lawyer David Coombs asked Capt. Fulton which websites the enemy was known to visit gathering intelligence, she merely said that it was general knowledge that the enemy goes to “all sorts” of websites. Pressed to name something specific, Capt. Fulton said that they were briefed on social media sites like Facebook, where people generally post lots of personal information, and Google and Google Maps. Once more Coombs asked if there were any specific websites that she and her fellow analysts had “actual knowledge” that the enemy visited, and Capt. Fulton said no.

Intelligence work for Army, not WikiLeaks

She also provided more information on an Excel spreadsheet that Bradley created as an analyst in Baghdad, which included all of the Significant Activities (SigActs) later released in the Iraq War Logs. The government has referred to this spreadsheet as an indication that Bradley was culling information and preparing it to be sent to WikiLeaks. But Capt. Fulton said that the spreadsheet was used for an intelligence analyst assignment: she had asked him to compile all SigActs from the entire Iraq War to discern any patterns and increases or decreases in violence throughout the war. Bradley was simply doing his job.

That testimony corroborates what we heard from other witnesses today. Chief Warrant Officer 3 Hondo Hack and Warrant Officer Kyle Balonek testified to Bradley’s exceptional organizational abilities and impressive work for such an inexperienced analyst.

CW3 Hack rarely saw Bradley since they had opposite work shifts, so he looked into the shared drive where analysts posted reports and files they were researching. He called Bradley’s folder perhaps the most organized he’d ever seen, providing far more detail than more experienced analysts.

That revelation came after government questioning that attempted to paint Bradley as neglectful of his duties, presenting an email from him to CW3 Hack providing the name of a high-value target several months after he started his work. Prosecutors admitted when prompted by Judge Denise Lind that they were trying to show a dereliction of duty, and Coombs recalled their effort to characterize him as working for WikiLeaks when he should have been doing his job.

But CW3 Hack said he was frustrated with the entire intelligence analyst squad, and didn’t expect Bradley, as a junior analyst, to provide “actionable” information and in fact expected more from his more senior colleagues.

War Log reports didn’t reveal source names

CW Balonek was one of those more experienced analysts, who worked in Bradley’s division. He testified about keeping classified information secret, since he witnessed Bradley’s signing of the Non-Disclosure Agreement vowing to protect sensitive documents. He told government lawyers that it wasn’t common practice for those in Iraq to look at Afghanistan SigActs or other files, but he told the defense that there wasn’t any provision that he knew of prohibiting it.

He gave more insight into what those SigActs or HUMINT (Human Intelligence) files contained. The SigActs typically provided the 5 Ws: who, what, when, where, and why an incident occurred, documenting basic information about incidents like IED attacks. Both types of files didn’t refer U.S. sources by name–HUMINT reports cited sources by number, and SigActs would protect the source from identification as well. SigActs have some names, but those are witnesses, for example, to violent incidents, and not reliable sources with exact information.

Supervisor Showman’s conversations with Bradley 

Specialist Jihrleah Showman was Bradley’s team leader at Ft. Drum before he deployed to Iraq, interacting with him daily. She testified with slight but visible disdain about their personal conversations, which she said typically involved “his topic of choosing,” and that he talked about social interests including “martini parties” in the D.C. area, having friends with influence in the Pentagon, and his interest in shopping.

She also said he liked to talk about politics, and that he would often debate with others about broad U.S. policy and that she found him “very political” and on the “extreme Democratic side,” responding affirmatively to Coombs’s phrasing.

When she oversaw him at Ft. Drum, most soldiers uploaded video games, movies, and music to their computers, which weren’t explicitly authorized but which she believed her superiors knew about. Bradley was so “fluent” with computers, she said, that she asked him to install the military chat client mIRC to her computer, and that he once mentioned that military portals’ passwords “weren’t complicated” and that he could always get through them.

Because the government moved through its witnesses so quickly, court is in recess for the week and will resume Monday, June 10.

Nathan Fuller, a writer for the Bradley Manning Support Network, where this dispatch also appeared. He can be reached at Nathan@bradleymanning.org

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

Melissa Etheridge: Pot Saved Me! Legalize It!

0

Singer Melissa Etheridge was moved by the recent ACLU report, “The War on Marijuana in Black and White: Billions of Dollars Wasted on Racially Biased Arrests,” outlining why marijuana reform is necessary now. In an Op-Ed for cnn.com, the singer tells her story of how medical marijuana saved her during a very dark time–is still helping her–and why the drug war, which has ruined so many lives, needs to end.

In 2004, when Etheridge was diagnosed with breast cancer, she opted for particularly strong “dose dense” chemotherapy, partly because she had the luxury of not working while in treatment.

“My close friends told me that, as an alternative, medical marijuana was a natural way to help with the excruciating side effects of chemo,” she writes. “It worked. The entire experience changed my life. It opened my mind to a new way of thinking about my body, my health and the future.

“This herb, this weed that is so strong it grows wild by the side of the road, has always been with us. In ancient times it was highly regarded and has even been found in tombs. It has even been put forth from some biblical scholars that Jesus may have used cannabis oil to heal.”

Etheridge admits she was a pretty straight arrow in terms of drug use up until then (some rock star!) But using it every day during chemo it helped her appetite so she was able to keep her strength up, helped with depression and eased her stomach pain.

“I have been a medicinal marijuana smoker for nine years now. I find relief from the gastrointestinal effects of the chemo even now. I find it helps with regulating my sleep. I also enjoy it before I watch ‘Game of Thrones,'” she writes. “The state of fear in which these laws were created has changed. Educated people have experienced pot or they understand that research has shown that while marijuana use is not entirely safe, its dangers have been grossly overstated.”

But she’s not advocating marijuana use for all. After all, as she points out, she is the mother of teenage children, and has to negotiate the tricky question of why it’s okay for her to smoke pot and not them. Here’s her answer: “I have found a way to inform my children that the growing adolescent brain reacts differently to cannabis and studies have shown that the benefits an adult brain experiences are actually detrimental to the growing teenage brain. Common sense tells me that kids smoking pot is not a good idea. Just like sex, you can handle it when you are mature enough to respect it.”

She then compares the debate about same-sex marriage with the dialogue about ending pot prohibition and concludes, rousingly:

“We have arrived at the tipping point of understanding that true freedom is the ability of a nation to handle diversity.

These days our society is experiencing a new open-mindedness. We are beginning to break away from the old fears that governed our parents’ world. We do not automatically fear someone because of the color of his or her skin. We do not fear for our children if homosexuals are living in the neighborhood. And we do not fear that smoking pot will necessarily lead to a life of ruin.

I believe it is time to shine a light on the old “Reefer Madness” fears. Let’s legitimize cannabis sales so that our youth are as protected from illegal pot as they are from illegal alcohol and tobacco sales. Legitimize the growers so that pot can have regulations and I know I am supporting American businesses and not outlaws when I purchase it.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

‘Bag Men’ Suing New York Post for Boston Bombing Cover

0

Joe Coscarelli
New York Magazine
June 6, 2013

Salaheddin Barhoum and Yassine Zaimi, who had nothing to do with the attack on the Boston Marathon besides being there (two hours before the bombs went off) and loving running, have filed a lawsuit against the New York Post for implying otherwise. Barhoum, a 16-year-old high schooler, and his 24-year-old running buddy are claiming that the Post‘s “Bag Men” cover was libelous, inflicted emotional distress, and invaded their privacy, the Boston Globe reports. “The front page would lead a reasonable reader to believe that plaintiffs had bombs in their bags, that they were involved in causing the Boston Marathon bombing,” says the complaint, and that it led to “scorn, hatred, ridicule, or contempt in the minds of a considerable and respectable segment of the community.”

The Post, well practiced in strongly suggesting things without coming right out and saying them, was deliberate in its wording, which could make the case hard to win: The story read, “Investigators probing the deadly Boston Marathon bombings are circulating photos of two men spotted chatting near the packed finish line … Meanwhile, officials have identified two potential suspects who were captured on surveillance videos taken shortly before the deadly blasts … It was not immediately clear if the men in the law-enforcement photos are the same men in the surveillance videos.”

“We did not identify them as suspects,” Post editor Coll Allan argued, technically telling the truth. “All NYPost pics were those distributed by FBI,” Rupert Murdoch tweeted at the time. “And instantly withdrawn when FBI changed directions.” That part is less true: The Post still has a photo of Barhoum and Zaimi, with red circles around their heads, on its website.

Read full article

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 12:34 pm

Tags:






<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Blast hits US-led base in Afghanistan

0

[unable to retrieve full-text content]A powerful car bomb explosion rocks a US-led military base in Afghanistan’s southern Helmand Province.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

1,000s protest austerity in Brussels

0

Belgian protesters march in Brussels on June 6, 2013.

More than 25,000 Belgians have staged a rally in Brussels, protesting against the governmentâ„¢s austerity measures while demanding equal status for workers and employees.

The march on Thursday was organized by the Socialist and Christian Democratic unions, which estimated the number of protestors at 35,000.

Å“Austerity is not the solution, it is the problem. We must change course. [There] should be more and better jobs,” Secretary of the Christian Democratic Union Claude Rollin said.

The protesters also expressed opposition to a proposal presented by Prime Minister Elio di Rupoâ„¢s government to freeze wages for public sector workers for two years.

Rollin criticized the governmentâ„¢s early retirement reforms without taking any step to improve the status of workers.

The Socialist Union has pledged to take further actions in case the government refuses to heed public demands.

There is a growing resentment against di Rupoâ„¢s government as a large number of public sector workers have been laid off and many more are facing pay cuts.

The worsening debt crisis has forced EU governments to adopt harsh austerity measures and tough economic reforms, which have triggered incidents of social unrest and massive protests in many European countries.

CAH/KA

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

The Alternative To Cockroaches: Countering Imperialism

Global Research and Countercurrents 6/6/2013 and The 4th Media 7/6/2013

Many of us have a vision, an alternative vision to the tyranny of those who control the world. But we are ridiculed, dismissed, put on trial (Manning), confined to a small embassy in London for months on end (Assange), called unrealistic or subversive and told to ‘get real’. Are we destined to be the ‘I told you so bunch’? 

The current wholly corrupt system is edging humanity towards the precipice of oblivion. When that happens, we (if we are still alive – if anything is still alive, apart from cockroaches) will say ‘we told you so’. If there is to be any hope, if there is to be anything better, we must remain ‘unreal’ and true to our beliefs.  

Some like to believe that the meek (or gentle) shall inherit the earth. But it is popularly suggested that cockroaches may well do so if or when humanity destroys itself through nuclear war (or depleted uranium radiation). Cockroaches have a much higher radiation resistance than vertebrates, with the lethal dose perhaps six to 15 times that for humans.  

Cockroaches are regarded as pests. They feed on human food, and can leave an offensive odor. They can also passively transport microbes on their body surfaces, including those that are potentially dangerous to humans. Cockroaches have been shown to be linked with allergic reactions in humans, including asthma. 

It begs the question: is there much difference between the people that currently run the world and the cockroach? Both are pests, both feed off humanity, both cause disease and suffering. And both can end up sucking the oxygen from our lungs. The only difference is that there is no malicious intent on the part of the insect variety – it’s just the way they are. And the impact of the cockroach is minimal by comparison.  

The same may not be said of the human variety that has instituted a corrupt system of ‘globalisation’. This system of US-led imperialism benefits state-corporate interests who have been able to manipulate the international system of trade and finance in their favour to shift capital around the globe at ease. Supported by militarism and secular theology masquerading as neo-liberal economic theory, the result has been big profits and environmental degradation, easy money and cheap labour, private gain and public havoc.

The food and pharmaceuticals/healthcare industries work hand in glove to sicken and treat us; ‘big oil’ works with agribusiness to impose a system of big-dam, water intensive chemical-industrial at the expense of environmental sustainability; from Syria to Pakistan, US militarism is implemented under on behalf of powerful corporations under the lie of ‘humanitarianism’ or the ‘war on terror’; and the profiteering nuclear energy and resource extraction industries are destroying democracy, robbing people of their land and putting environments in jeopardy in places like India, where a nation’s poorest people are considered ‘surplus to requirements’, an inconvenient truth, and are beaten, raped and disposed of because they are a barrier to corporate ‘progress’ – profit and greed.

Whole populations are lied to and deceived on behalf of rich corporate interests that have succeeded in hijacking the machineries of state and media for commercial gain. Democracy is corrupted, local economies are destroyed, debt and dependency is used to assert control, science is pressed into the service of a worldwide arms industry and fraudulent corporate activities and there is endless conflict over finite resources. 

The current system is ecologically destructive and relies on perpetual war and conflict. It is both socially divisive and unsustainable and is tied to an image of the world laid down by corrupt transnational corporations and translated into policy by the IMF, WTO, World Bank and national governments. 

Projects like Navdanya in India that seek to take the control of food and agriculture back from agribusiness, or the finer elements of successful policies in places like Cuba or Venezuela, are just some of the many examples from across the world that indicate how we could address the problems we currently face. 

However, from Goldman Sachs, Bank of America and General Electric to Shell, Monsanto and others, there are those who seek to maintain the current system at all costs. We don’t need them, but they will be difficult to get rid of. 

“Some cockroaches have been known to live up to three months without food and a month without water. They are even resilient enough to survive occasional freezing temperatures. This makes them difficult to eradicate once they have infested an area.” — Wikipedia

These cockroaches – the financiers, industrialists and corporate funded politicians, despise transparency – dislike democracy and hate anyone trying to hold them to genuine account. These are the criminals who have quite literally got away with murder with their illegal wars, indiscriminate use of drone attacks and exploitative economic policies.

It is the likes of Bush, Blair, Obama, Cheney, Rice and their profiteering arms dealing cronies, private ‘security’ contractors and corporate billionaire puppet masters who should be standing in the dock, not the likes of Manning or Assange. They should be made to pay for the millions of deaths they have caused.

“It (the Nuremberg tribunal) defines aggression as the supreme international crime, differing from other war crimes, and it encompasses all of the evil that follows. The US and British invasion of Iraq was a textbook example of aggression, which means that we were responsible for all the evil that followed. Serious conflict arose. It spread all over the region. In fact the region is being torn to shreds by this conflict. That’s part of the evil that follows…Take a look at the International criminal court (ICC) — black Africans or other people the West doesn’t like. Bush and Blair ought to be up there. There is no recent crime worse than the invasion of Iraq. Obama’s got to be there for the terror war… it’s just murder on executive whim” Noam Chomsky (1)

However, to achieve what Chomsky advocates would entail the victims of such crimes being made to sit in judgement over the perpetrators. The International Criminal Court, a criminal court in the starkest sense of the term, is based on the opposite principle. And that’s the reason for its existence.

Come to think of it, to call these perpetrators human cockroaches does our insect friends a gross disservice.

Note:

Scientists Find Holes in Monsanto GM Wheat Denial

0

(AP Photo/Boris Grdanoski)(Photo: Boris Grdanoski AP)

Monsanto claimed Wednesday that the Oregon field found last week to be contaminated with Monsanto’s unapproved GM wheat was an “isolated” incident, and that it was likely either the result of an accident or “sabotage.” However, scientists warned Thursday that the biotech giant’s denial has many holes.

Monsanto claims that it has since tested 31,200 seed samples in Oregon and Washington and found no evidence of contamination–insisting there is no cause for concern in the world market.

However, researchers this week said that Monsanto’s tests are misleading and that the genetically modified gene, not yet approved for use in the U.S., will likely continue to be found in wheat seeds.

“We don’t know where in the whole chain it is,” said Carol Mallory-Smith, the weed science professor at Oregon State University who tested the initial wheat plants and determined they were the unapproved Monsanto seed.

“I don’t know how Monsanto can declare anything. We obviously had these plants in the field.”

“You introduce something into the environment, and genes move around in the environment, whether transgenic or not,” she added.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture is currently investigating how the wheat gene, which was taken out of test fields eight years ago, is now showing up.

Monsanto claims that all of the tested seeds had been either destroyed or recovered and sent to a USDA facility in Colorado for storage.

However, David Andow, a professor of entomology at the University of Minnesota, said in an interview with Bloomberg that these claims are misleading and that the tests cited by Monsanto this week, which displayed clean wheat in the state of Washington, are shortsighted.

“Sure they tested it, but that doesn’t mean it’s all clean,” Andow said. “It just means it’s not so widespread that it could be detected easily.”

And Doug Gurian-Sherman, senior scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists in Washington, said that this is not the first time Monsanto has been less than forthcoming on the extent of its seed contamination: “In previous cases, such as during the outbreak of herbicide-resistant weeds in recent years, Monsanto has initially played down the risks.”

“The reality is that nobody knows what happened until extensive testing is done.”

Additionally, Bloomberg reported recently that even if Monsanto’s claims about this specific wheat strain were proven true, Monsanto has resumed trials of other and very similar GM wheat seeds, according to information posted in a U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) database.

Monsanto planted 150 acres of GM wheat in Hawaii last year and 300 acres of GM wheat in North Dakota this year–meaning the risk of genetic pollution from unapproved Monsanto wheat is even greater than most people are aware.

Meanwhile, the discovery of the GM wheat in Oregon caused fast moving international backlash, with Japan suspending some imports of US wheat, South Korea testing all of its US wheat imports, and the EU urging its members to test some of its US wheat imports.

The extent of contamination from Monsanto’s GM wheat seeds in Oregon, let alone Hawaii and North Dakota, remain unknown.

_______________________

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

This article originally appeared on: Common Dreams

'Justice Not Done': Afghans Decry Soft Sentencing for Murderous US Soldier

0

US Staff Sergeant Robert Bales murdered sixteen Afghan villagers in cold blood, shooting many in the head and face before burning their bodies with kerosene. (File) US Army Staff Sergeant Robert Bales pleaded guilty and was sentenced to life in prison on Wednesday for the massacre of sixteen Afghan civilians in 2012.

But in the Afghanistan village where the murders took place, the sentence was met with anger as many relatives of Bales’ rampage–most of whom were women and children–say the US soldier should face harsher punishment for his crimes.

As the BBC reports:

Friends and family members of those killed say they were stunned to learn that he has escaped capital punishment.

“It is our firm demand that Afghanistan, the US and the international community condemn this American to death. He martyred our family members… and went back with his body full of blood of his victims to his camp,” bereaved villager Mullah Baran told the BBC.Afghan villager SamiullahSamiullah argues that bereaved villagers feel let down by the US justice system. (Photo: BBC)

Another villager, Haji Baqi, whose brother was killed by Bales, said: “We want him to be hanged. The international community should not ignore our grief.”

Villager Samiullah said the life sentence meant that justice had not been done. His mother, uncle and cousin were killed.

“The criminal is not being punished,” he said. “We want him to be dealt with as his deeds deserve.”

Though it seems as though Bales would have no hope for future release from his life sentence, a military jury must still decide whether or not he will one day be eligible for parole. That decision will be rendered after further proceedings set to begin August 19.

During Wednesday’s hearing, Bales spoke in a reportedly “calm and steady” voice as he described his violent actions. When asked to describe his motivations, Bales said, “There is not a good reason in this world for why I did the horrible things that I did.”

___________________________________

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

This article originally appeared on: Common Dreams

IMF's Mea Culpa on Austerity Met With Anger, Vindication in Greece

0

(Photo: Popicinio/cc/flickr)In a vindication of those who challenged the harsh austerity conditions, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) issued a report on Wednesday acknowledging that “notable failures” were made in its bailout to Greece. But the admission is too little, too late for many Greeks who have suffered “an economic death spiral” at the hands of the crushing austerity policies dealt by the troika.

The New York Times reports:

The International Monetary Fund released an internal report on Wednesday that sharply criticizes its first bailout program for Greece, the latest in a series of partial mea culpas as the fund reassesses the austerity that it has insisted on for ailing, debt-plagued economies.

The 50-page report, titled “Greece: Ex Post Evaluation of Exceptional Access Under the 2010 Stand-By Arrangement,” acknowledges major mistakes in Greece’s first bailout, which totaled about $143 billion and came into effect in 2010. The fund bent or broke three out of four of its own rules with the lending program, the report concludes. It also seriously underestimated the severity of Greece’s downturn.

Under the weight of such measures — applied across the board and hitting the poorest hardest — the economy, officials in Athens said, was always bound to dive into an economic death spiral.

“There were also notable failures. Market confidence was not restored, the banking system lost 30 percent of its deposits, and the economy encountered a much deeper-than-expected recession with exceptionally high unemployment,” the report stated.

And, Agence France-Presse points out,

The IMF’s mea culpa came in the wake of an earlier admission that the troika’s push for tough austerity to radically reduce Athens’ deficit was based on poor assumptions that have left the country in a protracted recession.

In Athens, according to the Guardian,  

officials reacted with barely disguised glee to the report, saying it confirmed that the price exacted for the €110bn (£93bn) emergency package was too high for a country beset by massive debts, tax evasion and a large black economy.”

Under the weight of such measures — applied across the board and hitting the poorest hardest — the economy, they said, was always bound to dive into an economic death spiral.

“For too long they [troika officials] refused to accept that the program was simply off-target by hiding behind our failure to implement structural reforms,” said one insider. “Now that reforms are being applied they’ve had to accept the bitter truth.” 

“Let’s not fool ourselves. They’ll never give us anything back. I’m sorry for all the people who killed themselves because of austerity. How are we going to bring them back? How?”Reuters reports that for many Greeks, the IMF’s mea culpa is too little, too late:

Greeks reacted with a mix of vindication and outrage at the International Monetary Fund’s admission it erred in its handling of the country’s bailout, berating an apology that comes too late to salvage an economy and countless lives in ruins.

Anger was palpable on the streets of Athens, where the EU-IMF austerity recipe that the Washington-based fund says it sharply misjudged has left rows of shuttered stores and many scrounging for scraps of food in trash cans.

“Really? Thanks for letting us know but we can’t forgive you,” said Apostolos Trikalinos, a 59-year old garbage collector and a father of two.

“Let’s not fool ourselves. They’ll never give us anything back. I’m sorry for all the people who killed themselves because of austerity. How are we going to bring them back? How?” […]

“It makes it easier for the Greek government to say ‘slow down all on these measures’ that have led to six years of recession and record high unemployment,” said Theodore Couloumbis from the ELIAMEP foreign policy think-tank.

Greece’s unemployment is at 26.8 percent, and suicides have increased 26 percent in the last year.

Mere hours after the IMF’s report, the European Commission shot back and defended the way the Greek bailout was handled. “We fundamentally disagree” with the IMF report, European Commission spokesman Simon O’Connor said, adding that “the reform program is on track and there are growing signs of stabilization and increasing confidence in Greece.”

_________________________

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

This article originally appeared on: Common Dreams

Bilderberg Day 1: Rare Photos of VIP’s and Police Surveillance of Demonstrators

0

While some media personalities are chasing their own digital shadow at this year’s Bilderberg, other more inquisitive journalists haven’t forgotten why they are there and have thus positioned themselves in the right places in order to capture the rare images that activists crave most — of VIP’s making their way in secret into this year’s globalist meeting in Watford, England…

The UK’s Liberty Tactics team includes Lou Collins and James Britpod, alongside the UK Column and 21st Century Wire reporters on the ground at the Grove Hotel. We are currently waiting for some IDs on some of the Bilderberg members pictured in these images below:


PHOTO 1: ID of this guest is TBC…


PHOTO 2: Can you ID this woman?


PHOTO 3: Bilberbergers wait between meetings, complete with portfolios and lanyards . ID TBC…


PHOTO 4: Tinted windows are the order of the day — judging by the low position in the seat, could this be a hunching Henry Kissenger?


PHOTO 5: Can you tell us who this VIP is (above)?


PHOTO 6: VIPs in the lay-by waiting for clearance to enter grounds…


PHOTO 7: Police trying to hide in the bushes, inconspicuously raising their 40 ft high CCTV surveillance periscopes.


PHOTO 8: UK Column’s Brian Gerrish speaks with Herfordshire police on the edge of the Grove Hotel grounds.


PHOTO 9: Police on mountain bikes trying to blend in…


PHOTO 10: Police on horseback, going for a gallop in the bushy heath…


PHOTO: This more or less sums the entire basis of Bilderberg members’ ability to buy power on the cheap.

This article originally appeared on: Global Research

Russia urges Iran presence in Syria talks

0

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov says Moscow will continue to push for Iranâ„¢s participation in the upcoming international conference on Syria despite opposition from some Western states.

During a Thursday press conference, the Russian foreign minister promised that his country will keep pressing to include all influential parties, including Iran, in the forthcoming talks which are expected to be held in Geneva.

Å“At the current stage our partners have been quite outspoken and critical about Iranâ„¢s participation,” Lavrov said before adding, Å“We think they are mistaken.”

On Wednesday, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov pointed to the United States’ opposition to inviting the Islamic Republic to the Syria conference and said that Iranâ„¢s absence in the Geneva 1 talks last summer Å“was a mistake and it should not be repeated.”

Bogdanovâ„¢s remarks followed a trilateral meeting in Geneva among UN-Arab League Joint Special Representative for Syria Lakhdar Brahimi; Russian deputy foreign ministers, Gennady Gatilov and Bogdanov; and US Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Wendy Sherman.

After the preparatory talks, Brahimi told reporters that the senior diplomats had failed to set a date for the Geneva 2 talks but expressed hope that the conference would convene in July.

Also late last month, Lavrov had stressed the necessity of Tehranâ„¢s presence in the upcoming Geneva talks, saying, Å“The issue of Iran is key for us. Iran, without question, is one of the most important nations.”

Foreign-sponsored militancy in Syria, which erupted in March 2011, has claimed the lives of many people, including large numbers of Syrian soldiers and security personnel.

MKA/SS/HMV

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Youth power can fix Iran economy: Jalili

0

Iranian presidential candidate Saeed Jalili says the next administration can fix the economic problems by involving the youth in the industrial and agricultural sectors.

During a tour of rural areas in Isfahan Province on Thursday, Jalili underlined the significance of using the potentialities of Iranâ„¢s young generation, particularly in industry and agriculture, to deal with the economic problems facing the country.

Å“We should make use of the youthsâ„¢ capacities in different sectors, including economy, agriculture and production, in order to solve the economic problems,” said the secretary of Iranâ„¢s Supreme National Security Council.

He added that the Islamic Republic stood up to the enemy during the 1980â„¢s eight-year Iraqi imposed war thanks to the sacrifices made by its youths.

Stressing that Iran needs to defuse all threats and make further progress, the principlist candidate said the same spirit and capacity that defeated the invading army of Iraq is now capable of building the economy and solving Iranâ„¢s economic issues.

Jalili currently faces seven rivals in the upcoming presidential election, namely former Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati, lawmaker Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, Secretary of the Expediency Council Mohsen Rezaei, Tehran Mayor Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, President of the Center for Strategic Research of the Expediency Council Hassan Rohani, former First Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref, and former Telecommunications Minister Mohammad Gharazi.

Iranians will go to the polls on June 14 to elect the countryâ„¢s 11th president.

Nearly 50.5 million Iranians are eligible to vote in the upcoming presidential election, with more than 1.6 million first-time voters.

AR/MKA/SS/HMV

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Hedge Funds and the Death of the Peasant Landowner

0

When I was growing up, relatives talked incessantly about retirement, which generally meant going to live with a daughter and her family. When social security kicked in some older relatives became more independent especially those who had bought a home and paid off it. They could rent out a room or two to a close friend.

The ideal, however, was to own one or two houses that could be rented out. That was the Mexicans’ Individual Retirement Account (IRA) only better because they did not have to pay an agent or be at the whim of the stock market. The best part of it was that the houses were paid for by the rents.

The lessons I learned from my relatives kept me alive during the summers after I became a school teacher. Teaching paid under $3,000 a year — paid over ten months; they took out for retirement, taxes and other annoyances. So you had to hustle a job during the summer; the alternatives were to go into debt or starve. I would save $200 and every summer buy a fixer up, which I would sell later to finance the following summer’s venture and pay the household expenses for my family.

If I would have kept this up, I could have wound up with ten to 20 houses. They were cheap at the time — cost $8,000 to $10,000 — no money down. However, priorities are set by your values. I gave the houses away in a divorce settlement, and turned to more productive pursuits.  I thought that I would die young; I didn’t like being a peasant landlord; and I expected my children to have the same opportunities that I had.

The times changed, and today it is the exception that can buy a house let alone two or three houses, and expect to live off the rents. I once had an IRA, but about 2003 I lost all $40,000 of it. This was not an aberration; many of my relatives’ children met the same fate. It almost seems comical because at the time George W. Bush was leading the chorus calling for the privatization of social security.

I am not an economist; I am a historian; and I had fully expected the housing market to correct itself. During speculative years of the 1920s, housing prices soared, but were corrected by the crash of the Depression of the 30s and the Neal Deal. Working class people could afford homes, if they had a job. The cost of housing rose above my relatives means, and during the housing boom they could not afford a second home. That was good and bad, and people were satisfied that the home they owned increased in value.

The FHA and the GI Bill made houses more accessible, but they also inflated prices. There was a slight rise in housing costs during the 1950s, with a correction during the 60s and 70s. By the 1980s, a boom again made buying that extra home more difficult.

In the LA area prices came down briefly only to jump up again in the latter part of the decade. In the 90s, the patron saint of the working class William Jefferson Clinton ended the regulatory acts of the 30s, and that ended ability of the housing market to correct itself, making the housing bubbles of the first decade of the 21st Century inevitable.

When the Depression of 2008 came about I looked for a silver lining. I hoped that prices of homes would come tumbling down, and maybe my relatives’ grandchildren could walk away from the inflated prices they had to pay for their homes during the decade of the bubbles.

Many had paid $450,000 for homes in marginal neighborhoods, which seemed a bit excessive — especially when the value of that home fell to $275,000. There was no way my relatives could keep making those house payments, or much less buy an extra home for retirement.

Many of us gave Presidents George Bush and Barack Obama passes when they gave bailouts to the Wall Street and the banks. Perhaps because we hoped that the bankers and the corporate elite would use the money for the common good.  But like they used to say when I was in the army, “Never happen G.I.”

Looking back, I am not as naïve as I once was, and I have ceased to believe in fairy tales. There will be no recovery at least not in the same way there was when I was a kid. Age has taught me that I have to wake up and accept the nightmare, and just maybe if I would have understood it then my grandchildren and those of my relatives would have something to look forward to. They would not be held captive by the managers of IRA-like funds.

What finally burst my bubble though was the rise of the hedge funds, which are today for all intents and purposes in control of government.

I have known this for some time but have been in denial. However, I recently read a series of articles in a community newspaper called Tribuno del Pueblo on the takeover of the family housing market by the super rich.  It wrote that this was organized by the largest bankers and hedge-fund operators that have seized control of Fannie and Freddie Mae grabbed half the nation’s mortgages and some 200,000 homes.

“The hedge-fund speculators who are buying up hundreds and thousands of houses in foreclosures and short sales are right when they say that this is ‘the new face of real estate.’” Rounding off the collusion between the speculators and government, the Obama administration is selling off tax liens to the former the super-rich — why not Obama’s appointments come from this class.

It is a new age and there is no room for the peasant landlord of my father’s times. We don’t have the capital to compete.

Recently a friend was trying to buy his first home. He followed the newspaper ads hoping to buy a foreclosure.  The brokers refused his multiple bids on foreclosed residential homes. They tried to sell him “for sale” homes that had already been bid up above the asking price. Probing around he learned that the broker had reserved the foreclosed house for a local politician who he represented at auction.

Well, there are those who are forever blowing bubbles. They are dreaming for the days that they could buy a home as an investment for old age and then pass it on to their children or grandchildren. But the truth is that those are only dreams, and today we are living the nightmare.

RODOLFO ACUÑA, a professor emeritus at California State University Northridge, has published 20 books and over 200 public and scholarly articles. He is the founding chair of the first Chicano Studies Dept which today offers 166 sections per semester in Chicano Studies. His history book Occupied America has been banned in Arizona. In solidarity with Mexican Americans in Tucson, he has organized fundraisers and support groups to ground zero and written over two dozen articles exposing efforts there to nullify the U.S. Constitution.

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

Dept. of Homeland Security: Laptops, Phones Can Be Searched Based on Hunches

0

cbslocal.com
June 6, 2013

U.S. border agents should continue to be allowed to search a traveler’s laptop, cellphone or other electronic device and keep copies of any data on them based on no more than a hunch, according to an internal Homeland Security Department study. It contends limiting such searches would prevent the U.S. from detecting child pornographers or terrorists and expose the government to lawsuits.

The 23-page report, obtained by The Associated Press and the American Civil Liberties Union under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act, provides a rare glimpse of the Obama administration’s thinking on the long-standing but controversial practice of border agents and immigration officers searching and in some cases holding for weeks or months the digital devices of anyone trying to enter the U.S.

Since his election, President Barack Obama has taken an expansive view of legal authorities in the name of national security, asserting that he can order the deaths of U.S. citizens abroad who are suspected of terrorism without involvement by courts, investigate reporters as criminals and – in this case – read and copy the contents of computers carried by U.S. travelers without a good reason to suspect wrongdoing.

Read more

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 12:24 pm

Tags: , , , ,






<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Scientists Find Holes in Monsanto GM Wheat Denial

0

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

(AP Photo/Boris Grdanoski)(Photo: Boris Grdanoski AP)

[field_image_caption-raw]

read more

This article originally appeared on: Common Dreams

Scientists Find Holes in Monsanto GM Wheat Denial

0

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

(AP Photo/Boris Grdanoski)(Photo: Boris Grdanoski AP)

[field_image_caption-raw]

read more

This article originally appeared on: Common Dreams

IMF's Mea Culpa on Austerity Met With Anger, Vindication in Greece

0

(Photo: Popicinio/cc/flickr)In a vindication of those who challenged the harsh austerity conditions, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) issued a report on Wednesday acknowledging that “notable failures” were made in its bailout to Greece. But the admission is too little, too late for many Greeks who have suffered “an economic death spiral” at the hands of the crushing austerity policies dealt by the troika.

The New York Times reports:

The International Monetary Fund released an internal report on Wednesday that sharply criticizes its first bailout program for Greece, the latest in a series of partial mea culpas as the fund reassesses the austerity that it has insisted on for ailing, debt-plagued economies.

The 50-page report, titled “Greece: Ex Post Evaluation of Exceptional Access Under the 2010 Stand-By Arrangement,” acknowledges major mistakes in Greece’s first bailout, which totaled about $143 billion and came into effect in 2010. The fund bent or broke three out of four of its own rules with the lending program, the report concludes. It also seriously underestimated the severity of Greece’s downturn.

Under the weight of such measures — applied across the board and hitting the poorest hardest — the economy, officials in Athens said, was always bound to dive into an economic death spiral.

“There were also notable failures. Market confidence was not restored, the banking system lost 30 percent of its deposits, and the economy encountered a much deeper-than-expected recession with exceptionally high unemployment,” the report stated.

And, Agence France-Presse points out,

The IMF’s mea culpa came in the wake of an earlier admission that the troika’s push for tough austerity to radically reduce Athens’ deficit was based on poor assumptions that have left the country in a protracted recession.

In Athens, according to the Guardian,  

officials reacted with barely disguised glee to the report, saying it confirmed that the price exacted for the €110bn (£93bn) emergency package was too high for a country beset by massive debts, tax evasion and a large black economy.”

Under the weight of such measures — applied across the board and hitting the poorest hardest — the economy, they said, was always bound to dive into an economic death spiral.

“For too long they [troika officials] refused to accept that the program was simply off-target by hiding behind our failure to implement structural reforms,” said one insider. “Now that reforms are being applied they’ve had to accept the bitter truth.” 

“Let’s not fool ourselves. They’ll never give us anything back. I’m sorry for all the people who killed themselves because of austerity. How are we going to bring them back? How?”Reuters reports that for many Greeks, the IMF’s mea culpa is too little, too late:

Greeks reacted with a mix of vindication and outrage at the International Monetary Fund’s admission it erred in its handling of the country’s bailout, berating an apology that comes too late to salvage an economy and countless lives in ruins.

Anger was palpable on the streets of Athens, where the EU-IMF austerity recipe that the Washington-based fund says it sharply misjudged has left rows of shuttered stores and many scrounging for scraps of food in trash cans.

“Really? Thanks for letting us know but we can’t forgive you,” said Apostolos Trikalinos, a 59-year old garbage collector and a father of two.

“Let’s not fool ourselves. They’ll never give us anything back. I’m sorry for all the people who killed themselves because of austerity. How are we going to bring them back? How?” […]

“It makes it easier for the Greek government to say ‘slow down all on these measures’ that have led to six years of recession and record high unemployment,” said Theodore Couloumbis from the ELIAMEP foreign policy think-tank.

Greece’s unemployment is at 26.8 percent, and suicides have increased 26 percent in the last year.

Mere hours after the IMF’s report, the European Commission shot back and defended the way the Greek bailout was handled. “We fundamentally disagree” with the IMF report, European Commission spokesman Simon O’Connor said, adding that “the reform program is on track and there are growing signs of stabilization and increasing confidence in Greece.”

_________________________

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

This article originally appeared on: Common Dreams

Bilderberg 2013: Live Updates

0

138 members of the global elite are meeting in Watford, England for the 61st Bilderberg Conference, with protesters from around the globe flocking the town to say ‘no’ to the rich and wealthy ‘deciding the planet’s fate over coffee’.

13:30 GMT: US radio host, Alex Jones, is in Watford to
cover the Bilderberg Conference play-by-play.

16:02 GMT: Traditionally, thousands of protesters from
around the world are flocking to Watford to say ‘no’ to
the rich and wealthy shaping the planet’s future.  

Security has been tightened around the town, with a no-fly zone
enacted over the Bilderberg meeting and concrete and wire
barriers surrounding the 300-acre premises of the Grove hotel.

Image from twitter.com @Lukewearechange
15:51 GMT: The Bilderberg Group, long criticized for a
lack of transparency, has this time revealed some of the main
topics of the upcoming meeting, with cyber warfare, US foreign
policy, “developments in the Middle East” and “Africa’s
challenges”
expected to be on the agenda.

15:40 GMT: RT starts live updates from the 61st Bilderberg
meeting, which is taking place at the 5-star Grove hotel in the
English city of Watford on June 8-9.

The 138 members of the global elite — politicians, bank bosses,
billionaires, chief executives and European royalty — get
together annually to discuss the most pressing issues in global
politics and economics.

This article originally appeared on: RT

German defense min. faces calls to quit

0

File photo shows a German unmanned Euro Hawk drone landing.

German Defense Minister Thomas de Maiziere is facing calls to step down for squandering 600 million euros on a drone project, Press TV reports.

Since de Maiziere cancelled the project on May 14, he has appeared before several parliamentary committees in Berlin to explain why his ministry spent such a large amount of money before calling off the purchase of surveillance drones.

The opposition has accused de Maiziere of wasting funds by not acting earlier.

The plan was cancelled since the drone lacked the anti-collision systems required for approval by European aviation authorities.

Germany had decided to buy US-made drones from Northrop Grumman.

The surveillance drones were planned to be equipped with special signal interception devices and then renamed Euro Hawk.

On Monday, de Maiziere is to be questioned again in a special session of the parliamentary budgeting committee.

The scandal deals a blow to the ruling coalition as de Maiziere is regarded as one of the closest allies of Chancellor Angela Merkel.

CAH/KA

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Lindsey Graham Isn’t Sure If Bloggers Deserve ‘First Amendment Protection’

0

Brian Fung
nationaljournal.com
June 6, 2013

Whether bloggers count as journalists has mostly been a matter of esoterics for reporter types. But as Congress weighs a media shield law in response to the Associated Press/Justice Department subpoena scandal, the question is gaining an urgency that lawmakers are finding hard to ignore as they turn to writing the bill.

Speaking to reporters Tuesday, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., took on the issue–and stumbled.

“Who is a journalist is a question we need to ask ourselves,” he said. “Is any blogger out there saying anything–do they deserve First Amendment protection? These are the issues of our times.”

Read more

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 12:00 pm

Tags: ,






<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Syria retakes key Golan Heights crossing

0

Syrian army troops have established their control over a key crossing in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights shortly after it fell into the hands of foreign-backed militants.

On Thursday, Syrian forces liberated the Quneitra Crossing – situated between Syria and the Golan Heights – after heavy clashes with anti-government gunmen.

Earlier in the day, Israeli media reported that foreign-backed militants had seized the crossing.

Meanwhile, Austria has announced that it will withdraw its peacekeepers from the UN monitoring force on the Golan Heights in wake of ongoing battles in the area.

Austrians account for about 380 of the 1,000-strong United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF), and their departure will deal a serious blow to the mission.

Israel captured the Golan Heights from Syria during the Six-Day War of 1967, when it also took control of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

It annexed the Golan Heights in 1981, although the move was never recognized by the international community and was a violation of international law.

The Israeli regime has used various means to help the foreign-sponsored militants in Syria, including the provision of medical assistance.

The Syrian troops have also recaptured the town of al-Dabaâ„¢a, north of Qusayr, which they liberated on Wednesday following three weeks of fighting with the militants. Qusayr had been an important center and supply route for the foreign-sponsored militants fighting against the Damascus government.

Syria has been gripped by a deadly unrest since March 2011, and many people, including large numbers of government forces, have been killed in the violence.

Damascus says the chaos is being orchestrated from outside the country, and there are reports that a very large number of the militants are foreign nationals.

MP/KA/HMV

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Afghanistan alarmed by civilian deaths

0

A child stands at the site of a car bomb explosion in Laghman Province, Afghanistan. (File photo)

The chief of the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) has voiced her concerns over the recent surge in violence against civilians across the war-ravaged country, Press TV reports.

Sima Samar told reporters in western Herat Province that deadly attacks have killed at least 366 people in the first two months of 2013.

The figures show an increase of over ten percent from a year ago.

Samar also called on warring parties to stay away from civilian areas.

Taliban attacks and clashes between the militants and foreign forces have claimed the lives of many civilians over the past years.

Many civilians have also lost their lives in US-led operations in various parts of Afghanistan over the past decade, with Afghans becoming increasingly outraged at the seemingly endless number of the deadly assaults.

The US-led war in Afghanistan, which has caused record-high civilian and military casualties, has become the longest military conflict in the American history.

FKO/JR/KA

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

‘US enshrouds Manning trial in secrecy’

0

The United States maintains a policy of secrecy on its trial of US Army whistleblower Bradley Manning, a peace activist says.

Å“To constantly label every piece of information on a government level as ËœTOP SECRETâ„¢ or higher is totally ridiculous. We have a government that once embarked on that path, would leave one to believe that they have a lot to hide,” Bill Gilian, president of the New York chapter of Veterans for Peace, told Press TV in an interview.

Although US officials have consistently cited national security, Washington has clearly chosen which side it stands when it comes to whistleblowers regardless of their intention to expose crimes to the public.

Å“I think thereâ„¢s a chilling message here beyond Bradley, as bad as that may seem. Even letâ„¢s say if the government does not seek the death penalty and we go with life imprisonment, I think that is sheer overkill. But what it does beyond that, it sends a message to all within the military and in the United States government that whistleblowers and truth tellers will be prosecuted,” said Gilian.

Numerous news organizations and human rights groups including the Center for Constitutional Rights, Wikileaks founder Julian Assange and a handful of journalists have challenged the extent of lack of public access to the Manning trial.

Å“If we look at the history of this administration since 2008, itâ„¢s abominable when it comes to prosecution and persecuting whistleblowers in the military and in government in particular,” Gilian stated.

The trial of the 25-year-old began at Fort Meade military base in the State of Maryland on June 3 over charges of espionage and dozens of other offenses.

Manning admitted to passing sensitive information regarding military field reports and US diplomatic cables to the whistleblower website WikiLeaks in an effort to start a debate on the role of the US military and foreign policy including its Å“bloodlust” and disregard for human life in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The overall charges may land Manning with a court-martial and a life-imprisonment sentence.

