[Peace-discuss] NfN/AOTA notes

[J.B. Nicholson]

Here are a few additional notes including some original text I wrote to go 
along with the previous notes I sent. Have a good show Carl & Dave.


Media: "RT is unrelenting but not lying" (Suzanne Spaulding, Former deputy 
secretary for cyber and infrastructure protection at DHS in the Obama 
administration)

https://on.rt.com/9jfg -- article about Spaulding's comments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATW2rNNWjQw -- video of Spaulding speaking
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OZXA2lfAbw -- commentary on Spaulding's 
comments

Former deputy secretary for cyber and infrastructure protection at DHS in 
the Obama administration Suzanne Spaulding spoke at the Center for 
Strategic and International Studies in Washington and said the following 
about RT show "America's Lawyer with Mike Papantonio":

> They feature every week, stories from our courts all across the country 
> to demonstrate the truth of this statement. I don’t think there’s 
> anything in there that is a lie. [...] Oftentimes, they don’t even have
> to make things up, they simply replay, they take kernels of truth, they
> take existing divisions and weaknesses of our own making and reproduce
> them, put them out, retweet them indefinitely in a very one-sided way.

I find that RT have been doing a remarkable job of covering stories other 
news outlets won't and giving interviewees a chance to have their say 
without telling them what to say, according to interviewees.

There are a number of interesting programs on RT[1] which cover stories you 
can't find covered widely elsewhere (including self-described alternative 
news outlets like Democracy Now) and the people they interview have 
interesting research and views to talk about.

By contrast DN is showing itself to be remarkably uncritical of the 
Democratic Party in what it won't cover and how its hosts are silent on 
other stories. DN didn't cover the lawsuit against the DNC corporation from 
Bernie Sanders supporters who alleged that the DNC favored Hillary 
Clinton's campaign over Bernie Sanders' campaign in the 2016 primaries. 
DN's hosts will repeat but not analyze Russiagate stories.

In addition to trying to manufacture an excuse to explain away how Hillary 
Clinton lost a rigged election, Russiagate stories are also useful as a 
means to provoke a war with Russia. The problem is that upon closer 
inspection Russiagate stories fall apart. War with Russia makes these 
stories critical to understand including when they prove to be 
exaggerations (Russian-purchased social media ads somehow handed Trump the 
presidency), fabrications (Russians infiltrated a Vermont electrical 
facility and threatened the entire US electrical grid), or distractions 
from better analysis (like explaining why Trump was duly elected including 
the results of a study which showed that if a few states had slightly lower 
deaths in Clinton-backed wars she might have won those states electoral 
votes and be US President now).

If there are any critical views about Russiagate stories run on DN they are 
far more likely to come from the guests who might say something that 
debunks a Russiagate claim (speaking for themselves) than from the host 
(who speak for the show). DN's uncritical repetition of Russiagate stories 
is a sharp departure from how DN treated stories of Iraqi WMDs during the 
run-up to the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Back then a DN host would report on 
what, say, the New York Times published as front page news from unnamed 
sources -- allegations that there were Iraqi weapons of mass destruction 
and that this somehow ostensibly justified invading Iraq -- and then DN 
would immediately follow that up with counteranalysis from what Hans Blix's 
team at the IAEA found when they visited Iraq -- no WMDs. Back then the 
point-counterpoint was informative and offered in a timely fashion; just 
the kind of "news you can use" that I believe helped the audience local 
media outlets to air the show.

RT's "Redacted Tonight", a news comedy program, covered the story about how 
over the past 20 years the US has allowed the US Defense Dept. and Housing 
and Urban Development to let $21 trillion dollars go unaccounted for. 
Redacted Tonight put that figure into context. With that money we could 
have used that money to afford every social and economic program that gets 
widespread support -- Medicare for All, paid-for college education, living 
wage jobs for all, ending homelessness by simply buying homes for any 
homeless American, laying potable water pipes to eliminate unpotable water 
anywhere in the US, improving public schools and paying teachers proper 
living wages (no more lecturing by day, living in one's car by night), and 
so much more.


