+- +-

+-User

Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
 
 
 
Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Members
Total Members: 43
Latest: Heredia05
New This Month: 1
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Stats
Total Posts: 10243
Total Topics: 244
Most Online Today: 1
Most Online Ever: 52
(November 29, 2017, 04:04:44 am)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 1
Total: 1

Post reply

Warning - while you were reading 4 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post.
Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

Attach:
Help (Clear Attachment)
(more attachments)
Allowed file types: doc, gif, jpg, jpeg, mpg, pdf, png, txt, zip, rar, csv, xls, xlsx, docx, xlsm, psd, cpp
Restrictions: 4 per post, maximum total size 1024KB, maximum individual size 512KB
Verification:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 22, 2018, 07:07:32 pm »

Is Putin’s Rule a Dictatorship? – RAI with A. Buzgalin (8/12)

July 22, 2018

On Reality Asserts Itself, Prof. Alexandr Buzgalin says while Putin heads a powerful state, this is not a system of one man rule; more than 100 billionaires and a stratum of top bureaucrats have political power – with host Paul Jay


Story Transcript

PAUL JAY: Welcome to the Real News Network, welcome to Reality Asserts Itself, I’m Paul Jay. As you can see, we’re continuing our discussion in a new studio, but we’re still in New York City with Dr. Alexander Buzgalin.

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Thank you.

PAUL JAY: Professor Buzgalin teaches political economy and is director of the Center for Modern Marxist Studies at Moscow State University. So, we’re going to pick up where we left off. You go on vacation for a lovely little August and you get away from it all, and you come back, you’re on the central committee, youngest member, I guess, maybe in history, I don’t know, of the communist party. You’re amongst the most powerful people in the county. And certainly, for decades and decades, the Soviet State looked like it would never go anywhere. And you come back from vacation and there’s no more Soviet Union.

The Communist Party, I think, is probably illegalized at this point. Yeltsin is the president, and so that’s kind of where we left off the story. We went a little bit further, we talked about the story of the next decade and the grab for cash, the emergence of the oligarchs and the many who came from the party itself and from the state bureaucracy. And we get to the end of the ‘90s with a fairly established class of now billionaires or becoming billionaires, and a very chaotic state. And Putin becomes the new leader, and that’s sort of where we left off.

The sort of common narrative of this period after Putin becomes leader is that this is the story of the rise of a one- man dictatorship. And this is what the story of this whole next period of the Russian state is. What do you make of that?

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: First of all, we do not have, and we didn’t have from the very beginning, dictatorship of Putin. In the beginning of his epoch, in the beginning of twenty-first century in our country, we had another style of life. It was continuation of the power of oligarchs with top officials. It was partnership and friendship with the West in the beginning, by the way. Partnership with NATO, partnership with the United States, even later, Putin was main advocate for joining to WTO. In Russia, we had very big opposition.

PAUL JAY: World Trade Organization.

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Yeah, World Trade Organization. Majority of Russian, even business people- not majority as far as money was concerned, but in terms of businessmen. Is concerned. So, majority of even business people we against joining to WTO, to World Trade Organization.

PAUL JAY: So, Putin advocated more of an integration with the Western capitalism.

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Yeah, Putin advocated, he became- I would say, in the modern sense of this word. Only after crisis, 2007, 2009- before, it was only some elements, some trends, maybe. And about democracy and dictatorship. In that period, we had growth of statism, but mainly in ideology, growth of Russian conservatism, but mainly in ideology, and it was not so strong. It was domination of liberal ideas before crisis, world crisis, 2007-2010. That was the trend. And it was, I want to remind, period when we had enormously high prices on oil and gas. It was up to one hundred fifty dollars per gallon. And Russia had an enormous amount of dollars for really nothing. And it came, it led to the enormous enrichment of oligarchs, but also some resources came to workers in budget sector, education, healthcare, to bureaucracy. It was enormous growth of bureaucracy and a little bit for ordinary workers and peasants.

PAUL JAY: And we talked earlier, in the previous segment, about even most of the oligarchs, as in medieval times, realized there needed to be a king because the competition between the oligarchs would threaten the systems of the oligarchs, and they needed a state to play that kind of role. In terms of Putin and the role of that state, there’s a perception, again, in the West, that it kind of gets used in a way that enhances Putin’s power in a sense that he can favor these oligarchs, and disfavor those, and a sense the state becomes more important than the oligarchs.

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: It’s true and not true. If any oligarch, and billionaire- and in Russia, we have hundreds, more than one hundred owners of more than one billion dollars.

PAUL JAY: More than one hundred billionaires.

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Yeah, and the country is not so rich as the United States or China, it’s ten times, maybe, not less than ten times- many times less than the United States or China. So, if any from these oligarchs will decide to attack rules of the game or personally, president and his team, he will be in prison or he must immigrate, and so on. But that doesn’t mean state became more important than class of oligarchs and top bureaucrats. First of all, it is not even class, it is strata inside class of bourgeoisie. We have very diversified class of bourgeoisie, very different types of bourgeoisie. And inside ruling strata, new nomenklatura is name which Voslenski used for Soviet bureaucrats. And now it’s very similar. A few thousand people with families, kids and so on, who are real rulers who concentrate economic and political power.

PAUL JAY: Because they control ministries, regulation-

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Yeah, executive power. They control ruling party, administration of president, and they control main part of wealth of Russia. Seventy percent of Russian wealth is concentrated in the hands of less than one percent of population.

PAUL JAY: We know that number here.

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: And key resources in the hands of a few families, one hundred, two hundred families. So, the problem is that they have common interests, but they have clans, like in, I don’t know, court of Louis XIV or XV in France, different clans of aristocracy fighting between themselves. But generally speaking, it is one power, one strata of aristocrats who has power. The same in Russia. We have different clans, regional clans, clans that have connected with military-industrial complex, with oil and gas, with small difference between state gas and oil corporations and private gas and oil corporations. But difference is small because top managers of state corporation are also oligarchs. And the private owners of private corporations are in the control of bureaucracy.

So, in Russia, state and private means not too much. It’s not very big difference, unfortunately. And they have common interests. And these common interests led to stagnation of the economy because the development can be realized only if big money from this capital, oligarchic capital, bureaucratic capital, will be used for investments in high-tech technologies. And it will be redistribution of power, not simply of money, but redistribution of power. It will be new, active class. Class of engineers, creators, business people, but business, productive business people, not speculators and those who take land from the oil. And they will lose their power. So, if we have not simply growth, but development, new quality of development, this strata will lose their power.

That’s why for them, it’s not profitable to change economic, social, tendrils of life, of rules of the game, better to say. And for other population, this is stagnation, and stagnation on the low level with very big social differentiation. During last decade, we had more or less the same. After crisis, 2007-2010, it was ten percent decline of production. Then, we had small growth after five years, more or less the same level as 2007, then minus two percent plus one percent, zero plus two percent, near zero. And then finally, after twenty- I will finish on this. After twenty-five years of transformation from so-called inefficient economy of Soviet Russia inside Soviet Union, we have only plus fifteen percent, twenty-five years and only plus fifteen percent.

PAUL JAY: In productivity.

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: In production, yeah, gross national product. Less than one percent per year during twenty-five years, all zig zags. And the quality is another.

PAUL JAY: Well, that’s kind of a dramatic number because, given computerization and such, productivity and gross national product in the West has gone far, far higher than that.

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: And if you compare with China, which had similar problems, but China had minimum seven percent per year, and an average eight point five.

PAUL JAY: So, what does this mean in terms of the life of working people and what their expectations were? Remember, in an earlier segment you were saying everyone thought, “Get rid of the Communist Party and socialism,” and everyone was going to have “capitalism without capitalists,” the utopia.

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Utopia, unfortunately. So, first of all, as I said, during first years of so-called market reforms, shock without therapy, we had terrible decline of production, incomes, and social differentiation. We received real poverty. And before, it was impossible. And poverty for not only lazy people, liberal dogma, but intelligentsia became extremely poor, workers became extremely poor. After this, high prices on oil, life became a little better. But what we have now- let’s move to modern situation. As I said, twenty million people from one hundred fifty, little less, in Russia, are living under the poverty level. And poverty level is ten thousand rubles. Ten thousand rubles is one hundred-

PAUL JAY: Say that again?

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Ten thousand rubles is poverty level.

PAUL JAY: And how many people below that?

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: We have twenty million people who has less than ten thousand rubles.

PAUL JAY: At this time?

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: At this time. And this is continuation. Before, it was sometimes little less, sometimes little worse, but more or less the same. What is ten thousand rubles? It is one hundred sixty dollars per month. Of course, purchasing power of dollar is high, but if you want to buy normal equipment, you will pay even more than in the United States. If you want to buy bread, it will be a little less. So, that’s why it is poverty. Wage of majority of Russians, working Russians, is less than thirty thousand rubles per month. This is five hundred dollars. This is not poverty, but still, country is rich with oil.

PAUL JAY: The majority of people earning that wage.

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Fifty percent has less than five hundred dollars per month. And in the same time, we have one of the best, second or so place as far number of billionaires is concerned. Billions, not of rubles, but billions of dollars. And they are buying football teams, palaces, two hundred thirty meters long yachts, and so on. It is a country with such situation.

PAUL JAY: So, Putin is the face of this system, whether he has as much power as people think he has or not, he’s powerful and the state is powerful. But he’s the face of this system. Why, if in fact he’s running at seventy percent or so popularity, if that’s true, why?

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: This is big question.

PAUL JAY: So, we’ll talk about why Putin seems to remain so popular in spite of tremendous inequality of the society. So, please join us for the continuation of Reality Asserts Itself with Professor Buzgalin on The Real News Network.

https://therealnews.com/stories/is-putins-rule-a-dictatorship-rai-with-a-buzgalin-8-12
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 16, 2018, 08:07:21 pm »

Growing Up in the USSR – RAI with A. Buzgalin (1/12)

Success and Mutation in the Soviet Union – RAI with A. Buzgalin (2/12)

Communism and Consumerism – RAI with A. Buzgalin (3/12)

Turning Power into Money, the End of the Soviet Union – RAI with A. Buzgalin (4/12)


“I Returned from Vacation to Find the Soviet Union had Collapsed” – RAI with A. Buzgalin (5/12)

July 16, 2018

On Reality Asserts Itself, Prof. Alexander Buzgalin says that he returned from a vacation in the countryside to find Gorbachev was arrested, Yeltsin was leader and the Soviet Union was no more – with host Paul Jay


Aleksandr Buzgalin is a Professor of Political Economy at Moscow State University. He is also editor of the independent democratic left magazine Alternatives, and is a coordinator of the Russian social movement Alternatives, author of more then 20 books and hundreds of articles, translated into English, German and many other languages.

Story Transcript

PAUL JAY: Welcome back to Reality Asserts Itself on The Real News Network. I’m Paul Jay, and we’re continuing our discussion with Professor Alexander Buzgalin. Thanks for joining us again.

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: I’m glad to be here and to talk with you.

PAUL JAY: I should say, we’re in New York City, this is not our normal studio. One more time, Professor Buzgalin teaches political economy and is Director of the Center for Modern Marxist Studies at Moscow State University. So, we got ourselves up to- you’re now on the Central Committee in your early thirties-

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: And the Soviet Union is nearly collapsed.

PAUL JAY: And they’re blaming you for it. Well, they certainly did blame Gorbachev for it, and we’re talking about, you were saying that there’s a rise within the party and within the party leadership of people who want to get rich, who had kind of given up on the socialist ideals. I guess they either decided it isn’t working or didn’t matter because they want to get rich. And while the internal factors may have been the most important, the Americans are very active in all this. Their dream is to bring down the Soviet Union. Talk about that period, and you have a very unique viewpoint, being on the Central Committee.

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: So, first of all, it was really an extremely contradictory situation, because from one hand, we had the growth of social creativity from below. We had the first attempts to build self-management in the enterprises. And the most that did it were people in big scientific production complexes. We had, in Soviet Union, like corporations, where we had research centers, production, social infrastructure, and so on. And typically, these groups, these classic corporations, had very skilled people and they had big intentions. And it was all Soviet Union council of worker’s collectives. A very interesting structure. And the last Congress, with one thousand delegates, where they participated, was very strong and important. And it’s not a well-known part of the story of the Soviet Union.

We had good interest in initiative of the young generation to build, on a cooperative basis, new houses for the life. It was very interesting initiatives in the Green Movement, which appeared from below, and so on and so forth. At the same time, from another hand, we had terrible growth of contradictions because criminal business, which existed in Soviet Union, became stronger because of the whole destruction of the institutional system. Weak institutions led to the growth of shadow economy and criminal business. A lot of former directors of state enterprises were waiting, that it will be privatization, and were trying to steal as much as possible of the resources.

PAUL JAY: This is before-

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Just before collapse of the Soviet Union.

PAUL JAY: People see it coming. What’s Gorbachev doing about this? Or does he want this to-

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Yeah, and- he was talking. And this is one of the problems. You know, there is this definition of revolutionary situation by Lenin, and he wrote very important things. Revolution came when those who are on the top cannot be rulers more, according to the old model. So, this is a crisis of the top. And we had crisis.

PAUL JAY: Not fit to rule.

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Yeah, not fit to rule. And people were trying to find another solution. And what was important, we had a lot of myths created with assistance of the West, but not by the West. One of them was a myth about market. And market, for majority of Soviet people, was associated with supermarket, with a lot of commodities. It was the strikes of the miners, a very interesting initiative from below, who wanted to change the situation. I participated in the Congress and the leader of the miner’s strike said, “We want to have capitalism, the factories will belong to the workers and not the Party and nomenklatura. We want to have capitalism, where we will have resources to buy whatever we want. We want to have capitalism, where everybody will have good apartments, and it will be no privileges of people who are rulers. We want to have capitalism where workers will decide what to do.”

PAUL JAY: They want to have capitalism without capitalists.