Protests have been held in the United States and other countries including Canada, France, Germany and South Korea against the negative portrayal of Manningâ„¢s case by American media and politicians.

GMA/KA

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Students suspended for using Nerf guns at school

0

Tracy Vedder
komonews.com
June 6, 2013

A number of Edmonds school kids were recently suspended for having Nerf guns at school.

That’s not surprising considering the school’s “zero tolerance” policy on toy guns, but what is surprising is that the teacher allegedly told the kids it was okay to have the guns.

Now the kids’ parents want to know why their children were punished if the teacher gave permission for the guns.

Read more

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 11:30 am

Tags:






<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Yes, We Do Have A Right To Know What’s Going On At Bilderberg

0

Donna Anderson
Infowars.com
June 6, 2013

Search Google News for Bilderberg coverage right now and you won’t see much from the mainstream media, even though it’s happening right now. Why? Because they buy into the idea set forth by the rich and powerful Bilderberg members that it’s a private party, nothing to see here, move along. But the discussions that occur at the Bilderberg round table shape corporate and government policies all over the world, therefore every person on the planet has a right to know what’s going on.

You’d have to do a lot of digging to find recent examples, like this, this and this, but over the years the mainstream media has occasionally lowered itself to report on the annual Bilderberg meetings, or at least acknowledge the Group exists. Generally, when they do, it’s to thumb their noses at members of the alternative media, because, well, that’s what they’re paid to do. They’re not paid to think or form opinions. They’re just paid to be parrots.

The general consensus among the mainstreamers, and even some of the alternatives, is that the Bilderberg shindig is a private party and as such, it’s none of our business what they discuss. If they don’t want to share their meeting notes with us that’s fine, but it certainly doesn’t mean they’re up to no good.

But, from the very first Bilderberg meeting in 1954, their secrecy has not been acceptable. In fact, it’s not even legal.

Article 2, Section 2, Clause 2, of the United States Constitution states:

“He (the President) shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur.”

Many Americans think, when they hear the word “treaty,” that it means a formal agreement of peace between two warring parties. But “treaty” is a much broader term which means, “A formal agreement between two parties in reference to peace, alliance, commerce or other relations.”

The Constitution limited the President’s power to make any kind of treaty or agreement on behalf of the country, regardless of how well-informed or “well-intentioned” that agreement was. But the Logan Act of 1799, took an even broader approach. According to the Logan Act, no citizen of the United States could discuss US business or problems with another country with the intent to influence the national policy of either country.

“Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.”

The Bilderberg guest list is made up of political leaders and experts in the fields of commerce, finance, science, and academia. That alone should be enough to convince anyone that this meeting isn’t just your run-of-the-mill garden party. But the fact that they’ve published an agenda that covers everything from US foreign policy to Middle East Developments, to Nationalism and populism clearly signals these people are serious — about something.

As their website states, and as the mainstream media is quick to remind us, the purpose of the Bilderberg meetings is so members can “take time to listen, reflect, and gather insights,” and “There is no detailed agenda, no resolutions are proposed, no votes are taken, and no policy statements are issued.”

But it’s naïve to assume that the national policies of every country in the world haven’t been influenced one iota by the Bilderberg group. No group of people, not your average American citizens and not even the Elite, gathers, discusses, and then goes their merry way. Someone is always somehow influenced to take some type of action.

In “The Wealth of Nations,” Adam Smith wrote, “People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public.”

And, as Kurt Nimmo of Infowars wrote, way back in 2008, “I’d have to say those who believe kings, queens, princes, chancellors, prime ministers, presidents, ambassadors, secretaries of state, Wall Street investors, international bankers, news media executives, CEOs of transnational corporations, et al, get together annually to simply and idly engage in informal discussion without seeking to “reach a consensus on the big issues,” as Bilderberg founder and former British Chancellor of the Exchequer Denis Healey once put it, are naive in extremis. Of course the members of Bilderberg wish to reach a consensus. And what is that consensus? Nothing less than the establishment of a world government.”

At the very least, every U.S. representative who’s ever attended a Bilderberg meeting has been in clear violation of the Logan Act. Therefore, the American people, have a right to know what’s going on behind those closed doors.

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

NY Senate passes Bill that would make annoying a cop a felony

0

Bill would basically allow police to arrest based on their own subjective impulses

Adan Salazar
Infowars.com
June 6, 2013

Lawmakers in New York may have jumped the shark with their latest police protection bill.

New York Senate Bill 2402 would effectively make it a class E felony to “annoy” so-called peace officers.

The bill, in part, reads:

A PERSON IS GUILTY OF AGGRAVATED HARASSMENT OF A POLICE OFFICER OR PEACE OFFICER WHEN, WITH THE INTENT TO HARASS, ANNOY, THREATEN OR ALARM A PERSON WHOM HE OR SHE KNOWS OR REASONABLY SHOULD KNOW TO BE A POLICE OFFICER OR PEACE OFFICER ENGAGED IN THE COURSE OF PERFORMING HIS OR HER OFFICIAL DUTIES, HE OR SHE STRIKES, SHOVES, KICKS OR OTHERWISE SUBJECTS SUCH PERSON TO PHYSICAL CONTACT.

According to WIVB, Sen. Joe Griffo, one of the original sponsors of the bill, defended it and the all-important police state arguing, “Police officers who risk their lives every day in our cities and on our highways deserve every possible protection, and those who treat them with disrespect, harass them and create situations that can lead to injuries deserve to pay a price for their actions.”

Besides the otherwise lame attempt to justify a bill that in essence gives police free rein, there is no actual explanation given for creating such a bill.

If signed into law, offenders would be subjected to the same penalties as other class E felonies like “placing a false bomb or hazardous substance” in a public place, and “riot in the first degree.” This is the lowest felony charge in New York, but can still carry a penalty of up to 4 years imprisonment, depending on the judge’s decision.

Given the fact that police almost universally disapprove of those who dare film them, little effort is needed to imagine them citing the bill as justification for their arrest of citizen journalists like We Are Change’s Luke Rudkowski, who routinely gets into verbal confrontations with police, or our own intrepid Infowars reporter Dan Bidondi, who it could be argued “harassed” authorities at the Boston Marathon press conferences.

In addition, the bill virtually welcomes and protects police who would provoke citizens into any kind of verbal spat, as, under the vague language of the bill, any “harassment,” verbal or not, can be deemed unlawful.

RT also noted the example of New York homeowner Emily Good, who was arrested by police in Rochester “while standing in her yard and videotaping police officers who were performing a traffic stop in front of her house.”

“When Good insisted on her right to stand in her yard, she was arrested, handcuffed, and taken away in a police car. She was later charged with obstructing governmental administration.” Police told Good they didn’t feel safe with her standing behind them recording.

Recently we also witnessed a 14-year-old in Florida get slammed to the ground and put in a choke hold for what amounted to little more than throwing police “dehumanizing stares.”

In essence, the bill, if passed, would allow police to arrest according to their own subjective impulses.

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 10:01 am

Tags: ,






<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Susan Rice, Power and Empire

0

What comes close to an imperial formula, but pretends to be something else? President Barack Obama’s distillation of it, a version where violence is carefully projected, directed and rendered, to use that ghastly term from international relations speak, “soft”. A bit of killing must be done, but generally speaking, the world’s citizens will still wish they could muster an American in their vitals to come forth and take the stand for Uncle Sam. The appointment of Susan E. Rice to the position of national security advisor exemplifies this.

This is a punch padded by the velvet glove, though that particular item is fraying. On announcing Rice’s appointment, the President outlined a few of his reasons which had the rancid smell of empire. “With her background as a scholar, Susan understands that there’s no substitute for American leadership.” Start the beat of the tom-toms. “She is at once passionate and pragmatic. I think everybody understands Susan is a fierce champion for justice and human dignity, but she’s mindful that we have to exercise our power wisely and deliberately.”

Rice had been sabotaged as an appointment to the position of US Ambassador to the UN after Republicans pounced on her incorrect assertions that the Benghazi affair had been a result of protests against a YouTube video. That hardly mattered, despite Senator Lindsey Graham’s assertions that Rice proved to be “an essential player in the Benghazi debacle.”

Powerful positions in US politics tend to be unelected, a curious anomaly for a democracy, but one typical of a heaving republic drunk on power. The Secretary of State has become increasingly irrelevant. John Kerry seems very much a ceremonial bauble, while individuals like outgoing national security advisor Tim Donilon have gone about the business of negotiating such gatherings as the upcoming California meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

It was the aggressive, sometimes bullying Donilon who moved the wheels of American empire more towards Asia, with a “wind down”, as opposed to the more defeatist appellation “withdrawal”, of US forces in Afghanistan and Iraq. And, along with John Brennan, he has played a significant role in the shadow wars of counter-terrorism.

Such is the language of brute force, one that is always premised with the hope that temporal and overwhelming power be “exercised wisely”. The unfortunate feature of that is that those with it tend to misbehave. The corollary of imperialism is mischief, and the Obama administration is far from averse from it. While Bush Jr. stormed his way through like a mentally challenged thug breaking the family china, Obama has given the same behaviour a smoother accent. As with so much in politics, it all comes down to the manner of delivery.

With Rice coming in, and Donilon moving out, we have a significantly noisy shuffle in the security ranks behind Obama. The humanitarian misfits are moving in. Samantha Power, whose own humanitarian flag is about to flutter before global delegates, is moving into the position Rice occupied. Obama on Power: “She knows the U.N.’s strengths. She knows its weaknesses.” Read: She knows how it can be subverted, knows how it can be bypassed. But wait, Obama offers a counter to that assertion. “She knows that American interests are advanced when we can rally the world to our side.” Let’s leave aside the fact that many states are quite happy not to be rallied, thank you very much.

It did not take long for the neoconservative largesse to come Power’s way. More than Rice, Power is one of the trumpeters of the interventionist doctrine, something she set out most clearly in A Problem from Hell. There, she portrayed Washington’s inertia in the face of possibilities to correct and prevent matters of genocide, more or less suggesting that global police power be exercised under the auspices of US control.

“Power is a good pick because she is a very capable and principled advocate of humanitarian intervention,” suggested an almost swooning senior fellow at the Council of Foreign Relations Max Boot (The Cable, Jun 5). Dismayed as Boot was at Obama’s indifference to intervening in the Syrian bloodbath, he was pleased about the appointment. “I think it’s obvious that Samantha has had a meteoric rise due to her great work as a journalist and advocate of humanitarian intervention.”

What is running in the waters of Washington at the moment must be infectious. Power has similarly received praise from John McCain (R-Az) and Joe Lieberman who claimed that she was “more personally interventionist” in her writings “as a matter of American foreign policy based on human rights than this administration has been.” Peter Yeo of the Better World Campaign has made the puzzling assertion that, as “neoconservative intellectuals have always been interested in the subject of civilian protection”, Power would be regarded as a naturally attractive choice (The Cable, Jun 5). That neoconservative doctrine only regards civilians as the bolster for broader assertions of power is something that even many human rights watchers miss.

Expect exertions of force justified by the high minded tones of humanitarianism, as fine a trick in international relations as any. We can only wish, as Albert Camus did, for the rake that doesn’t kill to the high-minded puritan who happily does so.

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

The Onslaught in Burma Continues

0

On April 21, the BBC obtained disturbing video footage shot in Burma. It confirmed extreme reports of what has been taking place in that country, even as it is being touted by the US and European governments as a success story pertaining to political reforms and democracy.

The BBC footage was difficult to watch even when faces of Muslim Rohingya victims were blurred. To say the least, the level of violence exhibited by their Arakan Buddhist attackers was frightening. “The Burmese police (stood) by as shops, homes and mosques are looted and burnt, and failing to intervene as Buddhist mobs, including monks, kill fleeing Muslims,” the BBC reported. A Rohingya man was set ablaze while still alive. The police watched.

To some extent, international media is finally noticing the plight of the Rohingyas who are experiencing what can only be described as genocide. And there are reasons for this. On one hand, the atrocities being carried out by the Burmese state, local police and mobs belonging to nationalist Buddhist groups in the northwestern Arakan State, are unambiguous attempts at removing all Rohingyas from Burma. The Rohingya numbers currently hover between 800,000 and one million. On the other hand, Burma (also known as Myanmar) has, as of late, been placed in the limelight for the wrong reasons — thanks in part to western governments breaking the political and economic siege of the country’s decades-long military dictatorship.

While the ‘new Burma’ is being rebranded in a new positive discourse in order to open Rangoon up for foreign investments and steer it way from growing Chinese influence, western governments are deliberately ignoring the fact that a human rights crisis of unprecedented proportions is taking place. This all being done with the active involvement and encouragement of the government.

In the eyes of many in Burma, the Rohingyas are considered subhumans, and are treated as such. Most Rohingya Muslims are native to the state of “Rohang” — also known as Rakhine or Arakan. The majority of them live in very poor townships — mainly Buthidaung and Maungdaw — in the northwestern part of Arakan, or live in refugee camps. Their population subsists between the nightmare of having no legal status (as they are still denied citizenship), little or no rights and the ethnic purges carried out by their neighbors. The worst of such violence in recent years took place between June and October 2012. However, the onslaught targeting Rohingyas is resurfacing and spreading. This time around the intensity and the parameters of violence grew to include other Muslim minority groups in the country.

The BBC footage is not only revealing in the sense that it confirmed the authorities’ complicity in the violence, but it also reflected the government’s general attitude towards this minority group, described by the UN as the ‘world’s most persecuted people’. Responding to the outcry against his country’s brutal treatment of its minorities, Burmese President Then Sein made an ‘offer’ to the UN last year where he was willing to send the Rohingyas “to any other country willing to accept them.”

This peculiar behavior by the Burmese government is problematic in more than one way. Rangoon doesn’t seem even slightly mindful of international humanitarian laws or simply wishes to ignore it altogether. Its legal frame of reference is hardly a reflection of a repented dictatorship. But what is even more dangerous is that Rangoon has been sending unmistakable messages to nationalist groups who are leading the ethnic purges, that their extremely violent behavior is in fact consistent with the central policies of their governments.

Groups like Human Rights Watch (HRW) have become markedly more outspoken regarding the violence against the Rohingya. To quell growing criticism, perhaps fearing a backlash in terms of lucrative business contracts, the Burmese government decided to investigate the ‘sectarian violence’ through a supposed independent commission. Its recommendations were as equally disturbing as the violence itself.

The government Inquiry Commission on the Sectarian Violence in Rakhine State, assembled last August, was composed of 27-members, all Arkanese Buddhists, none of them from the Rohingya minority. The long-awaited report on the violence finally emerged on April 29, 2013. Its major findings included concerns over “rapid population growth” among Rohingya and Kaman Muslims. Its recommendations compelled a swift response from local authorities that moved in to limit the birth rate of Muslim Rohingya in two large townships.

On May 26, Arakan State spokesperson Win Myaing told journalists that the findings of the commission were consistent with the 2005 law that limits birth rate among Roghingya Muslims to two children per family. That discriminatory law goes back to 1994 where severe marriage restrictions were imposed on the Rohingya community, requiring long and complicated procedures. The BBC said, “it is not clear how (the ‘two-child policy’) will be enforced.”

Regardless of what sort of mechanisms Burmese authorities plan to put in place to implement the ‘law’, limiting population growth of the Rohingya people, is an abhorrent principle in and of itself. It even compelled celebrated ‘democracy icon’ Aung San Suu Kyi to break her silence regarding the violence against Rohingyas, however, she carefully selected her language.

“It is not good to have such discrimination. And it is not in line with human rights either,” Suu Kyi told reporters, although “she could not confirm whether the policy was being implemented,” reported the BBC online on May 27.

Considering the level of violence directed at Rohingyas and the fact that more than 125,000 Rohingya have already been pushed into internally displaced camps, (tens of thousands more have already been forced to flee the country and are scattered in refugee camps throughout Southeast Asia) one can only imagine the kind of sinister plans which are being put into action, amid the deafening international silence.

In fact, ‘silence’ is an understatement, for following the early wave of devastating violence, European officials welcomed the country’s ‘measured response’ and spokesperson for the EU’s high representative on foreign affairs, Catherine Ashton, said on June 11: “We believe that the security forces are handling this difficult inter-communal violence in an appropriate way.”

Meanwhile, western countries led by the United States, are clamoring to divide the large Burmese economic cake amongst themselves. As Rohingya boats were floating (or sinking) in various waters, Burma’s President Sein met with Norway’s Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg in a ‘landmark’ visit in Oslo on February 26. Regarding the conflict in Arakan, Jens Stoltenberg unambiguously declared it to be an internal Burmese affair, reducing it to the most belittling statements. In regards to ‘disagreements’ over citizenship, he said, “we have encouraged dialogue, but we will not demand that Burma’s government give citizenship to the Rohingyas.” Moreover, to reward Sein for his supposedly bold democratic reforms, Norway took the lead by waving off nearly half of its debt and other countries followed suit, including Japan which dropped $3 billion last year.

Meanwhile, the Rohingyas are left to ponder their punishment for flouting one discriminatory law or another. “Fear of punishment under the two-child rule compel far too many Rohingya women to risk their lives and turn to desperate and dangerous measures to self-induce abortions,” Asia director at HRW, Brad Adams said in a report published May 28.

No words can suffice to describe the plight of the Rohingyas who are trying to survive an unprecedentedly violent ethnic purge, with support and complicity of the Burmese government and silence of the very western governments that never cease to preach democracy and human rights.

Matthew Smith is a researcher for HRW and author of the organization’s report, “All You Can Do is Pray”: Crimes Against Humanity and Ethnic Cleansing of Rohingya Muslims in Burma’s Arakan State.’ Concluding a commentary in CNN online, Smith wrote: “The world should not be blinded by the excitement of Myanmar’s political opening. Rohingya are paying for that approach with their lives.” Since then, more Rohingyas were killed, many more homes, mosques, shops and orphanages were burned to the ground and there has been no international uproar as of yet.

Ramzy Baroud is editor of PalestineChronicle.com. He is the author of The Second Palestinian Intifada: A Chronicle of a People’s Struggle  and  “My Father Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza’s Untold Story” (Pluto Press, London).

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

There is a War on Ordinary People and Feminists are Needed at the Front

0

As editor of the Daily Mail in 1970s and 80s, David English invented a newspaper for those urgently seeking membership of the English middle classes. Whether his readers ever achieved their ambitions was beside the point; their prejudices and illusions were reflected, often brilliantly. Women were central to his project. The Mail became “their” paper, boasting a new “media feminism” that subtly divided men and women into opposing camps and added a dash of moral panic.

This is now standard media practice. “Most weeks some lovely, caring berks tell me I am a man-hating witch,” wrote Suzanne Moore recently in the Guardian, “so let’s get it out there. Sometimes I am. The acceptable kind of suck-it-up feminism (I love men really!) is hard to sustain after yet more abuse stories… Do I think all men are rapists? No. Do I think all women can be raped. Yes?”

How quickly the broad brush of blame is applied to a rash of dreadful murder and kidnap cases. Throw in an abduction in Cleveland, Ohio, and the arrest of “yet another TV personality”; and, according to Cynthia Cockburn and Ann Oakley, this represents “the profound, extensive and costly problem of male sexual violence.”

Part of the problem, another commentator insinuates, is that men don’t care as much as women because they don’t use Twitter enough to express their abhorrence of rape and kidnap. This all adds up to a “crisis in masculinity” requiring men to join in a “conversation” about their social and moral deficiencies on terms already decided.

I am reminded of the elevation of Australian prime minister Julia Gillard to feminist hero following a speech she gave last October attacking Tony Abbott, the opposition leader, for his misogyny. Almost no one mentioned Gillard’s hypocrisy – her stripping of benefit from the poorest single parents, mostly women, her inhuman treatment of refugees, including the detention of children, and her campaign against stricken indigenous Australians, forcing them off their land in defiance of international law. Under her watch, more Australian soldiers have died in colonial wars than under any recent prime minister.

That Gillard might be an old-fashioned class warrior and militarist was not news. The same could be said of many of the “progressive” female Labour MPs who entered Westminster with the first Blair administration in 1997 and supported their leader’s almost immediate legislated attack on single mothers on benefit, and his numerous violent adventures abroad, notably the bloodbath in Iraq. Harriet Harman, a self-declared feminist and currently Labour’s deputy leader, comes to mind.

The problem with media-run “conversations” on gender is not merely the almost total absence of male participants, but the suppression of class. It is tempting to say real politics are missing, too, but bourgeois boundaries and prescriptions are real enough. Thus, gender, like race, can be presented in isolation. Class is a forbidden word; and gender subordinate to class is heresy. The Daily Mail model is built on this.

There is indeed a crisis among men — actually ordinary men and women — and it is not their masculinity that is to blame, but the neutering of any credible resistance to a sociopathic system now given the Orwellian title of “austerity”.

With honourable exceptions, the bourgeois media club relegates and distracts from the fact that a full-blooded class war is under way. Ask the women and men in Greece, Spain and Portugal who face Robocop police in defence of their right to basic decencies: jobs, education, medicine, even food. Ask the young people in state schools in Britain who have no hope of attending university; a recent survey found 11 to 16 year olds had “given up” because they knew their families could not afford higher education. Ask the family of Stephanie Bottrill, a disabled grandmother in the West Midlands, who took her own life in despair at the assault on housing benefit known as the “bedroom tax”.

The killers and kidnappers whose trials apparently require wall-to-wall voyeuristic coverage are no less violent and no less abusive of children than a government that drives people to suicide, that sends young soldiers to kill or have their legs blown off in Afghanistan and that arms and supports fanatics in Syria and Saudi Arabia.

In incisive articles published mostly on opendemocracy.net, Heather McRobie describes how simultaneous war and “austerity” policies have exacerbated all kinds of abuse, including domestic violence. She lists “the most pitiless decimations of the country’s social goods” — from cuts in public sector jobs to the closure of emergency hospital departments and domestic violence shelters and courts. “In media discussion of economic issues circa 2008,” she wrote, “women were largely Sex and the City caricatures of white prosperity, frivolity, recession-triggering over-spenders.” Behind these gender stereotypes lay the fake “empowering” of poor women in the United States. Persuaded to buy their own homes with rotten sub-prime mortgages, African-American women and their families fell into a chasm of debt. A report by United and Fair Economy, a non-profit group, estimates the total loss to Americans of colour who took out sub-prime loans as between $164bn and $213bn. Seven of Obama’s top Wall Street campaign donors profiteered from these juicy deals, as did the major British banks — until the “bubble” burst and their “toxic” debts were picked up taxpayers, and the poor.

The imposition of this criminal debt on ordinary people is a breathtaking scandal. Why has it not been challenged with any seriousness? Where is the political opposition? Class is your answer. The style may be different from that of the Tory toffs in power, but most Labour MPs are from the new bourgeoisie. This unrepresentative managerial and professional class exercises also power right across the trade union bureaucracy; and it dominates the media. Once again, it’s time to ask: whose side are you on?

For more information on John Pilger, please visit his website at www.johnpilger.com

This article originally appeared on: Global Research

How the Pentagon Removes Entire Peoples

0

If we think at all about our government’s military depopulating territory that it desires, we usually think of the long-ago replacement of native Americans with new settlements during the continental expansion of the United States westward.

Here in Virginia some of us are vaguely aware that back during the Great Depression poor people were evicted from their homes and their land where national parks were desired. But we distract and comfort ourselves with the notion that such matters are deep in the past.

Occasionally we notice that environmental disasters are displacing people, often poor people or marginalized people, from their homes. But these incidents seem like collateral damage rather than intentional ethnic cleansing.

If we’re aware of the 1,000 or so U.S. military bases standing today in some 175 foreign countries, we must realize that the land they occupy could serve some other purpose in the lives of those countries’ peoples. But surely those countries’ peoples are still there, still living – if perhaps slightly inconvenienced – in their countries.

Yet the fact is that the U.S. military has displaced and continues to displace for the construction of its bases the entire populations of villages and islands, in blatant violation of international law, basic human decency, and principles we like to tell each other we stand for. The United States also continues to deny displaced populations the right to return to their homelands.

At issue here are not the bombings or burnings of entire villages, which of course the United States engages in during its wars and its non-wars. Nor are we dealing here with the millions of refugees created by wars like those in Iraq and Afghanistan or by drone wars like the one in Pakistan. Rather, the following are cases of the intentional displacement of particular populations moved out of the way of base construction and left alive to struggle as refugees in exile.

In the Philippines, the United States built bases on land belonging to the indigenous Aetas people, who “ended up combing military trash to survive.”

During World War II the U.S. Navy seized the small Hawaiian island of Koho’alawe for a weapons testing range and ordered its inhabitants to leave. The island has been devastated.

In 1942, the Navy displaced Aleutian Islanders.

President Harry Truman made up his mind that the 170 native inhabitants of Bikini Atoll had no right to their island. He had them evicted in February and March of 1946, and dumped as refugees on other islands without means of support or a social structure in place. In the coming years, the United States would remove 147 people from Enewetak Atoll and all the people on Lib Island. U.S. atomic and hydrogen bomb testing rendered various depopulated and still-populated islands uninhabitable, leading to further displacements. Up through the 1960s, the U.S. military displaced hundreds of people from Kwajalein Atoll. A super-densely populated ghetto was created on Ebeye.

On Vieques, off Puerto Rico, the Navy displaced thousands of inhabitants between 1941 and 1947, announced plans to evict the remaining 8,000 in 1961, but was forced to back off and – in 2003 – to stop bombing the island.

On nearby Culebra, the Navy displaced thousands between 1948 and 1950 and attempted to remove those remaining up through the 1970s.

The Navy is right now looking at the island of Pagan as a possible replacement for Vieques, the population already having been removed by a volcanic eruption. Of course, any possibility of return would be greatly diminished.

Beginning during World War II and continuing through the 1950s, the U.S. military displaced a quarter million Okinawans, or half the population, from their land, forcing people into refugee camps and shipping thousands of them off to Bolivia – where land and money were promised but not delivered.

In 1953, the United States made a deal with Denmark to remove 150 Inughuit people from Thule, Greenland, giving them four days to get out or face bulldozers. They are being denied the right to return.

Diego Garcia

The story of Diego Garcia is superbly told in David Vine’s book, Island of Shame. Between 1968 and 1973, the United States and Great Britain exiled all 1,500 to 2,000 inhabitants from this island in the Indian Ocean. On orders from, and with funding from, the United States, the British forced the people onto overcrowded ships and dumped them on docks in Mauritius and the Seychelles – foreign and distant and unwelcoming lands for this indigenous population that had been part of Diego Garcia for centuries. U.S. documents described this as “sweeping” and “sanitizing” the island.

Those responsible for the displacement of the people of Diego Garcia knew that what they were doing was widely considered barbaric and illegal. They devised ways of creating “logical cover” for the process. They persuaded the ever-compliant Washington Post to bury the story. The Queen of England and her Privy Council bypassed Parliament. The Pentagon lied to Congress and hid its payments to the British from Congress. The planners even lied to themselves. Having originally envisioned a communications station, they concluded that advances in technology had rendered that unhelpful. So, Navy schemers decided that a fueling station for ships might offer a “suitable justification” for building a base that was actually a purposeless end in itself. But the Pentagon ended up telling a reluctant Congress that the base would be a communications station, because that was something Congress would approve.

Those plotting the eviction of the island’s people created the fiction that the inhabitants were migrant workers not actually native to Diego Garcia. Sir Paul Gore-Booth, Permanent Under Secretary in the Foreign Office of the U.K., dismissed the island’s people as “some few Tarzans or Men Fridays whose origins are obscure.” This stood in contrast to the respect and protection given to some other islands not chosen for bases because of the rare plants, birds, and animals resident there.

On January 24, 1971, remaining inhabitants of Diego Garcia were told they’d need to leave or be shot. They were allowed to take a small box of possessions, but had to leave their homes, their gardens, their animals, their land, and their society. Their dogs were rounded up and killed in a gas chamber as they watched, waiting to themselves be loaded on ships for departure. Arriving in Mauritius, they were housed in a prison. Their fate has not much improved in the decades since. David Vine describes them as very forgiving, wishing nothing but to be permitted to return.

Diego Garcia is purely a military base and in some ways more of a lawless zone than Guantanamo. The United States has kept and may be keeping prisoners there, on the island or on ships in the harbor. The Red Cross and journalists do not visit. The United States has de facto control of Diego Garcia, while the U.K. has technical ownership. The Pentagon is not interested in allowing the island’s people to return.

Jeju Island 

The South Korean government, at the behest of the U.S. Navy, is in the process of devastating a village, its coast, and 130 acres of farmland on Jeju Island with a massive military base. This story is best told in Regis Tremblay’s new film The Ghosts of Jeju. This is not a tragedy from the past to be remedied but a tragedy of this moment to be halted in its tracks. You can help. Tremblay’s film examines the history of decades of abuse of the people of Jeju, and the resistance movement that is currently inspiring other anti-base efforts around the globe. The film begins somber and ends joyful. I highly recommend creating an event around a screening of it.

Palestine

We should not neglect to note here that the United States funds and arms and protects the Israeli government’s ongoing displacement of Palestinians and denial of the right to return.

“The past is never dead. It’s not even past,” wrote William Faulkner.

David Swanson is author of War is a Lie. He lives in Virginia.

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

Justice Served in Afghanistan?

0

The New York Times recently reported that Staff Sgt. Robert Bales will plead guilty to the murder of 16 Afghan civilians. It is believed to be part of a plea bargain arrangement worked out between his lawyer and the US government. The Army had been seeking the death penalty, and it is understood that a plea of guilty will spare Sgt Bales his life.

The murder of 16 local Afghans is believed to be the worst case of civilian slaughter blamed on a single U.S. soldier since the Vietnam War. At a pre-trial hearing, the prosecution stated that on the evening of March 10-11, 2012, Sgt. Bales went from house to house firing his weapon with intent to kill. Children were shot through the thighs or in the head. At one point during the massacre 11 bodies, mostly women and children, were “put in a pile and put on fire.” The prosecutor said that the carnage was so violent that when Sgt. Bales finally returned to base the blood of his victims had seeped all the way through his uniform and down to his underwear.

John Henry Browne, Sgt. Bales’ lawyer, said his client was “crazed” and “broken” when he walked off base in Kandahar Province in southern Afghanistan and attacked the residents of two quiet nearby villages.

How a lone sergeant was able to walk off an army base in the middle of the night and in the middle of a hostile zone, unmolested and unnoticed, fully armed and fully loaded, attack a nearby village and murder several civilians, return to the army base, wake up a fellow soldier, confess to what he had done, leave the base for a second time, once more unmolested and unnoticed, go to a different nearby village, murder even more Afghan civilians, and then return to the base without anyone knowing or suspecting that anything was wrong has never been fully explained.

Sgt Bales was on his fourth combat tour. His defense attorney says that he was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and had suffered a traumatic brain injury. Witnesses from the camp also reported that Sgt. Bales, a decorated veteran of combat tours in Afghanistan and Iraq, had been upset over an incident that occurred 2 days earlier when an improvised explosive device (IED) exploded, resulting in one US soldier losing the lower part of a leg. Unfortunately for Sgt. Bales, his attorney said that his mental state at the time did not rise to the level of “legally insane” and thus wouldn’t help him avoid a possible death sentence.

There are also reports that Sgt. Bales was drinking alcohol, snorting Valium and had been taking steroids before the attack. Once more, how this behaviour (if true) was allowed to happen on an army base in the middle of a hostile zone has never been fully explained.

So in the end one sergeant will plead guilty to the murder of 16 Afghan civilians. Clearly a case of justice being served, is it not?

The US is in its 12th year of war in Afghanistan (longer than the Soviet Union’s campaign). A key component of US strategy in the Afghanistan / Pakistan theatre, or “AfPak” as the area is commonly known, is drones. The Pentagon has about 7,000 at its disposal, with not all of them being for attack purposes. For several years now, a sustained targeted drone campaign has been carried out in an effort to weaken the “insurgents” (i.e. local Afghan resistance). Since 2010 alone, at least 1100 weapons have been fired from drones in Afghanistan (as of February of this year the US military no longer gives out data on individual drone strikes in Afghanistan). The CIA even has its own private fleet of attack drones. Estimates put the number of strikes carried out by the CIA in Pakistan at 369 (317 carried out during the Obama presidency). These have reportedly killed anywhere from 411 to 884 civilians and between 168 and 197 children.

A question can be asked. Who is being held accountable for the deaths of literally hundreds if not thousands of civilians killed in drone attacks carried out by the US government?

If we lived in a correct and just society, and respected the principles put forth in the founding charter of the UN, Sgt. Bales would not be the only one going to prison.

He would be joined by President Obama and his administration as well as President Bush and his administration.

All of whom could easily be considered as war criminals.

It appears that once more America’s varying standards of justice are blindingly on display.

In what can only be called the “Inverse Nuremberg Principle,” if a front line US soldier massacres innocent civilians he can expect to be executed or spend the rest of his life in prison.

If the President of the United States massacres innocent civilians he can expect to have a library named after him or win a Nobel Peace Prize.

Tom McNamara is an Assistant Professor at the ESC Rennes School of Business, France, and a Visiting Lecturer at the French National Military Academy at Saint-Cyr Coëtquidan, France

NOTES

“AF removes RPA airstrike number from summary” by Brian Everstine, March 8, 2013, Air Force Times. Accessed at:

http://www.airforcetimes.com/article/20130308/NEWS/303080316/AF-removes-RPA-airstrike-number-from-summary

“Army Seeks Death Penalty in Afghan Massacre” by Kirk Johnson, November 13, 2012, The New York Times. Accessed at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/14/us/army-seeks-death-penalty-for-robert-bales-in-massacre.html

“Bales to plead guilty to Afghan massacre” By Gene Johnson, May 30, 2013. The Associated Press, reported in Navy Times. Accessed at:

http://www.navytimes.com/article/20130529/NEWS/305290032/Bales-plead-guilty-Afghan-massacre

“Death from afar” The Economist, November 3rd-9th, 2012. Accessed at:

http://www.economist.com/news/international/21565614-america-uses-drones-lot-secret-and-largely-unencumbered-declared-rules-worries

“Erased US data shows 1 in 4 missiles in Afghan airstrikes now fired by drone” by Alice K. Ross, March 12th, 2013, The Bureau of Investigative Journalism. Accessed at:

http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2013/03/12/erased-us-data-shows-1-in-4-missiles-in-afghan-airstrikes-now-fired-by-drone/

“Get the Data: Obama’s terror drones” by Chris Woods, February 4, 2012, The Bureau of Investigative Journalism. Accessed at:

http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2012/02/04/get-the-data-obamas-terror-drones/

“Predator Drones and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs)” September 26, 2012, The New York Times. Accessed at: http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/u/unmanned_aerial_vehicles/index.html

“Pretrial Hearing Starts for Soldier Accused of Murdering 16 Afghan Civilians” by Kirk Johnson, November 5, 2012, The New York Times. Accessed at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/06/us/hearing-begins-for-robert-bales-accused-in-afghan-murders.html?_r=0

“Prosecutors seek death for U.S. soldier charged in Afghan rampage” by Bill Rigby, November 5, 2012, Reuters. Accessed at:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/06/us-usa-afghanistan-trial-idUSBRE8A407T20121106

“Prosecution Cites Revenge as Motive for Afghan Massacre” by Neal Karlinsky and Luis Martinez, November 5, 2012, ABC News. Accessed at:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/prosecution-cites-revenge-motive-afghan-massacre/story?id=17646561#.UKY5j4aoEsc

“Principles of International Law Recognized in the Charter of the Nüremberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal, 1950” Report of the International Law Commission covering its Second Session, 5 june — 29 July 1950, Document A/1316. Accessed at:

http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/full/390

“Soldier Is Expected to Plead Guilty in Afghan Massacre” by James Dao, May 29, 2013, The New York Times. Accessed at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/30/us/staff-sgt-robert-bales-to-plead-guilty-in-afghan-massacre.html

“The Moral Case for Drones” by Scott Shane, July 14, 2012, The New York Times. Accessed at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/sunday-review/the-moral-case-for-drones.html?ref=opinion

“The Charter of the United Nations” June 26, 1945. Accessed at:

http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/intro.shtml

“U.S. hearing on Kandahar massacre to include video testimony from Afghans” by Laura L. Myers, October 12, 2012, Reuters. Accessed at:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/13/us-usa-afghanistan-trial-idUSBRE89C01720121013

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

Is the FBI Now in the Execution Business?

1

Anyone who was a fan of the old ABC TV series “The Untouchables” or of the later series, also on ABC, called “The FBI,” would know something is terribly fishy about the FBI slaying of Ibragim Todashev.

According to the FBI, Todashev, 27, who was an acquaintance, or friend, of Tamerlan Tsarnaev, one of the suspects in the Boston Marathon bombing, was shot and killed by an FBI agent who was interviewing the young man, at his home, at midnight, allegedly because Todashev had suddenly attacked him, causing the agent to feel threatened.

There are an astonishing number of conflicing versions of this official story, involving a variety of different weapons and multiple explanations for how it happened. These versions variously had Todashev threatening the agent with a sword, a knife, a chair, a pipe, a metal pole or even a broomstick. But one thing that stands out is that the agent in each version was alone with Todashev, who was suspected of having been an participant, with Tamerlan Tsarnaev, in an as yet unsolved September 11, 2011 slaying of three suspected young drug dealers in Waltham, Mass. at least one of whom was also a friend of the Tsarnaev brothers.

The critical word here is “alone.”

Watchers of those FBI TV programs know that FBI agents always work in pairs. This is not just Hollywood. It’s FBI policy.

Indeed, when my father was informed back in 1969, by a colleague at the University of Connecticut School of Engineering where he was a professor, that the FBI was investigating me for my anti-war activities, the colleague, an arch-conservative backer of the US war in Vietnam, said that “two FBI agents” had come to his office to inquire about my activities (he had been outraged that the agents had come to him and not to my father for information about his son!).

It was also a pair of FBI agents who came, unannounced, to my dorm room at Wesleyan University a year earlier, when a group of us students had been hiding my roommate’s older brother, a Marine who had deserted from the service on a visit home from Vietnam whom we later helped escape to Canada and ultimately Sweden. In fact, so common were the visits by agents to anti-war activists that we on the left back in those days used to laugh that the FBI guys always looked like Jehovah’s witnesses when they’d knock on your door on a visit, traveling in pairs and wearing their neatly pressed suits.

Jokes aside, though, there is a reason that FBI agents work in pairs. It’s not that they can’t handle themselves in a confrontation, though safety no doubt is part of it. It’s that lying to a federal law enforcement agent is a felony – one that is very easy to prosecute and win conviction on and that has long proved useful for locking people up when conviction for a bigger crime might be difficult – but it is necessary to have a witness to make such a case. Two FBI agents means that there is always a witness to such lying – one that a jury will be inclined to believe.

So how did it come to pass that when Todashev made his alleged lunge – armed with knife, sword, chair, pipe, broomstick or whatever – at the FBI agent in question, that agent was alone in the apartment with him?

We’re asked to believe that the other agent (two actually, as there were reportedly three of them involved in a five-hour interrogation at the house earlier that night), and several Massachusetts state cops who were also along in Orlando, Florida for the questioning of Todashev, had inexplicably just “left the room” for some reason. That’s a lot of people all needing to relieve themselves at the same time!

This “explanation” for the creation of a situation allowing for a fatal two-man fight strains credulity to the breaking point. The FBI also claims that Todashev had already “confessed,” or was “about to confess” (whatever that means) to having been involved in the triple murder of the drug dealers, though that alleged confession (or pending confession) was, also incredibly, not recorded. Todashev was being questioned too, reportedly, about his links to the Tsarnaev brothers, and was thought to know about their alleged plans for marathon mayhem, so presumably keeping him alive to testify would have been very important to the pending federal case against the surviving younger brother, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.

I would submit that it is simply not believable that such a suspect would not have been carefully guarded, carefully searched for weapons, and carefully secured in some fashion – most likely with handcuffs, before being questioned. I would also submit that there is no way that one lone agent would have been left alone with him under any circumstances, and not just for security reasons, but because Todashev was supposedly being interrogated, and there had to be a witness to his answers besides just the agent doing the questioning.

On TV, we do see agents or cops playing the old “good-cop-bad-cop” game with suspects, but that is always in a locked interrogation room, where the suspect has been searched for weapons already, and where reinforcements are just outside the door, ready to rush into the room should things get out of hand. Maybe this agent was the “bad cop” who was going to beat the crap out of Todashev while the other agents and cops were not there to call him off, you say? But if that was the case, he would either have had to be a very confident black belt to be alone confronting Todashev, who was known by the FBI to be a mixed martial arts expert, or he would have had his gun drawn. Furthermore, if beating up Tsarnaev, or torturing him, was the plan, they would have already cuffed him and locked him to a chair or table, since there was no advantage to be had by leaving him loose and free to counter-attack or defend himself.

The agent’s response to being allegedly attacked by the apparently un-restrained and variously armed Todashev (the FBI is now admitting that the victim was unarmed throughout the incident), was to draw his gun and kill the suspect with seven shots, including one fired, execution-style, to the back of the head.

Todashev, who had already been questioned, had already told a friend earlier that he was worried that he was being “framed” by the FBI. Does that sound like someone who would have willingly testified to guilt in a brutal triple murder?

I don’t know what happened at midnight in Orlando in Todashev’s apartment, but it seems clear to me that what the FBI is saying happened, and what it is claiming Todashev told them, is not what it was. The ACLU seems to agree and is calling for an “outside investigation” of the FBI killing.

America under President and Drone Commander Barack Obama and a “Justice” Department headed by Eric Holder, is fast becoming a very dangerous place – one that has much more in common with the Colonies under British rule than the one that the Founders envisioned when they appended the Bill of Rights to the Constitution. Indeed, if, as it certainly appears, Todashev was executed by the FBI, it is a country that more closely resembles China or Nazi Germany than the free country we all were taught that we lived in.

DAVE LINDORFF is a founding member of ThisCantBeHappening!, an online newspaper collective, and is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press).

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

UK to pay £20m compensation to Kenyans

0

Britain to pay almost £20 million compensation to more than 5,000 Mau Mau victims.

Britain is to pay out £19.9 million in costs and compensation to more than 5,000 Kenyans, who were severely mistreated under British colonial rule during the 1950s Mau Mau uprising, Britainâ„¢s Foreign Secretary William Hague has said.

Hague told the House of Commons that the payment was being made in “full and final settlement” of a high court action brought by five of the victims who suffered from torture and other ill-treatment, including castration, rape and beatings.

According to reports, more than 5,000 victims are each expected to be given £2,600 as part of the multi-million pound compensation deal.

Å“The British government sincerely regrets that these abuses took place and that they marred Kenya’s progress to independence. Torture and ill-treatment are abhorrent violations of human dignity which we unreservedly condemn,” Hague told the MPs.

At least 10,000 people died during the 1952-1960 Mau Mau uprising against British colonial rule, with some sources giving far higher estimates.

MOS/HE

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Turkey PM blames 'terrorists' for unrest

0

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan speaks during a joint press conference with his Tunisian counterpart Ali Laarayedh in Tunis on June 6, 2013.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has laid the blame on a Å“terrorist organization” and foreign suspects for anti-government demonstrations that continue to rock his country.

Speaking to reporters in Tunis on the last leg of his North Africa tour on Thursday, Erdogan said seven foreigners have been arrested in connection with the week-long protest rallies.

He did not specify the nationalities of the detainees.

Å“Seven foreigners have been implicated in the unrest, six of whom have appeared before the public prosecutor and one of whom is under arrest,” Erdogan stated.

Å“An inquiry is taking place to determine the manner in which they took part in the violence,” he said.

Erdogan, however, refused to back down on the implementation of a controversial Istanbul development plan that has triggered anti-government demonstrations.