[1] "America's Lawyer" with Mike Papantonio, "In Question" with Anya 
Parampil, the news segments with Sara Montes de Oca, "The World According 
to Jesse" with Jesse Ventura and Brigida Santos, "Watching the Hawks" with 
Tyrel Ventura, Sean Stone and Tabetha Wallace, "On Contact" with Chris 
Hedges, RT UK news segments (all hosts), "Going Underground" with Afshin 
Rattansi, and "Redacted Tonight"





More on how "diversity" is a distractive con

https://www.blackagendareport.com/ocasio-cortez-nancy-pelosi-and-con-diversity 
-- main article

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AguwSKFPTEw -- Danny Haiphong's interview 
on "In Question" with Anya Parampil

https://blackagendareport.com/glen-ford-chris-hedges-contact-con-diversity 
-- earlier BAR article from Glen Ford

Danny Haiphong in the BAR article above:

> Poor people, especially poor Black Americans, cannot eat from or survive
> off “diversity.”
> 
> The midterm elections have been over for two weeks and the
> Democrat-controlled House is set to nominate corporate mainstay Nancy
> Pelosi as Speaker of the House. Pelosi has been met with opposition in
> her own party and the Bezos-owned Washington Post has questioned whether
> she will garner enough votes for the nomination. Even Donald Trump felt
> compelled to come to Pelosi’s aid, offering the long-time California
> representative votes from the Republican Party. The debate over the
> Speaker position is indicative of growing divisions with the Democratic
> Party-wing of the duopoly. However, this debate has little significance
> for the masses of exploited and impoverished workers and poor people,
> especially Black Americans,in the United States and around the world.
> The opposition to Pelosi is a public relations stunt on the part of the
> Democratic Party, which has long united against the interests of the
> poor and working-class around the con of diversity.

Now Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez has endorsed pro-war, pro-bank, pro-capitalist, 
establishment Pelosi.

> Democrats like Pelosi and Ocasio-Cortez are two different strands of the
> same diversity disease. Pelosi is an entrenched corporate Democrat with
> a net worth of 196 million dollars. She is a staunch advocate of
> capitalism and most of her campaign contributions come from large donors
> or corporate Political Action Committees (PAC). Pelosi has been a major
> supporter of the drive to war with Russia, a policy that has its roots in
> her support of U.S. funding for the wars on Iraq and Afghanistan during
> the Bush Jr. Administration. In a word, Pelosi is beloved by the ruling
> class for her decade’s worth of service to finance capital and the war
> machine even as she promotes herself as a progressive politician for the
> “99 percent.”
> 
> Pelosi’s office was recently occupied by activists from the PAC “Justice
> Democrats.” Activists demanded support from Pelosi for a Green New Deal.
> The policy has been a feature of the Green Party’s list of demands on
> the U.S. government for years, but no Greens were consulted prior to the
> protest. New York Congresswoman-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez paid a
> visit to the protest as a show of faux-opposition to Pelosi. Despite the
> sexy optics of the protest, Ocasio-Cortez demonstrated the full extent
> of the danger that the diversity con game poses to the oppressed and
> exploited masses. Ocasio-Cortez said this about Pelosi when speaking to
> the corporate media at the protest, “One of the things that I admire so
> much about Leader Pelosi, is that she comes from a place of activism and
> organizing and she really appreciates civic engagement.”
> 
> Nancy Pelosi does indeed come from a place of activism and civic
> engagement in service of imperialism. In a townhall last year, Pelosi
> told a young socialist activist that the Democratic Party was capitalist
> through and through. Pelosi opposes Medicare for All even though nearly
> ninety percent of Democrat voters support single-payer healthcare.
> Pelosi has fought for the militarization of immigration policy and has
> drawn staunch criticism from immigrant rights groups. And most recently,
> Pelosi has used her “activist” spirit to call for bipartisanship in the
> form of tax policy that would effectively strangle in their crib any
> hopes for Medicare for All or any other progressive demand. Her proposal
> for a three-fifths majority requirement in the House to raise the tax
> rates of the bottom 80 percent of earners is a right-wing dog whistle
> that masquerades as an attempt to “increase” the income of a mythical
> “middle class.” And as a loyal servant of Israel and war, Pelosi was
> perfectly fine with giving the U.S. military 57.4 billion dollars
> more than what Trump proposed for the defense spending in 2017.
> 
> [...]
> 
> Make no mistake, there is no battle for the heart and soul of the
> Democratic Party as Ocasio-Cortez would have us believe. The current
> divisions within the Democratic Party over Pelosi will eventually lead
> to consensus around an imperial agenda. What revolutionaries should pay
> attention to, however, is the growing unrest and disillusionment of the
> Democratic Party base. That is what support for Sanders initially
> represented in 2016. The Democratic Party’s commitment to war and
> austerity will continue to create the conditions for a possible split
> among those who want healthcare, jobs, and education. Our job as
> radicals and revolutionaries is to organize these sentiments into an
> anti-imperialist and socialist alternative to the duopoly. The con of
> “diversity” is impeding the motion of the masses toward these ends by
> neutralizing revolutionary politics and privileging infantile misleaders
> willing to capitulate to the corporate ruling class at every turn. If
> this phenomenon could be explained in a picture, look no further than
> Michelle Obama’s warm embrace of George W. Bush. Expect Ocasio-Cortez to
> take advantage of similar photo opportunities after finally announcing
> public support for Nancy Pelosi for speaker. “Diversity” is, as
> Ocasio-Cortez shows us, class betrayal.