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Yeah, without capitalists, without unemployment, without social stratification, and so on. It was an illusion. And unfortunately, it was created by many contradictions inside Soviet Union, which we discussed before. And main contradiction was interconnected with concentration of the power in the hands of bureaucracy, and the money of social creativity of the masses, and attempts to build consumer society, conformist society. Socialism cannot be conformist, consumer society. Socialism must move in the direction of self-organization, social creativity, anti-conformism, if you want. It should be disalienation, but not conservation of alienation in consumerist form. I’m sorry for this professor’s language, but I cannot express this in any other terms. So, that’s why we had internal contradictions as main factor of self-destruction of this system. And we had chances for the changes, but here, a subjective factor could play a decisive role. 

PAUL JAY: How do you get to a point, after years of bureaucratization- but something new enters the picture, because it’s not just bureaucratized, some mutation, of socialism. Now, people want to get rich and now people within the Party leadership and sections of the enterprises, within the elite, people have said enough, now we just want to cash in. How do you get to that?

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: You already gave the answer, so I can say yes, you are right. And it was predictable. In the beginning of the Soviet Union, in writings of different people, from Mensheviks to Leon Trotsky, was made prognosis that if bureaucracy will have more and more power, and the control from below will be weak, social creativity will go down, the transformation of bureaucracy will be inevitable. They will have intention to transform themselves into the class of private owners who has both political power and economic power and no limitations, no frameworks.

Because even in bureaucratic period, in Brezhnev period of the Soviet Union, officials at the top had relatively small privileges. They had a lot of limits for their power and they had strong rules of the game. And so, the new generation who came, they wanted to have the same living standards as billionaires, as presidents and leaders of bourgeois countries. And that was main reason. Plus, as I said, decline, degradation of social creativity, led to the consumerism and conformism of majority of Soviet people. And conformism creates atmosphere where market system, capitalist system, is coming. It’s like a swamp where it’s impossible to have beautiful trees, where there will be only dirty grass and frogs.

PAUL JAY: So, talk about that period, the rise of Yeltsin and the last days of the Soviet Union.

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: So, still this is a big question mark. What happens, why we had this artificial coup d’état, what was the role of Gorbachev, who was behind? I am not a person who has secret information, so I will not give special commands.

PAUL JAY: And we’re in 1991?

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: It was August, 1991.

PAUL JAY: Where are you, what are you doing?

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: I was in the vacation, so unfortunately, I could not participate in this process. I was in the countryside, in the forest, just to relax a little bit. It was my mistake. I didn’t think that it will be so quickly-

PAUL JAY: So, most of our audience doesn’t really know this story at all.

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: So, in August, leaders of KGB and some other officials from the top said that Gorbachev is no more president of the Soviet Union. We have a special committee in emergency situations, and Gorbachev was formally arrested in his dacha in Crimea, where he was also on a rest. But then, they did nothing.

PAUL JAY: So, it’s essentially a coup.

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: It was coup, but leaders of the military coup must arrest the opposition, after all. But they did nothing. Yeltsin came to the house where there was Parliament of Russian Federation, people were walking in the streets with protests.

PAUL JAY: And who is Yeltsin, why all of a sudden, Yeltsin? What’s the power behind Yeltsin?

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Okay, so that’s another story. One year ago, he was elected as president of Russian Federation inside Soviet Union. Soviet Union had like states in the U.S., but with more powerful structure. It was republics, fifteen republics, and Russia was the biggest and in the center. And Yeltsin was elected as president of Russia. So, informally, he has not too big power, because republics inside Federation were not so powerful as central government. But when Gorbachev was arrested, Yeltsin became in Moscow a key person, according to official status. And all opposition came to Yeltsin to protect against coup. And it was both really democratic forces and pro-bourgeois, quasi-democratic forces.

PAUL JAY: To protect against a coup from whom?

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: To protect Yeltsin against those who organized the coup d’état. KGB leaders organized-

PAUL JAY: To protect Yeltsin from the KGB?

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: From the KGB, yes.

PAUL JAY: What did the KGB want?

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: KGB wanted to stop transformation led by Gorbachev to rebuild Soviet Union. It’s also important to say that in Caucasus and in Baltic states, republics in that period, was growth of nationalism and ideas to become separate states, not states in the Soviet Union. So, the idea was, “we will use military force, we will keep Soviet Union, and all Gorbachev experiments, we will stop.” They said, “we will keep freedom of speech, but with limitations,” these organizers of the coup, “we will continue some market reforms.”

PAUL JAY: And this was mostly driven out of the KGB?

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Some military leaders and a few people from- top officials from the Central Committee.

PAUL JAY: And they want to try to retain what’s left of the Soviet state.

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Yeah.

PAUL JAY: Yeltsin represents these “let’s get rich” factions inside.

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Yeah, but these guys did nothing. They didn’t arrest Yeltsin.

PAUL JAY: Why? KGB knows how to arrest people.

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Yes, but they did nothing. There are different explanations. Again, I cannot explain this phenomenon, myself. One of the explanations was that Gorbachev decided to play a role of the person who is not responsible for this, and then came to power again with the assistance of the KGB, simply to beat Yeltsin, who became leader of opposition in that period. Another explanation was that they did not have a final agreement of what has to be done, these leaders of the coup. But really, nobody knows. It’s a very strange story, very strange.

PAUL JAY: So, this famous photograph and videos of Yeltsin on the tanks, what is that, then, what goes on there?

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Yes, it was a few tanks and some soldiers in Moscow. But they did nothing. They were standing in the streets and did nothing. And the two guys who were killed-

PAUL JAY: This is outside the parliament buildings?

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Outside, yes. And two guys who were dead, officially, because tanks killed them- really nobody knows what happened in reality- but I think the tanks were going back from Moscow and they accidentally were- because it was crowded, and when they decided to move from the square, two persons were really killed. And then they were transformed into heroes.

PAUL JAY: So, the section of the KGB and army that arrested Gorbachev, they allowed Yeltsin to come to power. Why? Did they say, okay, we might as well get rich too?

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Really, I don’t have an explanation, as I said. For me, this is still a big question mark, what’s happened. No idea. Only what I can say is it’s a total crisis of the power. And the only person who was decisive and aggressive was Yeltsin.

PAUL JAY: You’re on the Central Committee. Do they have an emergency meeting, or the Party just starts to fall apart?

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: I didn’t have time to come back from this village. It’s Russia, it’s not so simple, even for a member of the Central Committee. When I was back, all was solved. And the Party also was paralyzed. It was total paralysis of legislative and executive organs. It was self-destruction of the elite.

PAUL JAY: So, you’re sitting in your cottage, on vacation- this is what, is it playing out for you on T.V.? I mean, do you know what’s going on?

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: First of all, I didn’t have any information. On T.V., it was on barely. The whole time only barely and nothing else. When I received- telephone was not working. It was a real village, and it was one telephone three kilometers from this place. So, when I found this telephone, I could not reach anybody in Moscow. So, after one day, I went to the regional center and received, more or less, information. But when I was back in Moscow, it was nothing.

PAUL JAY: Were you surprised or expecting it?

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: No, I was very surprised, of course. And I was afraid that something like that can happen, but not coup. I was afraid that it will be coup organized by republican leaders, Yeltsin and leaders of the Baltic Republics, Caucasus Republics, and so on.

PAUL JAY: And you don’t think the KGB was actually in cahoots with Yeltsin?

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: I don’t think so. I think what was real- the only hypothesis which I can propose is the following; it was informal, indirect, not final agreement with Gorbachev, and Gorbachev, it was his personal problem. He was not decisive. He could not make exact decisions, he was changing decisions very often. And he doesn’t know what has to be done. And he was a very weak leader, and for such periods, it’s necessary to have a strong leader, because personality, in the period of revolution, plays a big role, bigger than usual. In a stable system, personality is not important, or nearly not important. In the period of revolutions, strong personality and strong political organization is very important if this personality is on the top.

PAUL JAY: Well, in the next segment, we’ll pick up. You come back from vacation, and it’s not the Soviet Union, it’s Russia.

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Yeah, the Soviet Union is absent, the Communist Party is absent, and the whole situation is completely new, yes.

PAUL JAY: All right, so join us for the next segment of our interview with Professor Buzgalin on The Real News Network.

https://therealnews.com/stories/i-returned-from-vacation-to-find-the-soviet-union-had-collapsed-rai-with-a-buzgalin-5-12
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 13, 2018, 09:51:36 pm »

Congressional Progressive Caucus Challenge Party Leadership and Congress on Militarism and Foreign Policy

July 13, 2018

The little known Congressional Progressive Caucus🕊 is the largest caucus within the Democratic Party and has an important track record in calling attention to the highly interventionist and harmful foreign policy of the US, says CEPR’s Mark Weisbrot


https://therealnews.com/stories/congressional-progressive-caucus-challenge-party-leadership-and-congress-on-militarism-and-foreign-policy

Story Transcript

SHARMINI PERIES: It’s The Real News Network. I’m Sharmini Peries, coming to you from Baltimore.

As president Trump concluded his participation in a NATO summit this week, he called for a doubling of NATO members’ military spending, from a target of 2 percent of GDP by 2024, to 4 percent of GDP. In effect, Trump is proposing even greater militarization of world affairs, both at home and within NATO.There are, however, members of Congress who have recently been pushing back against the militarization and interventionism of US foreign policy. People such as Representatives Ro Khanna, Mark Pocan, Keith Ellison, Raul Grijalva, Barbara Lee, among many others. They are all members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, or CPC. This caucus is generally not that well known, but with 78 members, ( including Bernie Sanders in the Senate) it is the largest Democratic Party caucus. It was founded in 1991 and has grown steadily in size since then. It takes positions on both foreign and domestic policy that tend to be significantly to the left of the party as a whole.Joining me to discuss the foreign policy work of Congressional Progressive Caucus and its individual members is Mark Weisbrot. Mark is the co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research and is the author of the book, “Failed: What the ‘Experts’ Got Wrong About the Global Economy.” Thanks for joining us again, Mark.

MARK WEISBROT: Thanks, Sharmini, and thanks for doing this show. I think it’s a very important institution that hasn’t really gotten much attention.

SHARMINI PERIES: Thanks for that endorsement, Mark. Let’s start off by defining the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Who are they?

MARK WEISBROT: Yes. Well, it’s 70, around 76-77 members of Congress, all from the House except, as you mentioned, Bernie Sanders in the Senate. And they were formed to provide something of an alternative to a lot of the policies, both domestic and foreign policy, of some of the leadership of the Democratic Party, and turn it to the left of that.

SHARMINI PERIES: And Mark, what are the kinds of things that they are engaged in, and their past policy positions that are significant?

MARK WEISBROT: Well, they’ve taken a lot of positions on domestic issues that were always ahead, you know, on the budget, the monetary policy, the Federal Reserve and fiscal policy. What I think is most striking now, because we’re in a period where most of the foreign policy discussion is kind of retrograde, you know, even by U.S. foreign policy discussion standards, and they’ve taken consistently progressive positions on a whole variety of foreign policy issues. And I think that’s really important to see that there is this pull, because, you know, otherwise you could be really discouraged where you look. You know, you turn on the television and you look in the newspapers here, and all the debates are about various enemies around the world. And even, and you have this special period now where I think, because so much of the leadership and a significant part of the base of the Democratic Party, which would normally be taking a less-hawkish position on foreign policy, has become the more aggressive and interventionist part-.

SHARMINI PERIES: Mark, the Caucus has taken some really important positions that we’ve covered here at The Real News, like that of Yemen, and Brazil, and Syria. Give us some of those policy positions that-. You have actually worked on some of them, on the Hill.

MARK WEISBROT: Yes. Well, the issue of Yemen and the war in Yemen led by Saudi Arabia and the UAE, and supported militarily by the U.S., you know, in terms of refueling Saudi planes and selecting targets. And this is an actual participation of the United States in the war, and it’s unconstitutional. It’s against the law. You know, Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution reserves to Congress the power to decide on U.S. military intervention. It isn’t just declaring war, as you might, as some people read it. It actually, if you look at the legislative history, it really is any kind of military or paramilitary intervention, for that matter. That’s what the framers of the Constitution were describing when they put that in.

And so the Congress has that power, and it just hasn’t asserted it enough. This is the law of the land. And so this war is unauthorized and illegal under the Constitution. So what the Progressive Caucus and various members of the Progressive Caucus did in November of last year is they invoked the 1973 War Powers Resolution, which didn’t, you know, reinterpret the Constitution, but gave the Congress another way, a procedural way, of enforcing the constitutional power that they have. So it said that they could any member of Congress, when the U.S. was involved in hostilities overseas without the authorization of Congress, they could actually demand a debate and vote on that military involvement, and that the leadership of the House couldn’t block it. And so that’s what they did. And in the House there was some negotiation, but a resolution did pass. And it didn’t say that the U.S. had to withdraw, but it did recognize that the participation of the United States in this war was unauthorized.

And then they came back to the Senate in February. And it was a resolution-. By the way, these resolutions were sponsored not only by progressive members of Congress and Bernie Sanders in the Senate, but also by more conservative legislators who just believe in the Constitution, like Mike Lee of Utah in the Senate, and in the House there was Walter Jones and Thomas Massie. And so in the Senate, that vote was defeated, but they got, they got 44 votes for it. And it was the first time that the War Powers Resolution of 1973, which came out of the Vietnam War, was used to force that vote.

And I think this is very important for several reasons. First of all for this war, because this is the worst humanitarian crisis in the world. You have a million people who have gotten cholera from the destruction of water supplies in the bombing. And you had thousands of people die from that. And you have 8 million people on the brink of starvation. And so this isn’t over. And in fact, there’s negotiations going on right now with a U.N. envoy, and there’s some hope that there actually will be a settlement. And some more conservative members of Congress like Steny Hoyer and Eliot Engle, more conservative Democrats, they have even moved, and said to the Saudis in a letter recently that, you know, this is enough, and this has to stop, and you should negotiate a solution. And that’s because of this effort, because they use this power that the Congress has always had, but not used, to actually, you know, stop the, to try and stop this U.S. intervention. And they know, these other legislators know that this actually can be done. They can keep coming back with this, and they’re going to. They’re going to come back, and they can get a vote.