Å“We will go through with this project which respects Turkey’s history, culture and environment,” he noted.

Å“What we are doing is to protect the rights of the majority and to preserve the beauty of Istanbul,” Erdogan said.

Since Friday, tens of thousands of anti-government demonstrations have been held in Istanbul, Ankara, Izmir, Mugla, Antalya, and many other cities and towns.

The death toll from the week-long protests has risen to five following the death of a police officer. Officials say he died after falling into an underpass while trying to break up a protest in the southern city of Adana.

Turkish Human Rights Foundation says some 4,300 people have been hurt or sought medical care for the effects of tear gas inhalation. The Turkish government says dozens of police officers have been injured.

The anti-government unrest began after police broke up a sit-in staged in Taksim Square on May 31 to protest against the demolition of Gezi Park.

The protesters say the park, which is a traditional gathering point for rallies and demonstrations as well as a popular tourist destination, is the city’s last green public space.

Amnesty International has censured the Turkish police for the tactics they have used to control the protests.

MP/KA/HMV

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Syrian troops recapture another town

0

[unable to retrieve full-text content]Syrian Army troops have taken control of al-Daba’a town in the central province of Homs, a day after they fully purged the strategic border town of al-Qusayr from foreign-sponsored militants.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Former drone operator says he’s haunted by his part in more than 1,600 deaths

0

Richard Engel
nbcnews.com
June 6, 2013

A former Air Force drone operator who says he participated in missions that killed more than 1,600 people remembers watching one of the first victims bleed to death.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Brandon Bryant says he was sitting in a chair at a Nevada Air Force base operating the camera when his team fired two missiles from their drone at three men walking down a road halfway around the world in Afghanistan. The missiles hit all three targets, and Bryant says he could see the aftermath on his computer screen — including thermal images of a growing puddle of hot blood.

“The guy that was running forward, he’s missing his right leg,” he recalled. “And I watch this guy bleed out and, I mean, the blood is hot.” As the man died his body grew cold, said Bryant, and his thermal image changed until he became the same color as the ground.

Read more

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 11:02 am

Tags: ,






<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Got Verizon? Your Calls Are Being Monitored by The NSA

0

Photo Credit: Photo by Shutterstock

June 6, 2013
 |

Like this article?

Join our email list:

Stay up to date with the latest headlines via email.

The Obama Administration has continued the Bush Administration domestic spying program of ‘warrantless wiretapping’ of Americans’ phone lines, according to a top-secret federal court order obtained by The Guardian, a British news organization.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which is based in Washington, D.C., and operates inside the Justice Department, ordered Verizon to turn over to the National Security Agency daily records of: “all call detail records or ‘telephony metadata’ created for Verizon for communications (i) between the United States and abroad; or (ii) wholly within the United States, including local telephone calls.” The order does not include Verizon calls made in foreign countries.

The FISA Court said that metadata includes the phone numbers called, the identifying serial numbers for tracking mobile phones, calling card numbers, time and duration of calls, but “does not include the substantive content of any communication… or the name, address, or financial information of a subscriber or customer.”

The Guardian’s scoop confirms what many privacy rights and civil liberties groups have long suspected, that the Bush Administration’s program of data-mining American phone records for national security purposes has continued under Obama, much like his use and expansion of military drones. The FISA Court order is stamped “top secret” and is not to be declassified until April 12, 2038.

“From a civil liberties perspective, the program could hardly be any more alarming,” said Jameel Jaffer, American Civil Liberties Union Deputy Legal Director. “It’s a program in which millions of innocent people have been put under the constant surveillance of government agents. It’s analogous to the FBI stationing an agent outside every home in the country to track who goes in and who comes out. It is beyond Orwellian, and it provides further evidence of the extent to which basic democratic rights are being surrendered in secret to the demands of unaccountable intelligence agencies.”

The ‘ warrantless wiretapping’ controversy emerged in 2005, after the New York Times withheld publication of a story for a year–at the government’s request–that detailed how the National Security Agency had put data interceptors on key junction points in AT&T’s phone network. At that time, the Bush administration said the electronic surveillance was not designed to listen in on specific calls but trace calling patterns among millions of calls to fight terrorism. However, the program has always operated on the very fringes of U.S. law, with the Bush White House not telling Congress about its scope, and then Congress revising the FISA Court’s guidelines, and then the Justice Department in 2009 saying that it had over-collected data but had ‘corrected’ the problem.

It is not hard to make educated guesses about what is going on, which is that the NSA has maintained and expanded its ability to monitor all electronic communications as the Internet and ‘big data’ have grown exponentially. The agency installed data interceptors at Google’s data warehouses after China hacked into its network in 2009 to look for FBI requests to follow Chinese spies. China’s subsequent hack into RSA in 2011, the company that supposedly hardened the computer networks of American military contractors, led to the Chinese stealing detailed plans of America’s top weapons. With these massive data ‘plays’ as the backdrop, it’s hardly surprising that the NSA would be maintaining and expanding the tactics developed nearly a decade ago against al-Qaeda.

The Obama Justice Department defended allowing domestic law enforcement to track cellphones without a warrant as late as last fall, even though the U.S. Supreme Court found that action was unconstitutional in United States v. Jones ruling in January 2012. It is unclear whether the FISA Court order for Verizon would conflict with that Supreme Court ruling.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

'Justice Not Done': Afghans Decry Soft Sentencing for Murderous US Soldier

0

US Staff Sergeant Robert Bales murdered sixteen Afghan villagers in cold blood, shooting many in the head and face before burning their bodies with kerosene. (File) US Army Staff Sergeant Robert Bales pleaded guilty and was sentenced to life in prison on Wednesday for the massacre of sixteen Afghan civilians in 2012.

But in the Afghanistan village were the murders took place, the sentence was met with anger as many relatives of Bales’ rampage–most of whom were women and children–say the US soldier should face harsher punishment for his crimes.

As the BBC reports:

Friends and family members of those killed say they were stunned to learn that he has escaped capital punishment.

“It is our firm demand that Afghanistan, the US and the international community condemn this American to death. He martyred our family members… and went back with his body full of blood of his victims to his camp,” bereaved villager Mullah Baran told the BBC.

Another villager, Haji Baqi, whose brother was killed by Bales, said: “We want him to be hanged. The international community should not ignore our grief.”

Villager Samiullah said the life sentence meant that justice had not been done. His mother, uncle and cousin were killed.

“The criminal is not being punished,” he said. “We want him to be dealt with as his deeds deserve.”

Though it seems as though Bales would have no hope for future release from his life sentence, a military jury must still decide whether or not he will one day be eligible for parole. That decision will be rendered after further proceedings set to begin August 19.

During Wednesday’s hearing, Bales spoke in a reportedly “calm and steady” voice as he described his violent actions. When asked to describe his motivations, Bales said, “There is not a good reason in this world for why I did the horrible things that I did.”

___________________________________

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

This article originally appeared on: Common Dreams

Kids of Same Sex Parents Are Just Fine, Study Says

0

Photo Credit: Ivan Cholakov/Shutterstock.com

June 6, 2013
 |

Like this article?

Join our email list:

Stay up to date with the latest headlines via email.

The Australian Study of Child Health in Same-Sex Families is the world’s largest attempt to study how children raised by same-sex couples compare to children raised by heterosexual couples. According to a preliminary report on the study of 500 children across the country of Australia, these young people are not only thriving, but also have higher rates of family cohesion than other families:

An interim report found there was no statistical difference between children of same-sex couples and the rest of the population on indicators including self-esteem, emotional behaviour and the amount of time spent with parents.

However, children of same-sex couples scored higher than the national average for overall health and family cohesion, measuring how well a family gets along.

According to Dr. Simon Crouch, lead researcher on the study at Melbourne University, the way same-sex families have to cope with bullying and homophobia could impact how they relate to each other. A study recently found that 70 percent of gay and lesbian students in the Australian state of Queensland experience bullying from both students and teachers, so the children of same-sex couples likely experience similar taunts. If a student experiences stigma at school, the researchers hypothesize, the families are “generally more willing to communicate and approach the issues,” resulting in a closer family dynamic.

The Australian Senate defeated marriage equality last September and will not take the issue up again until after this September’s general election. Former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd recently came out for marriage equality, explaining that concern about the children of same-sex couples was previously his primary obstacle. Hopefully this research will convince additional Australian lawmakers to support marriage equality when it next comes up for a vote.

ZACK FORD is the editor of ThinkProgress LGBT at the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

Kill the bill: Swiss parliament stalls banking secrecy bill

0



Published time: June 06, 2013 14:25

The logo of Swiss Bank UBS.(AFP Photo / Fabrice Coffrini)

Download video (10.61 MB)
Embed

Code

The legislation to disclose client names and data to resolve an ongoing tax-evasion spat between Switzerland and the US, was met with sharp critique by the lower house of parliament in Bern, who halted the vote.

The legislation, which has been dubbed by some Swiss media
outlets as ‘American dictate’, is a strong demand by the US in a
step for Switzerland to end their banking secrecy regime and
bring transparency to their shady practices.

The accord, if enacted into law by Swiss parliament, aims to
better track tax evasion in the alpine nation. Last week, Finance
Minister Eveline Widmer-Schlumpt told reporters that her cabinet
had approved the bill.

The Swiss news agency, ATS, reported 90 votes were in favor, and
100 opposed to debate the new law, which is expected to decided
upon during the summer parliament session, which began on Monday
and will come to a close on June 21.

Before voting, members from various political parties voiced
concerns over the details of the deal to hand over sensitive data
to Washington.

A committee, supported by elected members of the Swiss People’s
Party, the Christian Democrats and the Ticino League, have until
December 4th 2014 to collect 100,000 signatures to put the
proposal to a national vote.

On Tuesday, the right-wing Swiss People’s Party launched a
campaign to kill the bill and said the package was too ‘vague’
and could create trouble for Swiss bankers.

The bill is vague because Washington and Bern are keeping mum
about the details and conditions of the deal, and plan to keep
quiet until after the Parliament approves it. Once
approved, Parliament will not be able to amend the accord.

The logo of Swiss Bank Frey.(Reuters / Arnd Wiegmann)

Swiss Finance Minister Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf last
week said that U.S. authorities had proposed a “unilateral
offer, one that we couldn’t negotiate”.

Following a public scandal in France, bank secrecy was written
into Swiss law in 1934. It has served as a financial safe haven
for funds from all corners of the world, and its tight lipped
policy helped it build its $2 trillion financial industry.

The US pressure mounted in 2009, when Switzerland’s biggest
lender, UBS, admitted to helping 52,000 American clients evade
taxes. The bank narrowly escaped prosecution in exchange for
handing over 5,000 client names and paying a $780 million fine.

In January Switzerland’s oldest private bank, Wegelin & Co,
said it would close down for good after over 250 years of
service, following its guilty plea to charges of helping
prosperous Americans hide more than $1.2 billion from the
Internal Revenue Service through secret accounts.

A managing partner at the bank, Otto Bruderer, confirmed in court
that “from about 2002 through to about 2010, Wegelin agreed
with certain US taxpayers to evade the US tax obligations of
these US taxpayer clients, who filed false tax returns with the
IRS.”

This article originally appeared on: RT

South African bodies call for Israel to be excluded from diamond processing over ‘war crimes’

0

South African human rights groups, trade unions and major civil society organisations are calling for the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme to exclude Israel from diamond processing.

The certification scheme is designed to stop ‘conflict diamonds’
from entering the mainstream diamond market and was set up in
2003. The organisation which runs the scheme is currently meeting
in South Africa.  

The coalition of organisations such as South Africa’s National
Union of Mineworkers, the country’s largest trade union
federation COSATU; South African Students Congress; the Coalition
for a Free Palestine and BDS South Africa say that “billions of
dollars’ worth of diamonds exported via Israel are a major source
of revenue for the Israeli military, which stands accused of war
crimes.”

The coalition is calling for Israel to be excluded from the
Kimberley Process Certification Scheme due to its human rights
record against Palestinians, and to end all exports of rough
diamonds to Israel immediately.


The organizations also wants to ban diamond polishing and cutting
in Israel. They claim excluding Israel from the diamond
processing would be a great chance for the South African
authorities to display “moral vision and political
leadership”.

“The Kimberley Process has played an important role over the
past decade in resolving conflicts linked to the diamond trade
but there is no doubt that it has to be reformed… [by]
expanding the definition of conflict to include human rights
abuses linked to diamond extraction perpetrated by governments
and companies; and expanding downstream monitoring so that the
process covers not just the rough diamond trade but also the
international movement and polishing of diamonds,”
Southern
Africa Resource Watch director Claude Kabemba told the Business
Day newspaper. 

The coalition also pointed to the local benefits of such a move,
claiming it could bring more diamond processing jobs back to
South Africa. “Consumers will have a clear conscience that
their diamonds are not funding, assisting or in any way involved
with the illegal Israeli occupation of Palestine, and more jobs
will be created locally for our people by bringing this diamond
processing back home instead of it being done in Israel,”

South African activist Mbuyiseni Ndlozi is quoted by the Middle
East Monitor as saying.

The Kimberley Process, established a decade ago to help resolve
international diamond trade conflicts and to ensure that the
diamond trade is not used as an instrument to fund military
rebellions and other violence interfering with human rights. The
organization includes 54 participants representing 90 countries
while its members account for about 99.8 percent of the global
production of rough diamonds, the Middle East Monitor reports.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Confirmed: NSA collection of millions of phone records 'renewal of ongoing practice'

0

The chairwoman of the US Senate Intelligence committee has confirmed that the top secret court order collecting the telephone records of millions of US Verizon customers is a three-month renewal of a continuing practice.

The collection of records was “on an ongoing daily basis,”
beginning on April 25, 2013 and ending July 19, 2013, Dianne
Feinstein, a Democratic Senator from California confirmed to
reporters on Capitol Hill on Thursday.

The top secret order required Verizon, one of the largest telecom
agencies in the US, to provide both the FBI and the NSA
information on all telephone calls made through its systems, both
domestically and to foreign countries.

According to a copy of the order, Verizon is required to disclose
the numbers of both parties during a call, as well as location,
call duration, and other unique data on an “ongoing, daily
basis.” Meaning that, regardless of whether an individual is
suspected of or linked to any crime, the data of all Verizon
customers is currently being delivered in bulk to the
intelligence agency.

Verizon did not confirm the existence of the top secret order. In
a memo sent to employees on Thursday, they stated that they were
forbidden “from revealing the order’s existence.”


The court order expressively forbade Verizon from disclosing the
existence of any US government request for the company’s customer
records, according to the original Guardian exclusive.

It is suspected that the practice is ongoing, stretching back far
beyond April 2013, possibly even to 2006. One anonymous expert
contacted by the Washington Post in the wake of the scandal said
that the order appeared to be a routine renewal of a strikingly
similar order issued by the same court in 2006, and renewed every
three months since.

As to the authority claimed by the government via this order,
that is specifically cited to fall under the “business records”
provision of the PATRIOT Act of 2001, which was granted a
four-year extension by President Obama in May of 2011.

It remains unclear as to whether the order, which spans a
three-month period, represents a single instance, or is
indicative of recurring cases of Verizon and other telephony
providers being ordered to disclose all their clients’ call
records.

The practice may also be more widespread among communications
data companies than initially believed: CNBC contacted Sprint, a
global provider of internet and communications services. The
company told CNBC on Thursday that it had no comment on whether
it may have received a similar FISA court order.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Russia’s Mariinsky teams up with James Cameron for worldwide 3D broadcast of ‘Swan Lake’

0

Russia’s Mariinsky Theater plans project one of its most famous ballets, Tchaikovsky’s ‘Swan Lake,’ in 3D to cinema audiences in 50 countries worldwide. Those working on the project included the director of ‘Avatar,’ James Cameron.

To transfer the magic of
ballet into cinemas eight 3D cameras will be filming the moves of
the troupe in multiple close-ups. Their pirouettes will then be
transmitted into cinemas in 1200 screens in different countries
in quality comparable with that of Hollywood blockbusters.

Few can match Cameron’s eye for 3D production — he directed
‘Avatar,’ the highest-grossing 3D film in history. The US-based
Cameron Pace Group, the company of James Cameron and Vince Pace,
will produce the 3D Mariinsky event using the same Oscar-winning
technology as in ‘Avatar.’

“We all know if you team up with Cameron [Pace] something
exciting will happen. All your experience helps you, so
Live will not lose any part of this promised magic. When people
know this is happening now it adds so much to the feeling,”

Mariinsky Theater Artistic Director Valery Gergiev said.

Members of the Mariinsky theatre perform during a rehearsal for filming in St.Petersburg June 2, 2013. (Reuters / Alexander Demianchuk)

The project is also being managed by British group Glass Slipper
Live Events, who worked with the late pop star Michael Jackson.

One of the project’s organizers is former Royal Ballet dancer
Ross MacGibbon, who danced in ‘Swan Lake’ himself and once
performed with legendary Soviet dancer Rudolph Nureev. He also
recently worked on a 3D version of the latest ‘Bourne’
blockbuster.

MacGibbon described the 3D version of the quintessential Russian
ballet as an “exciting adventure, a great honor and even a
challenge.” 

“Having already filmed a ballet in 3D, I feel up to this
challenge. The shapes made in classical ballet can only be fully
appreciated on screen in three dimensions, as dance is all about
movement through space. The 3D will transform the cinema
experience. I feel, it’s especially thrilling when allied with
great dance,”
MacGibbon explained.

The Mariinsky Theater, built in the 18th Century, is at the
forefront of using state-of-the-art technology in its shows. The
theater’s first-in-history live Internet broadcast of a
performance took place in 1999. The Mariinsky was also the first
Russian theater to experiment with Live 3D, with its
closed-circuit experimental live broadcast to an audience in
Paris and its 3D versions of ‘Giselle’ and ‘The Nutcracker.’

A cameraman films members of the Mariinsky theatre performing during a rehearsal for filming in St.Petersburg June 2, 2013.(Reuters / Alexander Demianchuk)

“Mariinsky Live 3D format is something totally new not only
for us but also for the whole world. Looking at this opportunity
it’s to both display the qualities of the company but to do it
with the newest possible technology,”
Gergiev said.

And for those who can’t make the trip to St. Petersburg, watching
‘Swan Lake’ in 3D at a cinema near you is also a way to save
money and time while still getting a chance to appreciate the
show. The performance will be conducted by Maestro Gergiev — who
is also the London Symphony Orchestra’s Principal Conductor — in
St Petersburg on Thursday, at 9:30pm local time (17:30 GMT).

A cameraman films members of the Mariinsky theatre performing during a rehearsal for filming in St.Petersburg June 2, 2013.(Reuters / Alexander Demianchuk)

Members of the Mariinsky theatre perform during a rehearsal for filming in St.Petersburg June 2, 2013.(Reuters / Alexander Demianchuk)

This article originally appeared on: RT

Syrian govt and rebels vie for strategic Golan region as Austria withdraws UN peacekeepers

0

Austria has pulled out of its peacekeeping mission as both Syrian rebels and regime forces claim to have seized control of a UN-manned demilitarized crossing on the Golan Heights, a disputed region between Syria and Israel.

Austrian Defense Ministry spokesperson Col. Bauer said that the
rebel Free Syrian Army had taken the crossing near the Syrian
city of Quneitra, which is operated by a 1,000-soldier United
Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF).

A mortar shell struck the UN base in Quneitra, injuring one
peacekeeper, Israeli media reported. Austria’s 380 UNDOF
peacekeepers had withdrawn to their bunkers, and suffered no
casualties. An Austrian Defense Ministry crisis committee has met
to discuss the incident, Col. Bauer told AP in Vienna.

However, it remains unclear who now controls the UNDOF post, with
conflicting reports emerging from both sides. The rebels
reportedly opened fire on the Syrian forces, who retaliated with
fire from tanks and armored vehicles. There have also been
reports that the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights was shelled by
Syrian government forces.

“The heroes of the Liberation of Quneitra Front, in
collaboration with the heroes of al-Mutasem bi-Allah brigade,
have liberated the border crossing with Israel,”
the rebels
declared on Facebook.

But several hours after the checkpoint was reportedly seized,
Israeli security sources said the Syrian army had recaptured the
area. “The Syrian army has recovered control of the crossing,
there are sounds of explosions from time to time but far less
than in the morning,” an Israeli source said, speaking on
condition of anonymity.

Separate reports have emerged claiming the Syrian army deployed
tanks to the border region as part of its fight against the
rebels. Syrian state news agency SANA said that government forces
“repelled terrorist groups” that “tried” to take
over the Quneitra crossing. SANA also cited an unnamed official
as saying that a large number of rebel fighters were killed or
injured.

Israeli military spokesperson Peter Lerner said that mortar
shells fell on the Israeli side of the border near the Quneitra
passage, CNN reported. Lerner also said that Israeli authorities
have instructed farmers in the Golan Heights not to approach the
border fence, due to the ongoing fighting on the Syrian side.
Israel has reportedly moved tanks to the Israeli-occupied side of
the border.

The UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights reported that a
“campaign of simultaneous attacks” was underway against
Syrian government checkpoints in Quneitra Province.

The battle for the Quneitra checkpoint comes just a day after
Syrian troops, backed by Lebanese Hezbollah fighters, retook the key town of Qusayr after a weeks-long
siege.

However, the siege combat was apparently in violation of a
ceasefire agreement with Israel after the 1973 war. The region is
located in a strategic area near main supply routes some 10
kilometers from the Lebanese border.

This article originally appeared on: RT

'US bans aim to dismay Iranian voters'

0

A file photo of Iranians preparing to cast their ballots in a presidential election

The recent US-engineered sanctions against Iranâ„¢s petrochemical industry are aimed at disheartening the Iranian voters ahead of the countryâ„¢s June 14 presidential election, an Iranian lawmaker says.

In a Wednesday interview, Mousa Ahmadi, a member of Iranâ„¢s Majlis Energy Committee, said Western embargoes will backfire by strengthening the Iranian nation.

Å“Under existing conditions, new sanctions that target our country’s petrochemical companies on the verge of the election are for psychological effect, as they (the West) seek to discourage the people from participating in this election with this psychological shock,” he said.

The US Treasury Department issued a statement on Friday, announcing sanctions against eight Iranian petrochemical companies namely Bou Ali Sina, Mobin, Nouri, Pars, Shahid Tondgouyan, Shazand, Tabriz and Bandar Imam.

Ahmadi downplayed the Westâ„¢s sanctions on Iran as futile, saying that every fresh round of sanctions is a sign that the previous ones have failed.

Noting that Iran’s budget for the budget for the current Iranian calendar year (started March 21) does not rely on oil revenues, the lawmaker said, Å“I believe that sanctions imposed by the US will not produce the effects which they expect on Iran.”

At the beginning of 2012, the US and the European Union imposed new sanctions on Iranâ„¢s oil and financial sectors with the goal of preventing other countries from purchasing Iranian oil and conducting transactions with the Central Bank of Iran.

The illegal sanctions were imposed based on the unfounded accusation that Iran is pursuing non-civilian objectives in its nuclear energy program.

Iran rejects the allegation, arguing that as a committed signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty and a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency, it has the right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.

MT/ASH/SS/HMV

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

New campaign hopes to cut food waste

0

The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the UN Environment Program (UNEP), and their partners have launched a new campaign to cut the 1.3 billion tons of food lost or wasted each year.

The campaign known as “Think.Eat.Save. Reduce Your Foodprint” specifically targets food wasted by consumers, retailers and the hospitality industry.

On its website, Think.Eat.Save. defines it goals as accelerating action and providing a global vision and information-sharing portal for the many and diverse initiatives currently underway around the world.

About one-third of all food produced worldwide – which is worth around USD 1 trillion – gets lost or wasted in food production and consumption systems, according to data released by FAO.

UN Undersecretary-General and UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner said 30 to 40 percent of food products are never used but are wasted somewhere in various stages of production – harvesting, processing and distribution – or at the retailer and consumer end of the supply chain.

“In a world of seven billion people, set to grow to nine billion by 2050, wasting food makes no sense – economically, environmentally and ethically,” Steiner stressed, referring to the cost of food production as well as the generation of greenhouse gas emissions produced by food decomposing on landfill.

“To bring about the vision of a truly sustainable world, we need a transformation in the way we produce and consume our natural resources,” he urged.

FAO Director General José Graziano da Silva also said almost half of the total food squandered in industrialized regions Å“is more than the total net food production of Sub-Saharan Africa, and would be sufficient to feed the estimated 870 million people hungry in the world.”

The increasing wasteful practices across the world have also raised fears of further hikes in the price of food.

Citing FAO figures, Think.Eat.Save. calls attention to a dramatic rise in food price volatility since 2006, with the standard deviation for food prices in the 2000-12 period jumping to 22.4 index points in comparison with 7.7 between 1990 and 1999.

MRS/SS

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Critics Blast Military Trial of WikiLeaks Whistleblower Manning

0

After a global outcry about his prosecution and alleged torture, whistleblower Bradley Manning (shown), an Army intelligence officer accused of “aiding the enemy” by leaking hundreds of thousands of U.S. government documents exposing war crimes and countless dubious diplomatic dealings to WikiLeaks, is finally on trial this week. The secretive court-martial proceeding, widely criticized as a show trial with a predetermined outcome, began Monday and is expected to run for around three months.

If convicted, which would supposedly require prosecutors to show that Manning knew the leaked documents would be seen by enemies of the U.S. government, the defendant could spend life in military prison. The penalty could have included death, but authorities promised not to seek capital punishment amid global outrage against prosecuting somebody who tried to expose government crimes. Manning and his attorney decided that the trial should take place before a military judge rather than a full panel.

The young whistleblower, who has attracted legions of supporters to his cause despite drawing the wrath of the Obama administration, defended his actions in a February statement to the court. “I believed that if the public, especially the American public, had access to the information … this could spark a domestic debate on the role of the military and our foreign policy in general, as well as it related to Iraq and Afghanistan,” Manning said.

Commenting about the estimated 250,000 secret diplomatic cables from the U.S. State Department that he sent to WikiLeaks, Manning also said it was important for the public to know what its government was doing. According to his statement, the cables “documented backdoor deals and seemingly criminal activity.” Indeed, as The New American has reported, the documents revealed everything from U.S. authorities’ unlawful spying and lying to bribing and bullying of foreign governments.

The leaked material from the Army, meanwhile – including now-infamous footage of U.S. troops gunning down civilians from a helicopter in what analysts said was clearly a war crime – exposed the “seemingly delightful bloodlust” of those American soldiers “congratulating each other on the ability to kill in large numbers,” Manning said in the statement. Despite the charges against Manning, it was not immediately clear how exposing war crimes would aid the enemy.

Military prosecutors, however, allege that the massive leak – likely the largest in American history – jeopardized U.S. national security and endangered lives. The government also claims that al-Qaeda operatives, many of whom have been armed and funded by the Obama administration during the war on Libya and the rebellion in Syria, have seen the documents and made use of them.  

“Pfc. Manning was trained and trusted to provide intelligence,” Army prosecutor Capt. Ashden Fein was quoted as saying in transcripts from a previous hearing. “He used that training to defy our trust, to systematically and indiscriminately harm the United States during a time of war and while deployed.” Indeed, despite evidence that Manning saw himself as a whistleblower and the fact that no serious national security issues have been linked to the explosive disclosures, prosecutors are trying to paint the defendant as a man who knowingly aided terrorist groups.

In addition to supposedly “aiding the enemy,” Manning, now 25, is facing 21 charges of illegally downloading and transferring some 700,000 secret reports, videos, and other material – much of it classified but none of it “Top Secret.” He has already pleaded guilty to 10 charges of “mishandling classified information,” which could put him behind bars for 20 years even if the other allegations are thrown out. The trial is happening at Ft. Meade in Maryland outside of Baltimore.

In all, some 150 witnesses are expected to testify at the court martial, with the vast majority being called by the prosecution. The man who reported Manning to authorities, ex-computer hacker Adrian Lamo, testified on Tuesday, telling the court how the Army analyst had told him in online chats about the efforts to expose government crimes and civilian casualties in the wars. When asked whether Manning had expressed hope that the leaks exposing various problems would spark global discussions and reforms, for example, Lamo answered “yes.”

Lamo also admitted to asking Manning why he did not sell the documents to a foreign government instead. According to Lamo’s testimony, the Army private said it was because he thought the information should be available to the general public – hardly the hallmark of somebody hoping to “aid the enemy.” The former hacker, though, claimed he reported Manning because it was the “socially responsible” thing to do.

Former Manning colleagues and superiors also testified at this week’s hearings before court was recessed on Wednesday. Their testimony portrayed the Army private as a well-organized computer genius and an excellent intelligence analyst who was very interested in political and social issues. The court will be back in session next week, and numerous other witnesses will testify.

While government prosecutors attempt to demonize Manning and his motives, a growing roster of prominent supporters are speaking out on his behalf. Before the trial officially began on Monday, Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg and other activists with the Bradley Manning Support Network gathered outside of the Ft. Meade gate to protest what they see as vicious persecution of an American hero.

“We are all Bradley Manning,” demonstrators reportedly chanted. Ellsberg, the famous leaker who has been a vocal and high-profile advocate for Manning, also blasted the administration: “I’m sure that President Obama would have sought a life sentence in my case,” he said. More than a few critics noted that the administration has prosecuted more whistleblowers than any other in history.

WikiLeaks chief Julian Assange, meanwhile, released a scathing editorial on the first day of the trial, calling Manning the “most prominent political prisoner in modern U.S. history.” Among other complaints, the world famous leak master slammed the military’s “cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment” of the whistleblower “at the hands of his captors.” Assange also said the government’s behavior in the case was criminal, suggesting the trial was being conducted in a kangaroo court that refuses to let Manning defend himself and that the verdict has already been pre-determined.

Even though Manning helped provide journalists and the public around the world with a gold mine of explosive information on government corruption and lawlessness, news of the trial this week has largely been ignored or downplayed by the establishment press. In fairness, however, that might have something to do with the veil of secrecy imposed over the court martial by authorities. 

A group of organizations and attorneys filed yet another federal lawsuit last month asking that more information be made available to the public. “The press and public are unable to engage in careful observation and analysis of the issues arising during what is arguably one of the most controversial, high-profile court-martials since the trial of Lt. William Calley for the My Lai Massacre in Vietnam,” noted a coalition of lawyers and Manning advocates in a brief.

Other analysts have noted that even larger issues are also being mostly overlooked, including what critics and experts have widely described as the barbaric torture of Private Manning. Even worse, the war crimes and lawless behavior of the U.S. government that the Army analyst helped blow the whistle on have also been largely forgotten. Meanwhile, as the Obama administration desperately seeks to punish Manning, the perpetrators of the myriad real crimes exposed in the leaked documents remain at large. 

Photo of Army Pfc. Bradley Manning being escorted out of a courthouse in Ft. Meade, Maryland June 5: AP Images

Alex Newman is a correspondent for The New American, covering economics, politics, and more. He can be reached at
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
.

Related articles:

WikiLeaker Bradley Manning Pleads Guilty to 10 of 22 Charges

Judge Rules Manning Mistreated by Army; New Evidence to be Offered by Gov’t

UN: Army Private Accused in WikiLeaks Case Was Tortured by U.S.

Army Private Accused in WikiLeaks Case Charged with Aiding the Enemy

Accused Wiki-Leaker Bradley Manning Wins Discovery in Court Case

Judge in Manning Case to Obama Admin.: Hand Over the Documents

Army Admits It’s Investigating Bradley Manning Supporters

Bradley Manning Demonstrations Planned for September 6

Protests Against Treatment of Alleged Wikileaks Source Widen

Petitioners Challenge “Outrageous Secrecy” of Bradley Manning Trial

This article originally appeared on: The New American

Germany’s industrial orders down 2.3%

0

File photo shows a German worker assembling a car engine at a factory in Ingolstadt.

Germanyâ„¢s industrial orders have dropped more than expected, highlighting the countryâ„¢s difficult struggle in recovering from a weak performance in winter and recession in the eurozone.

The German Economics Ministry announced in new data released on Thursday that the countryâ„¢s industrial orders fell by 2.3 percent in April.

”The German economy is unsteady. As long as the ailing euro zone countries are not back on their feet, this will likely remain the case,” said economist Thomas Gitzel.

This new data came three days after the International Monetary Fund halved its economic growth forecast for Germany to 0.3 percent for 2013.

The fund said the cut was the result of persistent uncertainty about the prospects for the eurozoneâ„¢s debt crisis that has affected Germany’s exports and investment.

Europe plunged into financial crisis in early 2008. The worsening debt crisis has forced EU governments to adopt harsh austerity measures and tough economic reforms, which have triggered incidents of social unrest and massive protests in many European countries.

CAH/KA

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Obama Defends Phone Record Tracking as ‘Critical Tool’

0

Jared A. Favole
wsj.com
June 5, 2013

The Obama administration called government review of complete phone records of U.S. customers a “critical tool” in protecting the public from terrorists.

The information “allows counterterrorism personnel to discover whether known or suspected terrorists have been in contact with other persons who may be engaged in terrorist activities, particularly people located inside the United States,” a senior Obama administration official said Thursday. The official stopped short of confirming the practice.

Former officials described the practice after a published account on the gathering of complete phone records from all Verizon U.S. customers, including landline and wireless accounts, was published Wednesday.

Read more

Massive Police Operation in Effect as Bilderberg Confab Convenes

0

Infowars.com
June 6, 2013

The Watford Observer reports that “a massive police operation is being mounted around the hotel using anti-terror laws to close roads and footpaths” as the Bilderberg confab convenes and members of the financial elite arrive to discuss their agenda behind closed doors.

In addition to a large influx of police, the government has declared a no-fly zone over the globalist event, according to the newspaper.

Residents of the area are experiencing a virtual police state. “All public rights of way across the grounds of The Grove, including the towpath of the Grand Union Canal, are now suspended for the duration of the three-day conference.”

Roads are closed down and residents are required to show their papers as a prerequisite to gain access to their community.

Citizens invariably suffer when the global elite meet to discuss their annual plans for world government, war and economic implosion. Moreover, in addition to citizens enduring Gestapo-like treatment, police have manhandled the media and treated demonstrators as domestic terrorists.

Politicians are not immune. In 2011, at the Bilderberg confab in Switzerland, Italian European Parliament member Mario Borghezio was roughed up by police at the Suvretta hotel in St. Moritz.

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Feds Using AP and IRS Scandals To Limit First Amendment Rights

0

Donna Anderson
Infowars.com
June 6, 2013

There’s been a subtle shift in the language coming out of Washington lately. If you pay attention and listen closely you’ll be fine. But it’s like one of those subliminal messages they used in the old movies — the new language is best absorbed subconsciously, while you’re thinking about something else. And the Feds are hoping that if they repeat it often enough you’ll willingly roll over and forfeit your first amendment rights.

Of course, at the top of the list, we have Congress debating a new media shield law in response to the Justice Department’s overreach in targeting AP reporters. On the surface it seems pretty cut-and-dried — a media shield law would protect journalists and their sources.

But anytime you implement a law you are essentially drawing a line in the sand, a line that can now, easily, be erased and moved until you’re boxed into a tiny little corner.

The proposed law only protects journalists to a certain degree. Journalists can still be subpoenaed to turn over their sources if it’s believed to affect national security matters, and yes, journalists can appeal to a federal judge. But let’s face it, who appoints those federal judges? Certainly not the journalists.

And as we’ve seen happen so many times in the past, the definition of “national security” is whatever is most convenient for Obama and the DHS at the time.

While the media shield law in and of itself will limit the press’ first amendment rights, it’s the language coming out of Washington in support of the bill that’s most frightening because it’s influencing every American citizen, not just journalists.

On Sunday, Democratic Senator Dick Durbin appeared on Fox News Sunday. On live TV, in front of millions of average American viewers, he questioned the media shield law and whether it should apply to bloggers.

Mr. Durbin said, (emphasis mine) “Here is the bottom line — the media shield law, which I am prepared to support … still leaves an unanswered question, which I have raised many times: What is a journalist today in 2013? We know it’s someone that works for Fox or AP, but does it include a blogger? Does it include someone who is tweeting? Are these people journalists and entitled to constitutional protection?”

The First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech for everyone, not just journalists, not just “the press” — everyone:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

But with just a few well-placed words, Durbin would have you believe that the first amendment right of freedom of speech only applies to journalists, and journalists are defined as only those reporters who hold credentialed positions with one of the mainstream media news outlets.

But Senator Durbin isn’t the only one trying to limit free speech. On Tuesday, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) also pushed the subliminal agenda. Speaking to reporters (who may or may not have been credentialed), Durbin had this to say:

“Who is a journalist is a question we need to ask ourselves,” he said. “Is any blogger out there saying anything–do they deserve First Amendment protection? These are the issues of our times.”

To be fair, when it was pointed out to both Senators that everyone enjoys the right to free speech here in America, they quickly jumped in to say that they didn’t deny that right, they were merely questioning where to draw the line between what gets protected and what doesn’t.

In an even more blatant attempt to limit the First Amendment, Sen,. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.), while questioning some of the conservative groups targeted by the IRS, suggested that it was their fault they’d been targeted because they applied for tax exempt status.

“None of your organizations were kept from organizing or silenced. If you didn’t come in and ask for this tax break, you would have never had a question asked of you.”

That statement, in itself, is scary enough, but it’s what he said to Fox News’ Megyn Kelly in a follow-up interview that really hits the subliminal nail on the head. When Kelly pointed out that many conservative groups were kept waiting months or even years for approval for tax exempt status and wasn’t that the same thing as being denied, McDermott said,

“Yes, but they were never denied their exemption. They could still operate…They can still collect money, they can still put out advertisements, they can use their First Amendment rights — nobody at the IRS stopped them from doing that.” (emphasis mine)

Again, McDermott is subliminally suggesting that certain groups or individuals are not entitled to their First Amendment right to freedom of speech, that it’s a right bestowed by those in authority upon only those who qualify.

Even Michelle Obama is using mind control tactics to teach us that we really don’t have the rights we think we have. When confronted by a heckler during a Democratic fundraiser, instead of allowing the heckler to have her say and politely waiting for silence Mrs. Obama said, “One of the things I don’t do well is this.”

She then pointed at the heckler and delivered her ultimatum: They could listen to her or the heckler could have the microphone, “but I’m leaving. You all decide. You have one choice.”

The message is subtle but it’s appearing more and more often. If we don’t start paying attention we’re going to lose our Constitutional right to free speech.

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Britain to hand over Afghan detainees

0

Afghan detainees being held by UK forces will be handed back to Afghan judicial system, MoD says.

Afghan detainees being held in Britainâ„¢s Camp Bastion in the southern province of Helmand will be handed back to Afghan judicial system, Britainâ„¢s Ministry of Defence (MoD) has announced.

The decision comes after last weekËœs revelations that UK forces in Afghanistan are holding eighty to ninety Afghan nationals without trial in the war-torn South Asian country.

“We have been working to identify a safe transfer route to Afghan custody and I am pleased that this work has come to fruition,” said British Defence Secretary Philip Hammond.

British troops in Afghanistan are allowed to detain suspects for only ninety six hours at the most. Lawyers acting on behalf of some detainees, however, said some prisoners were being held for up to 14 months without being given any kind of trial date, or prospect of one.

The lawyers said in an earlier statement that what MoD is doing is Å“a clear breach of UK and international law”.

According to the MoD, the detaineesâ„¢ transfer, which had been suspended in November amid claims prisoners were being mistreated, will be resumed after 21 days.

British forces have been based in Helmand province since the US-led war in Afghanistan began in 2001. Some 9,000 British troops are currently stationed in the war-ravaged country.

MOS/HE

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

‘Syria needless of Iran military aid’

0

Syrians wave national flag as they celebrate in the main square of al-Qusayr in Syria’s Homs Province, June 5, 2013.

Iranian deputy foreign minister for Arab and African affairs says Syria does not require the Islamic Republicâ„¢s military assistance in its fight against foreign-backed Takfiri militants.

Hossein Amir-Abdollahian said on Thursday that the recent victory scored by Syrian troops in the strategic town of al-Qusayr was the result of the struggles and perseverance of Syrian nation and army as “the Syrian government does not need Iranian fighters and weapons.”

The Iranian diplomat made the remarks in response to a Wednesday statement by White House spokesman, Jay Carney, claiming that the Syrian government Å“could not contest the opposition’s control of Qusayr on its own, and is depending upon Hezbollah and Iran to do its work for it in Qusayr.”

Amir-Abdollahian, however, reiterated that the Islamic Republic will continue its strong support for Syria.

The Syrian army managed to fully recapture the western town of al-Qusayr, an important center and supply route for the foreign-sponsored militants fighting against the Arab state, following three weeks of combat, Syriaâ„¢s state television reported on Wednesday.

Many of the foreign-backed militants and members of the armed groups were reportedly killed or injured during the Syrian army operation to clean Qusayr from terrorists.

Foreign-sponsored militancy in Syria, which erupted in March 2011, has claimed the lives of many people, including large numbers of Syrian soldiers and security personnel.

MKA/SS/HMV

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Would-Be World’s Biggest Oil Merger Agreed at Bilderberg

0

Steve Watson
Infowars.com
June 6, 2013

Despite countless examples that prove the contrary, detractors, debunkers and non believers continually argue that the Bilderberg group holds no power, and that it is just a talking shop for elite has-beens. Now yet more evidence has emerged that policy and secret multi-billion deals between business heads and government are formulated at the meeting.

The London Telegraph today reports in it’s article titled Bilderberg Group? No conspiracy, just the most influential group in the world, that recently, a major oil deal, in fact what would be the world’s biggest, was formulated at a Bilderberg meeting:

“And for business leaders, it is a perfect opportunity to lay the groundwork for deals.” the report states.

“According to Tom Bergin’s Spills and Spin, the account of the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster, Lord Browne, the head of BP, used a walk by Lake Como at the 2004 gathering in Italy to suggest a vast merger with Shell to create the world’s biggest oil company.”

“Lord Browne left under the impression it would happen.” the report asserts.

Indeed, the cards have been firmly on the table regarding the deal, and industry experts are sure that it is only a matter of time before the merger goes ahead.

Representatives from both BP and Shell are at the Bilderberg meeting this year, as usual, as well as members of the Dutch royal family and the Dutch prime minister — Shell Oil is a subsidiary of Royal Dutch Shell, which was founded under a royal charter.

The report also notes how Lord Healey, a long time Bilderberg attendee, recalls the importance of the discussions that were held there regarding policy on the Vietnam war, and particularly on European integration:

Most vividly, he recalls its role in bringing the architects of the European integration — Schmidt, Pompidou, Giscard d’Estaing, Leone — together for open-ended discussions with bankers and economists about how the European monetary system might work.

“The great advantage of the Bilderberg thing was they did not have to reach agreement. You had time to discuss things with people who influence events who normally you would not meet at all.”

He adds: “People could talk very freely, much more freely than they would at home.”

Would the European Union and single currency have taken the shape they have now without those early Bilderberg meetings, I ask him.

“I think it was a very important element in it. Whether it would have happened without it is difficult to say,” he says.

Indeed, documents read by the BBC and later released by Wikileaks divulge how Bilderberg members were discussing the creation of the euro single currency nearly 40 years before it was officially introduced in the 1992 Maastricht Treaty.

“A meeting in June in Europe of the Bilderberg Group- an informal club of leading politicians, businessmen and thinkers chaired by Mr. Davignon- could also ‘improve understanding’ on future action, in the same way it helped create the Euro in the 1990s, he said,” reported the EU Observer in March 2009.

As we have exhaustively documented, there are numerous examples to illustrate the fact that Bilderberg is not merely a “talking shop” as some in the corporate press frame it, but a venue where consensus is formed for the implementation of both national and geopolitical policies.

In spring 2002, when war hawks in the Bush administration were pushing for a summer invasion of Iraq, Bilderbergers expressed their desire for a delay and the attack was not launched until March the following year.