WikiLeaks/Assange: Regarding the allegations The Guardian made against 
WikiLeaks -- George Galloway tells us "Julian Assange and WikiLeaks have 
never lied to me (and to us, the public)"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7GprAU1U_c -- Guardian published a 
sourceless article[1] claiming Paul Manafort visited Julian Assange in the 
Ecuadorian embassy at least 3 times. WikiLeaks and Manafort deny this claim 
and the Guardian has reportedly made some edits to the article distancing 
themselves from their earlier claims. WikiLeaks also tweeted "WikiLeaks is 
willing to bet the Guardian a million dollars and its editor’s head that 
Manafort never met Assange"[2]. Corporate media (including CBS, MSNBC, and 
CNN) instantly repeated the Guardian's claim without critique. Glenn 
Greenwald's Intercept article[3] is very informative on this.

[1] 
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/27/manafort-held-secret-talks-with-assange-in-ecuadorian-embassy

[2] https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/1067430101548027906

[3] 
https://theintercept.com/2018/11/27/it-is-possible-paul-manafort-visited-julian-assange-if-true-there-should-be-ample-video-and-other-evidence-showing-this/

The case against the Guardian's claim is clear: The Guardian's claim comes 
from unnamed sources said to be working with the Ecuadorian embassy. The 
Guardian's claim means: Manafort somehow dodged a massive surveillance 
program in London, Manafort wasn't logged into the Ecuadorian embassy 
logbook of all of Assange's visitors, and nobody else saw Manafort's visit 
to a constantly-watched building to see an internationally-known person of 
interest. Given all of the infrastructure that would provide some evidence 
of Manafort's visit, the Guardian should have provided evidence to back up 
their claim but they provide none.

The US Government wants Assange in their hands so he can be secretly tried 
and given the death penalty, or perhaps "extraordinarily rendered" 
(kidnapped) to a "black site" (secret prison) where he can be forced to 
reveal information via torture, or killed. This is also a Russiagate story 
as well: Hillary Clinton cites WikiLeaks as one of the many excuses why she 
lost in 2016.

Related: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hyZktgMp4Q -- "On Contact" with 
Chris Hedges interviews Joe Lauria in an episode titled "Crucifying Julian 
Assange" in which he covers how Assange might be prosecuted, hearing a plea 
from Christine Assange (Julian Assange's mother), and discussion of how 
there is a disturbing set of actors who are okay with pursuing Assange 
(Republicans & Democrats want to do this, the public seems supportive or 
disinterested/distracted, and this is very disturbing for press freedom and 
our own education and civil liberties).

Related: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kihHqiHsU-c -- interview with 
Annie Machon, former MI5 intelligence agent who resigned in the 1990s to 
become a whistleblower about agent's incompetence and crimes, about 
Assange's political value as a pawn in a larger story.