And the final thing I’ll say about this, because I think it’s so important, is it’s a structural change that the Progressive Caucus and people like Ro Khanna, Rep. Ro Khanna from Silicon Valley in California, that are leading this effort. Mark Polkan from the Progressive, co-chair of the Progressive Caucus. This, if they continue this, down this path, which I’m very certain they will, this will be a structural change. Because this will now, if you look at the whole history of the United States, there are very few wars where the Congress was leading the charge. It’s, you know-. So this will help prevent a lot of wars in the future as the Congress reasserts its constitutional authority. So that’s very, very big.

SHARMINI PERIES: Now, Mark, the Congressional Progressive Caucus, or CPC, as it’s known, is currently the largest Democratic Party caucus with 78 members, which includes Bernie Sanders from Senate. Now, however, only about-. This only constitutes 15 percent of all the 535 members of the House and Senate. Now, given the size, just how much impact can they have, how effective can they possibly be?

MARK WEISBROT: Well, the example I gave was very important because they’re changing the rules of the game. They’re actually, they’re just enforcing the rules of the game, and therefore changing, changing them. But also on other issues they have a voice where nobody can really push back against. And so when it gets in the news and it gets in the news in other countries-. So for example, there’s a letter circulating in Congress now from progressive members on Brazil, because of, you know, in Brazil they’ve got the leading presidential candidate, former President Lula da Silva is in jail right now. And it’s become more and more obvious that this is because, not because he committed a crime for which they did not present material evidence at his trial, but also, but really because he’s the leading candidate and he would win in October. And you know, you get very little real information about this in the news. But these kind of letters, they make the news. If the reporters ignore them here, which they don’t always, they make the news in Brazil. So they have an influence there, and it shows that there is this force that really is, is pushing for a different foreign policy.

And they’ve had similar letters, you know, for other countries, as well. A number of letters on Honduras, for example, when they, with the help of the United States and support of the United States, the Honduran government stole the election in November, and they came out with letters and statements about that. If you look at the election of AMLO in Mexico that just happened, the statement on that was very positive, and it went against the, all the punditry and the most of the media coverage by agreeing with AMLO on his foreign policy, where he wants a more peaceful and non-interventionist foreign policy in the hemisphere. In other words, they’re not going to support like they did, they’re not going to support the United States like they did in the Honduran election, where they came out in favor of recognizing their election, then the U.S. pretended to follow them, after the U.S. had already asked them, the U.S. government had already asked them to do that.

Now, those are the kind of things that they’re not going to do. And the Progressive Caucus will be supporting them while everybody, you read all the opinion leaders in the newspaper are worried, and saying bad things about AMLO, because he’s not lining up with U.S. foreign policy in the hemisphere. And I think what they can do is provide a progressive vision, but not just a vision like an intellectual or a professor can do, but a vision that they’re actively implementing. So it’s far outsized in relation to its percentage of the Congress, because this is, after all, these are positions that the vast majority of Americans would agree with and do agree with, and they’re not represented because of the hegemony of this foreign policy establishment, which includes the government and the media. And this is especially true in Latin America where you see almost no dissent at all, so it’s almost monolithic.

SHARMINI PERIES: All right, Mark. Now, to tie all of this back to my introduction, which was about Trump’s presence at NATO, and calling for more spending on the part of NATO members, just a few weeks ago the U.S. House passed the 2019 Defense Authorization Bill, allocating $717 billion to the Pentagon. What is the Congressional Progressive Caucus’ position regarding military spending, particularly given just yesterday the House actually reinstated their commitment to NATO?

MARK WEISBROT: Well, the caucus members, I mean, the people that are leading this effort, especially in the Progressive Caucus, are definitely for less military spending. Bernie Sanders has, of course, said this publicly, but also Ro Khanna and other members of the Progressive Caucus. So they’re definitely on the record on this issue, and they are also against, you know, what a lot of the military spending is used for, which is regime change. And that’s a very important position that they’ve taken, as well. Even in Venezuela, for example, where you don’t have any, very little dissent at all against the regime change effort that is currently underway led by the U.S. government. You have opposition, again, from the Progressive Caucus.

So yeah, they’re presenting a consistent view of a positive foreign policy. It’s not isolationist, but it’s against the destructive things that our foreign policy is doing around the world.

SHARMINI PERIES: All right, Mark. Great discussion. I thank you so much for joining us today.

MARK WEISBROT: Thank you.

SHARMINI PERIES: And thank you for joining us here on The Real News Network.
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 13, 2018, 09:24:59 pm »

Communism and Consumerism – RAI with A. Buzgalin (3/12)

July 13, 2018

On Reality Asserts Itself, Prof. Alexander Buzgalin says that “market fetishism”, the hunger for commodities, became a major obstacle to building socialism – with host Paul Jay


Quote
Aleksandr Buzgalin is a Professor of Political Economy at Moscow State University. He is also editor of the independent democratic left magazine Alternatives, and is a coordinator of the Russian social movement Alternatives, author of more then 20 books and hundreds of articles, translated into English, German and many other languages.

https://therealnews.com/stories/communism-and-consumerism-rai-with-a-buzgalin-3-12
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 11, 2018, 08:07:09 pm »

Growing Up in the USSR – RAI with A. Buzgalin (1/12)

July 11, 2018

Prof. Alexander Buzgalin joins Paul Jay on Reality Asserts Itself; born two years after the death of Stalin, he talks about growing up in the Soviet Union


Related Bios

Aleksandr Buzgalin

Aleksandr Buzgalin is a Professor of Political Economy at Moscow State University. He is also editor of the independent democratic left magazine Alternatives, and is a coordinator of the Russian social movement Alternatives, author of more then 20 books and hundreds of articles, translated into English, German and many other languages.

https://therealnews.com/stories/growing-up-in-the-ussr-rai-with-a-buzgalin-1-12
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 18, 2018, 09:12:14 pm »

Far-Right 🦀 Wins Presidency in Colombia: ‘A Frightening Result’ 😨

June 18, 2018

Ivan Duque, who is the candidate of former president Alvaro Uribe, won a solid victory for Colombia’s presidency and will probably take Colombia back towards civil war and internal repression, with the help of the US and other conservative governments, argues Manuel Rozental, of PueblosEnCamino.org

Quote
Manuel Rozental

Emmanuel Rozental is a Colombian activist, physician, and practicing surgeon with more than 40 years’ involvement in grassroots political organizing with youth, indigenous peoples, and urban and rural movements. He has been exiled several times to Canada for political activities. Academic in social and political sciences, strategist with social movements throughout the Americas and beyond.



SNIPPET from video interview:

Quote
So our fear is now that Colombia is the spearhead of the U.S. policy for this continent. And the U.S. policy for this continent in economic terms is this: war actually is not a means to an end. The resources and territories that are needed are not only a means to an end. War is the end in itself.

The Middle Eastern wars have activated the economy and have improved the economy in the U.S. [Inaudible] that Colombia’s role is one of the Israel of Latin America. And what comes here is a model and a new phase, neoliberalism is left behind.

The new phase such as Colombia and Mexico for capital from the U.S., and pushed by, promoted by U.S. corporations and the Pentagon, is actually a, let’s call it a mafia-type capitalism which is, on the one hand, drug trafficking and drug mafias together with governments and corporations, and launching all types of wars constantly.

I am not trying to generate fear. I’m just showing the type of movements we’re seeing developing here.

https://therealnews.com/stories/far-right-wins-presidency-in-colombia-a-frightening-result
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 18, 2018, 07:31:38 pm »

I just took this quiz and did pretty well with it. This quiz is valuable because is shows how little the average American actually knows about why these wars happen and who gets killed in them. What I got right has a "✔" and what I got wrong has a red asterisk *.  The correct answer(s) are in bold.

Quiz: Beyond War 🕊

What tends to be present where war is? (Check all that apply.)

a) resource scarcity

b) human rights violations in need of response

c) raw fossil fuels

d) Islam  * (I picked this one too and should not have  :-[)

See documentation of c here.

See documentation of not a here.

B and D are non-plausible propaganda.

 

Nations are more likely to wage war if . . . (Check all that apply.) [THIS QUESTION NOT USED IN FACEBOOK VERSION DUE TO HAVING MULTIPLE ANSWERS]

a) they have militaries * (I didn't pick this one  :-[)


b) they spend more than other nations on their militaries ✔

c) their people accept that war is a legitimate tool of public policy


d) they’re great

See documentation of c here.

See evidence for a and b here.

 

The United States sells weapons to this percentage of the world’s dictatorships.

a) 0%

b) 12%

c) 52%

d) 73%

See documentation of d here.

 

The majority of those killed in modern wars are . . .

a) members of a military

b) terrorists

c) evil demons

d) civilians

It’s not even close. Some examples are here.

 

The majority of those killed with missiles from drones have been . . .

a) criminals

b) terrorists

c) suspect profiled individuals

d) unidentified

See documentation of d here.

 

What percentage of suicide terrorist attacks are aimed at getting a military to cease occupying a foreign country?

a) 4%

b) 27%

c) 39%

d) 95%

See documentation of d here.

 

What percentage of military bases on foreign soil are U.S. military bases?

a) 49%

b) 68%

c) 81%

d) 96%

See documentation of d here.

 

What percentage of global military spending could end starvation globally?

a) 1.5%

b) 3% *

c) 18%

d) 62%

See documentation of a here.

 

What percentage of the top 4 weapons dealers in the world are permanent members of the United Nations Security Council?

a) 0%

b) 25%

c) 50%

d) 100%

They are the United States, Russia, China, France. The U.K. does not always clearly hold fifth place, though it is always in the top 6 or 7. See documentation of d here.

 

People have signed World BEYOND War’s pledge to help end all war in how many countries?

a) 6

b) 44

c) 107

d) 158

https://worldbeyondwar.org/quiz/
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 18, 2018, 06:50:58 pm »

STUDY WAR NO MORE 🕊

A Concerned Citizens Study & Action Guide for "A Global Security System: An Alternative to War"

(Discussion 7) Transition: From an Offensive to Defensive Posture


Get your copy!  💐

A Global Security System: an Alternative to War

The 2017 edition of A Global Security System: An Alternative to War (AGSS) is now available.

AGSS, World Beyond War’s effort to describe an alternative security system, is the primary resource for STUDY WAR NO MORE.

AGSS describes the “hardware” of creating a peace system, and the “software” — the values and concepts — necessary to operate a peace system and the means to spread these globally.

Read more and view more great videos:


http://globalsecurity.worldbeyondwar.org/discussion-7-transition-from-an-offensive-to-defensive-posture/
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 17, 2018, 09:53:31 pm »

Truthdig

JUN 10, 2018TD ORIGINALS

Scapegoating Iran 😠

By Chris Hedges

SNIPPET:

NEW YORK—Seventeen years of war in the Middle East and what do we have to show for it? Iraq after our 2003 invasion and occupation is no longer a unified country. Its once modern infrastructure is largely destroyed, and the nation has fractured into warring enclaves. We have lost the war in Afghanistan. The Taliban is resurgent and has a presence in over 70 percent of the country. Libya is a failed state. Yemen after three years of relentless airstrikes and a blockade is enduring one of the world’s worst humanitarian disasters. The 500 “moderate” rebels we funded and armed in Syria at a cost of $500 million are in retreat after instigating a lawless reign of terror. The military adventurism has cost a staggering $5.6 trillion as our infrastructure crumbles, austerity guts basic services and half the population of the United States lives at or near poverty levels. The endless wars in the Middle East are the biggest strategic blunder in American history and herald the death of the empire.

Someone has to be blamed for debacles that have resulted in hundreds of thousands of dead, including at least 200,000 civilians, and millions driven from their homes. Someone has to be blamed for the proliferation of radical jihadist groups throughout the Middle East, the continued worldwide terrorist attacks, the wholesale destruction of cities and towns under relentless airstrikes and the abject failure of U.S. and U.S.-backed forces to stanch the insurgencies. You can be sure it won’t be the generals, the politicians such as George W. Bush, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, the rabid neocons such as Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz and John Bolton who sold us the wars, the Central Intelligence Agency, the arms contractors who profit from perpetual war or the celebrity pundits on the airwaves and in newspapers who serve as cheerleaders for the mayhem.

“The failed policies, or lack of policies, of the United States, which violate international law, have left the Middle East in total chaos,” the Iranian ambassador to the United Nations, Gholamali Khoshroo, told me when we met in New York City. “The United States, to cover up these aggressive, reckless and costly policies, blames Iran. Iran is blamed for their failures in Yemen, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and Lebanon.”

Full truth filled article:

https://www.truthdig.com/articles/scapegoating-iran/
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 13, 2018, 05:47:22 pm »

Trump Halts War Games, Floats Troop Pullout in Korea

June 13, 2018   

At the Singapore summit, President Trump announced a halt to U.S. war games on the Korean peninsula and said he wants to withdraw American troops. But if he does, he’ll face stiff resistance from Congress and Pentagon, warns author James Dorsey


https://therealnews.com/stories/trump-halts-war-games-floats-troop-pullout-in-korea

Can North Korea Believe Trump’s Promises?

June 12, 2018   

The United States has a history of not keeping its word. U.S. just withdrew from the Iran agreement, so why would the North Koreans believe the U.S. asks Tom Collina of the Ploughshares Fund


https://therealnews.com/stories/after-threatening-war-on-north-korea-can-trump-make-peace-2
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 09, 2018, 08:40:59 pm »

Photo taken by Syrian Christian soldier after the liberation of Ghouta

A SYRIAN CHRISTIAN REVEALS WHAT IS REALLY HAPPENING IN SYRIA

Posted in Miscellaneous and tagged Al Nusra, Al Qaida, Bashar al-Assad, Daesh, ISIS, Israel, Middle East, moderate rebels, Syria, Syrian Christians, U.S. foreign policy, White Helmets on March 30, 2018.