In 2006, journalists who got leaked information from inside Bilderberg predicted that the U.S. housing market would be allowed to soar before the bubble was cruelly popped, which is exactly what transpired.

In June 2008, we learned that Bilderberg were creating the conditions for a financial calamity, which is exactly what began a few months later with the collapse of Lehman Brothers.

Bilderberg has habitually flexed its muscles in establishing its role as kingmaker. The organization routinely selects presidential candidates as well as running mates and prime ministers.

Despite widespread expectation that former British Prime Minister Tony Blair would be announced as the first European Union President, the former Prime Minister of Belgium, Herman Van Rompuy, was picked for the role just days after he attended a Bilderberg Group dinner meeting.

Bill Clinton and Tony Blair were both groomed by the secretive organization in the early 1990’s before rising to prominence.

Barack Obama’s running mate Joe Biden was selected by Bilderberg luminary James A. Johnson, and John Kerry’s 2004 running mate John Edwards was also anointed by the group after he gave a glowing speech at the conference in 2004.

Despite the fact that the establishment media, many titans of which are Bilderberg members, routinely plays down the weight of the group’s influence on world affairs, in a 2010 radio interview former NATO Secretary-General and Bilderberg member Willy Claes admitted that Bilderberg attendees are mandated to implement decisions that are formulated during the annual conference of power brokers.

Although the topics on the agenda are usually disclosed during the course of the Bilderberg meeting, we already know that the group will have an influence on picking Mitt Romney’s running mate for the U.S. presidential election, with Florida Senator Marco Rubio being the firm favorite.

Rubio recently flaunted his “foreign policy chops” during a Brookings Institution speech in which he called for the U.S. to attack Syria and Iran.

The damn is breaking on Bilderberg secrecy, and the group knows it, hence their teasing a public press conference. That is why 2013′s meeting represents an unprecedented breakthrough that should be celebrated, preferably with a show of unity at The Grove hotel in Watford by anyone who values government transparency and corporate acountability.

–––––––––––––––––––––-

Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Infowars.com, and Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham, and a Bachelor Of Arts Degree in Literature and Creative Writing from Nottingham Trent University.

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 9:55 am

Tags:






<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

The Wandering Europeans

0

Next to U.S. support for Israel, the main reason why the military occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip continues is that the Europeans have reduced themselves to a subservient role in the Middle East Peace Process: one in which they underwrite the cost of Israel’s occupation by artificially propping up the Palestinian Authority, which created from the Oslo Peace Accords but has no sovereign authority whatever.

Coming on the heels of a recently published open letter on the Middle East peace process from ‘the European Eminent Persons Group’, a new report from the European Council on Foreign Relations, Europe and the Vanishing Two-State Solution, spills the beans, and they’re all Europeans beans. The author is not your average run-of-the-mill report writer, he is Nick Witney, who previously worked for the European Defence Agency where he was first chief executive. Before that, his career was divided between the UK diplomatic service and UK defence ministry. So Witney is in a position to know.

After reading this new report, I was moved to write this opinion piece and call it “The wandering Europeans”. The title is not innocent (the original version of the legend about “the wandering Jew” concerns a Jew who taunted Jesus on the way to the Crucifixion and was then cursed to walk the earth until the Second Coming). This piece concerns a European Union of 27 states, comprising of a population of over 500 million (7.3% of the world population), which entered the Middle East peace process in the back seat of an American-driven U.S. car; it paid the ride’s expenses but refused to take the wheel, acknowledging that the driver was drunk and swaying near the cliff.

The EU remains the largest financial donor to the Palestinian Authority, but refuses to address this political conflict by using the non-violent tools available to it, diplomatic, economic or political. The most we have come to expect – rather late in the game – from EU bureaucracy are well-crafted statements, condemnations and reports. The EU knows exactly what is happening on the ground. They have documented Israel’s illegal military occupation for all to read. EU officials can rattle off the exact violations of international law and know, in minute detail, in what Palestinian city, village, refugee camp and hamlet the violations are taking place. Yet no real action is taken to stop, or even hinder, the Israeli bulldozer which is destroying all hopes for peace.

At first glance, the European Eminent Persons Group’s open letter sounds bold; it depicts the two-state solution as being on a crash course with history. However, a closer look finds loaded language, such as calling the Israeli colonization of Palestine a mere “dispute,” or laying equal blame on Palestinians and Israelis for the failure of restarting negotiations, or stating that the two-state “solution” is the “only one recognized by the UN resolutions as just and equitable”[bold added]. The report goes on to encourage reform of the Palestinian Liberation Organization, but interferes in internal Palestinian affairs by conditioning this representation as it sees fit, by ignoring the majority of Palestinians who are refugees and who happen to live outside of Palestine. This group comprises a number of former presidents, prime ministers, ministers and senior officials of EU member states, some of whom were in office when the EU issued its damning reports about Israel’s violations of international law, so one would have expected a more accurate articulation of the current state of affairs.

The European Council on Foreign Relations report (Europe and the Vanishing Two-State Solution) is much more honest. Staring with the title, it makes a clear link between the loss of the two-state solution and Europe. Also it addresses the exact state of affairs the region faces: the loss of a historic paradigm called two states. The report leaves the European emperor not only naked but holding a checkbook, ready to continue to underwrite the status quo that is leading the region to a historic collapse. The report notes:

Israel’s election has produced a new government with an even more pronounced annexationist bent towards the West Bank, while US President Obama’s visit to the region lived down to the minimal expectations prepared for it.

Most [EU] member states acknowledge the strategic and economic importance of Middle East peace; many feel a strong political, even emotional, attachment to the aim. But few are much concerned to act decisively. Most prefer to treat the EU’s carefully elaborated positions on the “Middle East Peace Process” as a collective alibi, useful for deflecting criticism from the protagonists while they develop bilateral relations on the basis of national interest.

It [Israel] is the EU’s largest trading partner in the Mediterranean, and 24th in the world – ahead of such economies as Indonesia or Argentina.

In recent years, Israel has been among the top ten global arms exporters. Several of our correspondents identified links in these areas as lying at the heart of bilateral economic relations with Israel.

As employer of last resort, the [Palestinian Authority] public sector now accounts for 23 percent of jobs. The recent resignation of Fayyad confirms that “Fayyadism” has reached a dead end.

Israel is at pains to obscure the scale of its budgetary support to the settlement enterprise. But recent estimates of the direct and indirect subsidy, excluding security-related costs, are of the order of €200 million to €300 million a year. At one level, of course, these figures are a depressing confirmation of the commitment of the Israeli state to the settlers’ agenda.

…if elites favour “business as usual” with Israel, public opinion across the EU is consistently less patient with Israeli policies and more sympathetic to the Palestinians’ predicament. And the successive votes at the UN in 2011 and 2012 show that governments are now moving in a similar direction. Israel is in danger of “losing” Europe.

Further entrenchment of the occupation as hope for a two-state solution fades will make the parallels with apartheid South Africa increasingly difficult to ignore. Sanctions and international isolation will follow; and an eventual bloody catastrophe seems more probable than a “Rainbow Nation” [a “one-state solution”] sequel.

European efforts to restrain Israel from entrenching its occupation have had little impact. Their efforts to sustain the Palestinian Authority (backed by more than an annual €1 billion of aid) have not fared much better. “State building” has been a dead end, contributing to the creation of a dependency culture in the West Bank and masking the hollowing-out of the real economy.

So polling, and voting, and official statements all tell the same story – that Europe is becoming increasingly concerned for the continued viability of the two-state solution, and increasingly ready to tag Israel with the main responsibility for the impasse in negotiations and the deterioration of prospects for viable Palestinian statehood.

This non-Jewish cuckoo in the nest is what makes the mindset of “managing” the conflict with the Palestinians rather than resolving it so self-deluding. And it is what makes the vision of an Israel that comes to embrace Judaea and Samaria [West Bank] and yet remains both Jewish and democratic simply unattainable. The Israel of the future can be any two out of the three of Jewish, democratic, and enlarged to the banks of the Jordan – but it cannot, without large-scale ethnic cleansing, be all three.

The report goes on in great detail. However, like all previous reports, when it comes to what to do with all this information, it falls short. It notes: “[U.S. Secretary of State John] Kerry has evidently seized this point [need for “bolder” economic efforts] and is working on a package of measures to promote economic development in the West Bank. For European donors, the strategy should be to put the PA on notice that the days of the dependency state are numbered – but that Europe will stay around long enough to assist them in shifting their focus from “state-building” to “economy-building”[bold added].

After building a reality of dependency, the suggestion that Europe drops the issue of a Palestinian state, a state that all but one EU member state just voted for UN membership this past November! But this and other EU reports reveal the elementary finding that, without statehood, there is no sustainable Palestinian economy under military occupation.

The report ends with more unfeasible advice. “Palestinians must be empowered to earn their own living – matching a progressive reduction in European budgetary support – and the terms of the occupation [bold added] must be altered to enable the Oslo intention of a progressive build-up in the role and authority of the PA.” Speaking of any tomorrow that leaves the Israeli military occupation in place, regardless of the “terms,” is an insult, not only to readers’ intelligence but to the very same EU that keeps pumping out report after report and statement after statement calling for an end to the over four decades of Israeli occupation.

The “wandering Europeans” are doomed to remain in the back seat of the American-driven, U.S. car paying all the while for the ride’s expenses. The only modification to this revised legend is that when the car falls off the two-state cliff, the Europeans will not be able to say they didn’t know, since they wrote the script for the fall line by line.

Sam Bahour is a policy advisor of Al-Shabaka, The Palestinian Policy Network.

This was first published at: http://bit.ly/the-wandering-europeans

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

The Lautenberg Amendment

0

Adam Clymer’s New York Times article on the death of New Jersey Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (June 4, 2013) briefly mentions a “Lautenberg measure [that] gave refugee status to people from historically persecuted groups without requiring them to show that they had been singled out” and noted that the senator “estimated that 350,000 to 400,000 Jews entered the United States under the 1990 law” and that “Evangelical Christians from the former Soviet Union also benefited from the law.”

The article does not mention some of the most significant aspects of the little-known Lautenberg Amendment, Public Law 101-167, which was enacted November 21, 1989 and has been renewed annually by the U.S. Congress.

According to the Congressional Research Service (report on “Refugee Admissions and Resettlement Policy”) the Lautenberg Amendment, allows those groups covered by the legislation (nationals from the former Soviet Union, Estonia, Latvia or Lithuania who are Jews, Evangelical Christians, Ukrainian Catholics or Ukrainian Orthodox; nationals of Vietnam, Laos, or Cambodia; and Jews, Christians, Baha’is and other religious minorities from Iran) to prove they are eligible for special refugee status “with a credible, but not necessarily individual, fear of persecution.” By contrast, the Immigration and Nationality Act “requires prospective refugees to establish a well-founded fear of persecution on a case-by-case basis.” Those covered by the Lautenberg Amendment are eligible for Special Cash Assistance and for Federal Public Assistance Programs including, but not limited to, Social Security, Medicaid, Food Stamps, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.

CRS statistics indicate that over 370,000 refugees were admitted from the Former Soviet Union in the first ten years of the Lautenberg Amendment. In October 2002 the Jewish Telegraphic Agency reported that “The Lautenberg Amendment allowed some 350,000 to 400,000 Jews from the former Soviet Union to gain entry into the United States without having to prove they were individually persecuted.” In 2010 the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society cited Eric Rubin, Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow stating that the amendment had resulted in almost 440,000 refugees from the former Soviet Union and other regions of the world.

In the year 1992, according to an article in The Christian Science Monitor, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees estimated that there were 16 to 17 million refugees worldwide of whom the U.S. planned to fund the admission of 122,000, half of whom were to come from the Commonwealth of Independent States (states of the former Soviet Union), with approximately eighty percent of that number being Jewish applicants. The UNHCR pointed out at that time that almost no one emigrating from the CIS was a refugee as defined by the U.N., but that “once an individual asserts that he is a member of the covered class and asserts that he has been persecuted or has a fear of persecution, that individual shall be deemed a refugee.”

Of particular interest in this regard was Senator Lautenberg’s statement in his December 17, 2011, Press Release that “I created this program to allow religious minorities to come live safely in the United States and I am proud that it helped hundred of thousands of people.” Although Lautenberg maintained that his amendment was religion-related, the UJA-Federation of New York’s Jewish Community Study of New York: 2011 Community Report indicates that “almost a fourth” of Russian-speaking Jews in New York “consider themselves belonging to no religion.”

Charles Kamasaki, Executive Vice-President of the National Council of La Raza, in an article in the American Jewish Committee publication Latinos and Jews pointed out that “the admission of former Soviet Jews” under this “special” status meant that “former Soviet Jews were eligible for eventual permanent resident status as well as access to cash assistance, language courses, and job-training programs normally provided only to bona fide refugees.” He added, “To some Hispanic advocates, the inequity was obvious.”

Michelle Alexander in The New Jim Crow describes how “Mass incarceration marginalizes large segments of the African-American community, . . . and then authorizes discrimination against them in voting, employment, housing education, public benefits, and jury service.” Here too, the contrast with the treatment afforded to those covered by the Lautenberg amendment is “obvious.”

A brief look at the Lautenberg Amendment on immigration reveals disparities in classification and treatment between those who are covered and those not covered by the amendment and related special programs and assistance. A much closer look at the disparities in classification and treatment can provide important information for those struggling for more equal and just immigration, refugee, and domestic policies.

For those interested in further investigation of the Lautenberg Amendment on Immigration, the following information was provided by the Public Service Division of the Law Library of Congress —

The Lautenberg Amendment on immigration is part of Pub. L. 101-167 and 8 CFR 245.7. 

8 CFR 245.7 is a Federal regulation on the “Adjustment of status of certain Soviet and Indochinese parolees under the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1990 (Pub. L. 101-167).  Federal regulations are issued by federal agencies and the issuing agency has authority to make the regulation under laws issued by Congress.  This authority can be very direct as in the case of this regulation or more indirect.

Pub. L. 101-167 can be found on the Law Library of Congress’ website THOMAS. Select the option “Public Laws” under the heading “More Legislative Information.”  At the next screen select the 101st Congress and then select the range that includes 167.  At the following screen scroll down to 167 and click on H.R. 3743 which is the original bill number.  At the following screen you will get Bill Summary & Status information with links to additional information.  You can access the final text of the legislation by clicking on “Text of Legislation.”  The final version of the bill is the enrolled version, version 2 in this case.  The legislative history of the bill can be found under “All Congressional Actions with Amendments.”  

Dr. Jeffrey B. Perry is an independent, anti-white supremacist, working class scholar. His writing focuses on the lives and work of the anti-white supremacist, working class intellectuals and activists Hubert H. Harrison and Theodore W. Allen. His website is www.jeffreybperry.net

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

ILWU’s Northwest Grain Conflict

0

When Wisconsin state workers were courageously occupying the state capitol to protest Governor Scott Walker’s attack on their unions’ right to bargain, AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka trumpeted a call for solidarity actions throughout the labor movement on April 4, 2011 the anniversary of the assassination of Martin Luther King, killed during the Memphis sanitation workers’ strike. International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) president Robert McEllrath reiterated the call to mobilize labor. It was to be a day of “no business as usual” proclaimed the labor media. Yet, only one union, ILWU Local 10, organized a solidarity job action that day shutting down the port of Oakland and sending their Drill Team to march with their sisters and brothers in the Wisconsin battleground.

When the employers’ Pacific Maritime Association (PMA) threatened a Taft-Hartley lawsuit against the local for an illegal sympathy strike, neither Trumka nor McEllrath came to their defense. But the Labor Federations of South Central Wisconsin, San Francisco, South Bay and Alameda passed resolutions defending ILWU Local 10 as labor’s moral compass. As the Wisconsin labor federation messaged to a rally in front of PMA headquarters in San Francisco: “Whether it’s racist apartheid in South Africa, imperialist war in Iraq, or fascist plutocracy in Wisconsin, Local 10, over and over again, shows us what a Union [should] look like!!” (see https://sites.google.com/site/defendilwulocal10)

ILWU vs the Grain Monopolies

Now the ILWU is under attack from the grain monopolies, “ABCD” – Archer Daniels Midland, Bunge, Cargill and Dreyfus who control 75-90% of the world’s grain trade. According to Oxfam their profits are rooted in the world’s hunger and poverty not to mention ecological devastation and attacks on unions. ILWU longshoremen are locked out and scabs are doing their work in Vancouver, Washington and across the Columbia River in Portland, Oregon. The union has only put up token informational picket lines while scabs continue to taunt them provocatively. Picket lines mean “DON’T CROSS”! ILWU’s militant history shows mass labor mobilizations can stop scabbing. Only a couple of years ago, led by Longview Local 21, longshoremen sporatically took militant actions. But the International union leadership to date remains paralyzed, unwilling to do what it takes to stop these employer attacks.

What’s at stake here is the future of the ILWU, and of the entire labor movement. If employers can attack what historically has been the most militant trade union in the U.S. without any unified response from organized labor, then the obvious question is: Where is the trade union movement heading? If unions like the Operating Engineers and now the Masters, Mates and Pilots Union (MMP) can waltz across union-sanctioned picket lines without a qualm and the head of the AFL-CIO remains silent, then what kind of a labor movement do we have? Worse still, according to an ILWU document, not only has the MMP crossed a picket line, they’re renting “office space to Gettier (strikebreakers’ Services) in the MMP’s building less than a mile from the Portland docks.” And both MMP and ILWU are members of the newly-formed Maritime Labor Alliance!

To rub salt into the festering wound, one Teamster official in California publicly ridiculed ILWU to one of its members for his union’s lack of resolve to defend itself. Two years ago, at the time of ILWU’s Wisconsin solidarity action the Teamsters raided ILWU warehouse Local 17 in Sacramento taking over the local, lock, stock and barrel. There was no fight back nor was there any mention in the ILWU’s newspaper The Dispatcher. And the Teamsters also are in a waterfront alliance with the longshore union!

Longshoremen Led the Struggle, But Then…

In 2011, U.S.-based Bunge began an employers’ feeding frenzy, by hiring another union Operating Engineers Local 701 to scab on ILWU at its new grain facility in Longview, Washington, the Export Grain Terminal (EGT). Then, EGT demanded and got cataclysmic concessions. Bunge is the dominant consortium partner of EGT with Japanese-owned grain trader Itochu and Korean-owned STX Pan Ocean Shipping.

Initially, rank-and-file longshoremen in the Northwest mounted a bold defense blocking grain trains, twice occupying the EGT facility and on September 8, 2011 shutting down major ports including Portland, Seattle and Tacoma. Longshore workers were linking up with other unions and the Occupy movement for a planned mass mobilization in January 2012 in Longview to “meet and greet” EGT’s first scab grain ship. However, fearing threats from Democratic Party “friends of labor” like President Obama, his Coast Guard and Homeland Security, as well as Washington Governor Gregoire’s mustering of police forces and the mounting fines, union tops capitulated. To mollify angry members, ILWU officers claimed they had a “secret plan” which was neither divulged nor implemented.

Following his members in blocking a train, McEllrath was jailed last year for a day. Rather than shutting down ports in protest for the day (as they’d done in 1980 for Inlandboatmen’s Union president Don Liddle jailed in Seattle for leading a ferry boat strike), officials just gave a nod, as longshore workers walked off the job for barely an hour at the end of the day. This was a sign of weakness rather than a demonstration of strength. Other members were arrested several times and jailed for weeks, like Byron Jacobs, former Secretary-Treasurer of Longview Local 21. Yet, nothing was done to protest their jailing or support their families.

EGT management won their demands: 1) cutting out job dispatch through the union hiring hall, the basis of ILWU’s power won in the militant 1934 West Coast Maritime Strike; 2) elimination of all ship clerks’ jobs (now done by management); 3) a minimum of 12-hour shifts; 4) removal of the union operator from the grain loading console (this, too, done by management); 5) no grievance machinery or work stoppages for safety; 6) allowing work to continue behind union picket lines with scabs and managers. McEllrath and ILWU Coast Committeeman Leal Sundet, who heads up grain negotiations and was formerly a PMA honcho in the Columbia River, claimed a jurisdiction “victory”. With more “victories” like this, the future of the ILWU is in jeopardy!

10 Steps Down the Road to Defeat

“Big Bob”, as McEllrath’s cohorts call him, and Coast Committeeman Leal Sundet, now the leadership of the union, have turned the once-militant ILWU around 180 degrees on a course toward business unionism. They want to collaborate with management, but the grain monopolies are giving them a cold shoulder. Their actions endanger the union. Let’s count (some of) the ways:

They have plotted a legalistic, super-patriotic course in the conflict with the grain monopolies, as well as filing ineffective charges with the NLRB and the courts. There’s a crying need to stop the scabbing and end the lockout in Vancouver and Portland through a mass mobilization of labor. That’s the ILWU’s militant legacy. Yet, when Sundet and McEllrath organized a flag-waving rally at United Grain, owned by Mitsui, patriotic, anti-Japanese venom was spewed. Rather than linking up with unions here and internationally, especially in Japan, they led workers not through the gates of United Grain to chase out the Gettier Security scabs but to Mitsui headquarters demanding they sign the “good” concessionary interim contract signed by “an American company,” Cargill/TEMCO. ILWU arbitrations show they have one of the worst anti-union records.

The power of the longshore union is at the point of production, on the docks under the hook. During ILWU’s Boron miners lockout in the Mojave Desert in 2010 by British-owned Rio Tinto, the leadership ordered picketing of the British Consulates, attended corporate shareholders meetings and lobbied politicians. They told pickets to record the number of the scab containers and they’d be stopped in the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Yet, not one scab container was stopped. A big caravan was organized with much fanfare from the docks to the desert. It should’ve gone from the desert to the docks where ILWU’s power is to stop scab containers. Again, they marched in the wrong direction!

McEllrath and Sundet oppose the ILWU’s “bottom-up, not top-down” union democracy. They denied Longview longshore workers the right to read, discuss and vote on the EGT grain contract as guaranteed in the ILWU Constitution. They refused to call a Longshore Caucus (Convention) at the start of the EGT dispute for delegates to hammer out a program of action to stop the scabbing at EGT. They undermine any rank-and-file longshore action, opposing rank-and file-rallies to stop the scabbing. To enforce their policies of capitulation they give virtually no information to the membership on the Coast about the Northwest grain conflict.

Big Bob McEllrath and his partner, Pacific Maritime Association head James McKenna, in a gesture of ultimate class collaboration, together received the Connie Award from the maritime employers’ Containerization and Intermodal Institute for signing a six-year contract in 2008 without a strike. Yet the contract included a robotics clause which is already devastating longshore jobs in Los Angeles and other major ports. It also included a clause to allow employers to negotiate a change in the medical benefit administrator, something the ranks have always opposed. Now the bottom feeder Blue Cross/Blue Shield administrates the plan and is blocking benefits. It so outraged pensioners that they’ve picketed terminals in Tacoma and Oakland stopping ships. That’s the only thing employers understand, the old-timers say.

Despite a majority vote by the Longshore Caucus in 2009, Sundet and McEllrath opposed a union defense campaign for two black longshore workers racially profiled and attacked by police in the port of Sacramento under the guise of “port security.” This signaled a clear break from the ILWU’s principle of defending the rights of black longshoremen which was key to winning the 1934 maritime strike in San Francisco.

McEllrath tried to stop Local 10’s Caucus resolution in 2008 to shutdown West Coast ports for May Day to protest the imperialist wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. When it was clear it was going to pass, Big Bob asked it be changed to an eight-hour shutdown. He and his clique crafted the Seattle demonstration into more of a patriotic parade than a protest demanding troop withdrawal.

McEllrath supported the attempt at the 2009 Convention to change the union’s name back to International Longshoremen’s and Warehousemen’s Union. This 16-year-old name change was made to recognize the leading role women have been playing in the union, especially in ILWU’s Rite Aid warehouse organizing drive. Changing it would’ve been a slap in the face of women members. Delegates overwhelmingly rose to oppose the name change, projecting the image of recently-deceased radical ILWU Hawaiian activist Ah Quon McElrath (no relationship personally or politically) on the wall. Big Bob quickly conceded and had the resolution of his supporters withdrawn.

In 2010, when the ILWU Local 63 Office Clerical Unit, the majority womens’ local, went on strike in Los Angeles and Long Beach because contract negotiations for the local broke down longshore workers honored the picket lines at first. Then, when the arbitrator unfairly ruled it was an illegal picket line, the International officers adhered to this phony ruling as longshoremen, in violation of ILWU’s 10 Guiding Principles, crossed their own union’s picket line. It wasn’t until this year when the local went back on strike and picket lines were honored that the dispute was finally resolved. Stunningly, the Longshore Caucus in April did not to allow the Office Clerical Unit to join the Longshore Division of the union.

When the populist Occupy Wall Street movement was in New York, McEllrath sent words of encouragement. However, when they shocked the PMA by shutting down the port of Oakland November 2, 2011 with a march of some 30,000 to protest police brutality against their City Hall encampment and in solidarity with Longview longshore workers, McElllrath and the International officers refused to participate in this mass outpouring of anger against Wall Street on the waterfront. However, Longview longshore union president, Dan Coffman addressed an Occupy Oakland rally giving his heartfelt thanks to Occupy, commending their action for bolstering his members’ morale. (www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtdQCZSQ99I) When Occupy organized a solidarity rally for Longview longshore workers at the Labor Temple in Seattle with rank and file ILWU speakers to build up for a mass mobilization to confront a scab ship docking at the EGT terminal, McEllrath and Sundet supporters made sure the meeting was broken up.

To cover their tracks in the labor movement and the left, they hired Craig Merrilees as communications director, a top-down man whose main qualification was experience in squelching union democracy. First they fired former ILWU Dispatcher editor Steve Stallone in 2007, in large part for his criticism of a blatantly pro-Zionist article by ILWU Secretary-Treasurer Willie Adams that was contrary to the union’s position on Palestinian rights. (Adams had just returned from a trip to Israel sponsored by the Zionist government.) Merrilees was a staffer in AFSCME in Washington, D.C., who was dispatched by union president McEntee in 2005 to run Local 3299 at the University of California at Berkeley under trusteeship. When workers rejected McEntee’s proposed settlement and wildcatted, Merriless was there to put out the fire. Then-Executive Board member MaryAnn Ring remembers Merrilees saying at a meeting “This is not a democracy!” He’s certainly found his niche in the ILWU under McEllrath and Sundet.

Lessons of Maritime Labor History

Seventy-five years ago, the maritime section of the militant wing of the American labor movement, the Congress of Industrial Unions (CIO), was led by the ILWU and the National Maritime Union (NMU), which at its peak represented nearly 100,000 seamen. The heads of both unions, Harry Bridges and “Big Joe” Curran respectively, publicly sympathized with the Communist Party. CIO unions challenged capitalist property rights by occupying ships, plants and mines. They inspired workers by leading militant strikes and racially integrating their unions and communities. Union recognition and decent contracts were won through mass labor mobilizations. The trade-union movement grew by leaps and bounds, breaking from the old business unionism mold of the American Federation of Labor (AFL).

But during World War II, the Communist Party and its sympathizers imposed a no-strike ban, in the name of supporting the war effort, which lost them some backing from members. Then, after the war, the anti-communist hysteria of the McCarthy period wreaked havoc on the unions. Curran jumped ship and fingered reds who’d built the NMU from the beginning to the Coast Guard, the waterfront police. They were purged from the maritime industry and the union.

Some like the legendary black orator Ferdinand Smith (Red Seas: Ferdinand Smith and Radical Black Sailors in the United States and Jamaica by Gerald Horne) were deported. Smith went back to Jamaica. Thousands, mostly African Americans, were blacklisted from the waterfront. The government tried four times to deport the self-proclaimed Marxist Harry Bridges back to Australia, but they never could prove he was a member of the Communist Party. Moreover, they knew the threat of a West Coast longshore strike loomed large if they did.

The ILWU became a haven for those purged like Jim Herman (later ILWU president). Shaun Maloney, an organizer of the militant 1934 Minneapolis Teamsters’ strike who’d gone to federal prison along with the rest of the Trotskyist strike leadership prior to WWII, later became Seattle longshore president. And Blackie Meyers, who’d been NMU Vice President, became a member of Ship Clerks Local 34 in San Francisco. Now the gutted NMU became increasingly defenseless as shipowners began to register ships under foreign flags to escape unions. Each successive NMU contract was called a “victory” by “Big Joe” Curran despite having fewer ships, smaller crews and worse conditions and benefits. A few years ago, the skeleton of the NMU, once the largest maritime union, was taken over by the successor union from which it had split 75 years ago, the Seafarers’ International Union. For sailors who remember a militant waterfront, NMU now stands for “No More Union”.

Could The ILWU End Up Like The NMU?

Today top ILWU officers use red-baiting to attack those members who oppose their concessionary bargaining with employers. Yet, if ILWU members don’t fight for their rights and stand up to these grain cartel attacks, the master longshore negotiations in 2014 will be a disaster. The storm warnings are ever present.

After the EGT contract was signed, ILWU officials were quick to claim a “victory”. Communications Director Merrilees made sure the labor and reformist left press echoed that characterization. Coast Committeeman Leal Sundet even boasted “The ILWU contract with EGT is key to standardization of the grain export industry on the West Coast…” (ILWU Dispatcher, January 2012). Yet, with such horrendous union losses longshore veterans countered that it was the “worst concessionary contract ever”

( ILWU Headed In Wrong Direction: EGT-Longview Longshore … ) and warned that it would whet the appetite of the other grain traders of the Pacific Northwest Grainhandlers’ Association who’d extended their contract one year to see how EGT would fare in its war on the ILWU.

The EGT contract was a chumming for sharks, and now they smell blood. In September 2012, all the other grain handlers demanded similar concessions in a laundry list of non-negotiable demands. That’s when Christmas cargo is peaking, the East Coast dockworkers’ contract of the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) had expired and grain elevators were brimming full. It was the time to strike together.

However, ILA President Harold Daggett gave the USMX employers what they wanted, an extension of the contract past Christmas, abandoning the best chance for solidarity between the two longshore unions. After the Christmas holiday, ILWU longshoremen voted to reject the PNGA demands by 94%. But they stood alone now.

ILWU president “Big Bob” McEllrath and Coast Committeeman Sundet got busy with their nationalistic campaign and negotiated a temporary agreement with Cargill/TEMCO containing many of the same giveaways as in the EGT contract. They hailed it as a “win-win” contract and sold it to the membership. But ILWU’s press releases failed to report that the largest grain port on the West Coast, Portland Local 8, voted “no”!

The day after ratification United Grain locked out longshoremen and hired scabs of the Gettier (strikebreaking) Services in February. Columbia Grain followed suit in May. This is the same strikebreaking outfit that was used in ILWU’s Boron lockout in 2010. According to ILWU miners, scabs are still in the Boron mine today!

Portland Leads The Way For ILWU And All Of Labor!

Portland longshoremen voted to hold a rally in a park near Columbia Grain June 1. Seven different union locals in the Portland area voted motions to help build the rally as a show of labor solidarity and power. But the ILWU International officers loudly opposed any such rally. It could lead to an injunction or fines, they argued, and the time to picket is at harvest time. Yet they didn’t do it last year when the time was ripe, and if they wait until next fall to react, the union may not be able to flex its muscle.

Already, these union bureaucrats have had over three months since the lockouts began to organize mass picketing to stop the scabs and haven’t. Meanwhile, there’s simmering anger amongst the rank and file longshoremen. Members of Los Angeles Local 13, the largest local on the Coast with 60% of the longshore membership, came up to Portland for the rally, though it was cancelled, and joined the picket line. Any gain in maritime has been made by the workers themselves taking the bull by the horn and taking care of business. It’s no different today.

The fate of hard-fought union gains and the future of the ILWU is in their hands. It’s either business unionism and defeat, or class-struggle unionism together with all of labor and its supporters. Which road will it be? It’s up to the membership to decide.

Jack Heyman was a seaman in the National Maritime Union and member of the Militant-Solidarity Caucus. In 1980, he joined ILWU, worked on barges and later longshore. Now retired, he chairs the Transport Workers Solidarity Committee. (TWSC) www.transportworkers.org and continues to write on labor and politics. This article first appeared on the TWSC website. 

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

Pipelinistan

0

I have written on more than one occasion about the value of preaching and repeating to the choir on a regular basis. One of my readers agreed with this, saying: “How else has Christianity survived 2,000 years except by weekly reinforcement?”

Well, dear choir, beloved parishioners, for this week’s sermon we once again turn to Afghanistan. As US officials often make statements giving the impression that the American military presence in that sad land is definitely winding down — soon to be all gone except for the standard few thousand American servicemen which almost every country in the world needs stationed on their territory — one regularly sees articles in the mainstream media and government releases trying to explain what it was all about. For what good reason did thousands of young Americans breathe their last breath in that backward country and why were tens of thousands of Afghans dispatched by the United States to go meet Allah (amidst widespread American torture and other violations of human rights)?

The Washington Post recently cited a Defense Department report that states: The United States “has wound up with a reasonable ‘Plan B’ for achieving its core objective of preventing Afghanistan from once again becoming a safe haven for al-Qaeda and its affiliates.”

“Preventing a safe haven for terrorists” — that was the original reason given back in 2001 for the invasion of Afghanistan, a consistency in sharp contrast to the ever-changing explanations for Iraq. However, it appears that the best and the brightest in our government and media do not remember, if they ever knew, that Afghanistan was not really about 9-11 or fighting terrorists (except the many the US has created by its invasion and occupation), but was about pipelines.

President Obama declared in August 2009: “But we must never forget this is not a war of choice. This is a war of necessity. Those who attacked America on 9/11 are plotting to do so again. If left unchecked, the Taliban insurgency will mean an even larger safe haven from which al Qaeda would plot to kill more Americans.” 2

Never mind that out of the tens of thousands of people the United States and its NATO front have killed in Afghanistan not one has been identified as having had anything to do with the events of September 11, 2001.

Never mind — even accepting the official version of 9/11 — that the “plotting to attack America” in 2001 was devised in Germany and Spain and the United States more than in Afghanistan. Why didn’t the United States bomb those countries?

Indeed, what actually was needed to plot to buy airline tickets and take flying lessons in the United States? A room with a table and some chairs? What does “an even larger safe haven” mean? A larger room with more chairs? Perhaps a blackboard? Terrorists intent upon attacking the United States can meet almost anywhere. At the present time there are anti-American terrorist types meeting in Libya, Syria, Turkey, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, democracy_300_470London, Paris, and many other places. And the Taliban of Afghanistan would not be particularly anti-American if the United States had not invaded and occupied their country. The Taliban are a diverse grouping of Afghan insurgents whom the US military has come to label with a single name; they are not primarily international jihadists like al-Qaeda and in fact have had an up-and-down relationship with the latter.

The only “necessity” that drew the United States to Afghanistan was the desire to establish a military presence in this land that is next door to the Caspian Sea region of Central Asia — reportedly containing the second largest proven reserves of petroleum and natural gas in the world — and build oil and gas pipelines from that region running through Afghanistan.

Afghanistan is well situated for such pipelines to serve much of South Asia and even parts of Europe, pipelines that — crucially — can bypass Washington’s bêtes noire, Iran and Russia. If only the Taliban would not attack the lines. Here’s Richard Boucher, US Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs, in 2007: “One of our goals is to stabilize Afghanistan, so it can become a conduit and a hub between South and Central Asia so that energy can flow to the south.” 

Since the 1980s all kinds of pipelines have been planned for the area, only to be delayed or canceled by one military, financial or political problem or another. For example, the so-called TAPI pipeline (Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India) had strong support from Washington, which was eager to block a competing pipeline that would bring gas to Pakistan and India from Iran. TAPI goes back to the late 1990s, when the Taliban government held talks with the California-based oil company Unocal Corporation. These talks were conducted with the full knowledge of the Clinton administration, and were undeterred by the extreme repression of Taliban society. Taliban officials even made trips to the United States for discussions. 

Testifying before the House Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific on February 12, 1998, Unocal representative John Maresca discussed the importance of the pipeline project and the increasing difficulties in dealing with the Taliban:

The region’s total oil reserves may well reach more than 60 billion barrels of oil. Some estimates are as high as 200 billion barrels … From the outset, we have made it clear that construction of the pipeline we have proposed across Afghanistan could not begin until a recognized government is in place that has the confidence of governments, leaders, and our company.

When those talks with the Taliban stalled in 2001, the Bush administration reportedly threatened the Taliban with military reprisals if the Afghan government did not go along with American demands. On August 2 in Islamabad, US State Department negotiator Christine Rocca reiterated to the Taliban ambassador to Pakistan, Abdul Salam Zaeef: “Either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold [oil], or we bury you under a carpet of bombs.” The talks finally broke down for good a month before 9-11.

The United States has been serious indeed about the Caspian Sea and Persian Gulf oil and gas areas. Through one war or another beginning with the Gulf War of 1990-1, the US has managed to establish military bases in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Oman, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Kazakhstan.

The war against the Taliban can’t be “won” short of killing everyone in Afghanistan. The United States may well try again to negotiate some form of pipeline security with the Taliban, then get out, and declare “victory”. Barack Obama can surely deliver an eloquent victory speech from his teleprompter. It might even include the words “freedom” and “democracy”, but certainly not “pipeline”.

“We are literally backing the same people in Syria that we are fighting in Afghanistan and that have just killed our ambassador in Libya! We must finally abandon the interventionist impulse before it is too late.” — Congressman Ron Paul, September 16, 2012 

How it all began: “To watch the courageous Afghan freedom fighters battle modern arsenals with simple hand-held weapons is an inspiration to those who love freedom. Their courage teaches us a great lesson — that there are things in this world worth defending. To the Afghan people, I say on behalf of all Americans that we admire your heroism, your devotion to freedom, and your relentless struggle against your oppressors.” — President Ronald Reagan, March 21, 1983

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

Couple says deputies unlawfully broke into their home

0

Tom Jones
wsbradio.com
June 6, 2013

A husband and wife are livid, saying that sheriff’s deputies barged into their home, handcuffed them and pointed guns at them.

The couple was shocked at what deputies said made them suspects in a home invasion in another county.

“I thought that my life was going to end that night,” Willie Evans said to Channel 2′s Tom Jones.

Read more

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 9:30 am

Tags: ,






<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Samantha Power and the Weaponization of Human Rights

0

Yesterday Barack Obama nominated Samantha Power as UN Ambassador. This profile of Power by lawyer Chase Madar ran in CounterPunch on September 10, 2009.

American liberals rejoiced at Samantha Power’s appointment to the National Security Council. After so many dreary Clintonites were stacked into top State Department positions–Dennis Ross, Richard Holbrooke, Hillary herself–here was new blood: a dynamic idealist, an inspiring public intellectual, a bestselling author of a book against genocide, a professor at Harvard’s Carr Center for Human Rights. And she hasn’t even turned 40. The blogosphere buzzed. Surely Samantha Power was the paladin, the conscience, the senior director for multilateral affairs to bring human rights back into U.S. foreign policy.

Don’t count on it. “Human rights,” a term once coterminous with freeing prisoners of conscience and documenting crimes against humanity, has taken on a broader, more conflicted definition. It can now mean helping the Marine Corps formulate counterinsurgency techniques; pounding the drums for air strikes (of a strictly surgical nature, of course); lobbying for troop escalations in various conquered nations–all for noble humanitarian ends.

The intellectual career of Samantha Power is a richly instructive example of the weaponization of human rights. She made her name in 2002 with A Problem From Hell: America and the Age of Genocide. In this surprise global bestseller, she argues that when confronted with 20th-century genocides, the United States sat on the sidelines as the blood flowed. Look at Bosnia or Rwanda. “Why does the US stand so idly by?” she asks. Powers allows that overall America “has made modest progress in its responses to genocide.” That’s not good enough. We must be bolder in deploying our armed forces to prevent human-rights catastrophes–to engage in “humanitarian intervention” in the patois of our foreign-policy elite.

In nearly 600 pages of text, Power barely mentions those postwar genocides in which the U.S. government, far from sitting idle, took a robust role in the slaughter. Indonesia’s genocidal conquest of East Timor, for instance, expressly green-lighted by President Ford and Secretary of State Kissinger, who met with Suharto the night before the invasion was launched and carried out with American-supplied weapons. Over the next quarter century, the Indonesian army saw U.S. military aid and training rise as it killed between 100,000 and 200,000 East Timorese. (The figures and the designation of “genocide” come from a UN-formed investigative body.) This whole bloody business gets exactly one sentence in Power’s book.

What about the genocide of Mayan peasants in Guatemala–another decades-long massacre carried out with American armaments by a military dictatorship with tacit U.S. backing, officer training at Fort Benning, and covert CIA support? A truth commission sponsored by the Catholic Church and the UN designated this programmatic slaughter genocide and set the death toll at approximately 200,000. But apparently this isn’t a problem from hell.

The selective omissions compound. Not a word about the CIA’s role in facilitating the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of Indonesian Communists in 1965-66. (Perhaps on legalistic grounds: Since it was a political group being massacred, does it not meet the quirky criteria in the flawed UN Convention on Genocide?) Nothing about the vital debate as to whether the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi deaths attributable to U.S.-led economic sanctions in the 1990s count as genocide. The book is primarily a vigorous act of historical cleansing. Its portrait of a “consistent policy of non-intervention in the face of genocide” is fiction. (Those who think that pointing out Power’s deliberate blind spots about America’s active role in genocide is nitpicking should remember that every moral tradition the earth has known, from the Babylonian Talmud to St. Thomas Aquinas, sees sins of commission as far worse than sins of omission.)

Power’s willful historical ignorance is the inevitable product of her professional milieu: the Carr Center for Human Rights at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government. One simply cannot hold down a job at the KSG by pointing out the active role of the U.S. government in various postwar genocides. That is the kind of impolitic whining best left to youthful anarchists like Andrew Bacevich or Noam Chomsky and, really, one wouldn’t want to offend the retired Guatemalan colonel down the hall. (The KSG has an abiding tradition of taking on war criminals as visiting fellows.) On the other hand, to cast the U.S. as a passive, benign giant that must assume its rightful role on the world stage by vanquishing evil–this is most flattering to American amour propre and consonant with attitudes in Washington, even if it doesn’t map onto reality. A country doesn’t acquire a vast network of military bases in dozens of sovereign nations across the world by standing on the sidelines, and for the past hundred years the U.S. has, by any standard, been a hyperactive world presence.

For Samantha Power, the United States can by its very nature only be a force for virtue abroad. In this sense, the outlook of Obama’s human-rights advocate is no different from Donald Rumsfeld’s.

Power’s faith in the therapeutic possibilities of military force was formed by her experience as a correspondent in the Balkans, whose wars throughout the ’90s she seems to view as the alpha and omega of ethnic conflict, indeed of all genocide. For her, NATO’s bombing of Belgrade in 1999 was a stunning success that “likely saved hundreds of thousands of lives” in Kosovo. Yet this assertion seems to crumble a little more each year: estimates of the number of Kosovars slain by the province’s Serb minority have shrunk from 100,000 to at most 5,000. And it is far from clear whether NATO’s air strikes prevented more killing or intensified the bloodshed. Even so, it is the NATO attack on Belgrade–including civilian targets, which Amnesty International has recently, belatedly, deemed a war crime–that informs Power’s belief that the U.S. military possesses nearly unlimited capability to save civilians by means of aerial bombardment, and all we need is the courage to launch the sorties. Power has recently admitted, perhaps a little ruefully, that “the Kosovo war helped build support for the invasion of Iraq by contributing to the false impression that the US military was invincible.” But no intellectual has worked harder than Samantha Power to propagate this impression.