War: Afghanistan

The US killed at least 30 civilians in Afghanistan on Wednesday; the first 
6 months in 2018 shows the highest number of bombs dropped on Afghanistan 
since this war began (700 more than the peak of the war in 2011) and 2018 
is a record year for deaths there according to the UN.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdpTyEI3MaQ -- report from "In Question" 
featuring an interview with George Galloway making important points 
throughout. The Taliban are identified as a major stakeholder there (the US 
war in Afghanistan has apparently given the Taliban control over more land 
than at any point since that war began) so it's questionable (perhaps 
downright impossible to imagine) these peace talks being anything but a 
setup to fail and something the US can try to use to justify more war. The 
US continues to claim it is "in our interest to see Afghanistan succeed, 
peaceful, democratic, and enjoying good relations with its neighbors" even 
though it's not in the war profiteer's interest to see any war ever end.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSUsPr-tXPo -- Afghanistan so-called "peace 
talks" proceed without Taliban. Is the US really interested in the Afghan 
peace they claim to seek?







War: Yemen

The Yemeni war is unpopular in the Senate, but since weapons manufacturers 
profit from this, what are the real chances of ending Saudi Arabian support 
in this war?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJbbHJjskek -- Senators back proposal to 
end SA support and allege they're interested because children are suffering 
(including the craven Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin who is shown speaking on 
the Senate floor pointing to pictures of starving children). But 15 million 
people on the brink of starving, a cholera epidemic made worse by the 
US-backed SA-led war, and rampant poverty didn't seem to motivate the 
Senate's sympathy until after Khashoggi was murdered. How far can this bill 
really go?

The Intercept is sanguine about this[1][2]. I suspect that really has more 
to do with trying to make Democrats look good than what's good for the war 
profiteers.

[1] 
https://theintercept.com/2018/11/29/the-senate-just-took-a-major-step-toward-ending-the-war-in-yemen-what-happens-now/

[2] https://theintercept.com/2018/11/27/us-senate-vote-yemen-war/






Russiagate: Maria Butina

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCtrm1DEr_0 -- Butina's father speaks to RT 
saying she does not deserve her harsh conditions -- being not allowed to 
sleep for two weeks, being woken every 15 minutes, being kept in cold 
conditions, being denied medical care, subjected to strip searches, being 
segregated in prison, and awaiting trial for three months.

Butina is a Russian national and gun enthusiast who visited the US on a 
student visa. She was targeted by the US Government after failing to 
register as a foreign agent (very much like what RT was threatened with if 
they didn't register, including RT America) and charged with "conspiracy to 
act as an agent of the Russian Federation".

Butina is currently in a Virginia prison in solitary confinement awaiting 
trial. US prosecutors alleged that Butina was a Russian spy and traded sex 
for some kind of power (which wasn't clear), but there was no evidence to 
back the claim that she was either a spy or trading sex at all. Prosecutors 
later stopped making the claim about trading sex admitting they 
misinterpreted a joke she texted her friend about using sex to get into 
Republican politics.






Economy: Israel

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abyHZnYiyhQ -- US will fund Israel's 
military like never before -- $38 billion and likely to go up in future 
years. Sen. Rand Paul put a hold on the aid bill. This piece is an 
interview with Alison Weir.

Meanwhile the US has homeless people, people who want a living wage job, 
people who want to try a guaranteed annual income, mainstream support for 
Medicare for All, a strong taste for potable water, and so much more.







Science: Editing human DNA for HIV resistance; better living through 
technology?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZ2Zc7jirjI -- Chinese scientist 贺建奎 (He 
Jiankui) of Shenzhen claims he helped make the world's first genetically 
edited babies -- twin girls born this month named Lulu and Nana -- by 
editing their embryo's DNA with CRISPR-cas9 gene editing technology during 
fertility treatments in order to make them HIV-resistant. This claim is 
unverified as of now.

Chinese authorities suspended all He's research activities, saying He's 
work was "extremely abominable in nature" and a violation of Chinese law.[1]

[1] http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2018-11/29/c_137640174.htm

-J