By James Perloff 

SNIPPET:

“H” was born in Damascus, and legally immigrated to the United States from Syria more than 20 years ago, long before the current war began. She became a U.S. citizen and earned a doctor’s degree from an American university. She is completely fluent in both English and Arabic. She recently returned from a trip back to Syria, where she has many family members and friends who keep her apprised of the situation there. She is also one of the kindest and most devoted Christians I have ever met. I am keeping H’s name confidential, as I do not wish this interview to in any way jeopardize her family’s safety in Syria, or the status of her professional work in the U.S.

I originally anticipated that our discussion would be two-part; first I would give her a short primer on the back story of American politics. When we sat down, I told H that I have been a journalist since 1985. I began to explain that America is run by an oligarchy that conceals itself behind a façade of two-party democracy, that Presidential candidates have long been pre-selected, that Americans have been repeatedly deceived into wars, and that our press is controlled by the same establishment that controls the politicians. H was smiling, and I could swiftly tell that nothing I said was news to her. And so it was affirmed that what famed commentator “Syrian Girl” (whose Facebook and YouTube accounts have been censored) said is true: Syrians are well informed about the New World Order. Indeed, Syrians know more about the realities of American geopolitics than most Americans do. So, after about four minutes, I laughed, and told H that my “lecture” was over. I now asked her to tell me the truth about Syria. My questions are in normal font, her replies in bold. For this post, I have inserted some pictures and video that correlate with her comments.

Full eye opening interview with more pictures and video: 👀

https://jamesperloff.com/2018/03/30/a-syrian-christian-reveals-what-is-really-happening-in-syria/
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 04, 2018, 02:58:53 pm »

Agelbert and Palloy, listed alphabetically and not in order of importance  :laugh: ;D ::)

Would any or both of you gents care to comment on the Russian boasting of it's new weapons prowess a short while back.

It seemed like a bold threatening boast that was found believable by me of it's new superiority.

My reason for asking is the subsequent non reporting and totally ignoring of the boast both by the media and the rhetoric and threats from both parties namely Russia and The US as if nothing had even happened or mentioned, and the status quo seems to have remained the same.

It seemed, at least to me, as a massive restart of the nuclear arms race as well as making the new China,Russia alliance a much more potent military force, yet there is nary a word of it mentioned.   

You two gents seem to have an abundance of interest in these matter, Palloy from the political war wary area and AG from his recent revelation of his work in this area and aircraft expertise.

Did I read it wrong, did not Putin state he had the goods we could not intercept and issue a warning??
                                                                                              Thanks, GO
 

It is FAR crazier than you can imagine. The US and Russia are now in a new NUCLEAR arms race  . Plutonium pits, those deadly little hollow balls of Plutonium that get injected with Tritium nano-seconds before a hydrogen bomb goes off, which we ALREADY have thhousands of sitting in warehouses in TEXAS, are now all the NEW THING to FUND in the Trump adminsitration. The new ones are a nuclear welfare queen operation to save Senator Graham's arse since the Mox making plant he championed has gone so far over budget that it had to be cancelled.

This new cold war is nuts. These are not just weapons of mass destruciton; they are weapons of GLOBAL destruction.

Hear all about it at Radio Echoshock:

Two Dangerous Myths Exposed
Posted on May 23, 2018, by Radio Ecoshock 📢

https://www.ecoshock.org/2018/05/two-dangerous-myths-exposed.html

Did you know about Putin's FABULOUSLY RICH daughters? Perhaps Palloy will do a bit of research and tell us all about them.  ;) Between the Putins and Trumps, the corruption competition is fierce.   

They may have to blow up the planet to see who is the biggest "apex Predator" among these empathy deficit disordered dynastic bunches.

Have a nice nuclear day.


 
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 30, 2018, 01:05:47 pm »


Agelbert NOTE: More of the above brinkmanship stupidity from the Trump 🦀 wrecking crew.

A poster named Jtrillian tells it like it is.


Quote
Jtrillian Wed, 05/30/2018 - 11:13 Permalink
So much for the POTSDAM DECLARATION.

Those Islands are China's.  They belonged to China prior to Japan taking them in WWII.  They were returned to China in the terms dictated in the above mentioned agreement as part of Japans unconditional surrender.

But hey, when has any agreement that we signed ever stopped us from making war?

China has a valid claim to the islands.  The US government is trying to provoke the sleeping dragon into a war.  Be careful what you wish for... you just might get it.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potsdam_Declaration

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spratly_Islands




Quote
“We are going out of our way to cooperate with Pacific nations, that’s the way we do business in the world,” Mattis 🦀 told reporters. “But we are also going to confront what we believe is out of step with international law, out of step with international tribunals that have spoken on the issue.”


The above is from the article linked below:

Wed, 05/30/2018 Mattis: US Will Confront China With "Steady Drumbeat" Of American Ships Over Weaponized Islands

Agelbert analysis: Friends, to the too clever by a half Trump wrecking crew, this is not about war.    That's right. sports fans.

THIS is about the silly posturing blustering bravado Trump's ghost writer talked about in the "Art of the Deal". It is no accident that Mattis 🦍 is making all these noises just as the US trade team is scheduled to arrive in China.

The Chinese, who are experts in this sort of thing, are probably laughing all over themselves by this crude and thoroughly pedestrian attempt to get China to swallow some US tariffs without retaliating big time. Trump does absolutely everything he can to insult both the North Koreans and the Chinese so he can get them into the "negotiating position" Trump wants.

Trump totally missed the memo on Face Saving in these cultures. The only thing Trump has accomplished is to strengthen their resolve to RETALIATE economically BECAUSE they have LOST FACE! Trump thinks he has "softened them up" with threats before he turns on the charm (📢 THAT DOES NOT WORK WITH THE CHINESE or the North Koreans!).

Trump is cornered by China on trade. THAT is what this is REALLY all about. The US, due to its trading account imbalance, NEEDS Chinese products more than they need ours. China can EASILY destroy what is left of our asset stripped and impoverished economy while maintaining a market for its products in other countries.

Sure, Turmp knows that. But the only thing Trump understands is winning by intimidation. That DOES NOT WORK with China (or anyone with half a brain when dealing with a country with a reputation for ignoring/breaking treaties like the USA).

China inderstands the USA better than the USA does. The USA is ALL ABOUT MONEY. So, expect China to REALLY put the tariff heat on our exports now (this will negatively impact our economy FAR AND WIDE, not just the grain exports).

This will hit the banksters that run the USA in the wallet, where their god is.

This will severly impact tthe stock market.

This will bring down the Trump wrecking crew.


The problem is that the Trump 🦀 wrecking crew😈🦕👹🦖🦍  is so STUCK on their "(F)Art of the Deal" ideology, that they might just start a shooting war 💣 if they see that their too clever by a half FArt of the Deal intimidation maneuvers resulted in the following:

1) they FAILED to make China back down

2) The USA becoming the economic and military laughing stock of the world

3) Political GOP disaster in the midterms due to a cratering market and economy.


Read the following story between the lines. Please consider what I have written in regard to the Chinese modus operandi. If you work for the Trump wrecking crew, please get your "Art of the Deal" mafia head out of your ass and stop this insane brinkmanship before you end up wishing you had never been born.

War Erupts Between Trump's🦀
Two Top Trade Advisors 😈 👹  Over China

by Tyler Durden

Wed, 05/30/2018 - 10:14

Commenting on the latest, surprise escalation in the US-China trade ceasefire war, in which Trump unexpectedly announced 25% tariffs on up to $50BN in Chinese imports, prompting a fresh round of outrage and confusion in Beijing which was confident it was done with Trump's "flip-flopping", we observed that "the latest move by Trump signals the more hawkish wing of Trump’s trade team is trying to amplify its hard line, after Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said this month that any talk of a trade war was suspended for now."

“Mnuchin’s ‘trade war on hold’ comments look to have been repudiated,” said Derek Scissors, a China analyst at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington. “It may be the administration has shifted somewhat to appease the Congress on the lifting of the ZTE sanctions.”

Which, we concluded, begs the question:

is China trade hawk dragon Peter Navarro back in Trump's good graces, and if so, is the countdown to Mnuchin's resignation officially on?

Then just moments later, none other than Peter Navarro himself confirmed that there may be another major battle behind the scenes, when in a rare public rebuke of Steven Mnuchin, Navarro - who the media recently relegated to D-grade advisor status when he was excluded from China talks after reportedly exploding at Mnuchin and Wilbur Ross two weeks ago - called Mnuchin's claim that the trade war with China was "on hold" an "unfortunate sound bite" and admitting that there’s a dispute that needs to be resolved.

“What we’re having with China is a trade dispute, plain and simple,” Navarro said in an interview broadcast Wednesday with National Public Radio. “We lost the trade war long ago" with deals such as Nafta and China’s entry into the World Trade Organization, he said.

"That was an unfortunate sound bite," says WH adviser Peter Navarro of Steven Mnuchin saying a trade war with China is "on hold." It's on hold no longer, though Navarro calls it a "trade dispute." More in this thread.https://t.co/m7oPSJWcTA @MorningEdition @npr

— Steve Inskeep (@NPRinskeep) May 30, 2018
Navarro also said that "we can stop them from putting our high tech companies out of business" and "buying up our crown jewels of technology.... Every time we innovate something new, China comes in and buys it or steals it."

Earlier this month, Mnuchin shocked markets and sent stocks surging after he said in a weekend televised interview that the prospect of a trade war with China was "on hold." It turns out, Mnuchin was merely saying whatever someone had told him to say.

The latest controversial remark from Navarro, who refuses to go gentle into that good night, came just days before U.S.  Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross is scheduled to meet with his counterparts in Beijing to discuss ways to reduce the U.S.’s trade deficit with China, and - as noted earlier - follows Trump's surprise announcement that the U.S. is moving ahead with plans to impose tariffs on $50 billion of Chinese imports and curb investment in sensitive technology.

The renewed tariff threats could stop the planned talks and jeopardize a deal, the WSJ reported on Wednesday, citing sources in both countries. A team of U.S. officials was scheduled to arrive in Beijing on Wednesday. Asked about potential Chinese retaliation, especially on American farm goods, Navarro said “we’re ready for anything.”

As for the implications of this growing trade advisor war in Trump's inner circle, two weeks ago Bill Blain wrote that "Mnuchin’s Name Is Now High On The Trump Deadpool List" and come to think of it, it has been a while since Trump fired anyone...

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-05-30/war-erupts-between-trumps-two-top-trade-advisors



Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 25, 2018, 08:43:03 pm »

Trump-Jong Un Meeting Cancelled, But Can the Talks Survive?

 



May 24, 2018

Denuclearization, Libyan model, military exercises, and criticism in South Korea, we discuss it all with columnist James Dorsey, in Singapore


https://therealnews.com/stories/trump-jong-un-meeting-cancelled-but-can-the-talks-survive
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 25, 2018, 02:38:09 pm »

Agelbert NOTE: Russia sends Trump a message (while Trump plays finger pointing games in the US).



Russian Defence Ministry

Watch: Russian Nuclear Submarine Rapid-Fires Four Ballistic Missiles

May 23, 2018 by gCaptain


The Russian Defense Ministry has released video of nuclear-powered Borei-class submarine test firing a barrage of four Bulava missiles from below the surface.

The test was conducted on Tuesday from a submerged location in a designated area of the White Sea, located off the northwest coast of Russia. The Ministry said the missiles were launched against targets at the Kura shooting range on the Kamchatka Peninsula.

The test, which was conducted using the nuclear submarine Yuri Dolgorukiy, marked the first-ever salvo fire from this type of submarine, the Ministry said.



The footage published on Wednesday shows some pre-launch activities on board the submarine before it is shown firing four missiles in quick succession.

“The test confirmed combat readiness of the Project-955 Borei SSBN and the Bulava missile system,” the Defence Ministry stated.

The full-length version of the test is below:




http://gcaptain.com/watch-russian-nuclear-submarine-rapid-fires-four-ballistic-missiles/


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 22, 2018, 05:38:09 pm »

What the Pentagon Papers were really all about

ASSASSINATIONS, TORTURE, DRUG DEALING, MONEY LAUNDERING – BY THE CIA

DANIEL SHEEHAN EXPLAINS

You’ve heard about the Pentagon Papers and they were a big deal. But what were the Pentagon Papers really all about?

Assassinations, torture, drug dealing, money laundering – by the CIA.

You never heard that part, did you?

Here’s the story:

While Eisenhower played golf (and recovered from a heart attack), the fledgling CIA grew fangs.

Maybe it was his exposure to the mass slaughter of WW II, but whatever the reason Eisenhower was a big fan of covert – and illegal – operations.

The CIA succeeded in using illegal, covert operations to remove the secular and popularly-elected Mossadegeh from power in Iran in 1953 and did the same thing in Guatemala in 1954.

In 1954, something called NSC 5412 was written to set up to give the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State and the President oversight over this secret, un-elected new branch of government.

The so called “Pentagon Papers” were the first public look into the operations of the 5412 committee.

But there’s more to the story than that.

Under the conniving of Allen Dulles, the 5412 committee soon calcified into a weak review board and the real action of the CIA was carried out “off the books” and away from the oversight of the 5412 committee.

That’s how the Vietnam war really started. It had little to do with the Pentagon at all.

Confused yet?

Good.

Now to go deeper down the rabbit hole…

Who exactly was Daniel Ellsberg?

For starters, he was a war hawk.

Then after proving his bona fides as a Marine Lieutenant he was loaned by the Pentagon to the CIA’s proto-Phoenix Program where he engaged in the “pacification” of the Vietnamese people under the direction of none other than CIA officer/Air Force General and overall maniac Edward Landsdale.