A Problem From Hell won a Pulitzer in early 2003. America’s book reviewers, eager to be team players, were relieved to be reminded of the upbeat side of military force during the build-up to Operation Iraqi Freedom. Surely Saddam Hussein, who had perpetrated acts of genocide against the Kurds, needed to be smashed by military force. Didn’t we owe it to the Iraqis to invade? Hasn’t America played spectator for too long? Power, to her credit, did not support the war, but she has been mighty careful not to raise her voice against it. After all, is speaking out at an antiwar demonstration or joining a peace group like Code Pink really “constructive”? It is certainly no way to get a seat on the National Security Council.

The failed marriage of warfare and humanitarian work is also the subject of Power’s most recent book, Chasing the Flame, a biography of Sergio Vieira de Mello, the UN humanitarian worker who was killed, with 21 others, by a suicide bomber in Baghdad just months after the U.S. invasion. Most of the book is a sensitive and rather gripping account of Vieira’s partial successes and heroic efforts in refugee resettlement in Thailand, Lebanon, and the Balkans. He eventually rose to become the UN’s high commissioner on human rights–a position he left when asked by George W. Bush to lead a UN “presence” in Iraq. That the UN’s top human-rights official would rush to help with the clean-up after an American invasion that contravened international law may strike some observers as strange. (One can imagine the puzzlement and outrage if the UN’s high commissioner on human rights had trailed the Soviets into Afghanistan in 1979 to help build civil society.) But for Vieira, and for Samantha Power, there is nothing unseemly about human-rights professionals serving as adjuncts to a conquering army, especially when the prestige of the UN–scorned and flouted during the run-up to the war–is on the line. Besides, Vieira had the personal assurances of the U.S. administrator, L. Paul Bremer–a simply charming American: he even speaks a foreign language–that the UN taskforce would have a great deal of sway in how a new Iraq was built.

In June 2003, Vieira arrived in Baghdad and was surprised to find himself completely powerless. That Vieira and company believed the UN insignia would be more than a hood ornament on Blackwater’s Humvees bespeaks not tough-minded idealism but wishful thinking. Power herself claims that Kofi Annan’s main reason for sending Vieira off to Baghdad was to remind the world of the UN’s “relevance” by getting a piece of the action. But for him and his colleagues, this confusion of means and ends proved deadly, one of tens of thousands of blood-soaked tragedies that this war has wrought. The clear lesson is that humanitarian work is always fatally compromised if it’s part of a militarized pacification campaign: NGO workers wield no real power and serve mostly as window dressing for the conquering army.

But this isn’t the moral that Power draws. She is still looking for Mr. Good War. Today, her preferred human-rights adventure is an escalation of the war in Afghanistan.

For the past seven years Afghanistan has been the “right” war for American liberals, but this carte blanche is fast expiring, as more civilians and soldiers die, as the Taliban resurges, and as the carnage whirlwinds into Pakistan. The numerous humanitarian nonprofits in Afghanistan are no longer backed up by the military; it is they who are backing the armed forces, having morphed into helpmeets to a counterinsurgency campaign. This transformation has, according to one knowledgeable veteran of such work in Afghanistan, rendered humanitarian work unsustainable. But Power, like so many American liberals, remains committed to “success” in Afghanistan–whatever that means.

As a human-rights entrepreneur who is also a tireless advocate of war, Samantha Power is not aberrant. Elite factions of the human-rights industry were long ago normalized within the tightly corseted spectrum of American foreign policy. Sarah Sewell, the recent head of the Carr Center for Human Rights at Harvard, has written a slavering introduction to the new Army and Marine Corps Counterinsurgency Field Manual: human-rights tools can help the U.S. armed forces run better pacification campaigns in conquered territory. The Save Darfur campaign, more organized than any bloc of the peace movement in the U.S., continues to call for some inchoate military strike against Sudan (with Power’s vocal support) even though this disaster’s genocide status is doubtful and despite an expert consensus that bombing Khartoum would do less than nothing for the suffering refugees. Meanwhile, the influential liberal think tank the Center for American Progress also appeals to human rights in its call for troop escalations in Afghanistan–the better to “engage” the enemy.

Nor is the imperialist current within the human-rights industry a purely American phenomenon: the conquest of Iraq found whooping proponents in Bernard Kouchner, founder of Médecins Sans Frontières, now Sarkozy’s foreign minister, and Michael Ignatieff, also a former head of the Harvard’s Carr Center and poised to become Canada’s next prime minister. Gareth Evans, Australia’s former foreign minister and a grinning soft-peddler of Indonesia’s massacres in East Timor, is perhaps the leading intellectual proponent of the Responsibility to Protect, or R2P as it is cutely called, an attempt to embed humanitarian intervention into international law. Evans, who recently stepped down from leading the International Crisis Group, laments the Iraq War chiefly for the way it has soiled the credibility of his pet idea.

To be sure, the human-rights industry is not all armed missionaries and laptop bombardiers. Human Rights Watch, for example, is one of few prestigious institutions in the U.S. to have criticized Israel’s assault on Gaza, for which its Middle East and North Africa division has endured much bashing not just from right-wing media but from its own board of directors. That said, HRW’s rebuke was limited to Israel’s manner of making war, rather than Israel’s decision to launch the attack in the first place–the jus in bello, not the jus ad bellum.

Human-rights organizations can do a splendid job of exposing and criticizing abuses, but they are constitutionally incapable of taking stands on larger political issues. No major human-rights NGO opposed the invasion of Iraq. With their legitimacy and funding dependent on a carefully cultivated perception of neutrality, human-rights nonprofits will never be any substitute for an explicitly anti-imperialist political force. In the meantime, America’s best and brightest will continue to explore innovative ways for human rights to serve a thoroughly militarized foreign policy.

CHASE MADAR is a translator of Verlaine and Buñuel and a civil rights lawyer in New York. He can be reached at chasemadar@hotmail.com

This article originally appeared in The American Conservative.

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

Pakistan denies India's militancy claims

0

Pakistan has vehemently dismissed accusations that its Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) was fomenting militancy across the border with India.

Å“Pakistan rejects those remarks accusing us and implicating one of our government agencies for fomenting terror in Indian Punjab,” Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Aizaz Ahmad Chaudhry said in a statement on Thursday.

Chaudhry added that such allegations could hinder the process of normalization of ties between the two countries.

On Wednesday, Indian Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde accused ISI of trying to recruit militants in Punjab and several other parts of India.

Å“The Sikh youths are being trained in ISI facilities in Pakistan,” said the Indian minister in New Delhi, adding, Å“There has been some significant developments on the Sikh militancy front.”

The minister claimed that Sikh youths living in the United States and Europe were also being encouraged to travel to Pakistan to be trained for terrorist-related attacks.

Å“Such a statement in our view is uncalled for and regrettable. We feel that making such statement has the potential of undermining the efforts made by both sides to normalize the relations between the two countries,” the statement read.

Indian officials say Sikh separatists based outside India are trying to revive militancy in the state of Punjab.

New Delhi armed forces battled a bloody uprising by Sikh secessionists in Punjab in the 1980s.

India has repeatedly accused its neighbor and arch-rival of some degree of involvement in attacks in its major cities in recent years.

Pakistan, which has firmly denied allegations of involvement, has asked India to share intelligence instead of blaming Islamabad.

JR/KA

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Media Complicit In Bildergerg Cover Up

0

Infowars.com
June 6, 2013

Jakarai Jackson of Infowars Nightly News covers effort to send Bilderberg story to the memory hole.

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 9:13 am

Tags: ,






<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Libor oversight may be transferred from UK to France

0

The European Union is considering the transfer of control of the London Interbasnk Offered Rate (Libor) from the UK to France. It is to restore trust in the key interbank lending rate after the rigging scandal.

Under the EU plan, Libor oversight should be handed to the
Paris-based European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) from
its current watchdog – the London-based UK Financial Conduct
Authority (FCA).

Libor is a benchmark interest rate representing the average that
London banks are paying to each other to borrow money in the
short term.

The draft regulation suggests oversight of “certain critical
inter-bank interest rate benchmarks
” by a national regulator
“will not be efficient and effective in terms of addressing
the risks that the critical benchmark poses,
” according to
Bloomberg News. It goes on to say that “authorization and
supervision is most effectively carried out by ESMA
.”

The need to either find an alternative to Libor or change its
regulator was largely recognized after US and UK officials
unveiled attempts to manipulate Libor to benefit trading
positions. Such banking giants as Royal Bank of Scotland Group,
UBS and Barclays have been fined a total of about $2.5 billion,
with at least a dozen firms remaining under investigation.

Distorting the real state of a banks’ health added to the mess
within the global financial system. Estimates suggest Libor
related financial instruments and transactions are worth more
than $300 trillion worldwide.

Libor is calculated by a poll carried out daily by Thomson
Reuters on behalf of the British Bankers’ Association (BBA) that
asks firms to estimate how much it would cost to borrow from each
other for different periods and in different currencies.

The first regulatory report and huge fine against Barclays for
alleged Libor rigging was made in June 2012.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Russia refutes US reports on Syria power handover agreement

0

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has called a US State Department report that Russia, the US and UN agreed that Syrian authorities should pass their power to a transitional government as a “strong distortion of information”.

The top Russian diplomat commented on the statement made earlier
this week by the Department of State spokeswoman Jen Psaki.

“In particular, the State Department representative stated
that Russia, the United States and the United Nations agree that
the goal of the new conference in Geneva must be the forming of a
new transitional government in Syria. This really matches with
what was written down last year. But, if the reports that I have
received are true, the State Department went on to add that this
should be a transitional government to which the current
authorities in Damascus would hand over all their powers. If this
was really said by the State Department, this is a very strong
distortion of what the talks were about
,” Lavrov told
reporters at the press conference connected with the Baltic
States’ conference of foreign ministers.

The Russian Foreign Minister said the agreement reached at his
meeting with Secretary of State John Kerry was that the “forming
of a government on the basis of consent between the authorities
and the opposition is one thing and forming it through handing
over the power from the government to the opposition — is
something completely different. “Therefore, I expect that the
US negotiators will observe what we have agreed upon with John
Kerry
,” he noted.

The official reiterated the Russian position that the
international community must make up its mind and take one side
in the settlement of the Syrian conflict — either with those who
insist on regime change or with those who press for internal
dialogue. Lavrov said that the first option was a direct path to
violence and it did not promote the interests of the Syrian
people. Sergei Lavrov emphasized that the current analysis showed
that everything was interconnected within the so called “Arab
Spring”.

Russia insists that the forthcoming Geneva-2 conference united
all countries that could potentially influence the situation,
including Iran. “Our partners are using quite strong
expressions when they speak against the
Iranian
presence. We consider it a
mistake
,” Lavrov said.

The head of the Russian Foreign Ministry asked the Turkish
authorities to provide information about the detention of Syrian
rebels who had in their possession chemical weapons, such as
sarin nerve gas.

“We would like to bring clarity in all questions because the
chemical weapons issue becomes a basis of speculation and
provocation. I would not exclude that someone wants to use it and
claim that the “red line” has been crossed and the military
intervention from abroad is necessary
,” the official told
reporters.

Earlier this week the French and British governments said that
their experts completed investigations into alleged chemical
attacks in Syria and came to the conclusion that the attacks were
true and that the Damascus authorities should be blamed for at
least one such attack.

Russia insists that the probe must be conducted by an impartial
body, such as the UN, but recently a top Russian diplomat admitted that under
current conditions the hopes for a speedy and unbiased probe were
slim.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Teenage leftist activist brain dead after ‘politically motivated’ Paris skinhead attack

0

A left-wing French activist has been rendered brain dead after being brutally assaulted by neo-Nazi skinheads. Police called the attack against the 18-year-old ‘politically motivated.’

Police described the attack against left-wing anti-fascist
activist Clément Méric as “politically motivated incident
involving the far-right versus the far-left,”
with witnesses
saying angry words were exchanged between he and “skinhead
type individuals,”
according to AFP.

The 18-year-old suffered multiple blows from the assailants, one
of whom was reportedly wearing brass knuckles.

Méric was visiting a clothes sale with friends late Wednesday
when they got into a confrontation with three individuals. They
left to gather a larger group of people, and attacked Méric as he
left the building, knocking him to the floor. In addition to
injuries sustained from the assailants’ blows, he also hit his
head on the pavement.

He was declared brain dead in one of the capital’s hospitals
later on Wednesday night.

Social media exploded in fury at the attack, with some saying
“Clement was murdered by thugs,” and others deriding
racist right-wing propaganda, pitting the far-right and far-left
directly against one another.

Paris-based neo-Nazi organization JNR (Young Revolutionary
Nationalists) were blamed for the incident by a collection of
far-left French parties known as the ‘Parti de Gauche,’ in a
statement released shortly afterwards. “The horrors of fascism
have brought murder to Paris,”
the statement read.

The JNR has been active for more than 30 years, and is infamous
for committing similarly violent attacks since its founding.
Left-wing groups have demanded that the JNR be banned if a direct
link to this recent assault is proven.

The 48-year-old founder and head of the JNR, Serge Ayoub, told
reporters on Thursday that the allegations were false, and
that the beating was likely instigated by left-wingers.

French President François Hollande’s office issued an official
statement in the wake of the attack, condemning the perpetrators
and revealing that police were under “firm instructions to
ensure that the perpetrators of this odious act are arrested as
soon as possible.”

An anti-fascist vigil being held at the London mosque which
suffered an arson attack on Wednesday has said they will keep him
in their thoughts.

This article originally appeared on: RT

No ‘great recovery’ for US — study

1

Despite the US government’s efforts to boost growth a forecast from the UCLA Anderson School of Management said the anticipated “Great Recovery” hasn’t come true and even normal growth is hard to achieve.

The second-quarter UCLA Anderson Forecast released on Wednesday
said the growth real GDP is still not enough to help the economy
recover from recession, the Associated Press reports.

The government’s extreme monetary easing has boosted growth on
the US markets this year; however returning to a normal growth
pace will take time. Edward Leamer, Director of the UCLA Anderson
Forecast, argues that the “Great Recovery” hasn’t materialized.

He writes that normally the country’s total economic output or
GDP grows at 3 percent, however during this year’s first three
months the US GDP grew at 2.4 percent. The current growth pace is
15.4 percent below what’s considered a “normal” growth trend,
Leamer wrote.

“To get back to that 3 percent trend, we would need 4 percent
growth for 15 years, or 5 percent growth for eight years, or 6
percent growth for five years, not the disappointing twos and
threes we have been racking up recently,
” he said. “It’s
not a recovery. It’s not even normal growth. It’s bad,
”
Leamer argues.

It’ll take two more years for US GDP to return to the “normal”
growth rate of 3 percent. The UCLA Anderson Forecast predicts it
will happen in 2015. GDP growth for this year is expected at just
1.9 percent.

The forecast also predicts a decline in unemployment to 6.9
percent next year and to 6.6 percent by 2015. Also the forecast
foresees a boost in the US housing market, also pointing to
better economic health. The US housing market has been struggling
to rise from the depths of recession for several years. The
recent rebound in demand has once again lifted the sector.

In the forecast Leamer also highlights the problems the US is
still facing despite efforts to boost growth and fight
unemployment.

“The tepid growth continues to obscure the nation’s most
fundamental problems: too much government spending funded with
too much borrowing, too little national savings to cover
late-in-life health care issues and too many workers lacking the
skills to compete in the modern economy,
” the UCLA press
statement said.

The study also found that the State of California is feeling much
better than the rest of the country. It has displayed better
results in job growth in the year since April 2012, with only
Utah beating California.

This article originally appeared on: RT

SARS-like virus kills 1 more in S Arabia

0

The picture shows nCoV-EMC novel coronavirus seen under an electron microscope.

Saudi health authorities say one more person has died from a deadly new respiratory virus related to the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) in the countryâ„¢s eastern region of al-Ahsaa.

Saudi Arabiaâ„¢s Ministry of Health announced on Thursday that the latest victim died from the infection on Wednesday.

Since September 2012, twenty-five people have died from nCoV-EMC novel coronavirus in Saudi Arabia. Forty people are suffering from the disease in the kingdom.

The Italian Ministry of Health said on Sunday that a 45-year-old man, who had recently returned from a 40-day visit to Jordan, was hospitalized in Italyâ„¢s central region of Tuscany with a high fever, cough and respiratory problems.

Tuscan medical officials said that a young relative of the man and a work colleague have also contracted the virus.

The nCoV-EMC novel coronavirus is a cousin of SARS. The virus first emerged in the Middle East, and was discovered in September 2012 in a Qatari man who had recently traveled to Saudi Arabia.

Cases have been reported in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Germany, France, Italy, Tunisia and the United Kingdom. Health officials say the virus is likely to have already spread between people in some circumstances.

Health authorities are trying to find out how humans are contracting the virus in a bid to find the best remedy to it.

It does not appear to be as contagious as SARS, which killed some 800 people in a 2003 epidemic.

The novel coronavirus is most closely related to a bat virus. Scientists are considering whether bats or other animals like goats or camels are a possible source of infection.

The World Health Organization has advised countries to test any people with unexplained pneumonia.

MP/KA

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

UK Labour leader to support welfare cap

0

The leader of Britainâ„¢s Labour Party Ed Miliband has pledged support for Conservativeâ„¢s welfare cap if he becomes Prime Minister in 2015 general election.

Miliband admitted the public’s faith in the welfare system has been Å“shaken” as it apparently gives Å“something for nothing”. He then said he would drive down rents and crack down on low pay in attempts to ease the burden on the British taxpayer.

Miliband also noted that reversing the coalition’s child benefit cuts for higher earners is not his partyâ„¢s priority if he wins back power, adding that “the next Labour government will use a 3-year cap on structural welfare spending to help control costs”.

However, at Prime Minister’s Questions in the House of Commons, Cameron accused the Labour leader of being totally confused.

“[Miliband initially] attacked me for taking child benefit away from higher earners and yet today we learn it is now Labour’s official policy to take child benefit away from higher earners. Total and utter confusion,” Cameron said.

MOS/HE

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Owner of dog killed in drug raid says police targeted wrong apartment

0

Gene Warner
buffalonews.com
June 5, 2013

A West Side resident and Iraq War veteran with no criminal record is mourning the loss of his rescue dog who was fatally shot during a Buffalo police narcotics raid that apparently targeted the wrong apartment Monday night.

Cindy, a chocolate-brown 2½-year-old pit bull, was shot multiple times while chained up in the kitchen of Adam Arroyo’s apartment on Breckenridge Street near Grant Street, he said in a phone interview.

The search warrant that police left for Arroyo, who was not at home at the time of the raid, lists the upper apartment at the Breckenridge Street address, but there are two upstairs apartments at that address, and Arroyo insists that police targeted the wrong apartment.

Read more

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 9:08 am

Tags: ,






<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Bilderberg 2013: The Protests Begin

0

Infowars.com
June 6, 2013

The Bilderberg meeting is officially underway today, many protesters have arrived, as have reporters from the London Times, the BBC, and even members of the European Parliament.

Many of them are massing around Alex in the protest area, asking him questions. Alex is on fire, with direct, informatiove, focused and eloquent answers. Watch some of the videos below and check the UStream for more live footage from the Infowars crew at The Grove in Watford.

http://www.ustream.tv/AlexJonesLive

Video streaming by Ustream

Video streaming by Ustream

Video streaming by Ustream

Video streaming by Ustream

Video streaming by Ustream

Video streaming by Ustream

Video streaming by Ustream

Video streaming by Ustream

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 9:09 am

Tags:






<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Rezaei outlines bid to diversify economy

0

Iranian presidential candidate, Mohsen Rezaei, has pledged to diversify Iranâ„¢s economy and wean it off oil revenues if elected president.

Addressing his supporters in the province of Chahar-Mahal and Bakhtiari on Thursday, the independent candidate said he will grant incentives to different sectors, including agriculture, travel and tourism, as well as industry and mining, as part of his bid to diversify the Iranian economy.

Rezaei, currently the secretary of Iranâ„¢s Expediency Council, stressed that his future administration will regulate the capital market and form a federal economic system in which local communities will be in charge of local governments.

The presidential candidate also reaffirmed his resolve to decentralize the government and privatize most of the state-owned entities.

Rezaei is competing against Tehran Mayor Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, President of the Center for Strategic Research of the Expediency Council Hassan Rohani, lawmaker Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council Saeed Jalili, former Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati, former First Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref, and former Telecommunications Minister Mohammad Gharazi in Iranâ„¢s 11th presidential election.

On June 14, Iranians will cast their ballots at over 66,000 polling stations across the country, and some 285 polling stations will be set up for Iranian nationals in other countries.

ASH/SS/HMV

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

The Ultimate Weapon of Mass Destruction: “Owning the Weather” for Military Use

0

Author’s Introductory Note

Environmental modification techniques (ENMOD) for military use constitute, in the present context of global warfare, the ultimate weapon of mass destruction.

Rarely acknowledged in the debate on global climate change, the world’s weather can now be modified as part of a new generation of sophisticated electromagnetic weapons. Both the US and Russia have developed capabilities to manipulate the climate for military use.

Environmental modification techniques have been applied by the US military for more than half a century. US mathematician John von Neumann, in liaison with the US Department of Defense, started his research on weather modification in the late 1940s at the height of the Cold War and foresaw ‘forms of climatic warfare as yet unimagined’. During the Vietnam war, cloud-seeding techniques were used, starting in 1967 under Project Popeye, the objective of which was to prolong the monsoon season and block enemy supply routes along the Ho Chi Minh Trail.

The US military has developed advanced capabilities that enable it selectively to alter weather patterns. The technology, which is being perfected under the High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP), is an appendage of the Strategic Defense Initiative — ‘Star Wars’. From a military standpoint, HAARP is a weapon of mass destruction, operating from the outer atmosphere and capable of destabilising agricultural and ecological systems around the world.

Weather-modification, according to the US Air Force document AF 2025 Final Report,

“offers the war fighter a wide range of possible options to defeat or coerce an adversary’, capabilities, it says, extend to the triggering of floods, hurricanes, droughts and earthquakes: ‘Weather modification will become a part of domestic and international security and could be done unilaterally… It could have offensive and defensive applications and even be used for deterrence purposes. The ability to generate precipitation, fog and storms on earth or to modify space weather… and the production of artificial weather all are a part of an integrated set of [military] technologies.”

In 1977, an international Convention was ratified by the UN General Assembly which banned ‘military or other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects.’ It defined ‘environmental modification techniques’ as ‘any technique for changing —through the deliberate manipulation of natural processes — the dynamics, composition or structure of the earth, including its biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere, or of outer space.’

According to the Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques:

The term “environmental modification techniques” refers to any technique for changing — through the deliberate manipulation of natural processes — the dynamics, composition or structure of the Earth, including its biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere, or of outer space. (Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques, United Nations, Geneva: 18 May 1977)

While the substance of the 1977 Convention was reasserted in the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) signed at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio, debate on weather modification for military use has become a scientific taboo.

Military analysts and scientists are mute on the subject. Meteorologists are not investigating the matter and environmentalists are focused on greenhouse gas emissions under the Kyoto Protocol. Neither is the possibility of climatic or environmental manipulations as part of a military and intelligence agenda, while tacitly acknowledged, part of the broader debate on climate change under UN auspices.

While discussion of the post Cold War military applications of weather warfare is a taboo, the US Air Force has nonetheless acknowledged the strategic importance of ENMOD techniques in the modern battlefield of non-conventional warfare and intel ops, including the conduct, without the enemy’s knowledge, of “covert” weather modification operations.

At this juncture in our history, US-NATO forces are deployed worldwide.

The US and its allies are not only targeting Syria, Iran and North Korea, they are also threatening Russia and China.

The Pentagon has formulated the contours of a global military agenda, a “long war”, a war without borders.

“Weather warfare” is the ultimate WMD with the potential of destabilizing an enemy’s ecosystem, destroying its agriculture, disabling communications networks. In other words, ENMOD techniques can undermine an entire national economy, impoverish millions of people and “kill a nation” without the deployment of troops and military hardware.

The following text, with the exception of some small edits was first published in September 2004. The 2004 article is follow-up on an earlier study by the author entitled Washington’s New World Order Weapons Have the Ability to Trigger Climate Change, Third World Resurgence, January 2001, http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO201A.html

While The Ecologist published in 2007 a shorter version of the above study, the issue of climatic manipulation for military use has largely been ignored by Environmentalists.

The URL of the original article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO409F.html.

This essay is dedicated to the memory of Dr. Rosalie Bertell, who, from the very outset revealed the diabolical nature of the HAARP project, as part of an integrated non-conventional weapons program:

“It is related to fifty years of intensive and increasingly destructive programs to understand and control the upper atmosphere. … HAARP is an integral part of a long history of space research and development of a deliberate military nature. The military implications of combining these projects is alarming. … The ability of the HAARP / Spacelab/ rocket combination to deliver very large amounts of energy, comparable to a nuclear bomb, anywhere on earth via laser and particle beams, are frightening. The project is likely to be “sold” to the public as a space shield against incoming weapons, or, for the more gullible, a device for repairing the ozone layer.“

It is my sincere hope that this article will renew the debate on the dangers of weather warfare and will contribute to the broader objective of World peace which requires the relentless “disarming” of the US- NATO military apparatus.

Michel Chossudovsky, September 28, 2012


Weather Warfare

The significant expansion in America’s weather warfare arsenal, which is a priority of the Department of Defense is not a matter for debate or discussion. While, environmentalists blame the Bush administration for not having signed the Kyoto protocol, the issue of “weather warfare”, namely the manipulation of weather patterns for military use is never mentioned.

The US Air Force has the capability of manipulating climate either for testing purposes or for outright military-intelligence use. These capabilities extend to the triggering of floods, hurricanes, droughts and earthquakes. In recent years, large amounts of money have been allocated by the US Department of Defense to further developing and perfecting these capabilities.

Weather modification will become a part of domestic and international security and could be done unilaterally… It could have offensive and defensive applications and even be used for deterrence purposes. The ability to generate precipitation, fog, and storms on earth or to modify space weather, … and the production of artificial weather all are a part of an integrated set of technologies which can provide substantial increase in US, or degraded capability in an adversary, to achieve global awareness, reach, and power. (US Air Force, emphasis added. Air University of the US Air Force, AF 2025 Final Report, http://www.au.af.mil/au/2025/ emphasis added)

While there is no firm evidence that the US Air Force weather warfare facilities have been deliberately applied to modify weather patterns, one would expect that if these capabilities are being developed for military use, they would at least be the object of routine testing, much in the same way as the testing of new conventional and strategic weapons systems.

Needless to say, the subject matter is a scientific taboo. The possibility of climatic or environmental manipulations as part of a military and intelligence agenda, while tacitly acknowledged, is never considered as relevant. Military analysts are mute on the subject. Meteorologists are not investigating the matter, and environmentalists are strung on global warming and the Kyoto protocol.

Ironically, the Pentagon, while recognizing its ability to modify the World’s climate for military use, has joined the global warming consensus. In a major study (pdf) , the Pentagon has analyzed in detail the implications of various global warming scenarios.

The Pentagon document constitutes a convenient cover-up. Not a word is mentioned about its main weather warfare program: The High-Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) based in Gokona, Alaska —jointly managed by the US Air Force and the US Navy.

There are several mainstream explanations on weather and climate change, none of which fully explains, within their respective terms of reference, the highly unusual and erratic weather occurrences, not to mention the human toll and devastation, which have led to the destabilization of entire agricultural and eco-systems. Needless to say these explanations never address the issue of climate manipulation for military use.

Climatic Manipulation by the US Military: The HAARP Program

The High-Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) based in Gokona, Alaska, has been in existence since 1992. It is part of a new generation of sophisticated weaponry under the US Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). Operated by the Air Force Research Laboratory’s Space Vehicles Directorate, HAARP constitutes a system of powerful antennas capable of creating “controlled local modifications of the ionosphere” [upper layer of the atmosphere]:

“[HAARP will be used] to induce a small, localized change in ionospheric temperature so that resulting physical reactions can be studied by other instruments located either at or close to the HAARP site”. (HAARP website)

Nicholas Begich —actively involved in the public campaign against HAARP— describes HAARP as: “A super-powerful radiowave-beaming technology that lifts areas of the ionosphere by focusing a beam and heating those areas. Electromagnetic waves then bounce back onto earth and penetrate everything – living and dead.” (for further details see Michel Chossudovsky, http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO201A.html )

World renowned scientist Dr. Rosalie Bertell depicts HAARP as “a gigantic heater that can cause major disruptions in the ionosphere, creating not just holes, but long incisions in the protective layer that keeps deadly radiation from bombarding the planet.” (quoted in Chossudovsky, op cit.)

According to Richard Williams, a physicist and consultant to the David Sarnoff laboratory in PrincetonHAARP constitutes “an irresponsible act of global vandalism.”

He and others fear a secret second stage where HAARP would “beam much more energy into the ionosphere. That could produce a severe disruption of the upper atmosphere at one location that may produce effects that spread rapidly around the Earth for years.” (Quoted in Scott Gilbert, Environmental Warfare and US Foreign Policy: The Ultimate Weapon of Mass Destruction, http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/GIL401A.html )

HAARP has been presented to public opinion as a program of scientific and academic research. US military documents seem to suggest, however, that HAARP’s main objective is to “exploit the ionosphere for Department of Defense purposes.” (quoted in Chossudovsky, op cit).

Without explicitly referring to the HAARP program, a US Air Force study points to the use of “induced ionospheric modifications” as a means of altering weather patterns as well as disrupting enemy communications and radar. (Ibid)

HAARP also has the ability of triggering blackouts and disrupting the electricity power system of entire regions.

An analysis of statements emanating from the US Air Force points to the unthinkable: the covert manipulation of weather patterns, communications systems and electric power as a weapon of global warfare, enabling the US to disrupt and dominate entire regions of the World.

Weather Warfare: A Corporate Bonanza

HAARP has been operational since the early 1990s. Its system of antennas at Gakona, Alaska, was initially based on a technology patented by Advanced Power Technologies Inc. (APTI), a subsidiary of Atlantic Ritchfield Corporation (ARCO).

The first phase of the HAARP Ionospheric Research Instrument (IRI) was completed by APTI. The IRI system of antennas was first installed in 1992 by a subsidiary of British Aerospace Systems (BAES) using the APTI patent. The antennas beam into the outer-atmosphere using a set of wireless high frequency transmitters.

In 1994, ARCO sold its APTI subsidiary, including the patents and the second phase construction contract to E-Systems, a secretive high tech military outfit with links to the CIA (http://www.crystalinks.com/haarp.html ).

E-Systems specializes in the production of electronic warfare equipment, navigation and reconnaissance machinery, including “highly sophisticated spying devices”:

“[E-Systems] is one of the biggest intelligence contractors in the world, doing work for the CIA, defense intelligence organizations, and others. US$1.8 billion of their annual sales are to these organizations, with $800 million for black projects-projects so secret that even the United States Congress isn’t told how the money is being spent.( http://www.earthpulse.com/haarp/vandalism.html )

“The company has outfitted such military projects as the Doomsday Plan (the system that allows the President to manage a nuclear war) and Operation Desert Storm.” (Princeton Review, http://www.princetonreview.com/cte/profiles/internshipGenInfo.asp?internshipID=998 )

With the purchase of APTI, E-Systems acquired the strategic weather warfare technology and patent rights, including Bernard J. Eastlund’s US Patent No: 4,686,605 entitled “Method and Apparatus for Altering a Region in the Earth’s Atmosphere, Ionosphere and/or Magnetosphere”.

It is worth mentioning that the Eastlund /APTI patents were based on the research of Yugoslav scientist Nicola Tesla (many of whose ideas were stolen by US corporations). (See Scott Gilbert, Environmental Warfare and US Foreign Policy: The Ultimate Weapon of Mass Destruction, http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/GIL401A.html )

Eastlund described this deadly technology as capable of:

“causing…total disruption of communications over a very large portion of the Earth…missile or aircraft destruction, deflection or confusion… weather modification…” ( http://www.wealth4freedom.com/truth/12/HAARP.htm ),

Not surprisingly, the patent had previously been sealed under a government secrecy order.Barely a year following the E-Systems purchase of APTI’s weather warfare technology, E-Systems was bought out by Raytheon, the fourth largest US military contractor. Through this money-spinning acquisition, Raytheon became the largest “defense electronics” firm in the World.Meanwhile, ARCO which had sold APTI to E-Systems, had itself been acquired by the BP-AMOCO oil consortium, thereby integrating the largest oil company in the World (BP).

Raytheon through its E-Systems subsidiary now owns the patents used to develop the HAARP weather warfare facility at Gakona Alaska. Raytheon is also involved in other areas of weather research for military use, including the activities of its subsidiary in Antarctica, Raytheon Polar Services.

“Owning the Weather”: Towards the Expanded Final Stage

The HAARP antenna array and transmitters were slated to be built in several distinct phases http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/phases.html

During the Clinton administration, the “Filled Developmental Prototype” (FDP), namely a system composed of an array of 48 active antenna elements with connected wireless transmitters, was installed and completed at the HAARP facility in 1994. (See Figure 1 below) Under the initial Developmental Prototype (DP), only 18 of the 48 transmitters were connected.

Bernard Eastlund in a 1997 interview described this antenna array in its Filled DP stage as the “the largest ionospheric heater ever built”.

This system of 48 antennas, however, while fully operational, was not according to Eastlund, powerful enough (in 1997) “to bring the ideas in his patents to fruition”:.

“But they’re getting up there”, he said. “This is a very powerful device. Especially if they go to the expanded stage.” (quoted in Scott Gilbert, op cit, see also http://www.emagazine.com/january-february_1997/0197currhaarp.html )

This ‘final expanded stage’ envisioned by Eastlund, which will provide maximum capability to manipulate the World’s weather patterns, has now been reached.Under the Bush administration, the main partner of Raytheon (which owns the patents) in the construction and development stage of the HAARP antenna array, is British Aerospace Systems (BAES), which had been involved in the initial installation of the antenna array in the early 1990s.The multimillion dollar contract was granted by The Office of Naval Research to BAES in 2003, through its US subsidiary BAE Systems Advanced Technologies Inc. The contract was signed barely two months before the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq.

Using Raytheon’s technology, BAES was to develop the HAARP Ionospheric Research Instrument (IRI) to its maximum capabilities of “Full size or final IRI (FIRI)”.

In April 2003, BAE Systems Advanced Technologies outsourced the production and installation of the antennas to Phazar Corp (http://www.phazar.com/ ), a company specializing in advanced wireless antennas for military use. (Phazar owns Antenna Products Corporation of Mineral Wells, Texas http://www.antennaproducts.com/ ). Phazar was entrusted with producing and installing 132 crossed dipole antennas items for the HAARP facility. (http://www.antennaproducts.com/News%20Release%2004-18-03.pdf )

A year later, in April 2004, the final phase in the expansion of the HAARP facility was launched. (Dept of Defense, 19 April 2004). This phase consisted in equipping all the 180 antennas with high frequency transmitters. BAE Systems was awarded another lucrative contract, this time for $35 million.

In July 2004, Phazar had delivered and installed the 132 crossed dipole antennas including the antenna support structures and ground screen items at the HAARP facility, bringing the number of antennas from 48 under the FDP stage to 180. (see Table 2).

Meanwhile, BAE Systems had contracted with Jersey based defense electronics firm DRS Technologies, Inc in an $11.5 million outsourcing arrangement, the production and installation of the high-frequency (HF) radio transmitters for the HAARP antenna array. (See http://www.drs.com/press/archivelist.cfm?PRESS_RELEASE_ID=1529&preview=1 and Business Wire, 15 June 2004). DRS specializes in a variety of leading edge products for the U.S. military and intelligence agencies.( http://www.drs.com/corporateinfo/index.cfm ).

Under its contract with BAE Systems Information and Electronic Warfare Systems in Washington, D.C., DRS is to manufacture and install “more than 60 Model D616G 10-Kilowatt Dual Transmitters” to be used with the HAARP system of antennas. (It is unclear from the company statements whether all the 180 antennas will be equipped with a transmitter, bringing the system up to full IRI capabilities).

Deliveries and installation are to be completed by July 2006. While HAARP is described as a “research project”, the production of the transmitters was entrusted to DRS’ C41 “Command, Control, Communications, Computers and Intelligence (C4I) Group”


The diagram and images below describe the HAARP Alaska Facility in 1997.

. FDP layout

Figure 1: The Array of 48 Antenna Elements with the Transmitter Shelters (FDP stage)

The 48 antenna array is supported by transmitter shelters, each of which contains 6 transmitter cabinets. (See image of shelter below)

Each cabinet contains two transmitters. (image of cabinet below)

The newly installed 132 dipole antennas supplied by Phazar vastly increase the size of the HAARP Alaska facility; the new transmitters are supplied and installed by DRS

Image 1: Aerial Photo of the HAARP Alaska Site

Source: http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/ohd.html

HAARP

Image 2: HAARP Antenna Array

Source: http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/HaarpSite.html

Image 3 Transmitter Shelter

http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/images/trans/transtr.jpg

Transmitter Shelter containing Six Transmitter Cabinets. Each Cabinet contains two transmitters

Image 4: Inside the Transmitter Shelter

http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/images/trans/shelter.jpg

Image 5. Two Transmitters making up a Transmitter Cabinet

http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/images

Testing of HAARP Equipment (2003- 2004)

It is worth noting that the expansion of the antenna array (e.g. during 2003-2004) required, as part of the contracts reached with BAE Systems and its various subcontractors, the routine testing of the installed weather warfare equipment. An intermediate stage Limited IRI (LIRI), could be in operation by 2004, following the completion of the 180 antenna array under the Phazar contract and pending the final delivery of the remaining HF radio transmitters.

In this regard, a report published by the Russian parliament (Duma) in 2002, suggests that the US Military had plans to test its weather modification techniques at its Alaska facility, as well as at two other sites:

“The committees reported that the USA is planning to test three facilities of this kind. One of them is located on the military testing ground in Alaska and its full-scale tests are to begin in early 2003. The second one is in Greenland and the third one in Norway.

“When these facilities are launched into space from Norway, Alaska and Greenland, a closed contour will be created with a truly fantastic integral potential for influencing the near-Earth medium,” the State Duma said.

The USA plans to carry out large-scale scientific experiments under the HAARP program, and not controlled by the global community, will create weapons capable of breaking radio communication lines and equipment installed on spaceships and rockets, provoke serious accidents in electricity networks and in oil and gas pipelines and have a negative impact on the mental health of people populating entire regions, the deputies said. (Interfax News Agency, original Russian, BBC Monitoring, 8 August 2002, emphasis added)

Whether this report by the Russian Duma on testing “starting in early 2003″ is correct or not, the US administration must be confronted nationally and internationally, at the political and diplomatic levels, at the UN and the US Congress, by the international scientific community, by environmentalists and the antiwar movement. The future of humanity is threatened by the use of weather modification techniques.

Moreover, to wage an effective campaign, it is essential that corroborating scientific investigation of the unusual weather occurrences observed in recent years (and particularly since early 2003) be undertaken. This investigation should be far-reaching, collecting relevant data, correlating specific weather occurrences to recorded antenna activity at the Alaska site as well as at the two other sites, etc.

The Full Size Ionospheric Research Instrument FIRI stage, described as “a maximum size of 180 antenna elements, arranged in 15 columns by 12 rows” is scheduled to be completed by mid-2006 (assuming the installation of the remaining dual transmitters), at which time the HAARP program will have reached its maximum FIRI capacity, meaning the ability to selectively modify, for military use, weather patterns anywhere in the World.

“The IRI is currently [June 2004] composed of 48 antenna elements and has a power capacity of 960,000 watts. When installed, the additional 132 transmitters will give HAARP a 3.6 mega-watt capacity [see Table 2 below]. The HAARP build-out is jointly funded by the U.S. Air Force, the U.S. Navy and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). (Business Wire, 10 June 2004)

Table 2: Comparison of IRI Phases

DP

FDP

LIRI

FIRI

Number of Active Antenna Elements

18

48

108

180

Total Transmitter Power (kW)

360

960

2160

3600

Maximum Antenna Gain (dB)

19

24

29

31

Max Effective Radiated Pwr (dBW)

74

84

92

96

Min Antenna Pattern Width (degrees)

9

8

5

Frequency Range

2.8 to 10 MHz

Modulation Types

CW/AM/FM/PM

Source http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/phases.html

This advanced stage of full capacity (FIRI) corresponds to what the US Air Force has called “Owning the Weather”:

US aerospace forces [will] ‘own the weather’ by capitalizing on emerging technologies and focusing development of those technologies to war-fighting applications… From enhancing friendly operations or disrupting those of the enemy via small-scale tailoring of natural weather patterns to complete dominance of global communications and counterspace control, weather-modification offers the war fighter a wide-range of possible options to defeat or coerce an adversary… In the United States, weather-modification will likely become a part of national security policy with both domestic and international applications. Our government will pursue such a policy, depending on its interests, at various levels.(US Air Force, emphasis added. Air University of the US Air Force, AF 2025 Final Report, http://www.au.af.mil/au/2025/ )

Weather Warfare against “Rogue States”

The unusual climatic occurrences in the US and Western Europe have been extensively documented.

However, what the news media has failed to underscore is that a number of unusual and dramatic climatic changes have occurred in recent years in countries which are identified as possible targets under the US Administration’s pre-emptive war doctrine.

Weather patterns in North Korea, for instance, have been marked since the mid-1990s by a succession of droughts, followed by floods. The result has been the destruction of an entire agricultural system. In Cuba, the pattern is very similar to that observed in North Korea. (see Table 3)

In Iraq, Iran and Syria, a devastating drought occurred in 1999. In Afghanistan, four years of drought in the years preceding the US led invasion in 2001, have led to the destruction of the peasant economy, leading to widespread famine.

While there is no proof that these weather occurrences are the result of climatic warfare, Phillips Geophysics Lab, which is a partner in the HAARP project provides a course for military personnel at the Hanscom Air Force Base in Maryland, on “Weather Modification Techniques”. The course outline explicitly contemplates the triggering of storms, hurricanes, etc. for military use. (See his slide show at http://www.dtc.army.mil/tts/1997/proceed/abarnes/ open PowerPoint presentation at http://www.dtc.army.mil/tts/tts97/abarnes.zip )

Weather manipulation is the pre-emptive weapon par excellence. It can be directed against enemy countries or even “friendly nations”, without their knowledge. Weather warfare constitutes a covert form of pre-emptive war. The manipulation of climate can be used to destabilize an enemy’s economy, ecosystem and agriculture (e.g. North Korea or Cuba). Needless to say it can trigger havoc in financial and commodity markets and can potentially be used as an instrument of “insider trade” for financial gain. It has the ability of destabilizing a country’s institutions. Concurrently, the disruption in agriculture creates a greater dependency on food aid and imported grain staples from the US and other Western countries.

The Bush administration has stated that it reserves the right to attack these countries preemptively, with a view to ensuring the security of the American homeland.

Washington —as part of its nuclear posture review— has threatened several countries including China and Russia with pre-emptive nuclear strikes. One would assume that the same targeting of rogue states exists with regard to the use of weather modification techniques”.

While there is no evidence of the use of weather warfare against rogue states, the policy guidelines on “weather intervention techniques” have already been established and the technology is fully operational.


Table 3: Unusual Weather Occurrences: North Korea, Cuba, Afghanistan and Iraq

North Korea

Recurrent flooding and drought often in the same year has hit North Korea since 1995, 220,000 people died in the ensuing famine, according to Pyongyang’s own figures. U.S. figures place the number of deaths resulting from famine at 2 million.

The first major flooding occurred in 1995.

There were floods and drought in 1999. The serious water shortage resulting from the 1999 drought was conducive to the destruction of crops.

“The temperature of water in rice fields goes beyond 40 degrees and the tall rice plants fresh from the rice seedling beds are withering. In particular, nearly all after-crop maize seedlings and seeds are perishing,” it added.