And that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

Long story short: The Pentagon Papers were released by a CIA operative who managed to keep the attention OFF the CIA and on the Pentagon.

There is no video on this, but there is this excellent article by Douglas Valentine: Will the real Daniel Ellsberg please stand up.

***

MARCH 8, 2003

Will the Real Daniel Ellsberg  Please Stand Up!

by DOUGLAS VALENTINE
 
Political activist Daniel Ellsberg became an icon in 1971 after he leaked The Pentagon Papers. This “act of conscience” helped turn public opinion against the Vietnam War, and contributed to the demise of President Richard Nixon, whose felonious minions, the infamous Plumbers, sent CIA officer E. Howard Hunt, and former FBI agent (and self-professed rat-eater) G. Gordon Liddy, to burglarize confidential files from Ellsberg’s psychiatrist’s office. Hunt and Liddy thought they could trump the anti-War movement by showing that Ellsberg was a mentally deranged LSD-abuser, but their slap-happy plan backfired, and instead opened up the Pandora’s box of the CIA inspired dirty tricks the Republican Party relied upon (and still uses today) to wage political warfare.

Starting on March 9th, the Pentagon Papers story will be broadcast as a made-for-TV movie on the popular F/X network. Based partially on Ellsberg’s autobiography, the movie will star quirky James Spader as Ellsberg, and will feature Hayley Lochner as “the wife,” Jonas Chernick as CIA connected New York Times reporter Neil Sheehan, and Paul Giamatti as Anthony Russo, the man who went to prison on Ellsberg’s behalf.

Be forewarned: nowhere in this revisionist history will be audience be presented with the cast of Corsican drug smugglers and CIA agents that shaped Ellsberg’s sensibilities and sent him on his path to New Left notoriety. But as the reader shall see in this article, somewhere between the official Pentagon Papers story, and the CIA’s involvement in international drug trafficking, is a disturbing clash of facts from which Ellsberg will not emerge with his icon status intact.

Ellsberg And the Quiet American

The first thing the reader needs to know is that Ellsberg was not always a pacifist “dove” intent on ending the Vietnam War. At first he was an aggressive “hawk.” His militant approach to the Cold War ? he was all for nuking the Soviet Union ? was shaped during a tour of duty as a Marine lieutenant, and precisely because of his hard-line attitude, and his ability to articulate it, he was offered a job as a Defense Department analyst.

Then in 1965 he was assigned as a Pentagon observer to the CIA’s Revolutionary Development (RD) Program in South Vietnam. Here Ellsberg came under the influence of his mentor, CIA officer cum Air Force General Edward Lansdale. The mass murderer Graham Greene used as the model for Alden Pyle in “The Quiet American,” Lansdale was the architect of the CIA’s anti-terror strategy for winning the Vietnam War. When not engaged in typical RD Program “Civil Affairs” activities, such as helping the local Vietnamese build perimeter defenses around their villages, Ellsberg and his fellow RD advisors, under the tutelage of Lansdale, dressed in black pajamas and reportedly slipped into enemy areas at midnight to “snatch and snuff” the local Viet Cong cadre, sometimes making it appear as if the VC themselves had done the dirty deed, in what Lansdale euphemistically called “black propaganda” activities.

Functioning as a gruesome “shadow warrior” was not Ellsberg’s only claim to fame in South Vietnam. It will not be addressed in the TV docudrama, but Ellsberg was exceedingly charming and possessed with the uncanny ability to reproduce conversations verbatim–talents that made him a highly prized asset of John Hart, the CIA station chief in Saigon. Hart and the CIA’s foreign intelligence staff wanted to know what influential Vietnamese citizens and officials were privately thinking, and plotting, so they introduced Ellsberg into Saigon’s elite social circles, and he began reporting directly to station chief John Hart on matters of political importance.

And if what his CIA colleagues say is true, Ellsberg was not only as a superb spy, he was also as a swashbuckling swordsman who romanced numerous women, including the exquisite Germaine. One part French and three parts Vietnamese, Germaine was the object of every red-blooded American man’s desire, and when Ellsberg met her at a swinging Saigon party, the hot-blooded cocksman immediately rose to the occasion, heedless of the fact that she was engaged to an opium-addicted Corsican drug smuggler named Michel Seguin.

It is here, with Ellsberg’s love affair with Germaine, that the discrepancy between fact and fiction has its origins. According to Professor McCoy, at the time Ellsberg met Germaine, Ellsberg’s close friend, CIA officer Lucien Conein, was negotiating a “truce” with the Corsican gangsters who supplied South Vietnam’s top military officers and government officials with that most lucrative of black market commodities, heroin.

Ellsberg’s Perilous Peccadilloes

Legendary CIA officer Lou Conein was an Old Vietnam Hand. As a member of Detachment 202 of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), Conein had fought with the French Special Forces in Indochina in World War II. After the war he married a Vietnamese woman and remained in Vietnam. He joined the CIA upon its creation and after a tour of duty in Europe, he returned to South Vietnam in 1954, as an aide to the aforementioned Ed Lansdale, to help organize the CIA’s anti-communist forces in North Vietnam. As a measure of his knack for deceit and deception, it is worth noting that one of Conein’s favorite “dirty tricks” was “to stage funerals without a corpse, and bury the coffin filled with weapons for later use by the anti-communists.”1

“Black Luigi” Conein departed South Vietnam in 1958 after Lansdale had safely ensconced his Catholic prot?g?, Ngo Dinh Diem, as President of South Vietnam. Conein spent the next few years in the opium rich outlands of Iran as a military advisor to the Shah’s special forces. In 1962 he returned to Vietnam as a “floating emissary,” reporting directly to the Kennedy White House, while secretly coaching the cabal of generals that murdered President Diem and his opium-addicted brother Nhu on 2 November 1963.

After the bloody coup d’etat, Conein remained in South Vietnam, but not without further controversy. As noted, professor McCoy contends that Ellsberg and Conein formed a fast friendship at the exact same moment Conein was arranging a “truce” between the CIA and unnamed Corsican drug smugglers in Saigon.

Conein, however, adamantly denied the allegation that he arranged a drug-related “truce.” In a 1972 letter to McCoy’s publisher, he insisted that his meeting with the Corsicans, “had to do with ameliorating a tense situation engendered by Daniel Ellsberg’s peccadilloes with the mistress of a Corsican.”

Here we return to enchantress Germaine, her opium-addicted Corsican fianc?, Michel Seguin, and a new character in our passion play, Frank Scotton. In 1965 Scotton was ostensibly employed by the U.S. Information Service, though his undercover job as a CIA officer was forming assassination squads around Saigon in what was the prototype of the CIA’s infamous Phoenix Program. Through this experimental “counter-terror” program, which fell under Lansdale’s RD Program, Scotton and Ellsberg met and became the best of friends. In fact, it was Scotton who invited Ellsberg to the party where the fateful encounter with Germaine occurred.

What happened next is subject to conjecture–and it must be emphasized that in order to understand how the Discrepancy might occur, the reader must need be aware that rumors, whisper campaigns, and half-truths are the preferred weapons of political warriors. CIA dirty tricks and deceptions are meant to misdirect and discredit, so one must examine these statements closely to discover what is being concealed, and why. Complicating the already convoluted situation is the fact that Ellsberg’s closest friends, Lou Conein and Frank Scotton, were CIA officers. Which is not meant to cast guilt through association on Ellsberg, but it is intended to warn the reader that one must carefully study their conflicting stories.

Scotton and Conein, in separate interviews with this writer, claimed they warned Ellsberg to sever his relationship with Germaine. But Ellsberg, they said, would not be kept from his lover’s embrace. Scotton and Conein claimed that Michael Seguin hired a Vietnamese assassin to kill Ellsberg, but, they said, they were able to intercept the assassin before he could carry out his contract.

In an interview with this writer, Ellsberg admitted to having had the affair with Germaine, and he confessed that Seguin put a gun to his head and warned him to stay away from the woman they both cherished. But Ellsberg vehemently denied that either Scotton or Conein intervened on his behalf. Their stories, he said, were standard CIA disinformation, designed to make him seem beholden to former CIA comrades, and thus cast doubt on his motives for leaking The Pentagon Papers.

Ulterior Motives

Theoretically, it seems logical to conclude that one of the conflicting stories hides an ulterior motive. And in a search of the recorded history of the time, there is only one source that sheds any light on the situation. All we know, according to Professor McCoy, is that CIA agent Lou Conein met with Corsican gangsters to arrange a “truce” regarding drug smuggling in South Vietnam, and that after this “truce” the Corsicans (including, one would presume, Michel Seguin) continued to serve as “contact men” for the CIA in the drug smuggling business.

This is where The Discrepancy reaches critical mass, for Ellsberg denies that his CIA mentor, Edward Lansdale, or his CIA friends, Lou Conein and Frank Scotton, were involved with Corsican drug smugglers.

Recapping: McCoy claims that Conein arranged a” truce” with the Corsican gangsters over drug smuggling in South Vietnam; Conein denied the allegation and said the meeting concerned Ellsberg’s affair with Germaine; and Ellsberg denies (1) that Conein and Scotton intervened on his behalf, and (2) that Conein, Lansdale and Scotton were involved with drug smugglers.

Who is telling the truth? Could a CIA officer with a photographic memory not be aware that his colleagues were involved with drug smugglers? Or is McCoy’s research fatally flawed? Did the alleged “truce” occur? Was the good professor, who has prompted so many people to question the CIA’s role in international drug smuggling, misled by dirty trickster Conein. Was the ulterior motive to move McCoy toward the Corsicans and away from the CIA’s unilateral drug smuggling operation? Thinking the Unthinkable

It was 1970 when the mainstream American press first reported the CIA’s involvement in international drug trafficking, and it was 1970 when the U.S. Senate launched a potentially explosive investigation into the CIA’s Phoenix “assassination” Program, a special unit of which was providing security for the CIA’s unilateral drug smuggling operation.

The House of Representatives launched deeper probes into CIA drug smuggling and the CIA’s Phoenix Program in early 1971, and, naturally, the CIA at this critical time took extensive countermeasures in a concerted effort to conceal these facts. What is relevant to the discrepancy is the that in June 1971, Daniel Ellsberg leaked the aptly named Pentagon Papers, shifting blame for the increasingly unpopular Vietnam War from the CIA to the military, while distracting public attention from the investigations of the CIA’s Phoenix Program and the CIA’s involvement in drug smuggling.

Ellsberg is aware of the rumor that Conein and Scotton asked him to leak the Pentagon Papers as part of the CIA’s disinformation campaign. But he shrugs off the insidious rumor as yet another instance of ? CIA disinformation designed to cast doubt on his motives for leaking The Pentagon Papers.

While it is definitely politically incorrect within what passes nowadays for the New Left to even make the suggestion, is it unthinkable that Ellsberg might have suffered such a whisper campaign in order to prevent his CIA friends from being indicted for drug smuggling and mass murder?

The Politics Of Heroin (And War Crimes) In America

After Ellsberg leaked The Pentagon Papers, the CIA’s plot to cover-up its unilateral drug smuggling operation moved forward with greater gusto. According to the Justice Department’s still classified DeFeo Report, Conein in the spring of 1971 was called out of retirement by CIA officer E. Howard Hunt and asked to become an advisor to President Nixon’s “drug czar” (and Plumber) Egil Krogh, on matters regarding “problems of narcotic control in Southeast Asia and the Pentagon Papers.”

Consider that in 1971 the relationship between the French intelligence service and Corsican drug smugglers in its employ was exposed after a series of spectacular drug busts made in America with the assistance of the CIA. Concurrently, Conein was called out of retirement and immediately, in June 1971, told McCoy about the “truce” with the French-connected Corsicans, one of who put a gun to Ellsberg head.

Consider also that Egil Krogh’s investigators stumbled upon the CIA’s unilateral drug smuggling operation at this time, and that in July 1971, President Nixon declared the burgeoning war on drugs to be a matter of national security. Nixon went after the CIA and quick as a flash, E. Howard Hunt (Conein’s comrade from OSS Detachment 202) bungled the bugging of the Watergate Hotel. Washington Post reporter and former Naval Intelligence officer Bob Woodward, then assigned to cover Nixon’s war on drugs, was approached by the still anonymous Deep Throat, and based on unsubstantiated rumors, incrementally engendered the Watergate scandal and effectively neutralized Nixon, and his war on drugs.

In the summer of 1972 came the publication of McCoy’s book, which implicated the CIA in Corsican drug smuggling operation in Thailand, Vietnam, Burma and Laos. But no CIA officer was ever indicted for drug smuggling. In fact, the CIA boasted that it was actually helping, by infiltrating the Corsican operation, to wage the war on drugs. Amazing as it may sound, McCoy’s exposure in 1972 of the French Connection drug smuggling operation also helped to divert public attention from the CIA’s unilateral drug smuggling operations.

That same summer of 1972, Lou Conein became a consultant to the newly created Office of National Narcotics Intelligence (ONNI) at the Department of Justice. After the Drug Enforcement Administration was formed in July 1973, Conein became chief of a special operations unit that in 1975 was investigated by the U.S. Senate for the dubious distinction of assassinating drug lords.

The Pentagon Papers, Drugs, and Political Assassinations

Today only questions remain. Why did Conein meet the Corsicans in 1965? Was the rumor of an assassination attempt on Ellsberg concocted to provide Conein with a plausible cover story for his “truce” with the drug smuggling Corsicans? If so, why does Ellsberg deny that his CIA comrades, Lansdale, Conein and Scotton, were involved in drug smuggling, as McCoy contends? And, finally, was McCoy deliberately led by Conein in a wide circle around the CIA’s unilateral drug smuggling operation?