In 2001, in June there was an extensive drought with rainfall just 10% of normal levels, which served to undermine agricultural crops. And then a few months later, in October, there were extensive floodings leading to the further destruction of rice harvests and a crisis situation in food distribution.

“Officials in Kangwon province — an area which already suffers food shortages — say the impact of the torrential rain and flooding has been devastating. The normal recorded rainfall for October should be around 20mm. But in the worst-affected areas 400mm (18 inches) of rain fell in just 12 hours. “It was the worst flooding we’ve had since records began in 1910,” said Kim Song Hwan, head of the government’s Flood Damage Rehabilitation Committee for the region. (BBC, 23 Oct 2001, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/1614981.stm )

Cuba

For several years Cuba has been affected by recurrent droughts. In 1998, rainfall in Eastern Cuba was at its lowest level since 1941.

A United Nations team estimated 539,000 people, 280,000 of them farmers, were directly affected by reduced availability of food or reduced income through production losses. Some reported effects are: hunger in areas; a loss of up to 14% of the sugar cane crop planted last year and a reduction in this spring’s planted crops, since rains were not sufficient for some seeds to germinate (which will reduce next year’s crop); as much as 42% losses in food staples such as root vegetables, beans, bananas, and rice in the five eastern provinces; and livestock, poultry, and egg production losses

(UN Relief, http://www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/0/2975570e60ff2a7685256680005a8e2d?OpenDocument )

In 2003, a devastating drought hit the Western part of Cuba

In 2004 May-June, the country is hit by the worst drought in its history:

 ”A severe drought enveloping eastern Cuba has eroded 40 percent of the farmland, starved thousands of heads of cattle and has close to 4 million people counting every drop of water they consume.” The drought is described as the worst in 40 years.

“The drought has robbed underground water levels of some 10 feet over the past 10 years, leaving over 5,000 wells across the province dry,” said Leandro Bermudez, a geologist and the second man at Cuba’s National Institute of Hydraulic Resources. (MSNBC, 21 June 2004 http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5262324

The cities are running out of water. According to the Independent, “Drought is bringing Cuba to its knees

Unnoticed by the world, the longest dry period for decades has brought much of Cuba to its knees. Could this be the crisis that finally destroys Fidel’s revolution?

“All across central and eastern Cuba, farmers, ranchers, city dwellers and government officials are scrambling to deal with a punishing drought that began a decade ago and intensified in the last two years.

Although traditionally arid, the provinces of Holguin, Camaguey and Las Tunas hold some of Cuba’s finest pasture and farmland and have long been crucial to this communist nation’s dairy, beef and agricultural industries.

More than 12,500 cattle have died in Holguin alone in 2004 and milk production has fallen 20 percent. The price of beans, plantains, sweet potatoes and other staples has soared in private markets.

The drought has caused millions of dollars in losses and officials are spending millions more digging wells, building a water pipeline and taking other measures to try to ease the crisis — huge sums in an impoverished nation struggling through tough economic times and a battle with the United States.

Officials also have moved thousands of cattle to more fertile areas and are working furiously to finish a 32-mile pipeline that will draw water to Holguin city from Cuba’s largest river, the Cauto. The $5 million pipeline could be completed next month. (Chicago Tribune, July 29, 2004, http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/world/9271316.htm )

The above report date to September 2004, it was published before, the hurricanes hit the Cuban coastline followed by torrential rains.

Afghanistan and The former Soviet Republics of Central Asia

The worst drought in Afghanistan history occurred in the three consecutive years prior to the onslaught of the US led invasion, from 1999 to 2001. The agricultural recovery of the 1990s, in the wake of the Soviet-Afghan war was brought to a standstill.

In the wake of the US led 2001 invasion, the United States supplied Afghanistan with genetically modified wheat and appropriate types of fertilizer to be used with the GM wheat, which was said to be high yield drought resistant. The donation of GM wheat, however, also led to destabilizing the small peasant economy because the GM wheat varieties could not reproduced locally. In 2002, famines which were barely reported by the media, swept the country.

Similar although less severe conditions prevailed in the former Soviet republics of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan.

Like Afghanistan, Tajikistan has had its infrastructure ruined by prolonged civil war with Muslim fundamentalists. Since then, the worst regional drought in 74 years has destroyed food crops over a large part of the nation, rendering almost half of the 6.2 million people in the country vulnerable to the threat of famine and disease, up from 3 million last year. About the only portion of the economy that has been unaffected is the drug trade. Tajikistan is the transit route for 65 to 85 percent of heroin smuggled out of Afghanistan, the world’s largest producer. (http://www.americanfreepress.net/Mideast/Drought__Desperation_Breed_Vio/drought__desperation_breed_vio.html ]

Triggered by the lowest rainfall (2001) in living memory, vast tracts of Iran, Uzbekistan, Pakistan and Tajikistan are being reduced to desert as the water table sinks, long-established wells dry up and herds of livestock perish.

The crisis appears to fulfill alarming climate change predictions suggesting that states along the old Silk Road will experience steeper rises in temperature than any other region on earth. By the end of the century it will be 5C hotter in an area which regularly sees the thermometer soar above 40C.

The study, published last year by the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research at the University of East Anglia, predicted that Asian countries from Kazakhstan to Saudi Arabia will warm up more than twice as much as others. “Several states,” the report added, “including Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan and Iran, [are facing] famine.”

In Tajikistan, the United Nations appealed for aid to avert disaster. “Substantial foreign aid is needed or else there will be a large-scale famine,” said Matthew Kahane, the UN’s humanitarian aid coordinator, speaking from the capital, Dushanbe.

“The country has had its lowest rainfall for 75 years. Families who survived last year by selling their cows and chickens now have no other means of coping. Some households have sold the glass out of their windows and the wooden beams from their roofs to raise money for food.”

(The Guardian, 0ct 30, 2001, http://www.guardian.co.uk/famine/story/0,12128,736902,00.html )

Iraq

In 1999, Iraq suffered its worst drought of the century, with the effect of triggering an even greater dependence on imported grain under the oil for food program. There was a drop of up to 70 percent in domestic yields of wheat, barley and other cereals, which served to further weaken the country’s economy, crippled by economic sanctions and the routine bombing by allied aircraft in the no-fly zones.

A similar (although less serious) situation prevailed in Syria and Iran, marked by significant declines in agricultural output.


Related Global Research Articles on Weather Warfare

Michel Chossudovsky, Washington’s New World Order Weapons Have the Ability to Trigger Climate Change, Jan 2001, http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO201A.html

Vladimir V. Sytin, Secret Use of Weather Modification Techniques by US Air Force? August 2003, http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/SYT308A.html

Interfax,.US Could Dominate The Planet if It Deploys This Weapon In Space, CRG, August 2002, http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/INT208A.html

Scott Gilbert, Environmental Warfare and US Foreign Policy: The Ultimate Weapon of Mass Destruction, January 2004, http://globalresearch.ca/articles/GIL401A.html

Bob Fitrakis, Rods from Gods: The insanity of Star Wars, 24 June 2004, http://globalresearch.ca/articles/FIT407A.html

Did a Secret Military Experiment Cause the 2003 Blackout? 7 September 2003, http://globalresearch.ca/articles/ANA309A.html

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

New Books from Global Research

original

WWIII Scenario


This article originally appeared on: Global Research

'US firms bear brunt of oil bans on Iran'

0

An Iranian lawmaker has downplayed the impact of US-led sanctions on Iranâ„¢s oil exports, saying the bans harm US companies rather than the Islamic Republic.

Å“Sanctions are no obstacle to Iran oil sales, but imposing bans on Iranian oil will harm many US companies,” Seyyed Hossein Dehdashti, a member of the presiding board of Iran Majlis Energy Committee, stated on Thursday.

The Iranian legislator added that the Western countries are applying pressure to prevent the export of oil from Iran, but the Å“resolve of the Iranian nation and officials” will thwart their efforts.

Dehdashti also stressed that the Washingtonâ„¢s latest decision to exempt a number of countries from bans on Iran oil imports is aimed at placating protests from international buyers.

On Wednesday, US Secretary of State John Kerry extended exemptions from Washington’s sanctions on Iran for nine economies, namely China, India, Malaysia, South Korea, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Turkey, and Taiwan.

Kerry said the exemptions would be valid for 180 days. These economies were previously granted six months of exemptions in December.

At the beginning of 2012, the US and the European Union imposed new sanctions on Iranâ„¢s oil and financial sectors with the goal of preventing other countries from purchasing Iranian oil and conducting transactions with the Central Bank of Iran.

The illegal US-engineered sanctions were imposed based on the accusation that Iran is pursuing non-civilian objectives in its nuclear energy program. Iran has repeatedly rejected the allegation and argues that as a committed signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and an IAEA member, it has all the rights to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.

MRS/SS/HMV

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

US deploys extra forces in Guantanamo

0

Soldiers enter an area of the US Guantanamo Bay prison complex. (File photo)

The United States is dispatching additional soldiers to the Guantanamo Bay prison complex in Cuba amid the inmatesâ„¢ hunger strike.

A total of 125 guard forces will be transferred from Puerto Rico to the infamous US detention center, a US Army Reserve spokesman said on Wednesday.

The soldiers have been sent for a one-month training program before they leave for the detention center, he said.

The overall goal is to attain 2,000 staff members in order to watch over the 166 detainees. The detention center currently employs 1,831 troops and civilians.

One hundred thirty prisoners have been on a hunger strike for over 100 days in protest against their long confinement without charge or trial, as well as the horrible and degrading conditions at the jail.

Numerous countries and human rights groups including the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has also urged US President Barack Obamaâ„¢s administration to mend the situation in Guantanamo where guards have been force-feeding prisoners, saying that the act is akin to torture.

On June 4, the Armed Services Committee voted to keep the prison open, despite Obamaâ„¢s pledge to close the prison.

Obama mentioned in a recent speech the economic burden that the prison puts on taxpayers Å“during a time of budget cuts…[where] we spend USD 150 million each year to imprison 166 people – almost USD 1 million per prisoner.”

GMA/KA

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

French leftist attacked by neo-Nazis

0

A young French far-left activist has been declared brain dead he was attacked by a group of neo-Nazis in central Paris in what police call a Å“politically motivated incident.”

Franceâ„¢s Interior Minister Manuel Valls said Clement Meric, 18, was Å“hit extremely violently by several skinheads” in a fight on Wednesday.

A police source said four people were being held in connection with the attack which has left Meric brain dead in hospital.

A preliminary police inquiry indicated that a group of Å“skinhead types” stepped into a shop where Meric was attending a clothes sale with friends.

Witnesses told police that angry words were exchanged before the attackers left Å“to fetch reinforcements”.

After leaving the shop, Meric Å“was hit by one of the skinheads who wore brass knuckles and fell on the sidewalk, hitting a bollard.”

Valls accused the far-right for the incident, saying, Å“a group of the extreme right is at the heart of this assassination. There is a discourse of hate and a climate that favors this discourse. We need to pay attention to this because they threaten our values.”

Meric belonged to the Left Party (Parti de Gauche) which gave a statement after the attack accusing the extreme far Revolutionary Nationalist Youth (JNR) group for the assault.

Several other left-wing parties have called for people to rally on Thursday evening for Å“the dissolution of ultraviolent far right groups.”

CAH/KA

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Mornings With Cockburn

0

Alexander Cockburn would have been 72 years old today.

My last talk with Alex was like so many others. It wandered around from topic to topic in an easy, freestyle way. His voice was a little weaker than usual, a little scratchy in the throat. He was in Germany, talking on a cell-phone, in a hotel room near the clinic where he was being treated for cancer. We talked about how dreary American politics had become, about the spinelessness of Obama and his liberal supporters, the insanity of the Republican ultras, and the stuffiness of Mitt Romney. “Is this all there is?” he asked. “Politics used to be so much more fun.”

Then his voice livened up. He described an online photo essay on Bridget Bardot, then vividly recalled his stroll through the Pompidou Center in Paris with his daughter Daisy to view the vast Matisse retrospective. “No question, Matisse was the greatest.” Matisse had deposed Samuel Palmer, Edouard Vuillard, Turner, Hokusai, Bruegel the Elder, Morris Graves and Giorgioni, in Alex’s ever-changing retinue of favorite painters.

He asked what I’d been listening to. I told him Howlin’ Wolf and John Lee Hooker, as usual, reigniting a long-running debate between us. Alex was a Muddy Waters man. I emailed him a video clip of our mutual hero Ike Turner, playing at some odd venue in Italy, with the Ikettes high-stepping it in white mini-skirts and go-go boots. We watched it together online, laughing at the way the dancers seemed to mock Turner. “Ike’s headed for trouble,” Alex said.

Then Alex asked if the trout were rising in the Deschutes River in central Oregon. He said when he got back to the states we should ring up old Doug Peacock in Montana and spend a couple days tossing dry flies at the rainbows. I told him to count on it.

“Can you bring sausages? I can’t believe I’m in the heart of Germany and can’t even eat sausages.”

I told him I’d order some garlic sausages from Taylor’s down in Cave Junction, pack some goat cheese and a dozen bottles of Cote du Rhone.

“Thanks, Buddy.”

That was the last time I heard his voice.

The first time I heard his voice was in the fall of 1992, after the presidential elections. I was editing the environmental magazine Wild Forest Review at the time. The phone rang. I picked up. “Jeffrey, hullo, Jeffrey, is that you? This is Alexander Cockburn at The Nation.”

Even though I’d long given up reading the tedious, East Coast-biased prose of The Nation, the name was familiar from the Village Voice, which I used to read assiduously in the 1970s, and his marvelous books Corruptions of Empire and Fate of the Forest, with Susanna Hecht, both of which had fractured spines. The voice was sweetly accented, seductive almost. “That was a helluva piece you wrote on Clinton’s environmental record in Arkansas. You know, we may be the only two people in the country to the left of David Broder who see Bill for the corporate whore that he is.”

We talked for an hour or so about Clinton, Weyerhaeuser, Tyson Chicken and the poisoning of the White River. Turns out, Alex was not “at” The Nation, geographically anyway. I was surprised to learn that he lived on the Lost Coast in a little hamlet along the Mattole River called Petrolia. He’d left Manhattan behind to the consternation of many of his readers, friends and editors. But most of them had never seen the Mattole Valley or that wild stretch of California coast that runs from Shelter Cove north to Cape Mendocino.

A few days later, the fax machine began to spit out Alex’s column. It was pretty much a verbatim transcript of our talk–though I didn’t make an appearance. And that was vintage Alex, too. If there was a deadline, he would run right up to it and often past it. This wasn’t because Alex had writer’s block, it was because he had better things to do, like feed the horses, teach his cockatiel Percy to whistle the Internationale, fix–or try to fix–the septic, prune the apple trees, tweezer out a deer tick from Frank the cat’s black dreadlocks, distill hard cider, check the progress of the pit barbecue, negotiate a complex Persian rug deal with Lawrence of La Brea or find his glasses. Alex could write faster than anyone I’ve ever met and the faster he wrote the sharper his prose. And Alex wrote very sharp prose. His old partner at the Village Voice, James Ridgeway, called him “the Master.”

Two months later Alex was writing for me. After his first column appeared in Wild Forest Review, Alex rang me up. “Jeffrey, nice looking issue. But didn’t you forget something?”

“What’s that?” I said, fearing that I’d mangled one of his paragraphs.

“My payment. I’m a professional writer, you know. Just a little something to make me feel I’m not giving it away.”

We weren’t paying writers then. We could barely pay the rent. I scrambled for a plan.

“Can I send you a bottle of Scotch?”

“I hate Scotch. Make it Irish whiskey. Jameson’s.”

Alex had a reputation as a heavy drinker. But that wasn’t my experience with him. In the last few years, he tended to drink wine more than hard liquor. He flirted with hard cider and often came into possession of exotic distillations of dubious legality. But he didn’t get rip-roaring drunk very often. Instead, he revealed a predisposition toward narcolepsy. He could simply fall asleep, often at surreal times. Once his ex-girlfriend Barbara Yaley had gotten us tickets to see Little Richard perform in San Francisco as a birthday present. Twenty-minutes into a raucous performance, Alex’s head was nodding on my shoulder, snoring in sync to the beat of “Good Golly Miss Molly.”

A few years earlier we gave a book talk at Powell’s in downtown Portland. As usual, Alex drove his precious white Plymouth Valiant. After the gig we enjoyed a nice dinner at Jake’s Famous Crayfish, drained a couple glasses of wine and headed back to Oregon City on Highway 99. We’d barely reached the swank community of Eastmoreland, near Reed College, when Alex muttered, “Jeffrey, can you take the wheel? Now….” His chin dropped to his sternum, the tiny car veering toward the Willamette. I leaned over, grabbed the steering wheel with one hand, pounded the break with the other. I negotiated the car to the side of the highway, heaved Alex into the passenger seat, then sat befuddled at the control panels wondering how to get the car into gear. It was my first, though not last, encounter with the Valiant’s infamous push-button transmission.

Then there was the notorious incident in North Richmond, California. Our book Whiteout: the CIA, Drugs and the Press had recently been published, greeted by what was perhaps the most hostile review ever printed by the New York Times Book Review. We were speaking to a big and boisterous crowd in this largely black community in the East Bay Area detailing the CIA’s role in abetting cocaine trafficking during the Contra wars. I was about halfway through my talk when I was distracted by a delicate purring sound to my left. It was Alex, glasses perched on his forehead, hypnotized by the sedative power of my voice into a somnatic state. So, yes, even Cockburn nods.

Nearly every morning for the past 20 years, the phone would ring in our house at 7 am. “Jeffrey, this is Alex.” As if it could be anyone else. We talked an hour each morning. Several hours a day when we were writing books together. Those calls oriented my days. Now there is a strange lacunae, as I wait for those early morning calls and find only silence. I feel lost without them.

These weren’t business calls. They weren’t “about” CounterPunch. They were notations on our lives. We talked about car mechanics and fishing; French cinema and the best way to bake salmon; the architecture of Barcelona and the merits of free jazz; surrealist poets and the proper way to stack hay; Kimberly and Daisy’s adventures with the, yes, Alexander Technique; Roman emperors (we were intent on reclaiming the reputation of Nero) and the harvesting of mussels; the paintings Tintoretto and the dancing of James Brown; the plot of Tron Legacy (“Jeffrey, what’s it all about? I’ve got to talk with Olivia later and I couldn’t make heads or tails of it, could you?”); Becky Grant’s dazzling ceramics and Greg Smith’s latest project at Rancho Cockburn. One morning he called up and said, “Jeffrey, we have to rethink our opposition to journalism prizes. It seems my brother Patrick has just won the Gellhorn Prize for war reporting. And he’s going to accept it!” Who says Alex refused to change his mind?

Increasingly, we didn’t talk much about the political scene: too dull, too predictable, too dreary. We taunted each other on the phone with jokes and pop quizzes: indentify this painting, this singer, this line from Joyce, Wodehouse, Ruskin, Edward Gibbon or Henry Miller. We played these games right up to the end. On Bastille day, a week before he died, I sent Alex this stanza under the subject heading: “?”

Now was it that both found,

The meek and lofty did both find,

Helpers to their heart’s desire,

And stuff at hand, plastic as they could wish,

Both were called upon to exercise their skill–

Not in Utopia, subterranean fields, or some secreted island,

Or heaven knows where!

But in the very world, which is the world of all of us–

The place where in the end we find our happiness–

Or not at all.

Five minutes later an email skids into my Mac from Germany. “Wordsworth!”

And so he won again. Those are the closing lines of “The French Revolution as it Appeared to Enthusiasts at its Commencement.” The young Wordsworth was something of an armchair revolutionary, cheering on the French radicals from his cottage in the Lake District. But those were dangerous sentiments, even coded in verse, and Wordsworth was hounded by the secret police and broke under the pressure.

Alex never broke, never retreated, but always moved forward, toward greater liberation, toward justice and sometimes toward vengeance for grievous wrongs. His favorite line from Lenin was “Be as radical as reality.” This became CounterPunch’s motto. Alex’s politics weren’t static and they weren’t theoretical. They were geared toward the circumstances of our daily lives.

In the hundreds of interviews I’ve given since Alex’s death, I’ve taken to calling him “our Voltaire.” He shared Voltaire’s wide-ranging mind, his hatred of oppression, his rapier wit and astounding productivity. Alex wrote with breath-taking speed. I think he wrote as fast as Jean-Paul Sartre, but without the amphetamines. And the prose emerged, from the Underwood and later (thank god) his Mac, with a vicious lucidity. His columns deepen and expand with re-reading, because, like Voltaire, they are studded with inside jokes, puns, secret insults and allusions. It’s one of the reasons his friend Edward Said called him, “Alexander the Brilliant.”

The last email Alex sent chastised me: “Jeffrey, why haven’t you posted my diary! I sent it to you three DAYS ago!” I chuckled when I read it. He had actually sent the essay a few hours earlier and I had edited it and put it online only a few minutes later.

By that point Alex was apparently exploring Zeno’s Paradox, he was surfing other waves of time, subdividing the seconds into infinite segments, as if he was hot on the trial of Schroedinger’s Cat (the one that might be dead and alive at the same moment), a cat which, when he finally catches up with him, will be big and black and fluffy. Alex will call out: “Frankie!” And he will come…

Jeffrey St. Clair is the editor of CounterPunch. His most recent book (with Joshua Frank) is Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press).

A version of this essay originally ran in CounterPunch’s tribute issue to Alexander Cockburn.

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

Obama: The Most Effective of Two Evils

0

Part I: “Cuban Democracy” versus “American Democracy”

Arnold August is a political scientist, author and lecturer living in Montreal. He is the author of Democracy in Cuba and the 1997—98 Elections (Editorial José Martí). He has also contributed a chapter entitled “Socialism and Elections” for the volume Cuban Socialism in a New Century: Adversity, Survival and Renewal (University Press of Florida). His latest book is Cuba and Its Neighbours: Democracy in Motion.

Julie Lévesque: In regards to U.S. democracy, in your book Cuba and Its Neighbours: Democracy in Motion you talk about the notion of the lesser of two evils and the illusion of change. Could you give us an overview of your analysis of Barack Obama?

Arnold August: In this book I chronicle in a very detailed manner what I call “the Obama case study” because one of my main fears and preoccupations is not so much from the so called “right”, but rather the illusions that exist among liberals and among some people on the left with regards to Obama. So I dissected everything that Obama wrote in his first two books, his book of 2004 as he was running for senate and his book of 2008, just before he was nominated. Now looking into that, it very clearly indicates that Obama, with the support of others who were responsible for building the image of change, gave the right signals to the oligarchy that he is not in favour of changing the status quo. At the same time, he provided some indications that people might look to him as a source of change.

Now, if one looks at his books very carefully, on key issues, for example on Vietnam, he stood firmly in favour of U.S. aggression of Vietnam. He ridiculed people on the left, liberals who took a stand against the Vietnam war.

JL: Like Doctor Martin Luther King.

AA: Exactly. He took a stand against Vietnam. He didn’t ridicule Martin Luther King but he ridiculed people on the left who took a stand. On the issue of Chile for example, he complained in his book about people on the left, or liberals, being so concerned about the need to support the struggle of the people in Chile against Pinochet, when at the time, Obama asserted, they ignored that there was a dictatorship in the Soviet Union and other countries in the Eastern Bloc. And so he indicated clearly to the ruling circles that, as far as the basic fundamentals of U.S. foreign policy and domestic policy were concerned, that he is their man. At the same time, he gave the impression that he was in favour of change. Now he had a very specific assistant in this whole attempt to present him as the person of change, David Axelrod, who has very close ties to the ruling circles. He specializes in getting Afro-Americans elected in positions of power. He did that with the mayor of Washington D.C. and then his next customer was Obama.

JL: You explain in your book that Barack Obama was used to reduce the credibility gap among the African Americans. Could you tell us how that was done?

AA: That is really important. For example, Brzezinski who was Bill Clinton’s advisor, very cleverly pointed out — he was right — that there was a major credibility gap for the American ruling circles with regards to Latin America, with countries such as Venezuela and the new movement there; and with regards to the Middle East, before the eruption took place in Egypt; and with other parts of the world. And they had to put a new face on the American foreign policy in order to recuperate that credibility and that’s why he said “I am proposing Obama; he could do it.”

The same thing goes for domestic policy. I think that one of the main things was that the United States has always been, and rightly so, very fearful of an African American revolt against the ruling circles. Now, when Obama made his famous speech, I believe it was for senator, he said that there is no Afro-America, no Latino-America, that there is just one United States of America. In other words, let’s forget about racism especially if I get elected to the White House. And so the the most effective of two evils, is an important point.

JL: Because when one criticises Obama, a lot of people say “well, he’s better than Bush”. But that is not an argument and it’s a way to avoid any criticism.

AA: That’s right. Well, this is exactly what the problem is. Especially among people who call themselves liberals or, unfortunately, many people on the left say “well, he’s better than Bush, he is the lesser of two evils.” Now, I am from Montreal, and I am not an American, so in order to deal with criticism of Obama and that usual way of looking at things, I have investigated carefully other writers from the United States, for instance Black Agenda Report in the United States, based in California. They represent what is the best among African Americans, that revolutionary progressive tradition that goes back from the time of the struggle against slavery, to the 1960’s and 1970’s.

JL: And they are very critical of Barack Obama.

AA: Yes, because there is a major pressure from the ruling circles to declare: “We people, on the left, or liberals or progressive, we cannot criticise Obama because he is being criticized by the right.” So, I ally myself if you like, with Black Agenda Report and other American scholars, intellectuals concerned with civil liberties, African American lawyers such as Michelle Alexander who wrote an excellent book on the situation of African Americans today. And I agree with Black Agenda Report that Obama, far from being the lesser of two evils, is the most effective of the two evils. One of the main themes in that chapter of my book is that Obama does not really represent a continuation of Bush policies. Quite the contrary; he represents an offensive, a new offensive on behalf of the U.S. ruling circles, domestically as well as internationally.

JL: All that while giving an illusion of positive change?

AA: Yes and it still works, because the second time around, a lot of people were still claiming “well, he is better than Romney.” But he represents an offensive, if you just take for example, the upsurge among the Wall Street Movement not long after Egypt, Madison, Wisconsin and Spain, three countries in a row, which followed up on the Egyptian revolution. Now there were a lot of positive things about the Occupy Wall Street movement, and it’s not a homogeneous movement, it was not then, it is not now; some are openly against the two-party system, some are not, some make themselves unwittingly easy prey for the Obama administration. But the movement is mainly based on white middle class or lower middle class people of the United States. So you could imagine if the African American population at that time had been liberated from this illusion that Obama being in the White House means salvation to African Americans and instead join the Occupy Wall Street movement, it would have been a major problem for the U.S. ruling circles. So this is what Brzezinski had in mind, credibility gap internationally as well as domestically.

The health care reform is another example. It was just another way of increasing the profit of the insurance companies — there was nothing more than that, another offensive on the part of the ruling circles. And while providing the image that he is in favor of change, he is the one who plays the African American card every single day. Every time something happens, let’s say they are honoring Martin Luther King or Rosa Parks, he says “if it was not for Martin Luther King” or “Rosa Parks, I would not be here.” He never misses an occasion to raise the fact that he is an African American. At the same time, when African Americans are being killed on the streets, he has nothing to say. So in fact, and I quote some people, American scholars and people involved in legal rights and civil rights, he in fact assists in the killing of African Americans by, on the one hand, giving the impression that they are safe, because there is an African American in the White House, and at the same time not saying anything when they are killed.

If you take the example of the famous issue of the so called gun control, I wrote in my book published before the Newtown shooting that the killings are going to carry on because no one in the ruling circles raises the issue that the second amendment is a major problem. Now they have this false debate going, for or against gun control, but the competition between the Obama forces on the one hand and the so called “right forces” on the other side, merely revolves around which of these two forces are more faithful to the second amendment. None of them even think or hint at the necessity to challenge the second amendment because, in my view, the real question which should be asked in relation to gun control is “how come, in the United States, we are allowed to have an arms manufactory industry with no control, that companies can just manufacture arms of all kinds, the most devastating arms and sell them on the market?” But neither the Obama nor the other forces challenge this.

Obama keeps on saying “our Constitution is the oldest democratic Constitution in the world.” It’s true that it’s a very old constitution, but that’s a negative thing. Is it not time for the constitution to be updated? That people should have a say about what the constitution should be in the United States of America? The basic clauses such as the right to be armed should be rethought in order to eliminate this whole plague on American society?

JL: You also talk about the fact that the military industrial complex as well is never challenged by any of the two parties.

AA: Now, for example there is — if you watch CNN or any other U.S. broadcast — they keep on repeating continuously that in the United States you have democrats/republicans — left/right — liberals/conservatives. They keep giving the impression there’s two opposing forces in the United States of America. But it isn’t the case. It is basically the same force which changes its appearance from time to time. When one force gets discredited, they put the other in its place.

JL: You mean the same economic interests are behind the two parties?

AA: That’s right. Now there has been a lot of debate over the last while regarding budget, amounts of money necessary, but there are several American academics, which I mention in my book, who say that you can say anything about the U.S. budget or U.S. spending, but you cannot touch upon the issue of military spending. I think that one of the weaknesses of the Occupy Wall Street movement is that they talk about the banks in general without putting in perspective or without highlighting the proportion of military spending due to the fact that the United States is an imperial power. As a result of this imperialism, therefore, the U.S is necessarily spending money on armaments, and there is the fusion of the military, the industries and the banks resulting in military spending. The whole economy in the United States is built on military spending but no one challenges that, including Obama. They can make some adjustments, a few dollars less here, a few dollars more here, but addressing the reasons why a very important portion of American spending goes on the military is not allowed to enter into the discussion.

JL: And if both parties agree on that issue, does that not mean that when it comes to foreign policy, they agree that America needs to maintain and increase its military power everywhere on the globe?

AA: That’s exactly it. In fact Obama, right from the beginning, said that the United States taking it from the puritans at the end of the 18th century is a light for the world; it is the most powerful country in the world, it is the best nation in the world, even after the American soldiers would commit atrocities against people in Iraq or Afghanistan or anywhere, he would say “We have the best army in the world — the best nation in the world.” And sometimes he’s been accused of being against “American exceptionalism”, the idea that America is an exceptional country. But that is not true that he is against this concept. He even said he agrees with American exceptionalism, that this was born at the end of the 18th century with the puritans. He said “We are an exceptional nation and we have a special role to play in the world to bring democracy, civilization and culture to the people in the world.”

So there is no difference between him and people such as Palin, Romney or McCain. The only difference is that the Obama approach as manufactured by Axelrod and others is much more effective in pulling the wool over the eyes of many people; and my basic conclusion is that democracy in the U.S. now works very well, it is not in crisis. They are able to recuperate themselves after Bush, to put an entirely new face on a policy that is increasing the attacks on a world scale on behalf of Obama. Just look at what he’s done over the last five years from Iraq, Afghanistan, and other attacks in several countries; Soon after he was elected for his first mandate, a coup d’état took place in Honduras. Bush, McCain, Palin would not have been able to get away with it, but Obama got away with doing this coup d’état because there was still — even still now amongst some Latin American, progressive circles — a certain degree of illusion regarding Obama, that he was different from the Republicans or the right. But he really worked in favour of this Honduras coup d’état using with the better Ivy League language, and body talk, to give the impression that he’s not really behind it. But what did he say during the Honduras coup? Once Zelaya, the president was kidnapped, taken out of Honduras and then people were on the streets for over 100 days, risking their lives to demonstrate against the coup d’état and the American-backed military there, Obama kept on saying (and also Clinton and the others) that both sides have to use restraint. That’s very interesting. You have the military in power there, Zelaya outside of the country, people with their bare hands trying to resist, and he puts both sides on the same level — both sides have to use restraint.

JL: He tried to look neutral?

AA: Right. But in fact Obama never agreed that Zelaya should return to Honduras as a president. He said “I am against the coup, it’s no good, I am against the military, it’s no good,” but he would always oppose the return of Zelaya , who was elected, to Honduras. So that’s how they operate, that’s how the United States got away with it.

This article originally appeared on: Global Research

Verizon Hands Over Customer Data Daily to NSA, Top Secret Order Reveals

0

According to a court order labeled “TOP SECRET,” federal judge Roger Vinson ordered Verizon to turn over the phone records of millions of its U.S. customers to the National Security Agency (NSA).

The order, issued in April by the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and leaked on the Internet by the Guardian (U.K.), compels Verizon to provide these records on an “ongoing daily basis” to hand over to the domestic spy agency “an electronic copy” of “all call detail records created by Verizon for communications (i) between the United States and abroad; or (ii) wholly within the United States, including local telephone calls.”

This information includes the phone numbers involved, the electronic identity of the device, the calling card numbers (if any) used in making the calls, and the time and duration of the call.

In other words, if you are a Verizon customer, your detailed phone records secretly have been handed over – and will continue to be handed over – to NSA agents.

This wholesale dragnet of personal electronic communication data proves beyond dispute that the Obama administration is keeping millions of Americans under constant surveillance regardless of whether the targets are suspected of committing crimes.

In other words, millions of innocent Americans have had their call records shared with a federal spy agency in open and hostile defiance of the Fourth Amendment’s guarantee of “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.”

What is reasonable? While in the law, “the term reasonable is a generic and relative one and applies to that which is appropriate for a particular situation,” consider the following explanation of the use of the term in the constitutional context. St. George Tucker, a Founding Generation jurist, wrote:

In the administration of preventive justice, the following principles have been held sacred; that some probable ground of suspicion be exhibited before some judicial authority; that it be supported by oath or affirmation; that the party may avoid being thrown into confinement, by finding pledges or securities for his legal conduct, sufficient in the judgment of some judicial authority; that he may have the benefit of a writ of habeas corpus, and thus obtain his release, if wrongfully confined; and that he may at any time be discharged from his recognizance, or his confinement, and restored to his former liberty and rights, on the order of the proper judicial authority; if it shall see sufficient cause.

With this latest revelation it seems that the once “sacred” principles of reasonableness and probable cause have been defiled and justice is no longer a demonstrable purpose of government.

Again, the government has made no attempt to demonstrate that any of those whose phone records have been seized are suspected of committing some crime. It is a plain and simple violation of the Fourth Amendment in the hope of finding something that one day might be found to qualify as suspicious. That is putting the cart of culpability before the horse of the Constitution and it should not be abided by the American people.

How far are the citizens of this Republic willing to let the federal surveillance apparatus go toward constructing a Panopticon? At this accelerated rate of construction, how long until every call, every text, every e-mail, every online message, and every movement fall under the all-seeing eye of federal overlords?

When contacted by The New American, a spokesman for Verizon declined to comment on his company’s compliance with the order.

Such a demur is expected in light of the provision of the order which prohibits Verizon, the FBI, or the NSA from revealing to the public – including the Verizon customers whose phone records now belong to the Obama administration – that the data is being given to the government.

Glen Greenwald of the Guardian (U.K.) details the data being seized by the NSA:

The information is classed as “metadata”, or transactional information, rather than communications, and so does not require individual warrants to access. The document also specifies that such “metadata” is not limited to the aforementioned items. A 2005 court ruling judged that cell site location data – the nearest cell tower a phone was connected to – was also transactional data, and so could potentially fall under the scope of the order.

While the order itself does not include either the contents of messages or the personal information of the subscriber of any particular cell number, its collection would allow the NSA to build easily a comprehensive picture of who any individual contacted, how and when, and possibly from where, retrospectively.

Greenwald’s accurate analysis raises a couple of very important questions.

First, why would agents of the federal government willingly violate the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution by seizing phone logs of millions of innocent Americans?

Next, how long until the next TOP SECRET court order is leaked, one making the same demands on AT&T, Sprint, or other telecommunication companies?

As quoted by Greenwald, the Cato Institute’s Julian Sanchez remarked, “We’ve certainly seen the government increasingly strain the bounds of ‘relevance’ to collect large numbers of records at once – everyone at one or two degrees of separation from a target – but vacuuming all metadata up indiscriminately would be an extraordinary repudiation of any pretence [sic] of constraint or particularized suspicion.”

Can anyone doubt that?

Readers should recall that as required by provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Amendments of 2008 (FISA) and the Patriot Act (as amended in 2005), the Department of Justice revealed to Congress in April the number of applications for eavesdropping received and rejected by the FISA court.

To no one’s surprise (least of all to the architects and builders of the already sprawling surveillance state), the letter addressed to Senator Harry Reid (D-Nev.) reports that in 2012, of the 1,789 requests made by the government to monitor the electronic communications of citizens, not a single one was rejected.

That’s right. The court, established specifically to judge the merits of applications by the government to spy on citizens, gave a green light to every government request for surveillance.

Not content to be a mere formality for electronic surveillance, the FISA court (officially called the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court) also held the coats of the FBI while that agency carried out the searches and seizures set out in 212 applications.

Perhaps the most disturbing take-away from the leak of this secret court document ordering Verizon to hand over customer call logs and other data to a federal surveillance agency is the fact that the government considers the protections of the Fourth Amendment to be nothing more than a “parchment barrier” that is easily torn through. The Obama administration regards the Constitution – as did the Bush administration before it – as advisory at best, and nothing now stands between the citizens of this nation and the construction of the 21st century Panopticon.

In this country, then, every citizen is now a suspect.

As former NSA employee Thomas Drake told this reporter last July, these NSA projects began in the days after the attacks of September 11, allowed that agency to spy on Americans, and have “crossed the Rubicon” and “opened a Pandora’s box.”

With the Rubicon behind them, the federal government has declared war on the Constitution and obviously aims to disregard the reasonableness requirement and designate every American as a potential threat to the security of “the homeland.”

 

Joe A. Wolverton, II, J.D. is a correspondent for The New American and travels frequently nationwide speaking on topics of nullification, the NDAA, and the surveillance state. He can be reached at
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

This article originally appeared on: The New American

‘Violent crime in US hits new surge’

0

The violent crime rate in the United States has increased for the first time in seven years, indicating a shift in the national trend.

The FBI released a report this week showing a 1.2 percent increase in violent crimes in the United States in 2012, after yearly declines since 2006 – due to a surge in crimes committed in cities with large populations.

Å“It is a disturbing trend and itâ„¢s something that shouldnâ„¢t be happening in the United States….But as these statistics show in many big cities, the crime rate is going up and is continuing to do so,” Isabella Fabens, a member with the Council on Hemispheric Affairs, told Press TV.

In cities with populations between 500,000 and one million people, the violent crime rate rose by 3.7 percent including an increase of 12.5 percent in murder rates, according to FBI.

Cities with more than a million people witnessed a 1.4 percent increase in violent crimes including 1.5 percent for murders and 3.2 percent for rapes.

Violent crime is classified as an offense that includes murder, rape, robbery and aggravated assaults.

Experts are puzzled over the change in criminal behavior though the trend may indicate cuts in social services due to the recent spending cuts.

Å“I think that has impacted things other than the police force, that maybe there isnâ„¢t as good education or there arenâ„¢t other services to deal with people who donâ„¢t have jobs or there arenâ„¢t health services. To go along with that, the police force canâ„¢t operate within all of this happening even with a low budget,” Fabens stated.

GMA/KA

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

125 More Guards Head to Guantanamo to 'Help' With Solitary Confinement, Force-Feeding of Prisoners

0

(Photo: Justin Norman/cc/flickr)The U.S. Army Reserve is sending 125 troops from Puerto Rico to serve as additional guards at Guantánamo, the Associated Press reported on Wednesday.

These troops are currently in training in Texas for a month before heading to the prison, AP continues.

The reason these additional guards are needed, the Miami Herald reports, is due to the solitary confinement of nearly all the prisoners and the force-feeding of 39 prisoners on hunger strike.

“When you go to single cell, that takes more people,” the Herald reports Navy Capt. Robert Durand as saying.

________________________

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

This article originally appeared on: Common Dreams

Female Israeli soldiers post cheeky pics

0

A group of female Israeli soldiers have posted half-naked photos of themselves on the social networking website Facebook after they were punished for a similar act last week.

One picture showed the soldiers removing their fatigue uniforms to expose their underwear and back sides.

In another photo, five women posed in what appeared to be a barracks room, dressed only in helmets and a small amount of combat equipment.

Israeli news website Walla reported that the women were fresh recruits, who were stationed on a base in southern Israel.

Israeli military officials the women have been disciplined for the racy shots.

“The commanding officers disciplined the soldiers as they saw fitting,” the Israeli army said in a statement.

The statement did not provide any further information about the identity of the soldiers, or any details about the punishments.

Over the past few years, the Israeli military has on occasions disciplined soldiers for improper posts in social media networks.

Earlier this year, an Israeli soldier was criticized for posing naked with a gun and writing anti-Palestinian tweets.

In a video posted to YouTube in 2010, another male Israeli soldier was filmed dancing suggestively around a blindfolded Palestinian woman.

The incident came after photos of a female Israeli soldier posing in front of Palestinian prisoners were discovered earlier that year.

MP/KA

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

When Israel Compensated Germans for Land in Palestine

0

Image: German Templers in Wilhelma, Palestine

Last month marked the 65th anniversary of the Nakba – the Palestinian catastrophe of 1948, during which Israeli forces expelled some 800,000 Palestinians from their homeland and seized their properties. In total, 536 cities, towns and villages – 78 percent of the land of historic Palestine – were taken during the 1948 war.

The Nakba is not just a historical event, however. It remains an ongoing trauma.

Palestinian human rights are assaulted daily; Palestinians still live under occupation or are barred from their homeland. Meanwhile, Israeli land and water confiscation continue – particularly in the West Bank and the Naqab (Negev) desert.

Palestinians worldwide remain excluded and uncompensated, despite Israel’s admission to the United Nations in 1949 being preceded by its expressed willingness to abide by Resolution 194, calling for the Palestinian refugees’ repatriation and compensation.

Little known, however, is that four communities in Palestine have received carefully evaluated and internationally arranged compensation for their losses. The four villages – Sarona, Wilhelma, Betlehem (not the famed Bethlehem) and Waldheim – belonged to a Christian German group called the Templers.

Model for settlers

Sarona near Jaffa was one of the first modern agricultural settlements in Palestine (1871) and was a model for Jewish settlers. Wilhelma (1902) near Lydda, and Betlehem (1906) and Waldheim (1907) in the upper Galilee were prosperous communally-owned German agricultural settlements.

A German colony in Palestine received compensation from the Israeli government when settlers were forced to flee during the Nakba.  (Library of Congress)

The Templers maintained their German citizenship in Palestine. Although they established a Nazi party branch in Palestine during 1933, only approximately 17 percent of the Templers were Nazi sympathizers, according to Israeli scholar Yossi Ben Artzi. Still, most able-bodied Templer men were conscripted to fight in the German army in 1939.

During Second World War, the British Mandate government interned the German nationals in their rural villages. Some of the Templer families were then deported and interned inAustralia. Others became part of three British-German prisoner exchanges of Palestine-Germans for mainly Dutch Jews from the Bergen-Belsen concentration camps.

After the war, the British military guarded the four Templer villages to protect the Germans from Jewish extremists. Nevertheless, in April 1948, a Zionist attack killed at least two persons in Waldheim and resulted in many Templers fleeing. (This pattern of attack and killing to terrorize villagers and force them to leave was perpetrated on hundreds of Palestinian Arab villages by Zionist forces during the 1948 war.)

Fate diverges

The displaced Templers remained in Cyprus until they were admitted to Australia and became citizens (see Suzanne D. Rutland, “‘Buying out of the Matter’: Australia’s Role in Restitution for Templer Property in Israel,” Journal of Israeli History: Politics, Society, Culture, 24:1, 2005, pp 135-154).

Here is where the fate of the Palestinian refugees and the German Templer refugees diverge. The governments of Australia and West Germany worked together for ten years before the State of Israel agreed in 1952 to pay restitution to the German refugees for their four rural villages, as well as the Templers’ urban property holdings in Acre, Haifa, Jaffa and Jerusalem. A leading agricultural economist from Stanford University valuated the Templer holdings, including all real estate, their homes and farm buildings, orchards, forest and vineyards, down to the chicken coups and pigsties.

In 1962 – ten years later – the government of Israel paid 54 million Deutsche Marks to West Germany for the “German Secular Property in Israel” belonging to the displaced and dispossessed Templers, part of which was transferred to the Commonwealth of Australia (see Australian Treaty Series 1966 No 3).

Energetic campaign

How did the German Templers obtain compensation from the State of Israel for their expropriated property in Palestine?

The Australian and German governments mounted an energetic and determined international diplomatic campaign to secure compensation from Israel for the Templers’ assets. The Australian officials were persistent and convincing. They needed the capital inflows from restitution to assist in resettling the refugees.

Australia also assumed its obligation to protect its new citizens’ property rights. For their part, the Templers actively represented themselves through documentation, presenting evidence at international forums, and persistently demanding and claiming their rights before the Australian, German and Israeli governments.

The Templers lobbied their governments, showed up at international conferences to press their case, and advocated for themselves.

Unlike the Templers, diaspora Palestinians holding other citizenship have not been successful in obtaining compensation and restitution for their properties in present-day Israel. In 1949, educator Khalil Totah appealed repeatedly to the US State Department to assist him in obtaining compensation for his orange grove and lands in historic Palestine. “As an American citizen resident in the United States,” he wrote, “to whom should I turn for redress except to you?”

No public records exist of the US government attempting to obtain compensation for Totah’s or other American citizens’ property or assets seized by Israel during the 1948 war or after.

It is tragic and ironic that United Nations members remain complicit in the suppression of the Palestinians’ human rights. Even while some states applied significant diplomatic pressure to obtain compensation for displaced European settler communities in Palestine, which included a small but significant minority that sympathized and even fought for Nazi Germany, diplomatic pressure has not been expended for the indigenous Palestinians’ rights to Nakba compensation and restitution guaranteed under international law.

Rosemarie M. Esber is the author of Under the Cover of War: The Zionist Expulsion of the Palestinians. She is an independent researcher and international development consultant based in Washington, DC.

This article originally appeared on: Global Research

India detains 3 over tourist gang-rape

0

People demonstrate against the brutal gang-rape of a 23-year-old Indian woman on a bus in New Delhi. (file photo)

Indian police forces have arrested at least three men in connection with the gang-rape of an American woman in northern state Himachal Pradesh, security sources say.

The Indian security officials said on Thursday the men are accused of raping the 30-year-old tourist in Manali town, a tourist resort in the foothills of the Himalayas.

The men reportedly raped the woman on Tuesday after she accepted a lift from them. A similar case was reported in March in which six men gang-raped a Swiss tourist in Madhya Pradesh.

The media and public attention to sexual violence in India has grown since the rape and murder of a student on a New Delhi bus in December 2012.

The brutal murder sparked widespread protests and prompted the government to alter laws relating to rape. Reports on sexual assault have been on the rise in India in recent months.

The horrific nature of the crime shocked Indians, who thronged the streets across the country, demanding protection for women and capital punishment for rape, which currently carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.

According to Indiaâ„¢s National Crime Records Bureau, one woman is raped every 20 minutes in the worldâ„¢s second-most-populous country.

JR/KA

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Kerry and Blair’s $4 Billion Mystery Plan for Palestine: Crony capitalism under the guise of peace?

0

The recent World Economic Forum in Amman, Jordan, was billed as the Obama administration’s milestone moment for reviving the comatose US-led peace process. Announced days before in a nationally televised address by the President, Secretary of State John Kerry appeared at the forum to lift sinking hopes about the possibility of a two state solution.

Upon arriving, Kerry took in speeches by two billionaires who sought to claim leading roles in the cause of peace: the Israeli high tech baron Yossi Vardi, and Munib Al-Masri, the Palestinian oligarch known as the “Duke of Nablus” for his Italian revival style mansion, which sits on a hill above the poverty stricken Balata Refugee Camp.

9701a19ea2c3f811320f6a706700bf18
Peres, Kerry and Abbas (Photo: Associated Press)

Next, Kerry arranged a handshake between Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli President Shimon Peres, bringing two unelected figures together for a symbolic photo-op intended to summon fond memories of the halcyon days of Oslo. And finally, the Secretary stood at the lectern to tell his rapt audience about “a plan for the Palestinian economy that is bigger, bolder and more ambitious than anything proposed” in the last two decades.

In a speech brimming with optimism, Kerry introduced an ambitious initiative that promised to turn the whole situation around. Calling it, “Breaking The Impasse,” Kerry claimed the plan would triple tourism to the occupied Palestinian territories, double or triple Palestinian agriculture production, increase the Palestinian GDP by 50 percent, and foster the construction of a whopping 100,000 new, energy efficient Palestinian homes in the West Bank.

Kerry gushed about a dream team of “experts” that had supposedly gathered to implement the project. Pushing back against the naysayers, he asked, “Is this a fantasy? I don’t think so, because there are already great examples of investment and entrepreneurship that are working in the West Bank. We know it can be done, but we’ve never experienced the kind of concentrated effort that this group is talking about bringing to the table.”

The word “occupation” was not uttered once in Kerry’s address.

As soon as he left the stage, Kerry hustled off to a meeting with Timothy Collins, a philanthropist and top Democratic donor who operates a leveraged buyout firm called Ripplewood Holdings. Ripplewood was most recently credited with overseeing the wholesale liquidation of Hostess, losing all of the $130 million it invested in the firm and terminating 18,000 union jobs. “What’s happening with Hostess Brands is a microcosm of what’s wrong with America, as Bain-style Wall Street vultures make themselves rich by making America poor,” said Richard Trumka, the president of the AFL-CIO union federation.

Also on Kerry’s agenda were meetings with the foreign ministers of the United Arab Emirates and Jordan. He was a busy man — too busy, apparently, to discuss his big, bold plan with the media.

Stonewalling Reporters, “Absurd Rhetoric”

Days later, little is known about “Breaking The Impasse.” How the plan is any different from the economic bailout George W. Bush proposed for the Palestinian Authority at the World Economic Forum in 2008 is anybody’s guess. The names of the economic dream team Kerry promoted have not been publicly revealed, nor has any reporter been able to obtain a single specific detail of the plan.

Nearly all that is known is that Tony Blair, the Special Envoy of the Quartet, had been placed in charge of the initiative.

My email and telephone queries to Ruti Winterstein, Blair’s Political and Media Advisor at the Quartet offices in Jerusalem, have not been answered. The few Jerusalem and Ramallah based reporters who requested particulars about the initiative were unable to get any answers either, with one correspondent telling me they were being stonewalled by Blair and Kerry’s people.

David Horovitz, the editor-in-chief of the Times of Israel, said he was told by “various insiders” that Kerry had been thoroughly briefed on the specifics of the plan, and that he and the economic team were due to meet during the conference. “That didn’t happen,” Horovitz wrote. In the end, Horovitz wound up mocking Kerry for his “absurd rhetoric.”

A press release posted on May 26 on the Quartet Representative’s website suggests that specifics are not immediately forthcoming, stating that the Quartet “will provide further details of the potential options for investment, job creation and economic growth in the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem in due course.”

Back in 2011, Blair declared that “time was short” on reaching peace in the Middle East. This April, Kerry proclaimed that “the window for a two state solution is shutting. I think we have some period of time a year,” he warned, “a year and a half, to two years or its over.”

If the situation is so urgent, why has Blair’s office been unable to offer anything more than vague promises to get down to business “in due course?” And why was Kerry unwilling to discuss details of a plan he touted as a potential game-changer?

It may be that Kerry’s announcement was a trial balloon the authors of the initiative floated before deciding to roll out a formal blueprint. There is also the strong possibility that the big, bold, plan was just a fantasy, after all.

Whether the plan is a non-starter or simply non-existent, it is now in the hands of Blair, an ultra-connected man on the make.

Failing upwards with Tony Blair Inc.

On the day he resigned as British PM, Blair took on the role of official envoy of the Quartet. And since that day, he has accomplished little of substance in occupied Palestine. As the veteran Israeli reporter Akiva Eldar said of Blair’s work in the region, “if you judge by results, they are below zero.” Even the pro-Israel Saban Center at the Brookings Institute has slammed Blair’s record, declaring, “The Quartet has little to show for its decade-long involvement in the peace process…. The current mechanism is too outdated, dysfunctional, and discredited to be reformed.”

Blair is reportedly despised by Palestinian Authority officials, who yearn to see him clear out the luxury penthouse he rented in East Jerusalem and head back to his late-18th century Georgian townhouse in London. Already, they have “>rejected his “Breaking The Impasse” plan, with a PLO official telling Hugh Naylor of The National that the initiative was “not an alternative to resolving the political issues we face.”

But Blair’s gig as Quartet envoy has allowed him to remain in the international spotlight, where he cultivates an image as a tireless dealmaker wading into a seemingly intractable conflict with the best of intentions. While claiming credit for breakthroughs that few on the ground in Palestine seemed to notice, Blair established a vast business empire, advising banks, corporations, and governments— including the dictatorship of Kazakhstan — while tapping a vast web of advisors to help him ink deals around the globe. Since 2007, Blair and his network of firms haveearned over $90 million, a vivid demonstration of how Tony Blair the special envoy propels Tony Blair Inc.

In 2008, Blair took up a consulting position at JP Morgan worth around $2 million a year, and perhaps more. Back in occupied Palestine, Blair took credit for persuading Israeli administrators to open up radio frequencies to allow the Palestinian telecom company, Wataniya, to provide service in the West Bank. The deal reaped a major windfall profit for Blair’s employer, JP Morgan, which happened to have provided the $2 billion loan that brought Wataniya into existence. Indeed, Wataniya was owned by the Qatari telecom giant QTEL, which was one of JP Morgan’s top clients. Detailed in the UK Channel 4 documentary, “The Wonderful World of Tony Blair,” the lucrative deal represented crony capitalism at its crudest.

In Gaza, meanwhile, Blair has pushed to allow the development of a huge natural gas field located inside Gaza’s territorial waters. Discovered by the British Gas, another client of JP Morgan, Blair stands to generate another huge profit for his employer if the field is fully developed. Already, he has blocked British Gas from selling Gaza’s gas to Egypt, which would have provided it directly to Gaza, requiring the company to sell it to Israel instead.

Blair reportedly intended to funnel Gaza’s gas profits into an international account controlled by Abbas, circumventing Gaza’s Hamas authorities in a bid to promote economic collaboration between Israel and the PA. Given Israel’s long record ofwithholding revenue in from the PA, and doing so in bad faith, it appears unlikely that much of the gas profits will ever make into Palestinian hands. If any of it does, it may only wind up enriching the small circle of oligarchs who dominate the increasingly stratified Palestinian economy.

Blair’s record of questionable wheeling and dealing raises serious questions about the “Breaking The Impasse” plan — to the extent that it is a plan at all. Is this initiative just another slush fund for Blair and his business partners? Will executives from JP Morgan clients like Wataniya be involved? What about Qatar’s ruling Al-Thani family, who own Wataniya and are major investors in PADICO, the private investment holding firm chaired by Blair’s billionaire friend, Munib Al-Masri? And what role, if any, will Tim Collins, the Bain-style “vulture capitalist,” play?

Though details are impossible to come by, it is hard to imagine that any plan overseen by Blair and his associates will bring much relief to ordinary Palestinians subjected to the toxic blend of military occupation and neoliberal experimentation.

253228 10151428987921074 544534802 n
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry greets former British Prime Minister Tony Blair as the two attend the World Economic Forum in Dead Sea, Jordan, on May 26, 2013. 
(Photo: State Department)

This article originally appeared on: Global Research

‘Greece jobless rate keeps rising’

0

Homeless Greeks lay out their beds under a bridge in Athens. (file photo)

Greeceâ„¢s unemployment rate has risen once more as the country is struggling with a crippling recession after several years of austerity under international bailout.

The countryâ„¢s statistics service ELSTAT announced on Thursday that the jobless rate soared to 26.8 percent in March from a revised 26.7 percent reading in the previous month.

Å“It’s long-term unemployment that is the most worrisome as the percentage is higher than 60 percent,” Greek economist Angelos Tsakanikas said.

The youths, aged 15 to 24, are still the hardest-hit, even though the unemployment rate for the group fell from 64.2 percent in February to 58.3 percent in March.

In addition, ELSTAT estimates that 700 to 1,000 Greeks have been laid off from their work daily since the countryâ„¢s financial crisis erupted in 2009.

Greece has been at the epicenter of the eurozone debt crisis and is experiencing its sixth year of recession, while harsh austerity measures have left tens of thousands of people without jobs.

CAH/KA

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Russia Draws a “Red Line”: S-300, MiG 29s and MiG 31s for Syria

0

The recent commitment by Russia to honor a contract with Syria for the delivery of S-300 Surface to Air defense systems, considered to be one of the best, if not the best in the world, is followed up by a Syrian request for the delivery of MiG 29 M/M2 fighter jets.

In 2012 NATO stationed Patriot Missile Defense Systems along the 900 km long Syrian — Turkish border; Saudi-Arabia and the USA signed a deal for a significant upgrade of Saudi-Arabia´s air force. Russia is drawing a red line in the Syrian sand. With the words of Russian President Vladimir Putin, a direct military intervention against Syria would be futile. The Middle East is being prepared for a stand-off. Russia-made MIG-29 M/M2 fighter jets (file photo)

At a press conference on the opening day of the Russia — E.U. Summit in Yekaterinburg on Tuesday 4 June, Russia´s President Vladimir Putin confirmed again, that Russia will honor its contract with Syria and deliver S-300 SAM Systems. Putin stressed Russia´s disappointment over the E.U.´s failure to prolong the arms embargo against Syria which effectively permits each E.U. member state to decide whether it will arm the terrorist and mercenary corps which have destabilized Syria since 2011.

The S-300 SAMs will, according to Putin bring stability to the region. Putin made a point of stating, that the S-300 SAMs are among the best, if they are not the best Air Defense System, which, so Putin, every military expert can confirm. At the same occasion, the Russian President issued a thinly-veiled warning to NATO, Israel and the GCC member states when he stated, that any attempted direct military intervention against Syria would be futile.

Syrian Military forces are becoming increasingly successful at combating the insurgency. After the military strategy has been adapted to asymmetric warfare and counter insurgency tactics, which include popular militia which defend villages and towns against renewed attacks by insurgents after the Syrian Arab Army has cleared and secured an area, the insurgents continue loosing ground and begin using ever more desperate psychological warfare tactics, chemical weapons and the eating of organs of slain Syrian soldiers, on camera, included. The insurgents show signs of desperation.

S-300PS air defense system during drills to counter mass air and missile attacks at the Ashuluk training range in Astrakhan Region. Vladislav Belogrud/RIA Novosti The involvement of Hezbollah at securing the Lebanese — Syrian border, making it less porous for infiltration of weapons and fighters, and the commitment of the Iraqi government to do the same at the Syrian — Iraqi border is limiting the supply routes for the insurgents. The remaining open fronts are limited to Turkey, Jordan, Israel and the Kurdish administrated region of Northern Iraq.

The popular uprising in Turkey is likely to, at the very least, result in a severely weakened Erdogan administration which could be forced to adjust its policy toward Syria. Turkey could cease being the primary logistic front for the insurgents.

Russia has also drawn a red line in the Syrian sand, or waters, when it decided to create a Mediterranean Fleet. The first deployments have arrived and Tartous is slowly transformed from an auxiliary to an operative naval base. The move stabilizes the region to some degree and could become the foundation for countering the establishment of a NATO base on Cyprus.

In 2012 Saudi-Arabia and the USA agreed on a deal for a major update of Saudi-Arabia´s air force. Besides delivery of the latest, most advanced version of the F-16 fighter jet, which normally is reserved for a select club of only six nations, the older Saudi stock of F-16s received considerable upgrades. After completion of the deliveries, upgrades and training, Saudi-Arabia will have approximately 300 F-16 fighter jets in its fleet, making Saudi-Arabia´s airpower comparable to that of Israel.

After Russia initially halted a Russian — Syrian contract for an upgrade of Syria´s air force, it looks as if Russia is reconsidering, in response to the western unwillingness to settle the dispute about Syria peacefully. In principle, the Syria war is caused by a lack of convergence in the energy and energy-security requirements of respectively Qatar, Saudi -Arabia, Israel — of the USA and the two competing EU blocks led by respectively France and the UK and Germany, Czeck Republic; as well as Iran and Russia. Even a successful Geneva 2 conference would address the core issues. The statements of Vladimir Putin that the S-300 SAMs introduction creates stability may be followed up by also creating a strategic balance with regard to regional air forces. It is also a clear signal that NATO and E.U. cannot count on being able to solve energy, energy-security and geo-political problems by illegal wars without having to consider the possibility of having to pay a price that may be to high.

The Syrian governments authorities have reactivated contacts regarding the activation of Russian — Syrian contracts for the Syrian purchase of MiG-29M/M2 fighter jets after the expiration of the E.U. arms embargo on Syria. The information has been confirmed by the Russian aircraft producer.

A Syrian delegation has recently arrived in Moscow to discuss details and a time frame, stated the head of the Mikkoryan Design Bureau Sergei Korotkov. The contract was initially signed in 2007 but the outbreak of civil unrest in Syria in 2011 initially caused Russia to halt the deal to deliver 24 MiG-29MM fighter jets and 5 MiG-31 interceptors.

Finding a peaceful resolution to the Syria crisis becomes increasingly unlikely. While the foreign backed opposition a.k.a. al-Qaeda creates one Public Relations disaster after the other and fails at creating a coherent political front, the national dialog among parties, mass organizations, ethnic and religious communities, special interest organizations and the government in Syria continue making progress.

A decisive victory of the insurgency against the Syrian military also becomes increasingly unlikely, and the E.U., US, Saudi and Qatari continuation to finance and arm terrorist and mercenary corps of the likes of Jabhat al-Nusrah will, even though they can destabilize Syria, not lead to a decisive victory without direct military intervention or direct military support of the subversion.

The introduction of the Russian MiG 29s and MiG 31s, along with the introduction of the S-300 SAM´s and other Russian missile technology, as well as an increased Russian naval presence, will readjust the strategic balance between the western axis and the Iranian, Syrian, Russian axis. They cannot compensate for the massive firepower amassed by NATO and NATO allies in the region, but will guaranty that any military aggression against Syria will be more costly than western or Arab political leaders are willing or able to survive politically.

This article originally appeared on: Global Research

The REAL Reason Housing Prices Have Skyrocketed. How Another Housing Bubble Was Blown … And Why

0

we showed that mortgage applications are down, and it is really institutional investors driving the housing boom. Part 2 explains why.

Housing prices have boomed because:

(1) Lenders are artificially keeping vacant houses off of the market

and

(2) The Obama administration has thrown all sorts of artificial incentives at institutional investors to pump up prices

Artificially Suppressed Housing Inventory

Naked Capitalism reported last August:

Two trends are apparent. One is that banks are delaying foreclosures, or not foreclosing at all despite long-term delinquencies. The other is that private equity firms — flush with cash thanks to Tim Geithner’s religious devotion to trickle-down economics and the resulting cascade of corporate welfare — have been bidding up and holding foreclosed houses off the market. These two factors have artificially limited supply and, combined with cheap mortgages rates, driven up prices. While we can debate whether these strategies represent the best public policy, these policies are obviously not long-term sustainable.

***

Lenders argue the drop in foreclosures is caused by delays in the court system. However, Judge Jennifer D. Bailey, lead foreclosure judge in Miami-Dade County — epicenter of the foreclosure crisis — solidly rebuts that argument. “Here in Miami-Dade County’s Eleventh Circuit, there has been no delay in foreclosure case hearings for nearly two years,” Judge Bailey said in an Aug. 19, 2012 interview with the Miami Herald. “If you want to see a judge to hear your trial or summary judgment, you get a prompt court date.” This coincides with my own observations in foreclosure court, where judges rail at bank lawyers for repeatedly delaying their cases, even when borrowers are in no way contesting their foreclosures.

Holding back inventory means that the houses that are put on offer sell faster and at higher prices. That creates an incentive to delay foreclosures or not foreclose at all even when a home is delinquent.

Indeed — in the real world – 12.6 million houses are vacant … 1.5 million more home than are underwater. In other words, without artificial scarcity created by banks, there would be more available houses than there are underwater homeowners having problems paying their mortgage. There would — in a word — be a glut.

Government Is Secretly Helping Financial Companies to Snap Up Housing

There are realistic ways to help the economy. For example:

But instead, the government’s entire strategy is to try to paper over all of the real problems with the economy by artificially propping up asset prices in an attempt to hide the fact (which has been obvious for years) that the big banks are insolvent.

Stocks, for example, are largely being driven by insiders and government policy.

Indeed, we’ve pointed out for years that all of the Obama administration’s “homeowner relief” programs are really just back-door bailouts to the big financial companies … and are not even intended to help homeowners.

Mike Whitney explained last September:

Private Equity firms are piling in to the housing market to take advantage of bargain basement prices on distressed inventory. The Obama administration is stealthily selling homes to big investors who are required to sign non-disclosure agreements to ensure that the public remains in the dark as to the magnitude of the giveaway. Aside from the steep discounts on the homes themselves, the government is also providing “synthetic financing to reduce the up-front capital required if they agree to form a joint venture with Fannie Mae and share proceeds from the rental or sale of properties.” (Businessweek)

In other words, US-taxpayers are providing extravagant financing for deep-pocket speculators who want to reduce their risk while maximizing their profits via additional leverage. The plan resembles Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner’s Public-Private Partnership Investment Program …. Speculators are getting lavish incentives (gov financing, low rates, and severe discounts) in secret deals to buy distressed inventory which should be available to the public at market prices. If that’s not a ripoff, then what is?

***

Obama’s preferred customers are getting discounts of up-to 60 percent of the home’s peak value and generous gov-backed financing to boot!

***

As the article above indicates, there’s no shortage of delinquent homes that will eventually be foreclosed. That means the process is being dragged out so the banks don’t have to fess-up to the losses on their fetid pile of nonperforming loans Here’s a little more background from an article in Businessweek: 

“About 6 million U.S. borrowers will lose their homes in the next five years because of inability to pay their mortgages, creating demand for as many as 4 million new rental households, according to Scott Simon, head of mortgage bonds at Pacific Investment Management Co. in Newport Beach, California….

Single-family rentals are priced to deliver unlevered total returns in the range of 7.5 percent to 8 percent, or about 0.5 percentage point to 1 percentage point higher than institutional-quality apartments, according to a June 8 report by Ray Huang, senior associate at Green Street Advisors in Newport Beach, California. (“Colony Said to Win Foreclosed Homes Sold by Fannie Mae”, Businessweek)[Link.]

If “6 million homeowners” will lose their homes in the next five years, then why are clownshoes media dupes touting a “bottom” in prices and a “market rebound”?

It’s all hype. And look at how calculatingly fiendish Obama’s foreclosure-to-rental program really is. The big boys have figured out the nearest penny how much they can make by throwing people out of their homes. (7.5 percent to 8 percent) Talk about heartless. And, of course, this whole process is being orchestrated by President Fairydust and his Wall Street Pranksters to keep prices artificially high and preserve the illusion that the banks are solvent.

It’s infuriating!

And if that isn’t hard-hitting enough for you, Jim Quinn writes:

The contrived elevation of home sales and home prices has been engineered by the very same culprits who crashed our financial system in the first place. This has been planned, coordinated and implemented by a conspiracy of the ruling oligarchy — the Federal Reserve, Wall Street, U.S. Treasury, NAR, and the corporate media conglomerates. Ben’s job was to screw senior citizens and drive interest rates low enough that everyone in the country could refinance, attract investors & flippers into the market, and propel home prices higher. Wall Street has been the linchpin to the whole sordid plan.

They were tasked with drastically limiting the foreclosure pipeline, therefore creating a fake shortage of inventory. Next, JP Morgan, Blackrock, Citi, Bank of America, and dozens of other private equity firms have partnered with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, using free money provided by Ben Bernanke, to create investment funds to buy up millions of distressed properties and convert them into rental properties, further reducing the inventory of homes for sale and driving prices higher. Only the connected crony capitalists on Wall Street are getting a piece of this action. The Wall Street big hanging d[!@#*] have screwed the American middle class coming and going. The NAR and media are tasked with what they do best — spew propaganda, misinform, lie, cheerlead and attempt to create a buying frenzy among the willfully ignorant masses.

The chart below reveals the truth about the strong sustainable housing recovery. It doesn’t exist. Mortgage applications by real people who want to live in a home are no higher than they were in 2010 when home sales were 33% lower than today. Mortgage applications are lower than they were in 1997 when 4 million existing homes were sold versus the 5 million pace today. The housing recovery is just another Wall Street scam designed to bilk the American middle class of what remains of their net worth.

Of course, economist Michael Hudson would put it a little differently: banks are trying to roll back all modern laws and make us all into serfs.

In other words, the giant financial service companies are attempting to privatize public resources, socialize losses, scam people out of their homes and other private property … and then rent back to us what we used to own for a hefty price.

Do you understand the game now?

This article originally appeared on: Global Research

‘Childcare reforms could push up costs’

0

Britainâ„¢s Deputy PM Nick Clegg warns the governmentâ„¢s childcare reforms could push up costs for families.

Britainâ„¢s deputy Prime Minister and Liberal Democrats leader Nick Clegg has warned the governmentâ„¢s childcare reforms he vetoed could push up costs for UK households.

Under the Conservativeâ„¢s flagship reforms on childcare, nurseries and childminders will be allowed to look after more young children.

Clegg, who angered Tory ministers by blocking the plans, argued the reforms could damage the quality of childcare in the country as well as failing to achieve savings.

This comes as an earlier study by the Department for Education found the changes could slash childcare costs by up to 28 percent.

Clegg, however, told his weekly phone-in programme on LBC Radio that the departmentâ„¢s analysis was wrong and that there was no real evidence the plans would reduce the cost of childcare.

Lib-Dems leader said replies to the consultation from nurseries, parents’ groups and other experts suggested the plans might well drive costs up as the y will Å“have to spend more money on more higher-qualified [staff].”

Earlier last month, Clegg sated that the government needs to rethink reducing the staff-to-child ratios, adding that he had been discussing the issue with the Prime Minister David Cameron for Å“weeks and weeks”.

Shadow Children’s Minister Sharon Hodgson also accused Cameron of lacking a credible plan for providing affordable childcare in the country.

MOS/HE

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Iran on par with big powers: Jalili

0

Iranian presidential candidate Saeed Jalili addresses a gathering of people in the city of Varamin, Tehran Province, on June 5, 2013.

Presidential candidate Saeed Jalili says Iran is currently a regional power that is on a par with big powers, despite enemiesâ„¢ efforts to impede the countryâ„¢s progress and success.

Å“They [enemies] explicitly announce that the Islamic Republic of Iran has not only been stabilized, but is currently a regional power that is on a par with big powers,” Jalili said in an address to a gathering of people in the city of Varamin, Tehran Province, on Wednesday.

The principlist candidate cited pure Islam and the loyalty of the Iranian people as two main factors which have brought about the countryâ„¢s progress and success.

Å“Pure Islam that has been defined by [the founder of the Islamic Republic] Imam [Khomeini] and Leader [of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei] whose gist is the rule of the Muslim Jurisprudent. The second [factor] is the [participation of] people who have faith, and who have been allowed to make the most of their potentials,” he stated.

The secretary of the Supreme National Security Council said he deeply believes that many other problems can be also solved by these two factors.

Å“Our epic was not simply [limited to] the Sacred Defense,” Jalili said in reference to Iraqâ„¢s imposed war on Iran during 1980-1988. Å“If these two elements are brought together, as stated by the Leader, we will be able to create a political epic as well. We can also create an economic epic because these two elements are present everywhere,” Jalili pointed out.

He underlined the need for Å“revolutionary management” to resolve the countryâ„¢s problems, adding that such a management is a result of positive interaction among competent managers.

If this kind of management is realized, the presidential candidate added, officials in charge will do their best to manage the country’s affairs and will not simply focus on running the country based on their own interests.

Jalili is competing against President of the Center for Strategic Research the Expediency Council Hassan Rohani, MP Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, Tehran Mayor Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, former Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati, Expediency Council Secretary Mohsen Rezaei, former First Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref, and former Telecommunications Minister Mohammad Gharazi.

The president of Iran is elected for a four-year term in a national election. This yearâ„¢s election will be held on June 14.

SF/AR/SS/HMV

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Global Stock Sell-off amidst Signs of Deepening Slump

0

Global stock markets plunged Wednesday following the release of negative economic indicators pointing to a deepening slump in the United States, Europe and Asia and statements by US Federal Reserve officials suggesting a pull-back in monetary stimulus.

Japan’s stock market in particular, which had soared as a result of the Bank of Japan’s massive yen-printing program, suffered a sharp sell-off, falling 3.8 percent on Wednesday. The Nikkei Index was up 80 percent over the past year before it plunged more than 15 percent in the last ten trading days. Wednesday marked the index’s fifth daily fall of over three percent in two weeks.

The Japanese sell-off was followed by further stock losses in Europe, where the British FTSE 100 fell by 2 percent, the French CAC 40 declined 1.9 percent, the German DAX dropped 1.2 percent and the pan-European Eurofirst 300 index fell 1.5 percent.

In the United States, the Dow Jones Industrial Average lost 215 points, or 1.42 percent, closing below 15,000 for the first time in a month. The index has posted losses in four out of the past six trading days. The Standard and Poor’s 500 Index fell 21 points, or 1.3 percent, while the NASDAQ was down 43 points, or 1.27 percent.

The extreme volatility in financial markets reflects the artificial and unsustainable character of the rise in asset prices, which is entirely dependent on the continued pumping of trillions of dollars of virtually free credit into the banking system by the Federal Reserve and other major central banks. Meanwhile, the real economy in the US, Europe and much of Asia continues to stagnate or contract under the impact of austerity measures aimed at impoverishing the working class.

Wednesday’s sell-off came amid warnings by Wall Street insiders that the combination of vast cash infusions by central banks and anemic growth in the real economy will likely lead to a catastrophic collapse of the stock market.

Economist Gary Shilling noted that investors have been “paying little attention to weak and declining economies around the world, and concentrating on the flood of money being created by central banks.” The vast infusions of cash have created an explosion of toxic debt, “the zeal for yield, amidst low interest rates, benefited junk bonds and other low-quality debt,” he said.

William Gross, the cofounder of bond-trading firm PIMCO, warned earlier this year of a “credit supernova” and noted, “Investment banking, which only a decade ago promoted small business development and transition to public markets, now is dominated by leveraged speculation and the Ponzi finance.”

As stocks plunged Wednesday, the Financial Times reported that many of the largest global hedge funds have suffered huge losses as a result of a general sell-off in the bond market, rooted in fears that the Federal Reserve will wind down its asset-purchasing program. Yields on Treasury bills have surged in recent weeks, hitting 2.23 percent last week, up from 1.61 percent in early May. Bond prices move in the opposite direction from bond yields.

“Since mid-May it has been a perfect storm of some of the biggest trends in markets reversing all at once,” one fund manager told the Financial Times. The newspaper noted that the $16 billion hedge fund AHL lost more than 11 percent of its total assets in the last two weeks as a result of the bond sell-off. This triggered a 15 percent drop in the stock value of the hedge fund’s parent company, the Man Group.

Particularly unsettling for the markets were indications of a slowdown in the US. On Monday, the Institute for Supply Management said its manufacturing activity index fell to 49 in May, down from 50.7 in April, the third consecutive monthly fall for the manufacturing index.

The reading was the lowest in four years and the first time that the measure fell below 50, which indicates a contraction, since November. The Institute for Supply Management index of new orders also fell, as did its measures of production and employment.

On Wednesday, ADP, the payrolls processing firm, reported that the US private sector created, on net, only 135,000 new jobs in May, less than the 165,000 economists had predicted. The report showed a drop of 6,000 manufacturing positions.

“The number was weak,” Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, told Reuters. “The ADP is suggesting instead of job growth stepping up, it’s actually stepping down as we move into the summer months,” he added.

The ADP figures led economists to lower their expectations for the Labor Department’s official employment report for May, which is due Friday, as well as projections of economic growth in the second quarter of the year.

The meager ADP payroll figure was echoed by the Federal Reserve’s beige book report, which showed only tepid growth in business activity in the period from early April to late May.

The drop in US manufacturing activity is linked to a fall in global demand resulting from the ongoing slump in Europe and slowdown in growth in China and other Asian countries. Eurostat, the European statistics agency, said Wednesday that retail sales in the European Union fell by 0.7 percent in April.

HSBC Bank said earlier this week that its China Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI) fell to 49.2 percent from 50.4 in April, the lowest reading since October of last year.

“This is not a good moment for the world economy,” David Bloom, currency chief at HSBC, told the British Telegraph. “The manufacturing indices came in weaker than expected in China, Korea, India and Russia, and then we got America’s ISM.”

The current infusion of cash by central banks into the financial system follows the multitrillion-dollar bailout of the banks by governments in the US and Europe. These policies, dictated by the global financial elite, have further enriched those parasitic social layers that were responsible for the crisis in the first place, while the full burden of the crisis has been placed on the international working class.

Five years after the Wall Street crash, the ruling classes of the world have demonstrated their inability to revive the real economy, underscoring the fact that the current crisis is not merely a recession, but rather a breakdown of the world capitalist system.

The disconnect between the wild rise on stock markets, which have been surging for four years, and the moribund condition of the global economy is setting the stage for a financial collapse on the scale of, or even greater than, the meltdown of September 2008.

This article originally appeared on: Global Research

‘Beyond Orwellian’: Outrage Follows Revelations of Vast Domestic Spying Program

0

Outrage and rebuke are flying after explosive news broke late Wednesday that the National Security Agency, claiming authority under the Patriot Act and using a secret court order, has demanded (and been receiving) millions of phone records from Verizon which include all the company’s “telephony metadate” for all its US-based customers over a three month period.

The “metadata” being provided to the NSA does not provide individual names for each record, but is a blanket order that allows the government spy agency access to all call information for any Verizon Business Network Services customer, including the phone dialed from and to, the location from which the call was made, and the duration of the call.

Civil rights groups, privacy advocates, and others expressed shock at the extent of the order signed by the government’s secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Court, a copy of which was obtained by the Guardian newspaper.

Breaking the story, Guardian columnist Glenn Greenwald said the document shows “for the first time that under the Obama administration the communication records of millions of US citizens are being collected indiscriminately and in bulk — regardless of whether they are suspected of any wrongdoing.”

“It is beyond Orwellian, and it provides further evidence of the extent to which basic democratic rights are being surrendered in secret to the demands of unaccountable intelligence agencies.” – ACLU

Though the Guardian report contains only one order from the FISA Court covering a set period, most experts agree that the program has likely been going on for years without disclosure.

Articulating the revelations in plain language, the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s Cindy Cohn and Mark Rofuld explain that the “order gave the NSA a record of every Verizon customer’s call history — every call made, the location of the phone, the time of the call, the duration of the call, and other ‘identifying information’ for the phone and call–from April 25, 2013 (the date the order was issued) to July 19, 2013. The order does not require content or the name of any subscriber and is issued under 50 USC sec.1861, also known as section 215 of the Patriot Act.”

More worrisome, write the EFF staffers is that no indications exist “that this order to Verizon was unique or novel.”

“It is very likely that business records orders like this exist for every major American telecommunication company,” they continued. “If you make calls in the United States, the NSA has those records. And this has been going on for at least 7 years, and probably longer.”

The reaction was harsh and swift, with the ACLU and others calling for an immediate halt to the program and a large scale investigation.

What follows is a sampling of the responses from those deeply troubled–if not wholly surprised–by the program.

ACLU Calls for End to Program, Disclosure of Program’s Scope, Congressional Investigation:

“From a civil liberties perspective, the program could hardly be any more alarming. It’s a program in which some untold number of innocent people have been put under the constant surveillance of government agents,” said Jameel Jaffer, American Civil Liberties Union deputy legal director. “It is beyond Orwellian, and it provides further evidence of the extent to which basic democratic rights are being surrendered in secret to the demands of unaccountable intelligence agencies.”

“Since 9/11, the government has increasingly classified and concealed not just facts, but the law itself. Such extreme secrecy is inconsistent with our democratic values of open government and accountability.”

The program was put in place under the Patriot Act’s Section 215, a controversial provision that authorizes the government to seek secret court orders for the production of “any tangible thing” relevant to a foreign-intelligence or terrorism investigation. Recipients of Section 215 orders, such as telecommunications companies, are prohibited from disclosing that they gave the government their customers’ records.

“Now that this unconstitutional surveillance effort has been revealed, the government should end it and disclose its full scope, and Congress should initiate a full investigation,” said Michelle Richardson, legislative counsel with the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. “This disclosure also highlights the growing gap between the public’s and the government’s understandings of the many sweeping surveillance authorities enacted by Congress. Since 9/11, the government has increasingly classified and concealed not just facts, but the law itself. Such extreme secrecy is inconsistent with our democratic values of open government and accountability.”

Center for Constitutional Rights calls it “broadest surveillance order ever issued“:

As far as we know this order from the FISA court is the broadest surveillance order to ever have been issued: it requires no level of suspicion and applies to all Verizon subscribers anywhere in the U.S. It also contains a gag order prohibiting Verizon from disclosing information about the order to anyone other than their counsel.

“The broadest surveillance order to ever have been issued: it requires no level of suspicion and applies to all Verizon subscribers anywhere in the U.S.”

The Patriot Act’s incredibly broad surveillance provision purportedly authorizes an order of this sort, though its constitutionality is in question and several senators have complained about it. The Patriot Act provision requires the FBI to notify Congress about the number of such warrants, but this single order covering millions of people is a deceptive end-run around that disclosure requirement.

Electronic Frontier Foundation says NSA should “stop hiding behind legal privileges“:

This type of untargeted, wholly domestic surveillance is exactly what EFF, and others have been suing about for years. In 2006, USA Today published a story disclosing that the NSA had compiled a massive database of call records from American telecommunications companies. Our case, Jewel v. NSA, challenging the legality of the NSA’s domestic spying program, has been pending since 2008, but it’s predecessor, Hepting v. AT&T filed in 2006, alleged the same surveillance. In 2011, on the 10th Anniversary of the Patriot Act, we filed a FOIA lawsuit against the Department of Justice for records about the government’s use of Section 215 — the legal authority the government was relying on to perform this type of untargeted surveillance. […]

“It’s time to end the NSA’s unconstitutional domestic surveillance program.”

The American people have confirmed how the government has secretly interpreted Section 215. And we’re angry. It’s time to stop hiding behind legal privileges and to come clean about Section 215 and FISA. It’s time to start the national dialogue about our rights in the digital age. And it’s time to end the NSA’s unconstitutional domestic surveillance program.

Senator Mark Udall (D-CO), a member of the Senate Intelligence committee who has publicly, though “vaguely,” warned about such a program responded to the news by telling CNET:

“While I cannot corroborate the details of this particular report, this sort of widescale surveillance should concern all of us and is the kind of government overreach I’ve said Americans would find shocking. As a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, it’s why I will keep fighting for transparency and appropriate checks on the surveillance of Americans.”

Former US Vice President Al Gore tweeted:

Guardian columnist James Ball details what “metadata” is and what authorities can learn about you from accessing such data through phone records:

The primary purpose of large-scale databases such as the NSA’s call records is generally said to be data-mining: rather than examining individuals, algorithms are used to find patterns of unusual activity that may mark terrorism or criminal conspiracies.

However, collection and storage of this information gives government a power it’s previously lacked: easy and retroactive surveillance.

If authorities become interested in an individual at a later stage, and obtain their number, officials can look back through the data and gather their movements, social network, and more — possibly for several years (although the secret court order only allows for three months of data collection).

In essence, you’re being watched; the government just doesn’t know your name while it’s doing it.

Until now, such actions have been kept a tightly guarded and classified secret, speculated upon, suspected, and occasionally disclosed by sources, but never proven by documents.

Now the confirmation is in the open, the American public have the opportunity to decide which definition of private information they prefer: that of the privacy advocates, or that of the NSA and White House.

And Twitter:

_________________________________________

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

This article originally appeared on: Common Dreams

'PM who takes things personally’: Erdogan returns to Turkey amid riots

0



Published time: June 06, 2013 11:35

Download video (25.01 MB)
Embed

Code

Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan is returning to a nation besieged by protests, where he faces a list of demands from demonstrators. Erdogan’s personality — described as authoritarian, assertive and self-centered — has also come under scrutiny.

As the protests enter their
seventh day, casualties have risen, with three people dead and
more than 4,000 injured. What began as an environmental protest
against the demolition of Taksim Gezi Park in Istanbul to build a
mall has turned into Turkey’s biggest wave of anti-government
protest in years. 


“There is a problem called Twitter right now and you can find
every kind of lie there. The thing that is called social media is
the biggest trouble for society right now,”
Erdogan said
before leaving for North Africa. The Turkish prime minister also
slammed the protests as undemocratic, and dismissed them as being
organized by extremists. 

In their list of demands issued to Erdogan, activists are calling
for the firing of the chiefs responsible for the violent police
crackdown, the release of protesters detained by police, and for
a ban on the use of teargas. If these demands are fulfilled,
protesters said they would end the riots. 

Demonstrators wave Turkish flags and shout slogans during a protest at Gazi park next to Taksim square in Istanbul on June 5, 2013.(AFP Photo / Aris Messnis)

The period of time after Erdogan returns Thursday from his
three-day tour of North Africa is vital for Turkey, as public
pressure may force the prime minister to reverse several of his
own policies. 

So far, Erdogan has only singled out scapegoats in the unrest,
RT’s Irina Galushko reported from Istanbul.

He assailed the social networks used by demonstrators to organize
protests and post updates; many demonstrators turned to Twitter
and Facebook as a mobilization tool, as local media were largely
silent during the initial stages of the protests.

However, Deputy Prime Minister Bulent Arinc, who is formally in
charge while Erdogan is abroad, apologized on Tuesday for the
police brutality against demonstrators. Turkish police have been
roundly criticized for their widespread use of teargas and water
cannons to disperse crowds of protesters.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.(AFP Photo / Farouk Batiche)

Erdogan has been described as a man who rarely bows to
opposition, and cannot handle criticism. 

“He completely dislikes opposition to his ideas. He takes it
as a personal offense. He’s used to having agreement from the
country after having gained 50 percent of the votes. This time he
didn’t assume the protest would be so big”,
columnist and TV
host Mutlu Tonbekci told RT.  

Journalists Cengiz Candar told Reuters that “Erdogan takes
things very personally and has developed a very authoritarian
style.”
 

“Everybody here was being gassed, and people here were trying
to resist and trying to keep this park, and he was telling that
we are looters and there’s no project going on, and then he
changed his mind, saying there’s of course a project and I will
do what I want to do,”
activist Nazan Ustundag said to
RT.  

“Our intelligence work is ongoing [to determine the foreign
actors behind the protests],”
Erdogan said on Monday.
“It’s not possible to reveal their names. But we will have
meetings with their bosses.”
 

Conservative Turkish newspaper Yeni Safak reported that foreign
mercenaries were among the protesters, according to authorities:
“750 to 1,000 people, agents, many of whom are foreign
nationals, infiltrated the ranks of the demonstrators, and who
are being paid by foreign intelligence.”
 

Anti-government protesters gather in Istanbul's Taksim square June 5, 2013. (Reuters / Yannis Behrakis)

As clashes continue, some
believe that Erdogan will go to great lengths to avoid
embarrassment, as any sign of weakness could break up his
party.
“Erdogan cannot
backtrack now. It would mean defeat,”
car dealer Ali Aydin told Reuters.
“Weakness would destroy the
party.”
 