Unless these questions are resolved, the truth about Watergate and the Pentagon Papers will continue to elude historians, and this quiet discrepancy will serve, like the TV movie based on Ellsberg’s autobiography, only to perpetuate the myths, mysteries, and half-truths that define American history–a history that hauntingly reflects standard CIA operating procedures.

DOUGLAS VALENTINE is the author of The Hotel Tacloban, The Phoenix Program, and TDY. His new book The Strength of the Wolf: the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 1930-1968 will be published by Verso. Valentine was an investigator for Pepper on the King case in 1998-1999. For information about Valentine and his books and articles, please visit his website at www.douglasvalentine.com.

He can be reached at: redspruce@attbi.com

Valentine’s last article for CounterPunch was: An Act of State: the Assassination of Martin Luther King

https://www.brasscheck.com/video/what-the-pentagon-papers-were-really-all-about/

https://www.counterpunch.org/2003/03/08/will-the-real-daniel-ellsberg-please-stand-up/
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 19, 2018, 08:02:09 pm »

US-North Korea Peace Talks: Trump 🦀 Threatens Kim with Gaddafi’s Fate

May 18, 2018

Col. Larry Wilkerson: Trump’s threats, Bolton’s inexperience, combined with the military exercises in the region is putting the North Korean peace talks at risk. It is inexplicable form of diplomacy, unless you want the talks to fail


https://therealnews.com/stories/us-north-korea-peace-talks-trump-threatens-kim-with-gaddafis-fate
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 09, 2018, 02:27:05 pm »



Israel 😈 Threatens Lebanon After Hezbollah Makes Gains in Election

May 8, 2018

After Hezbollah and political allies won seats in Lebanon’s first parliamentary election in 9 years, Israeli minister Naftali Bennett threatened to retaliate against the Lebanese state for Hezbollah’s actions. Journalist Jamal Ghosn says this is the latest in a long string of threats, and Israel violates Lebanese sovereignty every day.


https://therealnews.com/stories/israel-threatens-lebanon-after-hezbollah-makes-gains-in-election
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 09, 2018, 02:22:21 pm »



Is Trump’s 🦀 Exit From Iran Deal a Prelude to War?

May 8, 2018

With Trump withdrawing from the JCPOA and European allies showing no signs that they’ll withstand US pressure, the Iran nuclear deal is in danger and the threat of war has increased, says Jamal Abdi of the National Iranian American Council

Comprehensive analysis  (video with transcript) of this precarious situation:

https://therealnews.com/stories/is-trumps-exit-from-iran-deal-a-prelude-to-war
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 07, 2018, 11:32:21 pm »

Truthdig

MAY 02, 2018 TD ORIGINALS


I Know Which Country the U.S. 🦍 Will Invade Next

By the end of this column, it will be clear which country the United States will invade and topple next. Or failing that, it will be clear which country our military-intelligence-industrial complex will be aching to invade next.

We all want to know why America does what it does. And I don’t mean why Americans do what we do. I think that question still will be pondered eons from now by a future professor showing his students a video mind-meld of present-day UFC fighters booting each other in the head while thrilled onlookers cheer (not for either of the fighters but rather for more booting in the head).

But we all seem to assume that America—the entity, the corporation—has some sort of larger reasoning behind the actions it takes, the actions put forward by the ruling elite. And almost all of us know that the reasons we’re given by the press secretaries and caricature-shaped heads on the nightly news are the ripest, most fetid grade of bullshit.

We now know that the invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with weapons of mass destruction. We now know that the crushing of Libya had nothing to do with “stopping a bad man.” If one does even a cursory check of what dictators around the world are up to recently, you’ll find that the U.S. doesn’t care in the slightest whether they are bad or good, whether they’re using their free time to kill thousands of innocent people or to harmonize their rock garden. In fact, the U.S. gives military aid to 70 percent of the world’s dictators. (One would hope that’s only around the holidays though.)


So if it’s not for the stated reasons, why does the U.S. overrun, topple and sometimes occupy the countries it does? Obviously, there are oil resources or rare minerals to be had. But there’s something else that links almost all of our recent wars.

As The Guardian reported near the beginning of the Iraq War, “In October 2000, Iraq insisted on dumping the U.S. dollar—the currency of the enemy—for the more multilateral euro.”

However, one example does not make a trend. If it did, I would be a world-renowned beer pong champion rather than touting a 1-27 record. (I certainly can’t go pro with those numbers.)

But there’s more. Soon after Libya began moving toward an African gold-based currency—and lining up all its African neighbors to join it—we invaded it as well, with the help of NATO. Author Ellen Brown pointed this out at the time of the invasion:

[Moammar Gadhafi] initiated a movement to refuse the dollar and the euro, and called on Arab and African nations to use a new currency instead, the gold dinar.

John Perkins, author of “Confessions of an Economic Hitman,” also has said that the true reason for the attack on Libya was Gadhafi’s move away from the dollar and the euro.

This week, The Intercept reported that the ousting of Gadhafi, which was in many ways led by President Nicolas Sarkozy of France, actually had to do with Sarkozy secretly receiving millions from Gadhafi, and it seemed that his corruption was about to be revealed. But, the article also noted, “[Sarkozy’s] real military zeal and desire for regime change came only after [Hillary] Clinton and the Arab League broadcasted their desire to see [Gadhafi] go.” And the fact that Gadhafi was planning to upend the petrodollar in Africa certainly provides the motivation necessary. (It doesn’t take much to get the U.S. excited about a new bombing campaign. I’m pretty sure we invaded Madagascar once in the 1970s because they smoked our good weed.)

Right now you may be thinking, “But, Lee, your theory is ridiculous. If these invasions were about the banking, then the rebels in Libya—getting help from NATO and the United States—would have set up a new banking system after bringing down Gadhafi.”

Actually, they didn’t wait that long. In the middle of the brutal war, the Libyan rebels formed their own central bank.

Brown said, “Several writers have noted the odd fact that the Libyan rebels took time out from their rebellion in March to create their own central bank—this before they even had a government.”

Wow, that sure does sound like it’s all about the banking.

Many of you know about Gen. Wesley Clark’s famous quote about seven countries in five years. Clark is a four-star general, the former head of NATO Supreme Allied Command, and he ran for president in 2008 (clearly he’s an underachiever). But it’s quite possible that 100 years from now, the one thing he’ll be remembered for is the fact that he told us that the Pentagon said to him in 2002: “We’re going to take down seven countries in five years. We’re going to start with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, then Libya, Somalia, Sudan. We’re going to come back and get Iran in five years.”

Most of this has happened. We have, of course, added some countries to the list, such as Yemen. We’re helping to destroy Yemen largely to make Saudi Arabia happy. Apparently our government/media care only about Syrian children (in order to justify regime change). We couldn’t care less about Yemeni children, Iraqi children, Afghan children, Palestinian children, North Korean children, Somali children, Flint (Michigan) children, Baltimore children, Native American children, Puerto Rican children, Na’vi children … oh wait, I think that’s from “Avatar.” Was that fiction? My memories and 3-D movies are starting to blur together.

Brown goes even further in her analysis of Clark’s bombshell:

What do these seven countries have in common? … [N]one of them is listed among the 56 member banks of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS). That evidently puts them outside the long regulatory arm of the central bankers’ central bank in Switzerland. The most renegade of the lot could be Libya and Iraq, the two that have actually been attacked.

What I’m trying to say is: It’s all about the banking.

So right now you’re thinking, “But, Lee, then why is the U.S. so eager to turn Syria into a failed state if Syria never dropped the dollar? Your whole stupid theory falls apart right there.”

First, I don’t appreciate your tone. Second, in February 2006, Syria dropped the dollar as its primary hard currency.

I think I’m noticing a trend. In fact, on Jan. 4, it was reported that Pakistan was ditching the dollar in its trade with China, and that same day, the U.S. placed it on the watch list for religious freedom violations. The same day? Are we really supposed to believe that it just so happened that Pakistan stopped using the dollar with China on the same day it started punching Christians in the nose for no good reason? No, clearly Pakistan had violated our religion of cold hard cash.

This leaves only one question: Who will be next on the list of U.S. illegal invasions cloaked in bullshit justifications? Well, last week, Iran finally did it: It switched from the dollar to the euro. And sure enough, this week, the U.S. military-industrial complex, the corporate media and Israel all got together to claim that Iran is lying about its nuclear weapons development. What are the odds that this news would break within days of Iran dropping the dollar? What. Are. The. Odds?

The one nice thing about our corporate state’s manufacturing of consent is how predictable it is. We will now see the mainstream media running an increasing number of reports pushing the idea that Iran is a sponsor of terrorism and is trying to develop nuclear weapons (which are WMDs, but for some strange reason, our media are shying away from saying, “They have WMDs”). Here’s a 2017 PBS article claiming that Iran is the top state sponsor of terrorism. One must assume this list of terror sponsors does not include the country that made the arms that significantly enhanced Islamic State’s military capabilities. (It’s the U.S.)

Or the country that drops hundreds of bombs per day on the Middle East. (It’s the U.S.) But those bombs don’t cause any terror. Those are the happy bombs, clearly. Apparently, we just drop 1995 Richard Simmons down on unsuspecting people.

Point is, as we watch our pathetic corporate media continue their manufacturing of consent for war with Iran, don’t fall for it. These wars are all about the banking. And millions of innocent people are killed in them. Millions more have their lives destroyed.

You and I are just pawns in this game, and the last thing the ruling elite want are pawns who question the official narrative.

If you enjoyed this article, please share it, and check out Lee Camp’s free weekly podcast, “Common Censored.”

https://www.truthdig.com/articles/i-know-which-country-the-u-s-will-invade-next/

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 05, 2018, 07:05:02 pm »

Sunflower Newsletter: May 2018

Rick Wayman, Nuclear Age Peace Foundation


May 3, 2018

Peace in Korea? Hope and uncertainty mix in the wake of Kim-Moon summit

Cesar Jaramillo lays out the factors that might make or break a more sustainable peace in the Korean peninsula, from security assurances to human rights.



https://www.opencanada.org/features/peace-korea-hope-and-uncertainty-mix-wake-kim-moon-summit/
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 01, 2018, 03:06:30 pm »

US Officials: Israel 😈 Preparing For War With Iran, SeekingUS 🦀 Support

by Tyler Durden

Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:14

Not that there was much doubt who was behind it, but two days after "enemy" warplanes attacked a Syrian military base near Hama on Sunday, killing at least 11 Iranians and dozens of others, and nobody had yet "claimed responsibility" the attack, US officials told NBC that it was indeed Israeli F-15 fighter jets that struck the base, NBC News reported.

Wow! Video of a huge explosion just now in #Salhab in #Hama, reasons still unknown pic.twitter.com/AfWYRAzosT

— Danny Makki (@Dannymakkisyria) April 29, 2018
Ominously, the officials said Israel appears to be preparing for open warfare with Iran and is seeking U.S. help and support.

"On the list of the potentials for most likely live hostility around the world, the battle between Israel and Iran in Syria is at the top of the list right now," said one senior U.S. official.

Fire and explosions are seen in the countryside south of Hama city, Syria, April 29, 2018
The US officials told NBC that Israeli F-15s hit Hama after Iran delivered weapons to a base that houses Iran's 47th Brigade, including surface-to-air missiles. In addition to killing two dozen troops, including officers, the strike wounded three dozen others. The report adds that the U.S. officials believe the shipments were intended for Iranian ground forces that would attack Israel.

Meanwhile, as we reported yesterday, the Syrian army said early on Monday that "enemy" rockets struck military bases belonging to Syrian President Bashar Assad's regime. According to several outlets, the strikes targeted the 47th Brigade base in the southern Hama district, a military facility in northwestern Hama and a facility north of the Aleppo International Airport.

Meanwhile, Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman said on Tuesday that Israel on Tuesday morning had four problems, one more than the day before: "Iran, Iran, Iran and hypocrisy." The comment came one day after Israel PM Benjamin Netanyahu "revealed" a cache of documents the Mossad stole from Iran detailing the country's nuclear program, which however critics said were i) old and ii) not indicative of Iran's current plans.

"This is the same Iran that cracks down on freedom of expression and on minorities. The same Iran that tried to develop nuclear weapons and entered the [nuclear] deal for economic benefits ,” Lieberman 😈 said.

“The same Iran is trying to hide its weapons while everyone ignores it. The state of Israel cannot ignore Iran's threats, Iran, whose senior officials promise to wipe out Israel,” he said. “They are trying to harm us , and we’ll have a response.

Iran's Defense Minister Amir Khatami threatened Israel on Tuesday, saying it should stop its "dangerous behavior" and vowing that the "Iranian response will be surprising and you will regret it." Khatami's remarks came Following Netanyahu's speech which Khatami described as Israeli "provocative actions," and two days after the strikes in Syria.

* * *

Meanwhile, in a potential hint at the upcoming conflict, Haaretz writes that two and a half weeks after the bombing in which seven members of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards were killed at the T4 base in Syria, Israel is bracing for an Iranian retaliation for the Syrian strikes (and if one isn't forthcoming, well that's what false flags are for).

As Haaretz writes, the Iranians’ response, despite their frequent threats of revenge, is being postponed, screwing up Iran's war planning. It’s also possible that as time passes, Tehran is becoming more aware of the possible complex consequences of any action. Still, the working assumption of Israeli defense officials remains that such a response is highly probable.

The Iranians appear to have many options. Revenge could come on the Syrian border, from the Lebanese border via Hezbollah, directly from Iran by the launch of long-range missiles, or against an Israeli target abroad. In past decades Iran and Hezbollah took part, separately and together, in two attacks in Argentina, a suicide attack in Bulgaria and attempts to strike at Israeli diplomats and tourists in countries including India, Thailand and Azerbaijan.

In any case, Lebanon seems all but out of bounds until the country’s May 6 parliamentary elections, and amid Hezbollah’s fear of being portrayed as an Iranian puppet. The firing of missiles from Iran would exacerbate the claims about Tehran’s missile project a moment before a possible U.S. decision on May 12 to abandon the nuclear agreement. Also, a strike at a target far from the Middle East would require long preparation.

* * *

For now, an Israeli war with Iran in Syria is far from inevitable: the clash of intentions is clear: Iran is establishing itself militarily in Syria and Israel has declared that it will prevent that by force. The question, of course, is whether this unstable equilibrium will devolve into a lethal escalation, or if it will somehow be resolved through peaceful negotiation. Unfortunately, in the context of recent events, and the upcoming breakdown of the Iran nuclear deal, the former is looking like the most likely outcome.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-05-01/us-officials-israel-preparing-war-iran-seeking-us-support

Agelbert NOTE: Dear readers, don't be fooled by this Orwellian exercise in mindfork news. THIS is ALL about sabotaging the US agreement to not sanction Iran that is up for review NOW in May. Israel is the totally unjustified aggressor here with Tump's 🦀 Pompeo Kochroach cheerleading the Zionist Fascist warmongering all the way.

There is much truth in the comments (see below). 🧐
Quote
Son of Captain Nemo Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:15 Permalink
If you're still an investor in the stock market after you've read this one... Try to put a smiley  face on the financial outlook for Wall Street based on THIS announcement???...

Speaking of forecasts for the market(s)!....

Needless to say the fat assed 3 $tar $milin nate is on board and willing to make whatever $acrifices are necessary WITH HIS OWN (https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-19/top-us-general-says-american-…) who will be more than happy to die making the Tribe exceedingly HAPPY (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option) SOMEWHERE "ELSE"!...

Now hit that big red plastic button center that says it for U.S.!!!

P.S.

If we could get all of our current active military and veterans to sign this (https://www.ae911truth.org/) and tell Syphilis-in-Chief NOT ONLY NO BUT HELL "NO"!...

And then nuke Israel and Saudi Arabia with our Navy this World would finally be able to start over!!!

Vote up!40 Vote down!11


strannick  Son of Captain Nemo Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:19 Permalink
If Christians would stop worshipping Israel, and Israel would start worshipping Christ, what a wonderful world.

In reply to Put the financial outlook… by Son of Captain Nemo
Vote up!14 Vote down!5

Dickweed Wang  strannick Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:19 Permalink
When are the morons in the USA that get their "news" from MSM outlets (i.e. from the government) going to realize the essentially nothing to do with IsraHell is good for the people of the US??  It's time to totally cut off the foreign and military aid to that little P.o.S. country. If they want to start a war with Iran then hey, go for it.  Just don't ask or expect the US to act like big brother and come in to kick someone's ass when you started the **** in the first place.  But we all know logic, common sense or reality for that matter has no place in the "relationship" between the US and IsraHell.

The creation of IsraHell during the 1940's will go down as one of the most evil events in the history of the world.

In reply to W by strannick
Vote up!10 Vote down!5


FireBrander  GlassHouse101 Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:26 Permalink
The USA should fully support Israel by selling it all the rope it needs to hang itself in a war with Iran.

In reply to I think we can start… by GlassHouse101

Vote up!10 Vote down!3


BullyBearish  FireBrander Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:30 Permalink
disgusting how anti-war pre-president trump becomes military pandering trumpanyahoo after election...his handlers, knowing he will need them in the near future, set him to constantly stroke the military every opportunity he has...

    B O N E     S P U R S

In reply to W by FireBrander

Vote up!9 Vote down!1


Chupacabra-322  BullyBearish Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:36 Permalink
The Western globalist billionaires and elites are ultimately responsible for any aggression coming from Israel. If they can conquer and control Iran and take over its oil and gas reserves, risking the fate of the millions of people in Iran, Syria and in Israel, then the losses to them will be incidental. The Western-globalist-Zio-hawk Axis no doubt feels it has to act now against Iran in case everything settles down in the ME with the Syrian war cooling off. Any expansion of Israeli turf or getting control of resources to the north would be stymied with further waiting and allowing both Syrian and Iranian defense systems to be further fortified.  The Israelis appear to be completely confident that if they can instigate a war with Iran that it will be backed by the US, the UK, France and other NATO nations.

That confidence could only come from the Western elites running things.  However, after their last fizzled false-flag poison-gas attack in Syria, the support by many NATO nations for more Axis aggression may not be that solid.  So what does the Israeli tough talk and threats mean at this time? Perhaps it means that Israel is in the process of concocting a massive and much more sophisticated  false-flag attack, like the taking out of a US war ship and blaming Iran for starting the war.

Remember Five points:

1. Isreal will fight to the very last American Soldiers Death.

2. The Zionist screams in Pain as he Stikes you.

3.The Yinon Plan.

4.Operation TALPIOT.

5. Qatari Pipeline Petro Dollar Vs. Russia / China Petro Yaun.

One bright aspect is the Anti-Isreal / Jew Zionist movement is gaining steam.  More & more Individuals are speaking openly against Israel’s War Crimes, False Flag involvements, The Yinon Plan along with Pro Zionist immigrantion policy of migrating Muslim’s &  Arabs to the EU & US without fear of retribution.  Pro migration policy which supports territory boarder expansion via the Yinon Plan & ethnic cleansing & migration of Arabs & Muslim’s.

Not to mention the Billions in US foreign aid, AIPAC, ZioNeoConFascist NGO’s & dual Israeli Citizen’s which hold Political Office in CONgress.  Which must be outlawed. 

In reply to disgusting how anti-war pre… by BullyBearish

Vote up!2 Vote down!4

evoila  Chupacabra-322 Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:37 Permalink
Iran proving it is the rational actor in this.

In reply to The Western globalist… by Chupacabra-322

Vote up!7 Vote down!1

Gadfly  BullyBearish Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:37 Permalink
Don't take the bait Trump. We elected you to get us out, not to go all in for the Israeli/One World Order agenda.  If you go along with this and get us into another war in the Middle East, you're a one term President.  I guarantee it.

In reply to disgusting how anti-war pre… by BullyBearish

Vote up!0 Vote down!1

BullyBearish  Gadfly Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:43 Permalink
HDGaF...

In reply to Don't take the bait Trump… by Gadfly

Vote up!0 Vote down!0

Eyes Opened  BullyBearish Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:51 Permalink
“They are trying to harm us, and we’ll have a response"

The word "response" seems inappropiate somehow...

Kinda like getting in your retaliation first..😒

In reply to disgusting how anti-war pre… by BullyBearish

Vote up!3 Vote down!0

Truther  FireBrander Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:32 Permalink
The Khazars are looking down at their sandy graves. Their wish will come true.

In reply to W by FireBrander

Vote up!9 Vote down!1

BangDingOw  Slimedon1 Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:50 Permalink
Anyone who thinks the NOK peace deal lining up with the iran war deal is a coincidence ought to think again. There are no such coincidences. The cabal knows the American people cannot handle threatening global thermonuclear war against 2 countries at the same time. Either Kim is a puppet, or they made him an offer he can't refuse. Either way he is a puppet. iran is in the crosshairs now regardless of what she does.

In reply to It is pretty uncanny how… by Slimedon1

Vote up!0 Vote down!1

Polynik3s  GlassHouse101 Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:55 Permalink
At five pounds a turd, I can get you 200 Bullshits to equal Israel's evidence for another goyim war.

In order for the world to live, Lucifarian Zionism must die.

Vote up!3 Vote down!1

Manthong  Dickweed Wang Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:26 Permalink
..the good news is that Tel Aviv will be crossed off the list of tourist destinations unless the populace there puts the tribal chiefs are put in their place.

In reply to . by Dickweed Wang

Vote up!11 Vote down!0

MK ULTRA Alpha  Manthong Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:30 Permalink
What about the 3 billion barrels of Syrian oil under the Golan. And block 9 Lebanon gas field.

And the plan to take southern Lebanon for the off shore gas field and the water.

It was the water, now it's water, oil and natural gas.

No word on Jew controlled MSM.

And no word on the killing of over 500,000 Syrian Christians out of a prewar population of 2 million.

https://genieoilgas.com/about-us/strategic-advisory-board/

Genie oil company, a Jewish controlled Red Shield operation. Why is this not told to the American people?

In reply to ..the good news is that Tel… by Manthong

Vote up!7 Vote down!0

inosent  Manthong Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:30 Permalink
The God damned jews and God damned israhell are at it again. Same old thing. When I contemplate the sublimity of the magnificence of creation and all of its manifest beauty, I am depressed and perplexed at the grotesque evil that continually emits from the satanic cabal of the juden and their israhell - and even WORSE, that a tax liability is place on my back to pay for it all.

#tohellwithisrahell

In reply to ..the good news is that Tel… by Manthong

Vote up!0 Vote down!1

Jesus von Einstein  strannick Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:27 Permalink
"The report adds that the U.S. officials believe the shipments were intended for Iranian ground forces that would attack Israel."

Why would Iran try to launch a ground attack on Israel - to guarantee they'd get nuked?  This is another lie.

Iran is in Syria, at the invitation of its government, to fight the largely, perhaps even mostly foreign [not Syrian] mercenaries, many or most of them Islamists [Sunni].  They've been fighting ISIS and Al Qaeda.

Israel, on the other hand, has by many accounts, directly and indirectly been supporting ISIS and Al Qaeda, and also attacking Syrian, Lebanese and apparently Iranian troops fighting those terror groups.

So Israel is claiming to be "defending itself" by attacking another country in order to kill people from another country, there legally, who have been fighting the Islamists/terrorists that the Israelis [and US, and Saudis] have been helping...  because, despite Israel's military and nukes and chem and bio weapons and the backing of the US...  Iran is going to attack Israel on the ground from Syria....

Listen, if you believe this, please consider the possibility you've accepted the spin and lies of inveterate, dissembling warmongers who think it's okay to kill lots and lots of people in wars of aggression reframed as 'defense.'

In reply to W by strannick

Vote up!1 Vote down!0

mailll  Jesus von Einstein Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:34 Permalink
Might as well call the State of Israel the 51st state of the US, since we will defend Israel State as if it was our very own.  And since Israel want Assad and Iran taken out, there is nothing that can stop their desire.  They will, unfortunately, get what they want.  Expect war to escalate in Syria and war with Iran to break out.  I just don't see it not happening. The US and Israel will continue doing what they want to Russia's allies until the bear comes out of hibernation and says "enough is enough".  The future is going to be pretty interesting.

In reply to "The report adds that the U… by Jesus von Einstein

Vote up!0 Vote down!3

Fireman  Jesus von Einstein Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:41 Permalink
The apartheid abomination in occupied Palestine is a malignant cancerous disease that needs to be defanged and broken up. The state of Palestine must be created and the chosenite khazarian dead beats must be forced to live in peace. Failing that send these killers back to the Eastern Europeon, USSAN and Russian slums that hatched them. The world can no longer indulge these monsters and their sickening hollow cost cult of murder.

No debate

No discussion

No tolerance

Boycott the horned beast of zion and all the filth that it produces. 

Barcodes 500, 729 & 871 mark the filth of "Israel"

Barcodes 7219 & 7922 mark the filth from the rest of occupied, apartheid Palestine. 

Hurt the beast where it does the damage. No more shekels for the squatters! 

In reply to "The report adds that the U… by Jesus von Einstein

Vote up!0 Vote down!1

Fireman  strannick Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:31 Permalink
USSANS are finally going to grasp the problems that all nations face that open their doors to khazarian thugs. However, no nation has ever been as seriously infected with the supremacist virus as Slumville. Are USSAN tax cattle ready to die for their anglozionazi masters and the neocohen evil that is nested at the core of the cancer that is Washing town?

In reply to W by strannick

Vote up!3 Vote down!2

FireBrander  strannick Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:33 Permalink
If Israel would start worshipping Christ

The Jews murdered Christ for Christs' sake!

Now you want them to worship him?

Which of Christs' "teachings" do you think they would be willing to observe as damn near every aspect of Israel is anti-Christ in manner and form.

In reply to W by strannick

Vote up!0 Vote down!0


Polynik3s  strannick Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:54 Permalink
Rothschild has twin Lucifarian monsters that have enslaved and brought endlessly financed wars: Central Banking Cartel and Israel.

When Trump and Q Anon push Rothschild's agenda, they reveal their true master: Lucifarian Zionism.

In order for the world to live, Lucifarian Zionism must die.

SocratesSolves

In reply to W by strannick

Vote up!3 Vote down!7

bowie28  Son of Captain Nemo Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:20 Permalink
Not what is seems.  Trump is using Israel as the attack dog for Nuke deal negotiations.

They will bark and maybe bite a little bit but will not be taken off the leash.

There will be no war and Iran will back down, just like Kim in NK did.

The game has changed.  Watch.

In reply to Put the financial outlook… by Son of Captain Nemo

Vote up!2 Vote down!0


I Am Jack's Ma…  bowie28 Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:44 Permalink
Kim hasn’t given up his nukes, and you seem to think Israel wants off the leash to fight Iran...

Not at all:  Israel wants Uncle Sam to do it, and then Israel also wants help with Hezbollah because the Jews covet Southern Lebanon to the Litani.

Anyone ever consider that there is no evidence for a powerful ancient Jewish kingdom?  No major ruins...  very few refeences outside the bible to Israelites...

There is no cognizable Jewish claim whatsoever on Lebanon...  they just want the water and offshore gas.

 
In reply to Not what is seems.  Trump is… by bowie28

Vote up! 3Vote down!2

junction  Son of Captain Nemo Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:21 Permalink
For more on Israel's low radiation mini-nukes (the ones they used to demolish the World Trade Center and destroy the Iranian weapons depot in Syria), go to:

https://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/01/29/iaea-source-trump-fires-accuse

In reply to Put the financial outlook… by Son of Captain Nemo

Vote up!5 Vote down!1

Perimetr  Son of Captain Nemo Tue, 05/01/2018 - 13:24 Permalink
Where is Russia in this? Does Israel get a free ride when it comes to bombing Syrian bases?

What happened to the vaunted Syrian and Russian air defenses in this latest attack?  Surely F-15s can be tracked as easily as cruise missiles?  Has Putin decided not to send the S-300s to Syria or are they not yet deployed or ???

Does Russia think it can stop a war through diplomatic means?  Good luck with that.

In reply to Put the financial outlook… by Son of Captain Nemo

Vote up!1 Vote down!0
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: April 30, 2018, 09:00:41 pm »



April 30, 2018

Israeli Military 🦍😈 Attacks Iranian Backed Syrian Bases

Col. Larry Wilkerson: Israel does not want to end the war in Syria, it is in their interest to keep this war going, and to keep the Iran Nuclear Deal from succeeding


http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=21693
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: April 28, 2018, 08:06:28 pm »



 April 27, 2018

Korean War Finally Ending, in Huge Victory for Peace Activists  🕊

North and South Korea have agreed to sign a peace deal, after nearly 70 years of war. Christine Ahn says this is thanks to dedicated activism inside and outside of the Korean Peninsula.


http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=21672
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: April 12, 2018, 05:17:29 pm »

World War III: The False Narrative that Fuels Conflict in Syria and Beyond

by TDB

Thu, 04/12/2018 - 11:34

Via The Daily Bell

SNIPPET 1:

The timing is fit for a movie plot climax!

Just as Trump announced intentions to get out of Syria, Assad did something unspeakable. According to Assad’s opposition, the Syrian government “once again” used chemicals weapons on civilians.

At a time when the war is almost won for Assad, he decided to re-ignite international calls for his ouster by senselessly murdering about the same number of civilians the Las Vegas Shooter killed. Seems logical, right?  ;)

Well, there goes the Syrian exit! 😇 😈

SNIPPET 2:

CNN reported in 2012 that America was involved in training the rebels to secure and monitor chemical weapons sites.

Quote
The United States and some European allies are using defense contractors to train Syrian rebels on how to secure chemical weapons stockpiles in Syria, a senior U.S. official and several senior diplomats told CNN Sunday.

The training, which is taking place in Jordan and Turkey, involves how to monitor and secure stockpiles and handle weapons sites and materials, according to the sources. Some of the contractors are on the ground in Syria working with the rebels to monitor some of the sites, according to one of the officials.

This confirms that rebel forces had access to chemical weapons and that the U.S. helped familiarize rebel groups with storing and transporting the weapons.

And now, with the rebels almost defeated, someone  decided to use chemical weapons against a few dozen civilians.

And everyone had to know that this was the most likely way to drag the U.S. deeper into the conflict.

SNIPPET  3:

There are No Good Guys

It is important to remember that there are no “good guys and bad guys” here. Arguably, they are all bad guys.

Full article with accurate history of war causing events in Syria:  8)

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-12/world-war-iii-false-narrative-fuels-conflict-syria-and-beyond

Agelbert NOTE: Operation Enduring Pentagon MEGA-Budget continues to BE, uh, somehow, "JUSTIFIED".


Suckers! 🕵️





Posted by: AGelbert
« on: April 11, 2018, 10:19:21 pm »

Quote
Eddie: This is the only world I ever found to live in, unfortunately. 

Ever heard of Mexico, about 2 hours drive away?

It's not that close. Maybe 4 or 5  hours to the closest border town, which from here is Piedras Negras, I think.

And yes, I've spent some time in Mexico, and I've read what a couple of ex-pats have written about living there. But I never learned the language (a failing of mine, it would even help me here, of that there is little doubt). I have enjoyed my trips to Mexico, but I haven't seen even a fraction of it.

And places I used to go with no worries are not at all safe anymore. When I was young, hippie kids went to the market in Matamoros in droves and we bought our huaraches and wedding shirts and a lot of junk. I went to Acuna, and I bought a very bad guitar when I was 16. That's the shithole where they shot the movie Mariachi. I wouldn't go there at all now. People get shot all the time.

I love Merida and Tulum, and even Cozumel, even though it's not nearly as cool as it was 30 years ago. Neither is Chichen Itza, but its still a place where you can feel the power of what it once was. Enough human sacrifices in one place, and it leaves a kind of creepy psychic residue that's palpable. I felt that anyway, and I'm fairly skeptical about such things.

I've been through the jungle to the pyramids at Coba and  Ek Balam. I've swum in deep clear sinkholes and eaten Octopus ceviche at the Casa Cenote by the Cenote Manatee on Tanka Bay. There's a tiny hotel there I used to dream of buying, but I never had that kind of money.

I'm no expert, but I have met prominent people who do what I do in Mexico, and I can tell you only the connected doctors who are from rich families and cater to rich families make real money. There is no middle class in Mexico. I couldn't make a living there.

The co-founder of this site, Peter, lost his life savings trying to make an ex-pat life in Mexico, from what I understand, and had to return to Canada. RE knows more of that story than I do.

There are some intentional communities in Mexico that I've investigated. Like the ones everywhere else, they're a mixed bag, and you have to buy in to participate, and the ones I saw aren't cheap.

As an alternative living place, I'd pick BC over Mexico, or David's northern Ontario cottage country.  Or C5's Maritime country. But, I have ties to this place. Lots of good reasons for staying, at least for the moment.

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: April 11, 2018, 10:06:16 pm »


Even with WW3 maybe only HOURS away, you are still all laughing and joking about the possible Death of the World.

My take on the possibility of WW3 with Captain Cheeto at the helm is that it ain't gonna happen. 

Besides that, we have a global economy now.  That economy is balanced by all of the fuckers at the top across all of the nations.  Murika is the bully in charge of that with Captain Cheeto head bully in charge.  He makes a real good bully.  He's stupid and doesn't know it, and he's weak. 

Anyways, I listen to the Murikan news on satellite radio these days.  I do that to hear human voices in conversation because even I get lonely driving this truck.  I listen to Fox, CNN, MSNBC, BBC, and NPR.  They are all full of ****, and I get a good laugh listening to their "fair and balanced" propaganda bullshit.  They are very good at getting you to believe their bullshit.  But it's all bullshit and it's bad for you.  I don't believe any of it. 

Yesterday I listened to the entire Zuckerberg hearing, and all of the Senators with their questions.  Interesting.  Apparently Swampbook doesn't sell data...lol...according to Suckerburg.  He also seems like a likable fella.  I found myself thinking, as I listened to our senators, that maybe democracy is working.  Maybe it's not a Corporatocracy running everything.  Then I laughed at myself for thinking something so preposterous. 

I don't think we are going to have WW3, especially not nuclear WW3.  Nobody wins with nuclear WW3, and that's why I think that.  Even the .0001% lose in that case.  They will all just "saber rattle" and take conventional pop shots at each other.  Captain Baby Cheetos will keep tweeting his digital diarrhea, and nobody will take him seriously with exception to the members of the global idiocracy. 

Eventually war will happen in Murika.  It will happen when gas and diesel stop being viable at the pumps.  When the fuel drys up for the masses we will have the end.  There will be massive civil unrest, looting, and rednecks and gangbangers out shootin' it all up.  When the gas dries up it's over.  Until that happens BAU will just keep on keepin' on in all corners of the world.  Unless, that is, the world shakes us off like flees with climate change or some over natural disaster with global scope. 

The only ends I see are two.  Either we run out of viable fuel or the biosphere puts an end to it.  We won't have global war, not until either of the two options I just mentioned happen.
 

https://youtu.be/KgzQuE1pR1w

Quote
not even Billionaires can stop the progress of Collapse.

A Collapse that has a nuclear strike on 12 April 2018 could have been stopped if you had got off your asses in 1980 and acted bravely, and no I don't mean by voting for Carter.  You've had Earth First, The Weathermen, Tim McVeigh, Ted Kaczynski, Ploughshares, to inspire you, but you told yourself jokes and stuck to safe subjects for discussion instead.

Without WW3, Collapse would play out very differently. THAT is what billionaires can't stop.  But YOU could have stopped WW3 if you had bothered.

Damn, I already wrote about this in my lost post. LOL.

Short version...I have definite regrets. I could have gone a different way, and at this point I do regret not becoming more of an activist. I never thought things would get to where we are now so fast. I knew it was likely, even when I was 16. But I thought collapse was in the very distant future. I knew about Silent Spring. I knew about Bucky Fuller. But where I lived there was no real movement to join. I only read about such things in the Whole Earth Catalog.

By 1980 my course was set. I'd have had to change course in 1974. I even thought about moving to the Farm back then. I liked what they were doing. But it wasn't like now. I couldn't email Albert Bates like I can now. I led a very isolated life, far from most like-minded people. I lived in my head a lot, and still do.

I'm not a joiner or a crusader. I've always been cynical about politics anyway. I didn't start voting at all until 1980, and I was trying to prove myself wrong about it being useless. That's why I did it. So nobody could say I didn't participate.

I hope somewhere in the multiverse there is a version of the US of A that listened to Bucky and didn't vote for Ronnie Raygun. Instead they got an early handle on PO and climate change...and managed to create some kind of society that didn't starve most people while making a few people wildly affluent. I really do hope that world is real, and maybe I can be born into that in my next incarnation. This earth is a cooked goose, and it's all over but the dying, which will commence soon enough.

I didn't change the world, but I get the lesson.

Getting the lesson, to me, might be just as important as changing the world.
 


Eddie and Lucid,

GREAT posts!  :

I agree WWIII ain't gonna happen. That said, I would LOVE to see the price of oil go to $300 a barrel! $1000 a barrel would be even better! 


But, if that does not happen within a couple of years, the climate is going to GIT us. Sure, it will take a while to git most of us and a few of us may make it all the way through. I do not find that to be much of a consolation. 😓

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: April 11, 2018, 02:04:39 pm »


Russia Furious As U.S. Navy Destroyer Approaches Syria Without Notification
"Moreover, US President Donald Trump said that he would think about the missile attack on Syria despite any resolutions at the UN Security Council. All this smells of something are outside the framework of universally recognised international norms," Shamanov added...

Hilarity ensues.

However, after yesterday news that the office of Trump's personal lawyer was raided by the FBI and that attorney-client privilege between Trump and Cohen may be compromised, it now appears that in a desperate diversion attempt from his domestic troubles, a military response against Syria by Trump is now inevitable...

That Trump will declare war and condemn all of us to death to defend his position and ego is a given. What is incorrect is the assertion "that attorney-client privilege between Trump and Cohen may be compromised." It is most emphatically NOT.

Note that, according to the American Bar Association, conversations between attorney and client when there is reason to suspect both are involved in an ongoing criminal activity are NOT actually protected by law and are subject to investigation. It's called the Crime-Fraud Exception, which says: The legal community does not deem discussions concerning future wrongdoings, such as fraud, that occur during an attorney-client communications worthy of protection. While the practice of law encourages full and frank communications between the attorney and client, ONLY communications concerning past wrongdoings are protected.

Make of that what you will.


Surly,

I didn't know about the Crime-Fraud Exception. Thanks for the info.   


Webster Tarpley has an interesting take on what Trump's reaction will be when he finds his family jewels in a vice grip. Tarpley believes Trump is a coward and will fold under any real pressure, NOT from Russia, but from the Pentagon war lovers that surround him.

That, of course, ends up resulting in more warlike moves, regardless of what Trump wants to do to distract we-the-people.


All that said, I believe the war lovers at the Pentagon are more rational than Trump. Their whole SCAM (that began with 911) is OPERATION ENDURING MEGA-PENTAGON BUDGET. So, they always want some level of war excuse going on that continues to fleece us on behalf of weapons manufacturers, but, is never on the scale that actually would require all-out war.

The problem with that too clever by a half calculation is that constant saber rattling is precisely what has ALWAYS triggered massive conflicts in the past.

Many will disagree with me on this, but I am certain that Trump will be removed from office by hook or by crook if he does not do what the M.I.C. wants him to do. Trump, though the trumpers were fooled into thinking he was an "outsider", IS a creature of the Deep State.

These creatures are not always obedient to their masters in our disguised military dictatorship. The moment they step out of line, a "lone nut" shows up. Nobody wants to talk about it, but that is precisely how they "reined in" Reagan in when he started making noises the Bush powers that be did not like.   

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: April 05, 2018, 09:04:19 pm »



January 19, 2014

King's Teachings on US Imperialism Opened My Eyes to Radical Thought - Dayvon Love on Reality Asserts Itself (1/2)

Young Baltimore activist Dayvon Love tells Paul Jay how MLK's teaching that American blacks must be anti-imperialist, changed his life.


http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=11361
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: April 05, 2018, 08:31:55 pm »

 

April 5, 2018

Remembering the Revolutionary Martin Luther King Jr. ✨

Highlights from TRNN's event honoring MLK on the 50th anniversary of his assassination, featuring his 1967 speech, "Why I am Opposed to the War in Vietnam,"   and a discussion with actor Danny Glover, Our Revolution President Nina Turner, and Executive Producer Eddie Conway



http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=21514



+-Recent Topics

War Provocations and Peace Actions by AGelbert
July 22, 2018, 07:07:32 pm

Global Warming is WITH US by AGelbert
July 22, 2018, 05:03:52 pm

Fossil Fuel Propaganda Modus Operandi by AGelbert
July 22, 2018, 04:58:22 pm

Sustainable Farming by AGelbert
July 22, 2018, 01:01:45 pm

The Big Picture of Renewable Energy Growth by AGelbert
July 22, 2018, 12:38:28 pm

Corruption in Government by AGelbert
July 22, 2018, 12:25:46 pm

Resisting Brainwashing Propaganda by AGelbert
July 22, 2018, 12:16:51 pm

Pollution by AGelbert
July 22, 2018, 12:10:49 pm

Future Earth by AGelbert
July 21, 2018, 10:36:12 pm

Hydrocarbon Crooks Evil Actions by AGelbert
July 21, 2018, 06:01:06 pm

Free Web Hit Counter By CSS HTML Tutorial