The prime minister may also be ill-equipped to dealing with the
recent developments. “This is an unprecedented situation for
Erdogan. Some people in [the ruling AKP party] think that his
policies have to soften, but they remain loyal to party
discipline and to Erdogan himself,”
Reuters quoted a source
close to the AKP as saying. 

Many protesters believe that the prime minister has lost touched
with reality, and is inflexible and unwilling to compromise.
 

Erdogan has alleged that hundreds of foreign agents are working
to create unrest in the country. He maintains that these agents
instigated the protests and are continuing to lurk among the
crowds, encouraging dissent and turmoil.

Authorities have arrested some 15 foreign nationals across the
country in connection with the protests, Today’s Zamaan newspaper
quoted an unnamed governmental source as saying. Many were
reportedly Iranian nationals, a country on Erdogan’s blacklist.

Despite the widespread protests, Erdogan remains a popular
politician. He is known for his assertive leadership style, and
his AK Party holds around two-thirds of the seats in parliament.
But a key question remains: How will he handle the protests that
are continuing to rock Turkey?

Erdogan is famous for his concrete human rights reforms,
including granting rights to the country’s Kurdish minority, the
opening of European Union entry talks, and a separation of the
government and military. He has lately faced criticism for
pressuring the media and for restrictions on alcohol sales.

Turkish protesters confront police forces during riots in a restaurant district of Ankara June 5, 2013.(AFP Photo / Marco Longari)

This article originally appeared on: RT

The Untouchables: NY Senate passes bill criminalizing ‘harassment’ of police

4

The New York State Senate passed a controversial bill on Wednesday that aims to classify ‘aggravated harassment of a police officer’ as a crime, but will it give the authorities the green light for strong-arm tactics if passed?

Sponsored by Senator Joe Griffo, Bill S.2402 would make it a
felony to “harass, annoy, or threaten a police officer while
on duty.”  

“Our system of laws is established to protect the foundations
of our society,”
Senator Griffo said. “Police officers who
risk their lives every day in our cities and on our highways
deserve every possible protection, and those who treat them with
disrespect, harass them and create situations that can lead to
injuries deserve to pay a price for their actions.”

Griffo said that New York police require extra safeguards because
“too many people in our society have lost the respect they
need to have for a police officer…. We need to make it very clear
that when a police officer is performing his duty, every citizen
needs to comply and that refusal to comply carries a
penalty.”

The bill, which will now move to the State Assembly, would make
it a crime for a person to make any type of physical action aimed
at intimidating a police officer. Harassment of a police officer
would be recognized as a Class E Felony, punishable by up to four
years in prison.

Not surprisingly, the bill has won accolades from police.

“Professionally, I am grateful to see this bill pass through
the Senate,”
said Utica Police Department Chief Mark
Williams, as quoted by the House Majority Press. “Our police
officers have a very dangerous job and need the support of our
government leaders to help make them safe.”

Williams believes that all too often, individuals are
“physically challenging police officers in the line of
duty.”
Currently, in instances where an officer is physically
attacked but does not sustain a physical injury, the only
possible charge is a violation, he explained.

These consequences are too lenient for offenders, and send the
wrong message to the public, Williams continued.

However, questions may arise as to where the boundaries should be
drawn concerning the right of individuals to report on incidents
of excessive police force, for example.

In May 2011, New York homeowner Emily Good was arrested by
Rochester police while standing in her yard and videotaping
police officers who were performing a traffic stop in front of
her house.  

When one of the officers asked Good what she was doing, Good
replied, “I’m just recording what you’re doing; it’s my
right.”
The officer then told Good that “we don’t feel
safe with you standing right behind us while we’re doing a
traffic stop,” and ordered her to go inside her house.  

When Good insisted on her right to stand in her yard, she was
arrested, handcuffed, and taken away in a police car. She
was later charged with obstructing governmental administration.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Anti-Syrian Blame Game Escalates: Who is Behind Killings of Civilians?

0

Since early 2011, ongoing blame game strategy holds Syria responsible for Western-enlisted death squad crimes.

In August 2011, the Human Rights Council (HRC) appointed a so-called Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria (COI). Paulo Pinheiro heads it.

His mandate is pro-Western propaganda. Credibility isn’t his long suit. His reports bear testimony to his bias. He wrongfully blames Assad for insurgent crimes. He’s done so throughout his tenure.

Washington calls the shots. Pinheiro and other COI members salute and obey. So do HRC officials. Truth is verboten. False reports up the stakes for full-blown US-led NATO intervention.

On June 4, 1,000 US marines arrived in Jordan. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel approved them along with deployment of F-16s, Patriot missiles and other weapons.

Operation Eager Lion 2013 is pretext. Eighteen countries will participate. Exercises begin later in June. They’ll last two months. According to US Central Command spokesman Lt. Col. TG Taylor:

“In order to enhance the defensive posture and capacity of Jordan, some of these assets may remain beyond the exercise at the request of the government of Jordan.”

Jordan needs no enhanced defensive posture. Deploying US troops and weapons near Syria’s border is provocative. Perhaps COI timed its new report release with their arrival. More on that below.

Pinheiro admits anti-Assad forces commit violations and abuses. They pale, he says, compared to government wrongdoing. He lies saying so. He’s paid to lie.

On June 4, COI issued its latest report. It covers the period January 15 — May 15, 2013. Three others preceded it.

The UN News Centre headlined “Independent UN panel calls for diplomatic surge to end ‘daily reality’ of war crimes in Syria.”

Syria was invaded. There’s nothing civil about ongoing conflict. COI persists in characterizing it that way. Doing so distorts reality on the ground. COI’s report states:

“War crimes and crimes against humanity have become a daily reality in Syria where the harrowing accounts of victims have seared themselves on our conscience. Referral to justice remains paramount.”

COI discussed “systematic imposition of sieges, the use of chemical agents and forcible displacement.”

According to Pinheiro, “Syria is in free-fall. No one is winning and will not win the war. More weapons will only lead to more civilians dead and wounded.”

He stops short of truth and full disclosure. It’s not his mandate. Syria was invaded. It’s victimized by Washington-initiated aggression. Obama bears full responsibility.

Pinheiro urges dialogue to end conflict. How can it when Obama prioritizes war? So far, proxy foot soldiers wage it.

Ending hostilities requires calling them off, halting all funding, arming, training and directing, as well as telling complicit allies to cease and desist all anti-Syrian activities.

Pinheiro’s a willing co-conspirator. “We ask that States exert influence over the parties to the conflict to compel them to protect civilians,” he urges.

Only one state matters. Washington calls the shots. What it says goes. As long as Obama prioritizes regime change, expect conflict to continue.

COI ignores the grim reality. It was formed to do so. It’s a pro-Western tool. So-called findings were based on 430 interviews and “other collected evidence.”

Who was interviewed wasn’t explained. Clearly anti-Assad elements were featured at the expense of government loyalists. More on Pinheiro’s report below.

On June 2, Al Manar reported a recent NATO study. Western organizations conducted it. The World Tribune said it shows Syrian forces winning decisively.

On June 4, Western media reported Syria in full control of Qusair. It’s a strategic town bordering Lebanon. It’s part of an insurgent supply route. According to General Yahya Suleiman:

“Whoever controls Qusair control the center of the country, and whoever controls the center of the country controls all of Syria.”

Syrian state television said “Our heroic armed forces have returned security and stability to all of the town of Qusair.”

NATO said 70% of Syrians support Assad. They do so for good reason. They’re alarmed about Al Qaeda, Al Nusra, and other extremist elements waging war, committing atrocities and other crimes.

According to an unnamed Western source, “Assad is winning the war mostly because the people are cooperating with him against the rebels.”

He omitted explaining why. They want no part of foreign invaders. They reject US-led belligerent intervention. They want Syrian sovereignty respected. They want no outside force deciding who’ll rule their country. Above all, they want peace and stability restored.

According to COI, government forces and affiliated militia committed “murder, torture, rape, forcible displacement, enforced disappearances and other inhumane acts.”

Pinheiro calls ongoing conflict part of Assad’s systematic attack on civilians. He lied saying so. Assad’s doing his job. He’s battling foreign invaders. He’s obligated to do so. Syrians express gratitude.

Pinheiro admits anti-government forces commit crimes of war and against humanity. According to COI’s report:

“The violations and abuses committed by anti-Government armed groups did not, however, reach the intensity and scale of those committed by Government forces and affiliated militia.”

At the same time it says:

“Anti-Government armed groups have committed war crimes, including murder, sentencing and execution without due process, torture, hostage-taking and pillage.”

“They continue to endanger the civilian population by positioning military objectives in civilian areas.” Government soldiers and noncombatant civilians were executed in cold blood “without due process.”

Gruesome videos revealed brutal anti-Assad atrocities. Western media largely ignore them. Big Lies substitute. Syrian forces are blamed for insurgent crimes.

Pinheiro suggests Assad’s forces target internally displaced Syrians. Chemical weapons have been used by both sides, he said. Assad bears most responsibility, he claims.

COI’s report cites four attacks. They include March 19 on Khan Al-Asal, Aleppo, March 19 on Uteibah, Damascus, April 13 on Aleppo’s Sheikh Maqsood’s neighborhood, and April 29 on Saraqib, Idlib.

“There are reasonable grounds to believe that limited quantities of toxic chemicals were used” in these incidents, said COI.

Precise chemical agents used, their delivery systems or perpetrators aren’t clear, it said. Other incidents remain under investigation.

No evidence whatever links Syrian forces to toxic chemical attacks. Plenty shows insurgents used them. In late May, Turkish forces arrested 12 suspected Al Nusra fighters.

They were seized in southern Turkey. They were caught red-handed with a two gm cylinder of sarin nerve gas.

Initial Turkish media reports said four and a half pounds of sarin were seized. US media scoundrels said nothing. They largely support aggressive war on Syria.

Along with sarin, Turkish police found handguns, grenades, bullets and various documents. A planned Al-Nusra bomb attack in Adana was foiled. Many Alawites live there. They’re Assad loyalists.

On May 5, COI said testimonial evidence indicates “rebel forces” used sarin. A day later, it suggested “no conclusive findings.”

Other reports confirmed anti-Assad elements using chemical weapons. Syrian forces confiscated two cylinders of sarin used by insurgents in Hama.

It bears repeating. No evidence whatever shows Syria’s military or other pro-government elements used sarin or other toxic agents.

False reports claim otherwise. French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius accused Assad of using them. He did so based on alleged tests France conducted. Results were sent to the UN, he said.

On June 5, the Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA) headlined “Syria: UNHCR Committee Insists on Exaggeration, Ignores Crucial Events,” saying:

Syria’s permanent HCR representative Fayssal al-Hamwi addressed the body. He accused it of premeditated exaggerations. It paid little attention to vital information too important to ignore.

“In spite of our warnings against using sectarian expressions,” he said, “basically rejected by the Syrian society, the committee used such terms and ignored in its conclusions and recommendations the causes of deteriorating the social and economic situation, including the unjust unilateral sanctions imposed by some Arab and western countries on the Syrian people.”

Russia’s permanent Geneva-based UN representative Alexei Borodavkin said COI’s report stopped short of “honest positions.”

It downplayed or ignored insurgent “terrorist acts.” It omitted explaining the harmful effects of unilateral economic sanctions. It’s “politically biased.”

False anti-Assad accusations persist. Repeatedly he’s been accused of foreign death squad atrocities. Eye witnesses point fingers the right way. Western media ignore them.

Recent White House and State Department comments suggest Obama appears heading for full-scale intervention.

With marines, other US forces and heavy weapons on Syria’s border, anything may happen any time. If Libya 2.0 is launched, expect Israel to be involved. Israeli air attacks may initiate it.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

His new book is titled “Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanII.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 Fridays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour

http://www.dailycensored.com/anti-syrian-blame-game-escalates/

This article originally appeared on: Global Research

Police officer dies in Turkey protest

0

[unable to retrieve full-text content]A Turkish police officer dies while trying to break up an anti-government protest rally in the country’s southern city of Adana.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Venezuelan Government Rejects Colombia’s Efforts to Join NATO

0

 

Tamara Pearson (VA),- After Colombian president Juan Santos announced on the weekend that his government intended to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), Venezuelan and other Latin American governments responded with concern for the region’s peace.

Santos said that, “in the month of June, NATO will sign an agreement with the Colombian government, with the defence minister, in order to start a process of … cooperation, with the intention of joining the organisation”.

In an army promotion ceremony, Santos said Colombia has the “right to think big” and, if we “achieve peace; our army is in the best position to be able to distinguish itself at an international level”.

Santos said at the military ceremony that the Colombian government would sign an agreement of cooperation with NATO (SIG)

However, EFE reported that Colombia’s defence minister, Juan Carlos Pinzon said that although the country would extend its “cooperation” with NATO, he ruled out the possibility of membership of the alliance. The newspaper also reported an anonymous representative of NATO saying Colombia could not join it for geographic reasons; it “doesn’t meet the criteria”.

However the anonymous source apparently said that NATO is preparing an agreement with Colombia “to enable the exchange of classified information” and “future cooperation”.

On Monday a U.S State Department official, Roberta Jacobson, said “our goal is certainly to support Colombia as being a capable and strong member of lots of different international organizations, and that might well include NATO”.

“Ultimately this is a decision that all of the NATO members would have to make,” she added.

Then finally, late last night, Pinzon clarified again that the aim of the Colombian government is not to join NATO, but to become “a partner of cooperation as Australia, New Zealand, Japan, and other countries are”.

Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro initially described Colombia’s apparent intention to join NATO as an “abhorrent idea” aimed at “expanding NATO’s war plans…to South America”. He called on the Colombian government to “reflect” on the move.

“It’s more than a doubt, I can now say with certainty that president Santos isn’t interested any more in the peace process,” Maduro said, referring to Santos’ recent meeting with Venezuelan former presidential candidate Henrique Capriles, who still has not recognised Maduro as president. Following that meeting, the Venezuelan government said it would re-evaluate its supportive role in the peace talks between the Colombian government and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC).

Maduro also said he agreed with Bolivian president Evo Morales’ proposal to hold a meeting of defence ministers of the Union of South American Nations (Unasur) countries, to evaluate the “threat to peace and stability” that Colombia’s move represents. The Nicaraguan government also criticised Colombia’s intentions.

Also today, the general secretary of the Paraguayan Communist Party, Najeep Amado, told press that Santos’ declaration was a “continuation of Plan Colombia, a United States war strategy for South America”.

However, following the clarification by Pinzon, Maduro said that Venezuela welcomed it, and it was a “positive step” towards maintaining peaceful relations between the two countries.

Today, ex Colombian minister for defence and foreign trade, Martha Ramirez, said the Colombian government had “improvised” in its bid to join NATO, “exposing Colombians to international ridicule” because Colombia can’t enter the organisation “by definition”.

NATO is a military alliance based on the North Atlantic Treaty signed in 1949. Member countries agree to mutual defence in response to external attacks. It has 28 member states across North America and Europe, with other countries participating in its “Partnership for Peace” and in dialogue programs. The combined military budgets of all NATO members constitutes over 70% of global defence expenditure.

Tamara Pearson via Venezuelanalysis

This article originally appeared on: Global Research

Bilderberg Member Set to Speak on Record

0

Participant of secretive confab set to talk with BBC

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
June 6, 2013

A Bilderberg Group member is set to speak on record to the BBC in what represents an unprecedented move for the secretive organization, which is being forced to become more transparent in the face of huge protests and widespread condemnation.

Image: Infowars.com

In advance of an interview with Alex Jones today, a BBC reporter told Infowars that the broadcaster had approached a Bilderberg member for a television interview and although the person had refused to be on camera, a telephone interview was likely.

As we reported yesterday, a separate source close to the security operation surrounding the confab told Infowars that numerous Bilderberg Group members were aggrieved at the organization’s obsession with secrecy and wanted to see more transparency.

Campaigners are inviting Bilderberg members to come and address crowds of demonstrators and press at a specially constructed podium within the grounds of the Grove Hotel in Watford, which is where the conference is taking place behind a huge police presence.

Bilderberg’s veil of secrecy is being lifted as a result of serious mainstream media coverage — which took decades to achieve — along with a huge increase in the number of demonstrators who show up to denounce the annual confab as a shadowy lobbying network.

In addition, the establishment media hoax that Bilderberg has no influence and is merely a “talking shop” or a golfing holiday is quickly disintegrating.

The Telegraph reports today that the 2004 Bilderberg meeting in Stresa, Italy was where the head of BP Lord Browne suggested a monumental merger with Shell to create the world’s biggest oil company, a merger that many analysts still expect to see at some point.

If a Bilderberg member does agree to an interview with the BBC it would likely serve as an opportunity to downplay the significance of the group, but the mere fact that a participant of the secretive confab has been forced to speak publicly represents major progress.

It would also mark the first time a Bilderberg member went on record since Lord Healy over a decade ago.

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

No progress ending Guantanamo hunger strike or prisoner transfers since Obama speech

0

President Obama announced his intention to resume cleared prisoner transfers out of Guantanamo Bay in May. However, according to Lt. Col. Barry Wingard, who represents several detainees, no efforts have been made so far that he can see.

Wingard, an Air Force officer with the Judge Advocate General
(JAG) office, recently met with one of his clients to mark his
37th birthday, and eleventh year at the prison without charge.
Speaking via phone from Guantanamo Bay to RT, Wingard says that
no effort has been made so far to end the hunger strike, and a
recent vote by Congress to block funds for the closure of
Guantanamo means the situation is as bleak as ever.

RT: This vote by the House of Representatives must be a
massive blow, not just to hunger strikers but to you and all
those who represent them. You might as well give up now?

Barry Wingard: No. We’re not going to give up, so long as
men are imprisoned in Guantanamo Bay we’re not going to stop
fighting on their behalf. On Tuesday, yesterday, we spent with my
client, Fayiz Al-Kandari, a Kuwaiti, we spent his 37th birthday
here at Guantanamo Bay. He’s been at Guantanamo Bay 11 and a half
years, a third of his life. We’re not giving up. Part of our
discussion focused on the House vote today, when we met. And he
asked me, “Hey, what kind of people vote to fund a prison that’s
95% full of men who haven’t been charged with a crime after
eleven and a half years?” And I have to tell you, I had no answer
for him. It is a mystery to me what kind of person says “We don’t
care if you’ve done anything, you’re staying in Guantanamo Bay.”

RT: So, although no plans declared to close the prison,
what’s happened recently doesn’t give you any optimism whatsoever
for those who are cleared for a release to be released?

BW: Well, you know, Guantanamo Bay stands for the
proposition that it doesn’t matter if you did anything or didn’t
do anything. In fact it’s the opposite. If you are in fact
accused of something you might get a trial, but in Guantanamo Bay
it is a world in reverse, whereby if you’ve done nothing you get
nothing but indefinite detention in a well-funded prison from
Washington.


RT:
Now, in his recent speech Obama made it very clear he
was determined to close down the prison. So, is he in a position
to do just that without Congress?



BW:
Well, let me tell you, under the National Security Waiver
he can do that with the Secretary of Defense, he does have that
power. He continues to blame Congress, and Congress continues to
blame him. I mean, the words of May the 23rd are beginning to
fade, it’s time for this administration to either put up, or to
at least tell us what’s really going to happen. The President
does have the authority to release men from Guantanamo Bay, to
include men like Shaker Aamer back to London [England], an ally
of the United States.

In this photo reviewed by US military officials, two feeding tubes and cans of Ensure with flavors such as Butter Pecan and Strawberries & Cream are seen inside the detainee hospital inside Camp Delta, part of the US Detention Center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.(AFP Photo / Paul J. Richards)

RT: Lt. Col. you are there in Guantanamo right now,
after four months on hunger strike how are your clients and other
detainees holding up?



BW:
Well, let me tell you, the hunger strike — there’s no
kind of negotiation going on to end the hunger strike. My client
reports that all of his personal possessions are still
confiscated, his toothbrush, his soap, his letters from home, his
client-attorney letters which are privileged, that the two of us
are using to communicate — has all been taken and not returned.
I mean, there’s just, on the ground here at Guantanamo Bay, there
appears to be no change whatsoever, and everyone is sort of
waiting for Washington to show some leadership.

RT: What about the force feeding issue, accusations
that it in fact entails torture? If people are in fact on hunger
strike the prisoners need to be kept alive, and the prison
authorities are doing just that — are they still force feeding
them, and if so, it is justified isn’t it?

BW: No, we disagree. We believe that a person who is alive
and can make a decision as to what to do with their own bodies
can make that decision. I mean these men began a hunger strike
over their hopeless situation of indefinite detention and instead
of responding to their peaceful demonstration what we’ve seen is
a lot of violence and retaliation, and solitary confinement and
confiscations. We’ve seen aggressive searching — my client
reported to me today that when he was coming out to visit with us
they went out of their way to aggressively search him, in a very
uncomfortable way. I mean, that’s not accidental, that’s
intentional.

RT: But when it comes to the conditions of those hunger
strikers what is the military supposed to do? Congress has now
blocked the closure of the facility, the detainees are putting
their own lives at risk by refusing food, surely the officers are
simply doing their jobs. What are your thoughts on the way they
are handling this in the prison?



BW:
Well, I think that these are grown men, who have a right
to make decisions about themselves. I mean just think about it in
the opposite, how obscene is it to say we need to keep you
healthy to keep you here for the rest of your life without ever
being charged with a crime. I mean this isn’t about soccer fields
or Arabic libraries, one thing we’ve noticed here on the ground
is that there’s been a lot of effort in the public relations
field, every week these media outlets come in and do surface
tours, which is come in here and look at the prisoners in their
cells — but, how can anything be resolved when the prisoners are
kept without charges or an opportunity to defend themselves.


RT:
How is it going to be resolved? What are the next
steps you are going to take along with others who are
representing detainees, what’s the next step for you now after
what seems to be a fairly pessimistic result there from
Washington?

BW: Well, I’m going to go back to the fact that the
President does have the ability to release these men. I represent
the men from Kuwait, where they’ve built a $40 million
rehabilitation center. This whole argument that there is nowhere
for them to go — we’re going to continue to fight, we’re going
to continue to demand justice. This isn’t about soccer fields or
Arabic libraries, we’re going to continue to fight in the media,
we’re going to continue to fight in the habeas corpus arena. The
military commissions are no solution, they’ve done seven cases in
eleven years. So we’re going to try and get these guys real
justice from the federal court system.

This article originally appeared on: RT

‘America is our worst enemy’: Pakistani victim of US drone strike speaks out

0

Drone strikes in Pakistan have killed 1,000 civilians, activists say, while the US maintains they only target terrorists. Victims of drone warfare and their families live in constant fear of another strike, and say they are “angry and want revenge.”

A review of classified US intelligence records has revealed that
the CIA could not confirm the identity of about one-quarter of
those killed by drone strikes in Pakistan during a period
spanning 2010 and 2011. In a review of 14 months of classified
records, 26 out of 114 attacks designate fatalities as “other
militants,”
and in four other attacks those killed are
described as “foreign fighters.”

The CIA is reluctant to reveal information on its drone program,
Chris Woods of the Bureau of Investigative Journalism told RT.

“With so many civilians reported killed, and yet the CIA
reporting that it’s killed no more than 50 or 60 civilians I
think there is need for an open, not only an open inquiry, but
also for the CIA to share the information it has on who it
believes it’s killed in places like Pakistan. President Obama’s
speech the other week did seem to promise more openness but
unfortunately we’re not seeing signs of that just yet,”
Woods
said.

In his post-election address to parliament, Pakistani Prime
Minister Nawaz Sharif called for an end to US drone attacks in
the country’s northern tribal areas bordering Afghanistan.


“This daily routine of drone attacks, this chapter shall now be
closed,”
Sharif said to enthusiastic applause. “We do
respect others’ sovereignty. It is mandatory on others that they
respect our sovereignty.”

“Most of the strikes in Pakistan these days are really not
related to Al-Qaeda or those terrorist activities but really to
the war across the border in Afghanistan. The drone war has
changed quite significantly over the ten years or so it’s been
running. We see the US talking about using drones in Syria for
example; we have had calls from Iraq and Rwanda recently for the
US to use drones there. So there’s a concern among some that the
US wants now to use these drones as an easy plank in their view
of foreign policy,”
Woods explained.

Pakistani protesters from the United Citizen Action torch a US flag as they shout slogans during a protest in Multan on May 30, 2013.(AFP Photo / S.S Mirza)

Residents of Pakistan say they are living “in constant fear of
another strike.”
Amin Ullah was on his way to work at a mine
near his village when a drone struck the area. He lost his leg in
the attack, and three other miners were killed. “The Americans
should be able to tell an ordinary person from a Taliban leader.
They should know who they’re killing. What did we do to deserve
this?”
Ullah told RT.

“We are simple villagers who are stuck in a war that we didn’t
ask for. It’s a hopeless feeling. Death is above our heads all
the time,”
he added.

Another victim of the drone attack, Nek Bahadar, lost part of his
hearing and nearly his foot: “The drone’s shockwave was so
intense that it threw us outside far from the place where we were
sleeping. After several minutes there was another strike and it
killed many more people.”

“Of course this has made me hate the Americans. We are angry
and want revenge. They’ve destroyed our lives. My parents, my
wife my children — we all see America our worst enemy now,”

Bahadar said.

Pakistani human rights lawyer Shahzad Mirza Akbar has sued both
the US and Pakistan on behalf of civilian victims in Waziristan,
a mountainous region in northwestern Pakistan bordering
Afghanistan.

“I simply call it a concentration camp, that you’ve built a
wall of military and militants, and behind this wall you are
keeping more than 800,000 people who are not allowed to come out
and no one from the rest of the country is allowed to go in. And
that is kind of laboratory that US is using to use test its drone
program,”
Akbar told RT’s Lucy Kafanov.

MQ-1B Predator.(Reuters / Christopher Griffin)

Evidence of drone strikes is difficult to gather; fragments of
the attacks were collected by a local journalist Noor Behram, who
spent years documenting the civilian toll of drones, especially
on children.


“Whenever my 3-year-old daughter hears the plane she runs inside
and won’t sleep that night. The children here have been
traumatized by the drones. The sound of a door banging shut is
enough to terrify them,”
Behram said.

There are fears that the US campaign to eliminate terrorists
could end up creating more. “By carrying out drone strikes,
killing innocent people who are not part of the conflict, you are
just widening the conflict. You are giving the reason to people
who were not part of the conflict here to become part of the
conflict,” Akbar explained.

Breakthrough advances in unmanned aircraft technology have also
sparked concerns at the UN. The UN’s rapporteur for extrajudicial
killings, Christof Heyns, is calling for a worldwide ban on
“killer robots” that could attack targets autonomously,
without a human having to pull the trigger.

According to the report, the US, Japan, South Korea and Israel
have developed various types of fully- or semi-autonomous
weapons.

“It’s important to say there’s no particular day we’ll be able
to say, now we have fully autonomous robots. But there are
already very high levels of autonomy available, and full autonomy
may be available within a few years. It’s important to emphasize
the distinction between drones and lethal autonomous robots
(LARs). With drones you have a human in the loop with somebody
sitting behind the computer and taking the decision to pull the
trigger. With robots there’s no human being in the loop, it’s a
computer that takes a decision,”
Heyns explained.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Police officer dies in Turkey protests

0

[unable to retrieve full-text content]A Turkish police officer dies while trying to break up an anti-government protest rally in the country’s southern city of Adana.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Turkish police officer dies pursuing protester

0

Comments (1)

Anonymous user 06.06.2013 10:55

Is this the first police officer died?
How many protesters died so far?
It my get messy from now on

Undo

Add comment

By posting your comment, you agree to abide by our Posting rules

Log in to comment in full, or comment anonymously under character-limit restriction.

Name

New password

Retype new password

Current password

Save

Cancel

This article originally appeared on: RT

Report: Obama May Visit Bilderberg Meeting

0

Joy Lo Dico
London Evening Standard
June 6, 2013

As the last few diners pay the bill in a sleepy Carluccio’s in Watford, the waiter serving me an espresso also serves the hottest piece of town gossip for centuries. “I’ve heard President Obama is coming too,” he says. “How do you know?” I ask. He winds me back, through what the wife of the friend of the brother of someone told him, to the source – a member of staff at The Grove.

Hold on? Obama at The Grove, the luxury hotel that usually hosts the England football team before games at Wembley? In Watford?

Tomorrow, the country house style retreat and spa that soothes the brows of Hugh Grant and the Beckhams will host this year’s Bilderberg Group conference, in which the world’s power brokers meet under Chatham House rules to kick around the talking points of the day. According to the Bilderberg website, it is “an annual conference designed to foster dialogue between Europe and North America”, with “off-the-record discussions about mega-trends” and the major issues facing the world. If you choose to believe the conspiracy theorists, Bilderberg is running a shadow world government away from the eyes of the media.

This year’s official participant list, released by Bilderberg in a new spirit of openness, must have been put together by a Machiavellian genius to confound the agitators. They will have expected Chancellor George Osborne, puppeteer of the British economy, but what has his Labour counterpart Ed Balls done accepting the invitation? Prince of Darkness Peter Mandelson is a shoo-in but cuddly liberal Shirley Williams too? Eric Schmidt, CEO of the all-seeing Google, clinking glasses on the terrace with internet freedom fighter Lawrence Lessig? And why Watford?

The secrecy of Bilderberg is also the fascination. Founded in 1954, it takes its name from its first venue, the Hotel de Bilderberg in Oosterbeek in the Netherlands. No minutes are taken nor press conferences held but world leaders from Tony Blair and Bill Clinton to Angela Merkel have all rubbed shoulders with business leaders and academics in this private sphere.

Full article here

NSA collecting phone records of millions daily, court order reveals

0

Glenn Greenwald
London Guardian
June 6, 2013

The National Security Agency is currently collecting the telephone records of millions of US customers of Verizon, one of America’s largest telecoms providers, under a top secret court order issued in April.

The order, a copy of which has been obtained by the Guardian, requires Verizon on an “ongoing, daily basis” to give the NSA information on all telephone calls in its systems, both within the US and between the US and other countries.

The document shows for the first time that under the Obama administration the communication records of millions of US citizens are being collected indiscriminately and in bulk — regardless of whether they are suspected of any wrongdoing.

The secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (Fisa) granted the order to the FBI on April 25, giving the government unlimited authority to obtain the data for a specified three-month period ending on July 19.

Full article here

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 5:25 am






<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Bilderberg: ruling the world from Watford

0

Robert Shrimsley
Financial Times
June 6, 2013

The Bilderberg Group, that circumspect gathering of the western world’s great and used-to-be-great, is holding its annual conference this week in a spa hotel in Watford, a town a few miles outside London.

Watford is often overlooked among Europe’s glamour sites. This is in spite of its proximity to Pinner, Rickmansworth and the M25 motorway. But that exclusive status may at last have been secured with the choice of the Grove Hotel as the venue for the furtive meeting of Atlanticists, suspected by some conspiracy theorists of being the secret rulers of the world.

The hotel website traces its history back to 7,000BC when “early man settled on the site”. Not everyone was impressed in those early days. TripAdvisor reported that the amenities were prehistoric and the room service distinctly unfriendly.

The group itself, which takes its name from the hotel where it held its first meeting, is a cold war throwback — a gathering of dedicated Atlanticists discussing the big issues of the day. The secrecy of the event and the illustriousness of its 100-odd attendees — mainly bankers, business leaders and politicians — bolstered the paranoia about its sinister power. It is sometimes claimed that Senator John Edwards secured his spot as the 2004 Democratic vice-presidential candidate at a Bilderberg conference, although his career since is not perhaps the greatest testimony to the group’s all-encompassing power.

Full article here

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 5:28 am

Tags:






<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Bilderberg Group? No conspiracy, just the most influential group in the world

0

Matthew Holehouse
London Telegraph
June 6, 2013

Publicly, the group says it is still merely a debating society — a forum for leaders to “listen, reflect and gather insights” unbound by official policy positions.

But while they rankle at the conspiracy theorists, former leaders of the Bilderberg confences says they were the most important events they ever went to, and the freedom of speaking away from the ears of Whitehall officials meant the discussions that took place decisively shaped modern Europe.

It is above all a club for life’s winners. George Osborne, Ed Balls and Ken Clarke, the Cabinet Minister who also serves on the group’s steering committee, will arrive this afternoon, as will Mr Mandelson. They will be joined by Jose Manuel Barroso, the President of the European Commission; Christine Lagarde, the head of the IMF; Francois Fillon, the former French Prime Minister; Robert Rubin and Timothy Geithner, the former secretaries to the US Treasury; and serving prime ministers, foreign ministers and finance ministers from across north west Europe.

The chairmen and chief executives of some of the world’s biggest businesses will attend, with a combined wealth running into hundreds of millions of pounds — from Deutsche Bank, Barclays, Amazon, Google, Shell, HSBC, Lazard, Prudential and Alcoa. Henri de Castries, the chairman of the Bilderberg, is the head of AXA, the insurance giant. Peter Thiel, the billionaire founder of PayPal, is also on the guest list. Goldman Sachs and BP have in recent years been donors to the British committee organising this week’s gathering.

Full article here

Italy, Germany to join US Afghan force

0

US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel has announced that Germany, Italy and Turkey have pledged to contribute forces to the American troop contingent that will stay in Afghanistan following the 2014 withdrawal plan.

Hagelâ„¢s remarks came following a NATO defense ministers meeting, behind closed doors, in Brussels on Wednesday, when they reportedly agreed on a Å“concept of operations” for a Å“train, advise and assist” mission in the war-torn country starting in January 2015, The Los Angeles Times reports on Thursday.

According to the report, the US-led alliance has informally agreed that a post-2014 Å“training force” should number between 8,000 to 12,000 soldiers, but few member countries have formally pledged to contribute troops to the much smaller US-led military force that is due to indefinitely remain in Afghanistan even after the so-called pull-out date.

Å“Weâ„¢re transitioning, not leaving,” Hagel emphasized as cited in the report. Å“We intend to be [in Afghanistan] for the long haul.”

Hagel, however, refused to elaborate on what US officials have previously discussed as a separate Å“counter-terrorism” mission in Afghanistan undertaken by American Special Operations forces but noted that Å“anything we do in Afghanistan has to have the sign-off of the Afghan government.”

Meanwhile, Britain, which has been the second-largest troop contributor in the 11-year-old US-led war in Afghanistan, has not yet pledged to commit any new forces to the post-2014 NATO military force in the country, the report adds.

Citing diplomatic sources, the report further states that Germany will take the lead role in northern Afghanistan while Italian troops will be assigned to the west of the country.

Turkey, according to Hagel, is considering to become the lead US-led military force in the Afghan capital of Kabul, the daily says.

The US-led war in Afghanistan began in 2001 under the pretext of removing the Taliban regime, fighting terrorism and bringing peace and stability to the war-torn nation.

Nearly 12 years after the US-led military occupation, daily terror acts, mass displacement of civilians, narcotics production and trade and corruption remain rampant in Afghanistan.

MFB/MFB

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Stowaway from Italy ‘froze to death’ on way to Moscow

0

A man’s body was found in the landing gear bay of a plane that arrived in Moscow from Rimini, Italy. Investigators believe he was a stowaway who died from exposure to cold temperatures at high altitude.

“Apparently the man died from exposure to cold; we suspect
that he was a stowaway,”
a spokesperson for the investigation
said.

The body was discovered on Thursday after the Airbus А-330
aircraft landed in Moscow’s Vnukovo airport following a night
flight.

Blood drops were discovered during a post-landing inspection of
the right landing gear, which prompted a thorough search of the
bay and the grisly discovery.

Investigators from Moscow’s air traffic police are trying to
identify the unfortunate traveller.

The Russian aviation regulator said it will consult with Italian
authorities on how the pre-flight servicing and inspection of the
plane was carried out in Rimini. The aircraft belongs to the
Russian charter airline I Fly.

Trying to save ticket money by sneaking into the landing gear is
not uncommon, though usually fatal. With freezing temperatures as
low as -55C and scarce oxygen in the high-altitude air, such
trips are grueling ordeals for stowaways.

In 2010, a teenage orphan boy traveled a record 300km in a plane’s landing gear
after escaping an orphanage in eastern Siberia. He was exhausted
by the journey, and was taken to hospital upon arrival.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Qalibaf vows to create economic epic

0

Iranian presidential candidate Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf has pledged that his administration will create an economic epic by making use of provincial potentialities and national capacities if he becomes Iran’s next president.

Addressing a gathering of his supporters in the southwestern city of Yasuj on Thursday, the principlist candidate added the main plans and priorities for the first two years of his tenure will be based on resolving daily life problems, curbing inflation and creating job opportunities.

He emphasized that his administration would pay special heed to the development of the deprived areas, particularly rural regions.

Qalibaf will be competing against Secretary of the Expediency Council Mohsen Rezaei, President of the Center for Strategic Research of the Expediency Council Hassan Rohani, lawmaker Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council Saeed Jalili, former Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati, former First Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref, and former Telecommunications Minister Mohammad Gharazi.

Iranians will go to the polls in the countryâ„¢s 11th presidential election on June 14.

SF/HJL

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Hotel bombing kills 1 in Afghanistan

0

Afghan soldiers are seen at the site of a bomb attack in Afghanistan. (File photo)

At least one civilian has been killed and 15 others injured in a bomb blast that hit a hotel in Afghanistanâ„¢s northern province of Sar-e Pol, Press TV reports.

According to local officials, the attack took place Thursday morning in the provincial capital, Sar-e Pol city, located 349 kilometers (217 miles) north of the capital, Kabul.

The death toll is expected to rise as some of the injured are said to be in critical condition.

On June 4, a bomb blast claimed the lives of a father and his three children in Afghanistanâ„¢s western province of Farah.

Violence in Afghanistan has seen an upsurge over the past few months, with civilians being the main victims.

The United States and its allies invaded Afghanistan in October 2001 as part of Washingtonâ„¢s so-called war on terror. The offensive removed the Taliban from power, but insecurity continues to rise across the country, despite the presence of thousands of US-led troops.

MAM/HJL

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

The Same Federal Judge Who Struck Down Obamacare Approved The Government’s Sweeping Collection Of Phone Records

0

Brett LoGiurato
Business Insider
June 6, 2013

Roger Vinson, the same federal judge who ruled the Affordable Care Act unconstitutional in 2011, signed an order that compels Verizon to give the National Security Agency information on all telephone calls in its system.

The Verizon order was revealed Wednesday night in a report from The Guardian’s Glenn Greenwald. It requires Verizon to produce “certain call detail records or ‘telephony metadata’” created by the company. The report has already sparked concern and outrage from people questioning the federal government’s surveillance powers.

Here, side by side, are the Obamacare ruling and the Verizon order, courtesy of Twitter user @nycsouthpaw:

In 2011, Vinson ruled the key portion of Obamacare – the individual mandate – unconstitutional. In his decision, he put forth the metaphor that Congress could theoretically mandate Americans to buy certain foods.

Full article here

House votes to delay bulk ammunition purchase by DHS

0

Pete Kasperowicz
The Hill
June 6, 2013

The House late Wednesday voted to stop the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from entering into new contracts to buy millions of rounds of ammunition until DHS reports to Congress on the need for the ammo, and its cost.

Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) proposed an amendment to the DHS spending bill for 2014 that would require the report to Congress before it can pursue plans to buy 1.1 billion rounds of ammunition. Meadows said the speed bump is a necessary reaction to news of the huge purchase, which alarmed many Americans and prompted conservative groups to suspect that the government was stocking up on the rounds to fight citizens.

“Given this large purchase, the American people and members of Congress rightfully had concerns and questions,” Meadows said. “This is a responsible amendment which ensures that Congress and the American people are aware of the necessity and the cost of ammunition prior to entering into new contracts for procurement.”

Rep. John Carter (R-Texas) said the amendment was unnecessary, based on his talks with DHS officials. Carter said DHS has since admitted that its ammunition needs are not as great as first reported, and said the department is pursuing a bulk purchase to keep the costs down.

Full article here

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 5:00 am

Tags: ,






<!– this is where we need to show the related articles

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

IMF recognizes 'notable failures' in Greek bailout

0

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) acknowledged that it made ‘notable failures’ in its handling of the Greek bailout, admitting they had underestimated how deeply austerity measures would stint growth.

The IMF was successful in keeping Greece in the eurozone, which
prevented the entire collapse of the euro currency bloc, and have
helped keep the Greek economy afloat by pumping in over 200
billion euros ($258.8 billion).

With Greece in its sixth year of recession, and with an
unemployment rate of 27 percent, in a rare moment of critical
self-reflection, the IMF, has issued a report
asking many ‘what if’ scenarios, retracing their steps in the
Greek bailout.

In the titled ‘Ex-post evaluation’ report released on Wednesday,
the IMF takes a slice of the blame in Greece’s worsening
financial condition, as they grossly underestimated the impact of
austerity measures on its economy.

‘Notable failures’, according to the report, include failure in
restoring market confidence, the banks’ 30 percent loss in
deposits, high unemployment, waiting too long to restructure the
nation’s debt, and a deepening of the recession.

In short, under IMF policies, Greece’s recession
worsened.Image from www.imf.org

The IMF have four main criteria for qualifying bailouts, but
Greece only fulfilled one out of the four.

The report analyzes whether or not granting Greece ‘exceptional
access’ is justified now the country is in a much more severe
recession than the ‘troika’ lenders forecast 3 years ago.

In exchange for economic aid, Greece pledged to massively reduce
their government spending and to reform their economy under IMF
supervision.

Cyprus, Greece, Portugal, and Ireland have all received bail-out
support from IMF lending.

Cyprus has been hit hard with its bailout
arrangement, and is now urging its President to ask the European
Commission that Cyprus be listed as a ‘poorer’ region of the EU,
so they can be eligible for more structural funds. Currently,
they are classified as a ‘rich’ country, based on their economic
condition in 2004 when they entered the EU.

Activists met in Frankfurt on May 31st and staged a protest against European leaders handling
of the three-year euro debt crisis.

They blocked the entrance to the European Central
Bank
, one of the IMF’s ‘troika’ lending partners which gave
Greece bailout funds.

Blockupy activists lay blame for the debt crisis in Europe with
the banks and in particular the ECB for its role in imposing
austerity measures on EU citizens.

Many activists expressed distrust in the IMF, only seeing it as a
power-wielding organization that collects on European debt to
influence its policy.

According to Blockupy, the austerity measures proposed by the
so-called troika, consisting of the ECB, International Monetary
Fund (IMF) and the European Commission have not reduced the
national debt of the European countries. An increase in taxes and
cuts to social programs have actually worsened the situation,
deepening recession and increasing unemployment in the EU
dramatically.

This article originally appeared on: RT

‘Militants seize Golan Heights crossing’

0

Syrian forces clash with foreign-backed militants in the western town of Qusayr, Homs Province. (File photo)

Reports say the militants in Syria have taken over the Quneitra crossing between Syria and the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights.

On Thursday, the Israeli army radio quoted military officials as saying that the foreign-backed militants have seized the crossing after clashing with Syrian troops.

Reports say clashes are going on in the city of Quneitra, which is located near the crossing.

Israeli sources said there were exchanges of fire there, adding that the incident was ongoing.

The report comes after Syriaâ„¢s state television reported on Wednesday, Å“Our heroic armed forces have returned security and stability to all of the town of Qusayr.”

Many of the foreign-backed militants and members of the armed groups were killed or injured during the Syrian army operations to cleanse the western town of the terrorists.

Syrian troops backed by the forces of Lebanonâ„¢s resistance movement Hezbollah entered Qusayr from several directions on May 19 after weeks of clashes with militants.

Qusayr has been an important center and supply route for the militants.

The foreign-sponsored militancy that has gripped Syria for more than two years has so far resulted in the killings of many people, including large numbers of Syrian soldiers and security personnel.

IA/HSN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV