From davidgreen50 at gmail.com Sat Jun 1 15:13:12 2019 From: davidgreen50 at gmail.com (David Green) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2019 10:13:12 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Today's Demonstration? Message-ID: It would be nice to get a sense if there will be a few people at this afternoon's monthly demonstration. I have signs in my car if necessary. DG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stuartnlevy at gmail.com Sat Jun 1 15:23:12 2019 From: stuartnlevy at gmail.com (Stuart Levy) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2019 10:23:12 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] First Saturday - 2pm AWARE demonstration today Message-ID: <3596578a-eedd-1fbe-de6a-d989ee4e1591@gmail.com> It is the first Saturday of June, and AWARE has our monthly antiwar demonstration --     2pm-4pm, Saturday, June 1st     corner of Main and Neil, downtown Champaign Hope you can join us. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stuartnlevy at gmail.com Sat Jun 1 15:26:59 2019 From: stuartnlevy at gmail.com (Stuart Levy) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2019 10:26:59 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Today's Demonstration? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Yes, I aim to be there.   If you have the signs that's great! For my part I will aim to leave around 3:30pm though - can't stay until 4. On 6/1/19 10:13 AM, David Green via Peace wrote: > It would be nice to get a sense if there will be a few people at this > afternoon's monthly demonstration. I have signs in my car if necessary. > > DG > > _______________________________________________ > Peace mailing list > Peace at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sat Jun 1 15:32:20 2019 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2019 15:32:20 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Today's Demonstration? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I don’t plan to be there. On Jun 1, 2019, at 08:26, Stuart Levy via Peace > wrote: Yes, I aim to be there. If you have the signs that's great! For my part I will aim to leave around 3:30pm though - can't stay until 4. On 6/1/19 10:13 AM, David Green via Peace wrote: It would be nice to get a sense if there will be a few people at this afternoon's monthly demonstration. I have signs in my car if necessary. DG _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidgreen50 at gmail.com Sat Jun 1 15:45:47 2019 From: davidgreen50 at gmail.com (David Green) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2019 10:45:47 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Today's Demonstration? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: OK, I will bring the signs of course. On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 10:27 AM Stuart Levy wrote: > Yes, I aim to be there. If you have the signs that's great! > > For my part I will aim to leave around 3:30pm though - can't stay until 4. > > On 6/1/19 10:13 AM, David Green via Peace wrote: > > It would be nice to get a sense if there will be a few people at this > afternoon's monthly demonstration. I have signs in my car if necessary. > > DG > > _______________________________________________ > Peace mailing listPeace at lists.chambana.nethttps://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From grapes17 at gmail.com Sat Jun 1 16:02:14 2019 From: grapes17 at gmail.com (James M.) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2019 11:02:14 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Today's Demonstration? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I aim to be there in the tail end. I got something going on for the first hour. James. On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 10:46 AM David Green via Peace-discuss < peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > OK, I will bring the signs of course. > > On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 10:27 AM Stuart Levy wrote: > >> Yes, I aim to be there. If you have the signs that's great! >> >> For my part I will aim to leave around 3:30pm though - can't stay until 4. >> >> On 6/1/19 10:13 AM, David Green via Peace wrote: >> >> It would be nice to get a sense if there will be a few people at this >> afternoon's monthly demonstration. I have signs in my car if necessary. >> >> DG >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace mailing listPeace at lists.chambana.nethttps://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace >> >> >> _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Sat Jun 1 16:05:34 2019 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C. G. Estabrook ) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2019 11:05:34 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Today's Demonstration? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8CA3D1D5-46A6-4D8B-89FD-6DEE622D90E1@gmail.com> I’ll be there and bring flyers. > On Jun 1, 2019, at 11:02 AM, James M. via Peace-discuss wrote: > > I aim to be there in the tail end. I got something going on for the first hour. > > James. > >> On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 10:46 AM David Green via Peace-discuss wrote: >> OK, I will bring the signs of course. >> >>> On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 10:27 AM Stuart Levy wrote: >>> Yes, I aim to be there. If you have the signs that's great! >>> >>> For my part I will aim to leave around 3:30pm though - can't stay until 4. >>> >>>> On 6/1/19 10:13 AM, David Green via Peace wrote: >>>> It would be nice to get a sense if there will be a few people at this afternoon's monthly demonstration. I have signs in my car if necessary. >>>> >>>> DG >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Peace mailing list >>>> Peace at lists.chambana.net >>>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jbn at forestfield.org Tue Jun 4 23:30:41 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 18:30:41 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] AOTA #481 notes Message-ID: <76a4a559-7a09-f9e2-be25-690704546a18@forestfield.org> AWARE on the Air #481 Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePSaI2VGA-0 Links to items referenced on the show. Richard D. Wolff on "American History and the 2020 Election" https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/03/american-history-and-the-2020-election/ C. J. Hopkins on "The War on Dissent: The Specter of Divisiveness" https://www.unz.com/article/the-war-on-dissent-the-specter-of-divisiveness/ C. J. Hopkins on "Democracy vs. the Putin-Nazis" http://www.unz.com/chopkins/democracy-vs-the-putin-nazis/ Chris Hedges interviews Howie Hawkins on 3rd parties and US politics https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Holjckd9ZDs Bruce A. Dixon on "We Can't Have A Party Of Our Own Because Poor People Can't Be Trusted?" https://www.blackagendareport.com/we-cant-have-party-our-own-because-poor-people-cant-be-trusted -J From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Wed Jun 5 12:14:21 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 07:14:21 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?b?Rlc6IOKAmEN1bHR1cmFsIE1hcnhpc23igJk6?= =?utf-8?q?_The_Mainstreaming_of_a_Nazi_Trope?= In-Reply-To: <55.13.18151.AF8F6FC5@momentum-soi-01-mta3.prod.aweberint.com> References: <55.13.18151.AF8F6FC5@momentum-soi-01-mta3.prod.aweberint.com> Message-ID: <003801d51b98$35d8d780$a18a8680$@comcast.net> From: FAIR [mailto:fair=fair.org at send.aweber.com] On Behalf Of FAIR Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2019 6:04 PM To: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Subject: ‘Cultural Marxism’: The Mainstreaming of a Nazi Trope Image removed by sender. FAIR ‘Cultural Marxism’: The Mainstreaming of a Nazi Trope view post on FAIR.org by Ari Paul When Norwegian right-winger Anders Breivik invoked “cultural Marxism” as the reason for his 77-person killing spree in 2011, many observers placed the notion in the same category as the killer—the fringe. But since the election of Donald Trump, Brexit and the rise and re-election of other far-right governments around the globe, “cultural Marxism” has become a well-known nationalist buzzword, alongside “globalism”: Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro denounces it, and the media empire of former White House advisor Steve Bannon revolved around fighting it. The phrase is seeping into mainstream media discourse, a far cry from its former days as an extremist catch phrase, and it’s creating a dangerous situation with an ominous historical context. Image removed by sender. NYT: Liberal Parents, Radical Children David Brooks (New York Times, 11/26/19 ) explains the “generation gap” by invoking a buzzword ultimately derived from Nazi propaganda. Doing his usual shtick of a more refined version of Abe Simpson , columnist David Brooks (New York Times, 11/26/19 ) lamented that today’s youths “tend to have been influenced by the cultural Marxism that is now the lingua franca in the elite academy,” giving them a “clash of oppressed and oppressor groups” worldview. Also in the Times, contributor Molly Worthen (4/20/19 ) quoted the phrase “cultural Marxism”—not approvingly, but not explaining what it meant, either, just offering it as an example of what “conservatives” were complaining about. A Times story in 2017 ( 8/11/17 ) about a former White House aide reported that the aide believed “globalists” would “impose cultural Marxism in the United States”—again, without defining for the layperson what that might mean. The Washington Post (like other newspapers) invoked the phrase in its reports on Bolsonaro’s rise to power last year, and even on the hipster styles of the new wave of American white nationalists: In November 2016, the Post (11/30/16 ) reported that the style of shaved sides with long hair combed back is “worn by men who feel their whiteness has been infringed upon by the ‘cultural Marxism’ of the Americas.” And opinion-haver Andrew Sullivan took to New York (2/9/18 ) to denounce “cultural Marxists” for inspiring social justice movements on campuses. What does cultural Marxism mean for the far right? In the modern iteration, in spaces like Breitbart or Infowars, it is the belief that a failure by communists to topple capitalism through worker revolt has led to a “Plan B” to destroy Western society from the inside. By tearing down the gender binary, de-centering Christianity values, championing the weak over the privileged and creating a multicultural society, revolutionaries have unanchored traditional Western order. Everything from gay rights to Muslim immigration is, in the language of the far right, part of a plot to finish the job that radical worker organizing could not. Suffice it to say, this is a most paranoid fantasy. Most Marxists don’t speak in these terms, and people who do advocate for immigration, multiculturalism or secularism do so out of a certain regard for human and civil rights. But the far right still obsesses that this is a historical cultural struggle. Like others on the right, the National Review (8/9/18 ) saw proof of the plot in the Frankfurt School, which was born out of a psychological need to explain why communism had failed to take root, initially in Germany but more broadly in the West. The answer that Herbert Marcuse, Theodor Adorno, Max Horkheimer and others settled on—after borrowing some ideas from Freud and Nietzsche—was that the structure of capitalist society (which they perversely and ludicrously equated with fascism) was even more totalitarian than they had realized. In other words, communism couldn’t take root because fascism already had. It’s far from a cultural grappling with the Frankfurt School’s actual ideas, which live mostly in academia. As Spencer Sunshine, an associate fellow at Political Research Associates, points out, the focus on the Frankfurt School by the right serves to highlight its inherent Jewishness. “A piece stands in for the whole,” he said. This isn’t one of those “yeah, it could be interpreted as antisemitic” things—it’s straight from Nazi ideology, with just enough cosmetic changes to make it acceptable for the modern right. “Cultural Bolshevism” was the term used by Nazi critics of modernist art, which they believed to be rooted in Jewish decadence and thereby, according to Nazi logic, connected to the communist specter. As Dominic Green (Spectator USA, 3/28/19 ) wrote in a conservative critique of conservatives’ complaints about “cultural Marxism”: “For the Nazis, the Frankfurter School and its vaguely Jewish exponents fell under the rubric of Kulturbolshewismus, ‘Cultural Bolshevism.’” Image removed by sender. William Lind and Donald Trump William Lind meeting with Donald Trump (American Conservative, 10/17/16 ). It came into the American sector through paleoconservative writers William S. Lind and Paul Weyrich, who in a series of articles recrafted the Nazi idea of “cultural Marxism” as a scare tactic for the American right. “These guys were all Jewish,” Lind told a Holocaust denial conference in 2002; Lind would be later be cited as a prominent influence on Trump’s nationalist agenda. As Sunshine noted: It is deeply disturbing that it is used by mainstream conservatives when it’s clearly antisemitic…. They attribute it to all these things, anything from Black Bloc to Hillary Clinton, any kind of social liberalism. It’s not too surprising that the nationalistic right still clings onto such fascist anachronisms; it’s clearly helping them at the voting booth, from the United States to Europe to Brazil. It’s an important mobilizing call for the far right, depicting things like immigration and secularism not simply as liberal values, but as far-left revolutionary tools. What should be shocking is the cavalier way some traditional media, like the Times and the Post, are allowing it to live on their pages. Brooks rebrands cultural Marxism as mere political correctness, giving the Nazi-inspired phrase legitimacy for the American right. It is dropped in or quoted in other stories—some of them lighthearted, like the fashion cues of the alt-right—without describing how fringe this notion is. It’s akin to letting conspiracy theories about chem trails or vaccines get unearned space in mainstream press. And it’s not as if the Times doesn’t know this. In 2018, Columbia University historian Samuel Moyn wrote in a Times blog post (11/13/18 ): That “cultural Marxism” is a crude slander, referring to something that does not exist, unfortunately does not mean actual people are not being set up to pay the price, as scapegoats to appease a rising sense of anger and anxiety. And for that reason, “cultural Marxism” is not only a sad diversion from framing legitimate grievances, but also a dangerous lure in an increasingly unhinged moment. Newspapers should be responsible with such phrases, and it’s easy to do that. It is common—and good practice—for mainstream journalists to avoid imprecise phrases like “pro-life,” and instead call the position “anti-abortion.” Reuters has tight rules for using the word “terrorist,” because the label is too often thrown around. For those with strong feelings about terrorism, it might have seemed insensitive, but for the sake of straight reporting, it was necessary. Brooks shouldn’t have used “cultural Marxism,” not because he should be censored, but because what he meant was “political correctness” and not (we hope) a century-old antisemitic trope. It would be sensible, when the term is invoked by far-right extremists, to provide readers with a definition of the phrase and its origin. And unless it is invoked in a quote, writers like Brooks should be encouraged not to use it all. “They should define it as an antisemitic conspiracy theory with no basis in fact,” Sunshine said of mainstream news editors. Failure to do that, as places like the Times and Post are guilty of, has bitter consequences. “It is legitimizing the use of that framework, and therefore it’s coded antisemitism,” Sunshine said. _____ Featured image: Illustration of “cultural Marxism” from a neo-Nazi website. _____ FAIR/Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting 124 W. 30th Street, Suite 201 New York NY 10001 USA Unsubscribe | Change Subscriber Options Image removed by sender. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ~WRD000.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 823 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 2114 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 1784 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 332 bytes Desc: not available URL: From stephenf1113 at yahoo.com Wed Jun 5 22:46:15 2019 From: stephenf1113 at yahoo.com (Stephen Francis) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 22:46:15 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Peace-discuss Digest, Vol 185, Issue 3 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <69224833.180442.1559774775068@mail.yahoo.com> as per usual, the article on Cultural Marxism (CM) doesn't mention that virtually all of the major figures in were Jews. Hitler kicked them out of Germany because they were Marxist / Communists. The next generation of the collective has fully infiltrated American soft-science academia and have a death grip on those institutions. This is one of the main reasons that the Democratic Party is lurching to the Left....and will be buried in the next election...just as Macron was. On Wednesday, June 5, 2019, 7:14:52 AM CDT, peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net wrote: Send Peace-discuss mailing list submissions to     peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit     https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to     peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net You can reach the person managing the list at     peace-discuss-owner at lists.chambana.net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Peace-discuss digest..." Today's Topics:   1. AOTA #481 notes (J.B. Nicholson)   2. FW: ‘Cultural Marxism’: The Mainstreaming of a Nazi Trope       (David Johnson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 18:30:41 -0500 From: "J.B. Nicholson" To: Peace Discuss Subject: [Peace-discuss] AOTA #481 notes Message-ID: <76a4a559-7a09-f9e2-be25-690704546a18 at forestfield.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed AWARE on the Air #481 Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePSaI2VGA-0 Links to items referenced on the show. Richard D. Wolff on "American History and the 2020 Election" https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/03/american-history-and-the-2020-election/ C. J. Hopkins on "The War on Dissent: The Specter of Divisiveness" https://www.unz.com/article/the-war-on-dissent-the-specter-of-divisiveness/ C. J. Hopkins on "Democracy vs. the Putin-Nazis" http://www.unz.com/chopkins/democracy-vs-the-putin-nazis/ Chris Hedges interviews Howie Hawkins on 3rd parties and US politics https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Holjckd9ZDs Bruce A. Dixon on "We Can't Have A Party Of Our Own Because Poor People Can't Be Trusted?" https://www.blackagendareport.com/we-cant-have-party-our-own-because-poor-people-cant-be-trusted -J ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 07:14:21 -0500 From: "David Johnson" To: Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: ‘Cultural Marxism’: The Mainstreaming     of a Nazi Trope Message-ID: <003801d51b98$35d8d780$a18a8680$@comcast.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" From: FAIR [mailto:fair=fair.org at send.aweber.com] On Behalf Of FAIR Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2019 6:04 PM To: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Subject: ‘Cultural Marxism’: The Mainstreaming of a Nazi Trope Image removed by sender. FAIR ‘Cultural Marxism’: The Mainstreaming of a Nazi Trope view post on FAIR.org by Ari Paul When Norwegian right-winger Anders Breivik invoked “cultural Marxism” as the reason for his 77-person killing spree in 2011, many observers placed the notion in the same category as the killer—the fringe. But since the election of Donald Trump, Brexit and the rise and re-election of other far-right governments around the globe, “cultural Marxism” has become a well-known nationalist buzzword, alongside “globalism”: Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro denounces   it, and the media empire of former White House advisor Steve Bannon revolved around fighting   it. The phrase is seeping into mainstream media discourse, a far cry from its former days as an extremist catch phrase, and it’s creating a dangerous situation with an ominous historical context. Image removed by sender. NYT: Liberal Parents, Radical Children David Brooks (New York Times, 11/26/19 ) explains the “generation gap” by invoking a buzzword ultimately derived from Nazi propaganda. Doing his usual shtick of a more refined version of Abe Simpson , columnist David Brooks (New York Times, 11/26/19 ) lamented that today’s youths “tend to have been influenced by the cultural Marxism that is now the lingua franca in the elite academy,” giving them a “clash of oppressed and oppressor groups” worldview. Also in the Times, contributor Molly Worthen (4/20/19 ) quoted the phrase “cultural Marxism”—not approvingly, but not explaining what it meant, either, just offering it as an example of what “conservatives” were complaining about. A Times story in 2017 ( 8/11/17   ) about a former White House aide reported that the aide believed “globalists” would “impose cultural Marxism in the United States”—again, without defining for the layperson what that might mean. The Washington Post (like other newspapers) invoked the phrase in its reports   on Bolsonaro’s rise to power last year, and even on the hipster styles of the new wave of American white nationalists: In November 2016, the Post (11/30/16 ) reported that the style of shaved sides with long hair combed back is “worn by men who feel their whiteness has been infringed upon by the ‘cultural Marxism’ of the Americas.” And opinion-haver Andrew Sullivan took to New York (2/9/18   ) to denounce “cultural Marxists” for inspiring social justice movements on campuses. What does cultural Marxism mean for the far right? In the modern iteration, in spaces like Breitbart or Infowars, it is the belief that a failure by communists to topple capitalism through worker revolt has led to a “Plan B” to destroy Western society from the inside. By tearing down the gender binary, de-centering Christianity values, championing the weak over the privileged and creating a multicultural society, revolutionaries have unanchored traditional Western order. Everything from gay rights to Muslim immigration is, in the language of the far right, part of a plot to finish the job that radical worker organizing could not. Suffice it to say, this is a most paranoid fantasy. Most Marxists don’t speak in these terms, and people who do advocate for immigration, multiculturalism or secularism do so out of a certain regard for human and civil rights. But the far right still obsesses that this is a historical cultural struggle. Like others on the right, the National Review (8/9/18 ) saw proof of the plot in the Frankfurt School, which was born out of a psychological need to explain why communism had failed to take root, initially in Germany but more broadly in the West. The answer that Herbert Marcuse, Theodor Adorno, Max Horkheimer and others settled on—after borrowing some ideas from Freud and Nietzsche—was that the structure of capitalist society (which they perversely and ludicrously equated with fascism) was even more totalitarian than they had realized. In other words, communism couldn’t take root because fascism already had. It’s far from a cultural grappling with the Frankfurt School’s actual ideas, which live mostly in academia. As Spencer Sunshine, an associate fellow   at Political Research Associates, points out, the focus on the Frankfurt School by the right serves to highlight its inherent Jewishness. “A piece stands in for the whole,” he said. This isn’t one of those “yeah, it could be interpreted as antisemitic” things—it’s straight from Nazi ideology, with just enough cosmetic changes to make it acceptable for the modern right.  “Cultural Bolshevism” was the term used by Nazi critics of modernist art, which they believed to be rooted in Jewish decadence and thereby, according to Nazi logic, connected to the communist specter. As Dominic Green (Spectator USA, 3/28/19 ) wrote in a conservative critique of conservatives’ complaints about “cultural Marxism”: “For the Nazis, the Frankfurter School and its vaguely Jewish exponents fell under the rubric of Kulturbolshewismus, ‘Cultural Bolshevism.’” Image removed by sender. William Lind and Donald Trump William Lind meeting with Donald Trump (American Conservative, 10/17/16 ). It came into the American sector through paleoconservative writers William S. Lind   and Paul Weyrich, who in a series of articles recrafted   the Nazi idea of “cultural Marxism” as a scare tactic for the American right. “These guys were all Jewish,” Lind told a Holocaust denial conference   in 2002; Lind would be later be cited as a prominent influence   on Trump’s nationalist agenda. As Sunshine noted: It is deeply disturbing that it is used by mainstream conservatives when it’s clearly antisemitic…. They attribute it to all these things, anything from Black Bloc to Hillary Clinton, any kind of social liberalism. It’s not too surprising that the nationalistic right still clings onto such fascist anachronisms; it’s clearly helping them at the voting booth, from the United States to Europe to Brazil.  It’s an important mobilizing call for the far right, depicting things like immigration and secularism not simply as liberal values, but as far-left revolutionary tools. What should be shocking is the cavalier way some traditional media, like the Times and the Post, are allowing it to live on their pages. Brooks rebrands cultural Marxism as mere political correctness, giving the Nazi-inspired phrase legitimacy for the American right. It is dropped in or quoted in other stories—some of them lighthearted, like the fashion cues of the alt-right—without describing how fringe this notion is. It’s akin to letting conspiracy theories about chem trails or vaccines get unearned space in mainstream press. And it’s not as if the Times doesn’t know this. In 2018, Columbia University historian Samuel Moyn wrote in a Times blog post (11/13/18 ): That “cultural Marxism” is a crude slander, referring to something that does not exist, unfortunately does not mean actual people are not being set up to pay the price, as scapegoats to appease a rising sense of anger and anxiety. And for that reason, “cultural Marxism” is not only a sad diversion from framing legitimate grievances, but also a dangerous lure in an increasingly unhinged moment. Newspapers should be responsible with such phrases, and it’s easy to do that. It is common—and good practice—for mainstream journalists to avoid imprecise phrases like “pro-life,” and instead call the position “anti-abortion.” Reuters has tight rules   for using the word “terrorist,” because the label is too often thrown around. For those with strong feelings about terrorism, it might have seemed insensitive, but for the sake of straight reporting, it was necessary. Brooks shouldn’t have used “cultural Marxism,” not because he should be censored, but because what he meant was “political correctness” and not (we hope) a century-old antisemitic trope. It would be sensible, when the term is invoked by far-right extremists, to provide readers with a definition of the phrase and its origin. And unless it is invoked in a quote, writers like Brooks should be encouraged not to use it all. “They should define it as an antisemitic conspiracy theory with no basis in fact,” Sunshine said of mainstream news editors. Failure to do that, as places like the Times and Post are guilty of, has bitter consequences. “It is legitimizing the use of that framework, and therefore it’s coded antisemitism,” Sunshine said.   _____  Featured image: Illustration of “cultural Marxism” from a neo-Nazi website.   _____  FAIR/Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting 124 W. 30th Street, Suite 201 New York NY 10001 USA Unsubscribe   | Change Subscriber Options   Image removed by sender. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ~WRD000.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 823 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 2114 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 1784 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 332 bytes Desc: not available URL: ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss ------------------------------ End of Peace-discuss Digest, Vol 185, Issue 3 ********************************************* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mkb3 at icloud.com Fri Jun 7 00:45:55 2019 From: mkb3 at icloud.com (Morton K. Brussel) Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2019 19:45:55 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] D-Day Message-ID: An appropriate, enlightening commentary: Backstage matters… https://therealnews.com/stories/d-day-how-the-us-supported-hitlers-rise-to-power —mkb -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Fri Jun 7 02:19:04 2019 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2019 21:19:04 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] D-Day In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <81B58204-9089-45A0-88ED-FFED70C445BB@gmail.com> Quite right; to be read in conjunction with '"Human Smoke: The Beginnings of World War II, the End of Civilization,” ... a 2008 book by Nicholson Baker about World War II. It questions the commonly held belief that the Allies wanted to avoid the war at all costs but were forced into action by Adolf Hitler's aggression. It consists largely of official government transcripts, newspaper articles, and other documents from the time, with Baker only occasionally interjecting commentary. Baker cites documents that suggest that the leaders of the United States and the United Kingdomwere provoking Germany and Japan into war and had ulterior motives for participating. He dedicates the book to American and British pacifists of the time who, he states in the book's epilogue, were right all along: “They failed, but they were right.”’ Wikipedia > On Jun 6, 2019, at 7:45 PM, Morton K. Brussel via Peace-discuss wrote: > > An appropriate, enlightening commentary: Backstage matters… > > https://therealnews.com/stories/d-day-how-the-us-supported-hitlers-rise-to-power > > —mkb > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From jbn at forestfield.org Fri Jun 7 02:36:50 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2019 21:36:50 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Notes Message-ID: <418d632d-a2ff-470d-a911-10338ec12c04@forestfield.org> Notes for News from Neptune & AWARE on the Air to spur discussion. Have a good show guys. https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/bbc-sky-news-have-hidden-their-interviews-with-un-expert-on-the-torture-of-assange-4cb155aaf313 -- Caitlin Johnstone reveals that "BBC, Sky News Have Hidden Their Interviews With UN Expert On The Torture Of Assange" > UN Special Rapporteur on torture Nils Melzer has said that on the 31st > of May he gave video interviews with both Sky News and the BBC on his > findings that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is the victim of > psychological torture. As of this writing, footage of those interviews > is nowhere to be found. > > In response to a smear by virulent empire propagandist Idrees Ahmad > about his conducting an interview with RT, Melzer tweeted that he has > given interviews to both Sky News and BBC World, but that they seem not > to have been aired. > > “So the UN rapporteur actually appeared on the Kremlin’s premier > propaganda network — yes, the propaganda network of the state that > shoots journalists in the face — to discuss Julian Assange’s > ‘torture’,” tweeted Ahmad, pretending to be under the illusion that UN > experts are meant to remain exclusively loyal to a specific group of > nations. > > “For the record: On 31 May, I have also given similar exclusive TV > interviews to both Sky News and BBC World on Julian Assange, but it > seems they decided not to broadcast them,” Melzer responded. Related: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0L_kEo2LTU -- Nils Melzer's RT interview https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDGiXA_rvYM -- Nils Melzer's Ruptly interview https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErW1taJEPrs -- Nils Melzer's Democracy Now (DN) interview https://www.democracynow.org/2019/5/31/seg_1_julian_assange_please_update -- DN interview transcript Venezuela: The coup continues -- Deutsche Bank seizes (steals?) Venezuelan gold allegedly as collateral for defaulting on a loan. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-06-04/venezuela-is-said-to-default-on-gold-swap-with-deutsche-bank https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4QV14g6ePU -- RT's report Bloomberg cites anonymous sources ("two people with direct knowledge of the matter") and wrote: > Venezuela has defaulted on a gold swap agreement valued at $750 million > with Deutsche Bank AG, prompting the lender to take control of the > precious metal used as collateral and close out the contract [...] > As part of a financing agreement signed in 2016, Venezuela received a > cash loan from Deutsche Bank and put up 20 tons of gold as collateral. > The agreement, which was set to expire in 2021, was settled early due > to missed interest payments, said the people, who asked not to be named > speaking about a private matter. > > In the meantime, opposition leader Juan Guaido’s parallel government > has asked the bank to deposit $120 million into an account outside > President Nicolas Maduro’s reach, which represents the difference in > price from when the gold was acquired to current levels. As part of > efforts to unseat Maduro, the U.S. and more than 50 countries have > recognized Guaido as the legitimate leader of Venezuela even though he > still doesn’t control key institutions at home, including the central > bank. > > “We’re in touch with Deutsche Bank to negotiate the terms under which > the difference owed to the central bank will be paid to the legitimate > government of Venezuela," said Jose Ignacio Hernandez, Guaido’s > U.S.-based attorney general. “Deutsche Bank can’t risk negotiating with > the central bank’s illegitimate authorities," particularly after it was > sanctioned by the U.S. government, Hernandez said. Could this be part of American action to force Maduro out, let Guaidó in and make Guaidó seem more legitimate? Population: The world population is changing: For the first time there are more people over 64 than children younger than 5 https://ourworldindata.org/population-aged-65-outnumber-children -- > In 2018 the number of people older than 64 years old surpassed the > number of children under 5 years old. This was the first time in > history this was the case. https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2019/jun/03/its-a-miracle-helsinkis-radical-solution-to-homelessness -- Finland reduces homelessness by unconditionally (meaning housing comes first, not first solving other problems that may have led to homelessness) turning the homeless into tenants with medical support and job training via a halfway house (called Rukkila located in Malminkartano, Helsinki, Finland). The program is called "Housing First" and the effect is a huge savings. > Finland is the only EU country where homelessness is falling. Its > secret? Giving people homes as soon as they need them – unconditionally [...] > It is important that they are tenants: each has a contract, pays rent > and (if they need to) applies for housing benefit. That, after all, is > all part of having a home – and part of a housing policy that has now > made Finland the only EU country where homelessness is falling. > > When the policy was being devised just over a decade ago, the four > people who came up with what is now widely known as the Housing First > principle – a social scientist, a doctor, a politician and a bishop – > called their report Nimi Ovessa ("Your Name on the Door"). [...] > As in many countries, homelessness in Finland had long been tackled > using a staircase model: you were supposed to move through different > stages of temporary accommodation as you got your life back on track, > with an apartment as the ultimate reward. > > “We decided to make the housing unconditional,” says Kaakinen. “To say, > look, you don’t need to solve your problems before you get a home. > Instead, a home should be the secure foundation that makes it easier to > solve your problems.” > > With state, municipal and NGO backing, flats were bought, new blocks > built and old shelters converted into permanent, comfortable homes – > among them the Rukkila homeless hostel in the Helsinki suburb of > Malminkartano where Ainesmaa now lives. > > Housing First’s early goal was to create 2,500 new homes. It has > created 3,500. Since its launch in 2008, the number of long-term > homeless people in Finland has fallen by more than 35%. Rough sleeping > has been all but eradicated in Helsinki, where only one 50-bed night > shelter remains, and where winter temperatures can plunge to -20C. > > The city’s deputy mayor Sanna Vesikansa says that in her childhood, > “hundreds in the whole country slept in the parks and forests. We > hardly have that any more. Street sleeping is very rare now.” > > In England, meanwhile, government figures show the number of rough > sleepers – a small fraction of the total homeless population – climbed > from 1,768 in 2010 to 4,677 last year (and since the official count is > based on a single evening, charities say the real figure is far > higher). > > But Housing First is not just about housing. “Services have been > crucial,” says Helsinki’s mayor, Jan Vapaavuori, who was housing > minister when the original scheme was launched. “Many long-term > homeless people have addictions, mental health issues, medical > conditions that need ongoing care. The support has to be there.” > > At Rukkila, seven staff support 21 tenants. Assistant manager Saara > Haapa says the work ranges from practical help navigating bureaucracy > and getting education, training and work placements to activities > including games, visits and learning – or re-learning – basic life > skills such as cleaning and cooking. jbn: To make this work you need homes: > But if Housing First is working in Helsinki, where half the country’s > homeless people live, it is also because it is part of a much broader > housing policy. More pilot schemes serve little real purpose, says > Kaakinen: “We know what works. You can have all sorts of projects, but > if you don’t have the actual homes … A sufficient supply of social > housing is just crucial.” jbn: The savings and the interest in the program goes beyond Finland: > Housing First costs money, of course: Finland has spent €250m creating > new homes and hiring 300 extra support workers. But a recent study > showed the savings in emergency healthcare, social services and the > justice system totalled as much as €15,000 a year for every homeless > person in properly supported housing. > > Interest in the policy beyond the country’s borders has been > exceptional, from France to Australia, says Vesikansa. The British > government is funding pilot schemes in Merseyside, the West Midlands > and Greater Manchester, whose Labour mayor, Andy Burnham, is due in > Helsinki in July to see the policy in action. > > But if Housing First is working in Helsinki, where half the country’s > homeless people live, it is also because it is part of a much broader > housing policy. More pilot schemes serve little real purpose, says > Kaakinen: “We know what works. You can have all sorts of projects, but > if you don’t have the actual homes … A sufficient supply of social > housing is just crucial.” jbn: It seems to me that in the US a national jobs program to build the homes, roads, network infrastructure, electrical cabling, lay the potable water piping, and then fill the homes with homeless people would be something we could afford by cutting half of the military budget and training & paying people living wages to do good work the workers would be able to crow about when they went home. War: US weapons manufacturers sell to Taiwan, continue to sell to Saudi Arabia https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtzW6miJ06w -- US is arming Taiwan https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7V6ZxzXHF9U -- Yemen crisis is only possible with US/UK arming Saudi Arabia War training: US military doesn't like wind turbines claiming the turbines somehow interfere with "flying low to the ground", but is the military covering for frackers? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xz1v5wpcSjs -- RT commentary https://www.wired.com/story/the-military-is-locked-in-a-power-struggle-with-wind-farms/ -- > [Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Joseph Goana claims] there’s been a new > obstacle: wind turbines that now generate a third of Oklahoma’s > electricity and 17 percent of the power in Texas. > > "We need the space above the ground unimpeded so we can fly low to the > ground," says Goana, commander of the 80th Training Wing at Sheppard > Air Force Base. "Sort of like driver’s ed." > > A year ago, military leaders at Sheppard joined state officials to beat > back a proposed wind farm in nearby Oklahoma. But base officials now > worry about more proposed wind farms that keep cropping up. They say > they have been forced to close three of 12 low-flying training routes > in the past decade because of “wind farm encroachment.” > > “One or two is OK, we will move over,” Goana says about shifting > Sheppard's training routes, which also have to avoid cell towers and > radio masts. “But now it’s almost completely clogged.” > > Similar disputes between some military officials and wind farm > developers are underway in North Carolina, Tennessee, and upstate New > York. In California, the Navy wants to declare the Pacific Ocean from > Big Sur to the Mexican border off limits to proposed offshore wind > farms, because they would conflict with "the requirements of Navy and > Marine Corps missions conducted in the air, on the surface, and below > the surface of these waters." [...] > [S]tate officials who like the idea [of wind power-driven electricity] > are pushing back against legislators allied with the fossil fuel > industry. The battles over these wind farms aren't making headlines, > but they are having an impact across the country. Every fight slows the > transition to a renewable-powered world. > > Advocates say that wind is a win-win: Property leases and wind farm > jobs help struggling rural economies with a new source of revenue, > while helping wean utilities off fossil fuels. But if the fight over > military flight paths continues, wind companies will seek greener > pastures elsewhere, and that won't help residents of eastern North > Carolina, says Katharine Kollins, the Raleigh-based president of the > Southeastern Wind Coalition, a nonprofit industry group covering 11 > states. > > "When you have legislators that are so bent on removing those options, > wind energy companies that are investing millions of dollars in these > sites are starting to pull back," Kollins said. > > This debate isn’t new. Congress asked the Pentagon to deal with the > problem back in 2011, and the Pentagon set up a Siting Clearinghouse to > resolve these conflicts by reviewing technical and engineering studies > and meeting with both wind developers and military base leaders. For > offshore areas, the Pentagon also confers with the Department of > Interior’s Bureau of Offshore Energy Management. So California may > still get its offshore wind installations. > > Last year, the Clearinghouse reviewed 795 wind farm proposals, a jump > of nearly 30 percent in the past five years, according to Defense > Department spokesperson Elissa Smith. The Pentagon hasn't rejected any > proposals, but it has recommended developers to build fewer turbines, > lower them, or move them somewhere else, Smith says. Elizabeth Warren: another warmonger for the Democratic Party https://www.blackagendareport.com/elizabeth-warren-wants-green-bombs-not-green-new-deal -- Danny Haiphong: "Elizabeth Warren Wants Green Bombs, not a Green New Deal" > Warren prides herself in fighting for a kinder capitalism but has no > problem with a nasty, murderous imperialism. > > The Green New Deal has found little support among establishment > Democratic Party members of Congress. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called > the comprehensive policy a “list of aspirations” that could never be > considered all at once. Senate Democrats mostly abstained from the 57-0 > Senate vote against the Green New Deal in March, calling the gesture a > Republican “stunt.” Yet this “stunt” revealed that the corporate > Democratic Party is not very interested in the Green New Deal even > though it is supported by over eighty percent of voters in both > political parties. In this stage of capitalism, the Democrat side of > the two-party duopoly is just as enthusiastic a patron in the endless > regime of austerity as its Republican counterpart. > > Elizabeth Warren has been receiving more attention from the Democratic > Party establishment of late. Warren has attempted to make up for her > woeful confrontation with Trump around her proclaimed indigenous > identity by releasing a flurry of policy proposals on issues such as > maternal mortality and student loan forgiveness. While Elizabeth Warren > has voiced “strong support” for the Green New Deal, she recently > tweeted a strange proposal that deviates from its principles. In > mid-May, Warren announced that she would be introducing the Defense > Climate Resiliency and Readiness Act to help the military become more > “energy efficient.” As she stated on Twitter, “Climate change is real, > it’s worsening by the day, and it’s undermining our military readiness. > More and more, accomplishing the mission depends on our ability to > continue operations in the face of floods, drought, wildfires, > desertification, and extreme cold.” > > Elizabeth Warren believes that strengthening the “effectiveness” of the > U.S. military is consistent with the Green New Deal. Her bill doesn’t > demand that the U.S. military be reduced in size or scale.Nor does it > mention that the U.S. military is the world’s largest polluter and user > of oil and fossil fuels. Instead of turning the Green New Deal into > concrete policy, Warren has placed her attention on renovating the one > thousand U.S. military bases that exist domestically and abroad. The > so-called “policy wonk” of the 2020 elections appears to be more > concerned with creating “green” bombs than a “green economy.” > > The U.S. drops a bomb on another nation every twelve minutes. It is no > wonder that U.S. military, which serves as the armed body of the state > responsible for protecting the interests of Wall Street, fossil fuel > corporations, military contractors, and monopolies of all kinds, is > treated as a trophy by all sections of the U.S. political class. The > U.S. military embodies American exceptionalism claiming to spread > democracy and freedom to lands near and far. Holidays such as Memorial > Day and Veterans Day are designed to remind Americans of all races and > classes that the U.S. is exceptional because of its large military > footprint. Instead of seeing this footprint as bombs, sanctions, or > deadly raids, Democrat and Republican politicians alike believe that > the U.S. military permanently signifies American greatness. War/Press freedom: Australia is reacting to Assange with raids of an editor's home and the Australian Broadcast Corporation offices for covering Afghan war crime stories published over a year ago in 2017 which exposed Australian Special Forces operations which are likely war crimes based on secret defense documents. Annika Smethurt's home was raided in connection to a 2018 report she wrote regarding a "secret push for sweeping new home security powers" which involved spying on Australian citizens. This report was based on secret conversations between ministry. https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/jun/06/police-raids-raise-fears-of-australian-media-crackdown-abc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfzQgETezAQ -- RT's report including an interview with Binoy Kampmark (see https://www.counterpunch.org/author/jete6/ for Kampmark's articles on Counterpunch.org) in which he describes that the revelations are seen as offences but not the crimes the revelations disclose. Binoy Kampmark said: > The particular release of the files has been something of a > disillusioning thing for those in the Australian military: in a sense > the revelation of this has been also deemed the greatest offence rather > than seeing the SAS [Special Air Service Regiment, a special forces > unit of the Australian Army] is committing crimes, the issue has been > more those revealing that those crimes are committed. WikiLeaks' twitter post -- https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/1136218914898284545 > The criminalization and crack down on national security journalism is > spreading like a virus. The #Assange precedent is already having > effect. Journalists must unite and remember that courage is also > contagious. The Guardian (above URL): > Tuesday’s raid in Canberra, which came without any warning, was > connected to a scoop revealing a plan by one of Australia’s > surveillance agencies, the Australian Signals Directorate, to broaden > its powers to spy on citizens without their knowledge. It was published > in April 2018, and referred immediately for police investigation. > > The raid on [political editor of Australia’s Sunday Telegraph > newspaper, Annika] Smethurst’s home, following hot on the heels of a > federal election, was disconcerting enough for the Australian media, but > a second raid followed on Wednesday in Sydney at Australia’s national > public broadcaster, the ABC. This one related to an investigation about > alleged unlawful killings in Afghanistan by Australian special forces, > broadcast in July 2017. The story was referred for police investigation > the day after broadcast. > > The ABC – unlike Smethurst and the Sunday Telegraph’s owner, News Corp > – was aware the search was coming. John Lyons, the head of > investigations at the national broadcaster, decided to remain in the > room while police worked and live tweet Wednesday’s operation. The scope > of the warrant “staggered” the veteran journalist. He told his followers > the warrant allowed the police to “add, copy, delete or alter” material > in the ABC’s computers.> “This would not be allowed to happen in the > United States under their constitution,” Lyons said while the raid was > in progress. “My question is why is this allowed to happen in Australia > in 2019.” > > The answer to that question is multi-dimensional. Australia has a > global reputation for robust plain-speaking, both in the broader culture > and in its politics, but it does not have a bill of rights enshrining > protections for free speech and a free press. There is no explicit > constitutional protection for expression. The high court has determined > that an implied freedom of political communication exists. > > As well as a lack of basic systemic protections, Australia has an > onerous defamation regime that media companies have heavily criticised. > There are also restrictions on what can be reported from court > proceedings. > > Overlaid on all that is the post-September 11 framework of national > security laws. The Australian journalist Peter Greste, who was > imprisoned by Egyptian authorities while reporting for al-Jazeera > English, and is a founding director of the Alliance for Journalists’ > Freedom, points to “a slew of national security laws” passed by the > Australian parliament in recent years “that in some way limit and even > criminalise the legitimate work of journalists”. Israel: Lobbying to prevent a two-state solution https://amp.axios.com/two-state-solution-resolution-congress-israel-32aeee05-8461-44a5-ae6f-9f53c68880ab.html https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrA4zobgAl0 -- Israeli officials are currently lobbying the US Congress against a 2-state solution. Both RT and Axios cite unnamed sources which allegedly say that Israel wants the bill to not go up for a vote or, failing that, remove the words "two-state solution" from the bill. Surveillance: A few articles have come out indicating that companies are selling people the means of allowing the company to use the device as part of a well-organized surveillance network. https://www.cnet.com/features/amazons-helping-police-build-a-surveillance-network-with-ring-doorbells/ -- Amazon's new doorbell product with a surveillance camera and network connectivity (called "Ring") works by relaying data to Amazon, then letting the customer connect to Amazon to watch footage from their Ring camera. This also allows Amazon to correlate where the product is and put together a real-time updated image map of what's going on in the field of view of all Ring cameras -- one Ring to bind them all made real. https://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2019/06/05/how-does-apple-privately-find-your-offline-devices/ -- Matthew Green's blog article about how Apple's "Find My" feature actually works. Green wrote: > The idea of the new system is to turn Apple’s existing network of > iPhones into a massive crowdsourced location tracking system. Every > active iPhone will continuously monitor for BLE beacon messages that > might be coming from a lost device. When it picks up one of these > signals, the participating phone tags the data with its own current GPS > location; then it sends the whole package up to Apple’s servers. jbn: This means Apple is using devices they sold to create a whole new line of revenue and control for themselves -- if you want to locate a lost device using this the information Apple collects, you have to go through them to get that info. You can't have your own device report its location to you over the Internet, and you can't set up an alternative network to Apple's so other Apple device owners can choose to participate in your location network and not Apple's. Location devices are also the roots of privacy problems. This is another reason why you can't trust proprietary software -- you aren't given any control over whether your device emits the signal that allows "Find My" to work. So you don't get to go 'off-grid' (not be tracked) as it were. The only real solution to avoiding the privacy problems is to not submit data to organizations (Apple, Amazon, etc.) in the first place. Once they have the data they get to choose what to do with that data (including archiving it and creating profiles on users' movements). Now perhaps it's more clear why cell phones are more honestly called trackers that happen to also make phone calls, and so are proprietary computers including iPads. Green is far to conciliatory to Apple on his blog but he does get into what could go wrong: > * If your device is constantly emitting a [signal] that uniquely > identifies it, the whole world is going to have (yet another) way to > track you. Marketers already use WiFi and Bluetooth MAC addresses to do > this: Find My could create yet another tracking channel. > > * It also exposes the phones who are doing the tracking. These people > are now going to be sending their current location to Apple (which they > may or may not already be doing). Now they’ll also be potentially > sharing this information with strangers who “lose” their devices. That > could go badly. > > * Scammers might also run active attacks in which they fake the > location of your device. While this seems unlikely, people will always > surprise you. There are no user controls for turning the hardware that allows the various forms of tracking on and off. It wouldn't be hard to add a simple on-off switch for Bluetooth, WiFi, and anything else to let the user easily and quickly decide where they want to be tracked (so users can make a more informed privacy trade-off suited to their needs and desires). Also, any organization where location data can be tracked gains power through being able to predict one's movements -- where & when you've gone for the past 3 months helps determine where & when you'll go for the next 3 months. You'd find this kind of detail and notetaking creepy if it were done in person, but when there's no clearly visible person spying on one's every movement people tend to glibly dismiss or forget that this information is invaluable to help others: rob their home or car when it's unlikely they'll be around, spy on them remotely (you can't tell when a phone's mic is hot), share information with others (including other individuals, figures of power and authority like police and governments, or political opponents). Why place that faith in a proprietor -- an organization that has already shown you they don't trust you enough to control what is supposed to be your own device? And there's no discrimination for the age of the user in all of this: if your child has a tracker (phone), or other computer running proprietary software, it too could be set up to spy on that child's location and whatever else is in mic or camera range. Would it be okay if someone followed your child around and listened in on their conversations just because they were curious what your kid was up to? If not, keep in mind that there's no way to know if your kid's tracker (phone) isn't doing that. FastCompany.com claimed that "Apple's best product is now privacy" From https://www.fastcompany.com/90236195/forget-the-new-iphones-apples-best-product-is-now-privacy > In 2018, no issue is more important than user privacy–or the lack of it. > We’re tracked by private industry on an unprecedented scale, with major > corporations having so much data about us–much of it gleaned without our > knowledge–that they can tell when a teenager is pregnant (and inform the > teen’s father[1]) or even predict your future actions[2] based on > decisions you haven’t made yet. If you want to be part of this world, > designed by advertisers and tech giants, you must relinquish your right > to privacy. In other words, we live in a commercial surveillance state. > > Well, unless you use Apple’s products. [1] http://www.slate.com/blogs/how_not_to_be_wrong/2014/06/09/big_data_what_s_even_creepier_than_target_guessing_that_you_re_pregnant.html [2] https://theintercept.com/2018/04/13/facebook-advertising-data-artificial-intelligence-ai/ The first part is almost all true -- one can take steps to not submit to the surveillance state but most computer users don't take such steps. But the last part about Apple being an exception is unprovable (due to how proprietary software works) and that last part is known to be untrue because of the available evidence. Proprietary software simply doesn't allow Fast Company (or anyone else) to stand behind such a claim. We already know from Snowden's evidence that Apple joined the NSA's PRISM program in October 2012[3] and no proprietary software is trustworthy because (by definition) proprietary software cannot be legally inspected to learn what it does, or legally altered to do something else, or legally shared with others to help our community. So Apple's users can't legally make Apple's proprietary software (such as iOS, much of MacOS X, and most tracker/phone apps) behave differently. If an Apple device reports something somewhere which the user doesn't want reported, the user can only reject running the software that rats them out (assuming they know which program did this). For example, we know from a 2011 article in The Telegraph[4] that > An unpatched security flaw in Apple’s iTunes software allowed > intelligence agencies and police to hack into users’ computers for more > than three years jbn: iTunes is proprietary, so iTunes users (no matter how capable or willing) were denied permission to fix iTunes. And Apple apparently didn't fix the problem for over 3 years. There are many more such problems for Apple including discovery of back doors, Apple censorship, Apple using technical restrictions known as DRM -- digital restrictions management -- to keep people from using their computers as they wish, Apple's surveillance, and more[5]. [3] https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c7/Prism_slide_5.jpg [4] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/8912714/Apple-iTunes-flaw-allowed-government-spying-for-3-years.html [5] https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/malware-apple.html -J From jbn at forestfield.org Fri Jun 7 03:15:26 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2019 22:15:26 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] US corporations in Germany during the 1930s In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1bae951e-daa7-44f2-0fa9-a96e6c5df654@forestfield.org> Morton K. Brussel wrote: > An appropriate, enlightening commentary: Backstage matters… > > https://therealnews.com/stories/d-day-how-the-us-supported-hitlers-rise-to-power With regard to part of that: > [...] the case of many American manufacturers, helped Germany rearm. GM, > IBM, and Ford played a major role in rearming Germany For some images to go along with these words, I strongly urge watching one of my favorite documentaries, "The Corporation". I've got a relevant excerpt of what Peter Kuznick was referring to at https://files.digitalcitizen.info/corporations-prop-up-fascists/the-corporation-nazi-germany.webm featuring Howard Zinn, Noam Chomsky, Michael Moore, and Edwin Black. In https://digitalcitizen.info/2015/03/10/coca-colas-fanta-history-is-no-mistake-corporations-have-propped-up-fascists-for-a-long-time/ I cite this clip in response to what corporate comic John Oliver said on 2014-03-09 when he called an ad for Fanta (soda) an 'unintended mistake' because the ad revealed Fanta's ugly history. That ad was no mistake and (although you wouldn't know it from Oliver) corporations continue to do business with "official enemies of the United States including terrorists, tyrants, and despotic regimes" (as "The Corporation" says). In the above clip from "The Corporation" Edwin Black is seen making the same compelling and evidence-based case he raised in his book "IBM and the Holocaust": IBM knew they were helping the Nazis. IBM knew what the Nazis were up to, regardless of what IBM rep Irving Wladawski-Berger claimed. Early IBM employee and later business guru Peter Drucker (now deceased) explained in his interview also from "The Corporation": > Peter Drucker: You know, as it happens, I know that story. I discussed > it more than once with old Mr. Watson [Tom Watson senior] and I was > around at the time. I'm not saying that Watson didn't know that the > German government used punchcards -- he probably did know -- after all > we had very few customers. Watson didn't want to do it not because he > thought it was immoral or not, but because Watson, with a very keen sense > of public relations, thought it was risky. In the last part of the clip, note how many companies were "fined for trading with official enemies of the United States including terrorists, tyrants, and despotic regimes" and how they're all companies you've heard of even today. Watch or download "The Corporation": https://archive.org/details/The_Corporation_ or if you get the DVD, get the 2-disc version with full-length interviews and a hidden bonus. I read on https://thecorporation.com/#block-views-news_and_events_blog-feat that a sequel is underway. If this is as deeply interesting and rich with detail as the first movie, I'll end up watching this sequel many times and I'll look forward to a home video release. From jbn at forestfield.org Fri Jun 7 22:18:41 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2019 17:18:41 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Notes In-Reply-To: <418d632d-a2ff-470d-a911-10338ec12c04@forestfield.org> References: <418d632d-a2ff-470d-a911-10338ec12c04@forestfield.org> Message-ID: <8a24122e-8f2c-cffb-9cf9-15f70308985e@forestfield.org> I wrote: > https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/bbc-sky-news-have-hidden-their-interviews-with-un-expert-on-the-torture-of-assange-4cb155aaf313 > -- Caitlin Johnstone reveals that "BBC, Sky News Have Hidden Their > Interviews With UN Expert On The Torture Of Assange" I'm having no problem reaching the article at the above URL but if you're having trouble reaching that article at that URL, try https://archive.fo/nT1Hf instead. As far as I know archive.fo allows visitors from anywhere on the Internet. -J From jbn at forestfield.org Fri Jun 7 22:18:40 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2019 17:18:40 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] NfN #423 notes Message-ID: News from Neptune #423 Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCdInznoRts A "Truth and Lies on US Wars" edition Links to items referenced on the show. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Kursk -- Battle of Kursk https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Normandy -- Invasion of Normandy Peter Kuznick on "D-Day: How the US Supported Hitler’s Rise to Power" interview with Paul Jay on The Real News https://therealnews.com/stories/d-day-how-the-us-supported-hitlers-rise-to-power -- transcript https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MaWz42tmxug -- video The Unknown War (1978) Billed on one Reddit.com discussion as "20 part documentary series about the Eastern Front of World War II which was withdrawn from TV airings in the US for being too sympathetic to the Soviet struggle against Nazi Germany." (source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Documentaries/comments/4m07bf/the_unknown_war_1978_20_part_documentary_series/) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Unknown_War_(Documentary) -- about the series https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAR4nmj8q10&list=PL4w-2j6Q0Qj54wIYLSAGuYUic6tgyorO7 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BYz6UzF-j4&list=PLr7tdO3Zp0VFhTUH2LD9NYPzBh9uc3Kxb -- all parts George F. Will on "When war was the answer" https://www.djournal.com/opinion/columnists/george-will-when-war-was-the-answer/article_b37b9780-8929-5a6d-a449-9a32be7d24ca.html -- one copy of this widely reprinted article but only available in certain regions (possibly only inside the US) https://archive.fo/m8biz -- an archive copy, globally accessible "Human Smoke: The Beginnings of World War II, the End of Civilization" by Nicholson Baker https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Smoke ISBN: 9781416572466 Henry V -- St. Crispin's Day speech https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9fa3HFR02E -- Laurence Olivier's version https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-yZNMWFqvM -- Kenneth Branagh's version https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TU7NrnLsr5g -- Richard Burton's version (audio) Jeffrey St. Clair on "The Dams That Kill Orca" https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/07/112277/ David Swanson on "You Can Almost Count on Each New Mass Shooter Being a Veteran" http://davidswanson.org/you-can-almost-count-on-each-new-mass-shooter-being-a-veteran/ https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/04/you-can-almost-count-on-each-new-mass-shooter-being-a-veteran/ Rachel Maddow's ratings are falling https://www.thewrap.com/rachel-maddow-just-had-her-lowest-rated-month-of-the-trump-presidency/ https://www.fiweh.com/05/28/2019/rachel-maddow-just-had-her-lowest-rated-month-of-the-trump-presidency https://news.ntd.com/ratings-for-msnbcs-rachel-maddow-drop-for-fifth-straight-month_336692.html Rep. Rodney Davis on "Honoring our fallen with actions this Memorial Day" https://votesmart.org/public-statement/1249395/herald-review-honoring-our-fallen-with-actions-this-memorial-day https://herald-review.com/opinion/davis-honoring-our-fallen-with-actions-this-memorial-day/article_1b1919fd-2754-53e8-bd80-f459e7932263.html Related to drone warfare: "Drone" (2014 film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone_(2014_film) Related to anti-war movement within the US armed forces during the Vietnam War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir!_No_Sir! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTJF9MEU9XA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nPJgeg6hpA -- copies of the movie online "Ho" by David Halberstam ISBN-10: 0742559939 ISBN-13: 978-0742559936 Mueller Report https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZCXFmlEjmg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCcByndW6ag https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvAxhhk9QwU -- PBS NewsHour reports https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEjzF2Cx1UY -- PBS NewsHour/FrontLine special report https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvapuwssM8E -- Jimmy Dore interviews Aaron Maté on Mueller's statement Rob Urie on "Electoral Politics Versus Democracy" https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/07/electoral-politics-versus-democracy/ Sen. Bernie Sanders on "Bernie Sanders: I Know Where I Came From. Does President Trump?" https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/02/opinion/bernie-sanders-trump.html Adolph Reed on "What Materialist Black Political History Actually Looks Like" https://nonsite.org/editorial/what-materialist-black-political-history-actually-looks-like Sundiata Cha-Jua articles in The News-Gazette http://www.news-gazette.com/author/sundiata-cha-jua Adolph Reed on "Judith Stein and the Historical Materialist Study of American Political History" https://nonsite.org/article/judith-stein-and-the-historical-materialist-study-of-american-political-history -J From jbn at forestfield.org Tue Jun 11 22:08:19 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2019 17:08:19 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] AOTA #482 notes Message-ID: <86c7efc6-39f3-e1a9-b29e-93da48eb6955@forestfield.org> AWARE on the Air #482 Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baO7tDwyqEg C. J. Hopkins on "The Quds Day Panic of 2019" http://www.unz.com/chopkins/the-quds-day-panic-of-2019/ https://hedgeaccordingly.com/berlins-quds-day-panic-of-2019/ Other articles by C. J. Hopkins http://www.unz.com/author/c-j-hopkins/ Glen Ford on "Black Lives Matter Founder Launches Huge Project to Shrink Black Lives" https://blackagendareport.com/black-lives-matter-founder-launches-huge-project-shrink-black-lives Chris Hedges interviews Nils Melzer, UN Special Rapporteur on Torture https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fq_P9Nj6N58 Footage of Assange inside Belmarsh prison (all from RUPTLY as other news outlets don't seem to want to carry this) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHtFhApWGDQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0UEv7C8Bco https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9a9qh6OiEmE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0UEv7C8Bco Related: Various visitors to Assange in Belmarsh prison https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoDBJdXUbAA -- Julian Assange's father John Shipton https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYf5oD-I33Y -- investigative reporter John Pilger https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEnsWayCGP8 -- former MP George Galloway & current MP Chris Williamson https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-JbDUHjvv0 -- Political activist & artist Ai Weiwei https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Xqku7mG2MQ -- Footage outside Belmarsh prison as Assange is expected to get his first visitors. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXiR5ex26e4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmWuFGHY9oU -- UN Special Rapporteur, Nils Melzer From cgestabrook at gmail.com Tue Jun 11 22:11:02 2019 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2019 17:11:02 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] AOTA #482 notes In-Reply-To: <86c7efc6-39f3-e1a9-b29e-93da48eb6955@forestfield.org> References: <86c7efc6-39f3-e1a9-b29e-93da48eb6955@forestfield.org> Message-ID: <136F8827-7589-40C1-8488-86E362BC9AB0@gmail.com> An identity politics edition > On Jun 11, 2019, at 5:08 PM, J.B. Nicholson via Peace-discuss wrote: > > AWARE on the Air #482 > Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baO7tDwyqEg > > C. J. Hopkins on "The Quds Day Panic of 2019" > http://www.unz.com/chopkins/the-quds-day-panic-of-2019/ > https://hedgeaccordingly.com/berlins-quds-day-panic-of-2019/ > > Other articles by C. J. Hopkins > http://www.unz.com/author/c-j-hopkins/ > > Glen Ford on "Black Lives Matter Founder Launches Huge Project to Shrink Black Lives" > https://blackagendareport.com/black-lives-matter-founder-launches-huge-project-shrink-black-lives > > Chris Hedges interviews Nils Melzer, UN Special Rapporteur on Torture > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fq_P9Nj6N58 > > Footage of Assange inside Belmarsh prison (all from RUPTLY as other news outlets don't seem to want to carry this) > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHtFhApWGDQ > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0UEv7C8Bco > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9a9qh6OiEmE > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0UEv7C8Bco > > Related: Various visitors to Assange in Belmarsh prison > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoDBJdXUbAA -- Julian Assange's father John Shipton > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYf5oD-I33Y -- investigative reporter John Pilger > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEnsWayCGP8 -- former MP George Galloway & current MP Chris Williamson > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-JbDUHjvv0 -- Political activist & artist Ai Weiwei > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Xqku7mG2MQ -- Footage outside Belmarsh prison as Assange is expected to get his first visitors. > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXiR5ex26e4 > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmWuFGHY9oU -- UN Special Rapporteur, Nils Melzer > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From cgestabrook at gmail.com Thu Jun 13 01:31:14 2019 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2019 20:31:14 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Statement on Illinois Abortion Law References: <1368098196.8952.1560386942055@email.blitzdigitalgroup.com> Message-ID: <8E4C4A58-6ED3-436C-8CE5-185A632BEFB5@gmail.com> > > Illinois RHA Makes Radical Changes to Allow Abortion on Viable Fetuses > > The Thomas More Society has declared Illinois Governor JB Pritzker's signing of SB 25, the state's extreme abortion law, to be tantamount to "legalizing the death penalty, with no possibility of appeal, for viable unborn preemies." > > "The legacy of this governor, and any legislator who voted to pass this law, will be that of cruel dehumanization of unborn Illinoisans on a mass scale," declared Peter Breen, Thomas More Society Vice President and Senior Counsel. > > The Honorable Peter Breen, former Illinois Representative and Thomas More Society Vice President and Senior Counsel, issued a brief analysis and response to the Democratic supermajority's legislation, rushed through the Illinois House during the Memorial Day weekend and sent to the governor's desk by the State Senate on June 4, 2019. > > "This law is the most radical sweeping pro-abortion measure in America and makes Illinois an abortion destination for the country. The deceptively titled ‘Reproductive Health Act' gives our state some of the most extremely permissive abortion laws of any state in the nation," explained Breen… Click here to read more > READ MORE > > Thomas More Society > 309 W. Washington Street > Suite 1250 > Chicago, IL 60606 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kcapel at sbcglobal.net Thu Jun 13 02:15:14 2019 From: kcapel at sbcglobal.net (Karen Capel) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2019 21:15:14 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fire on Ice Message-ID: Fire on Ice Tonight free on HBO https://www.hbo.com/documentaries/ice-on-fire as heard on Thom Hartmann From kcapel at sbcglobal.net Thu Jun 13 02:18:26 2019 From: kcapel at sbcglobal.net (Karen Capel) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2019 21:18:26 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Fire on Ice...whoops: Ice on Fire In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6f1d2ba0-f482-5566-02c0-45109ade5066@sbcglobal.net> Whoops...got title backwards. Sorry: Ice on Fire -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Fire on Ice Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2019 21:15:14 -0500 From: Karen Capel Fire on Ice Tonight free on HBO https://www.hbo.com/documentaries/ice-on-fire as heard on Thom Hartmann -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jbn at forestfield.org Fri Jun 14 03:44:35 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 22:44:35 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Notes Message-ID: <8f8dfd2b-aaab-6e65-b245-c6d3ff31ddbf@forestfield.org> Some additional notes to spur discussion on News from Neptune and AWARE on the Air. Have a great show guys. > There's a reason education sucks, and it's the same reason it will > never, ever, ever be fixed. Don't look for it, be happy with what you > got. Because the owners of this country don't want that. I'm talkin' > about the real owners now. The real owners, the big wealthy business > interests that control things and make all the important decisions. > Forget the politicians. The politicians are put there to give you the > idea that you have freedom of choice. You don’t. You have no choice. You > have owners. They own you. They own everything. They own all the > important land. They own and control the corporations. They’ve long > since bought, and paid for the Senate, the Congress, the state houses, > the city halls, they got the judges in their back pockets and they own > all the big media companies, so they control just about all of the news > and information you get to hear. They got you by the balls. They spend > billions of dollars every year lobbying, lobbying, to get what they > want. Well, we know what they want. They want more for themselves and > less for everybody else, but I’ll tell you what they don’t want: they > don’t want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking. They > don’t want well informed, well educated people capable of critical > thinking. They’re not interested in that. That doesn’t help them. That’s > against their interests. That’s right. They don’t want people who are > smart enough to sit around a kitchen table and think about how badly > they’re getting fucked by a system that threw them overboard 30 fuckin' > years ago. They don’t want that. You know what they want? They want > obedient workers. Obedient workers, people who are just smart enough to > run the machines and do the paperwork. And just dumb enough to passively > accept all these increasingly shittier jobs with the lower pay, the > longer hours, the reduced benefits, the end of overtime and vanishing > pension that disappears the minute you go to collect it, and now they’re > coming for your Social Security money. They want your fuckin' retirement > money. They want it back so they can give it to their criminal friends > on Wall Street, and you know something? They’ll get it. They’ll get it > all from you sooner or later cause they own this fuckin' place. It’s a > big club and you ain't in it. You and I are not in The Big Club. By the > way, it’s the same big club they use to beat you over the head with all > day long when they tell you what to believe. All day long beating you > over the head with their media telling you what to believe, what to > think and what to buy. The table has tilted folks. The game is rigged > and nobody seems to notice. Nobody seems to care. Good honest > hard-working people: White collar, blue collar it doesn’t matter what > color shirt you have on. Good honest hard-working people continue, these > are people of modest means. Continue to elect these rich cocksuckers who > don’t give a fuck about them. They don’t give a fuck about you. They > don’t give a fuck about you. They don’t care about you at all. At all. > At all. And nobody seems to notice. Nobody seems to care. That’s what > the owners count on. The fact that Americans will probably remain > willfully ignorant of the big red, white and blue dick that’s being > jammed up their assholes everyday, because the owners of this country > know the truth. It’s called the American Dream cause you have to be > asleep to believe it. -- George Carlin https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5dBZDSSky0 Justice delayed is justice denied: Grenfell edition https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUC0hh-KX78 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1a_By0XV_RU -- UK government figures reveal that almost 60,000 people still live in dangerous tower blocks. This means that the UK government knows others face what could be harmful or lethal risk because the tower block construction uses construction material which is known to be substandard. Grenfell had cladding made from material including arsenic which, when burned, produced toxic smoke and helped kill some of the 72 people who died in the June 14, 2017 fire. Over 70 people were injured and 223 escaped the building. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xy5dSD_3QSQ -- "Grenfell inquiry is taking too long" says North Kensington resident. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OMnCfIwPe8 -- Grenfell survivors sue US companies for faulty building materials, filing their suits before the UK commission is finished because if they don't file before the statute of limitations runs out, they lose their chance to file at all. Justice delayed is justice denied: Vietnam edition https://cdnv.rt.com/files/2019.06/5cfd26b1dda4c8570b8b459d.mp4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5w17n5O6jno -- Sophie Shevardnadze's interview with Phan Thị Kim Phúc, famous for being the 9-year-old girl shown running naked down a road after a South Vietnam Air Force napalm attack suffering from chemical burns with large portions of her skin missing. https://www.rt.com/shows/sophieco/461476-vietnam-war-napalm-girl/ -- Transcript of above interview > Kim Phúc: I was 9 years old when that picture was taken, in 1972. > Avidly, I remember everything on that day. As children, we were allowed > to play in the temple near the bomb shelter. And I remember on June 8, > after lunch, we got to play around. And suddenly the soldiers yelled to > the children asked us to run out of that temple. So I remember, I was > one of them, of the children. I got in the front of the temple. Then, I > saw the airplane go towards me, so loud and so close. And I just stood > right there, on highway One, because I got to the highway One. And so, I > remember, as a child, I just stood right there, and then I saw > everything. I saw the four bombs landing like that. Then, I heard the > noise, bup-bup, bup-bup! Like that, and then, suddenly, the fire was > everywhere around me, and my clothes were burned off by the fire. And I > saw the fire was over my left arm, and then, like that, and I used my > right hand, I web it up. Then... I still remember my thought at that > moment: “Oh my goodness, I got burned, so I would be ugly, and people > would see me in a different way!” But at that moment, I was so scared > and terrified. I didn't see anybody at that moment. Then, I stopped > thinking about everything, just ran out of that fire, and then I saw my > brothers, and my cousin, and some of the soldiers right there. Then we > kept running and running. I remember I ran for a while, until I felt so > tired that I couldn’t run anymore. Then I stopped and cried out: “Too > hot, too hot!” And I remember, one of the soldiers tried to help me, he > gave me some water to drink, and he tried to help me. He poured water > over me. Then I lost consciousness. I didn't remember anything else, > that moment. Censorship: More website and VPN blacklisting, this time from China. https://theintercept.com/2019/06/07/china-bans-the-intercept-and-other-news-sites-in-censorship-black-friday/ -- Keep in mind that whatever technical measures the Chinese and Russian governments can get away with are viewed as goals by other ostensibly more freedom-loving governments like the US. Judging by what US and UK legislators are pushing for with social media organizations in the ongoing hearings, the US and UK governments are eager to see how effective various Internet blocks are (including outlawing VPNs, jailing VPN operators, and setting up firewalls that block access to certain sites). Here's the Intercept about a recent Chinese block: > The Chinese government appears to have launched a major new internet > crackdown, blocking the country’s citizens from accessing The > Intercept’s website and those of at least seven other Western news > organizations. > > On Friday, people in China began reporting that they could not access > the websites of The Intercept, The Guardian, the Washington Post, > HuffPost, NBC News, the Christian Science Monitor, the Toronto Star, and > Breitbart News. > > It is unclear exactly when the censorship came into effect or the > reasons for it. But Tuesday marked the 30th anniversary of the Tiananmen > Square massacre, and Chinese authorities have reportedly increased > levels of online censorship to coincide with the event. > > Charlie Smith, co-founder of GreatFire.org, an organization that > monitors Chinese government internet censorship, said that the apparent > crackdown on Western news sites represented a significant new > development and described it as a “censorship Black Friday.” > > “This frenzied activity could indicate that the authorities are > accelerating their push to sever the link between Chinese citizens and > any news source that falls outside of the influence of The Party,” said > Smith, referencing the ruling Communist Party regime. > > For years, China has blocked several Western news organizations after > they have published stories that reflect negatively on the government. > The New York Times, Bloomberg, the Wall Street Journal, and Reuters have > all previously been censored, rendering their websites inaccessible in > the country. > > China operates an internet censorship system known as the Great > Firewall, which uses filtering equipment to stop people in the country > from accessing content published on banned websites that are operated > outside China’s borders. > > It is possible to circumvent the censorship using tools such as a > virtual private network, or VPN. However, use of technology that > bypasses the Great Firewall is banned — and people in the country who > sell access to these services have been jailed. Censorship: YouTube is catching undesirable press for its unclear definition and application of its policies https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUFRXs4ls2w -- RT's CrossTalk discussion on this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIKnsw6Xo8Y -- Jimmy Dore show on Vox reporter Carlos Maza complaining that YouTube isn't censoring the correct people. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWzK81bxgbE -- Jimmy Dore featuring Glenn Greenwald's reaction to Maza's call for censorship. In other words, Maza is down with censorship so long as his political opponents are silenced. Therein lies a major problem with censorship: there's no way to be sure that one's own speech or that the "correct" ideas will be shut down/deplatformed/silenced/shadowbanned/etc. - Shutting down an account means disallowing the users with that account's credentials to login to the service with that account. Sometimes this includes making all posts by that user to vanish from the system. - Deplatforming a person means to remove opportunities for that person to speak and be heard (such as canceling local artist Nina Paley's latest movie "Seder-Masochism" and denying her a chance to speak and take questions from the viewers). - Shadowbanning means allowing a user on a service to post without telling that user that their subscribers (followers, etc.) aren't being notified of their new posts. The censorship isn't easily understood as being just against one particular set of political views. It seems that not only are those in favor of Pres. Trump finding it hard to get their messages published on YouTube, but so too are anti-police abuse news reporters and commentators, anti-war news and comments, and anyone else who speaks outside a narrow allowable range of debate. Assange: US reportedly officially asks for extradition to US https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GzPdVe6OyM -- Honoring such extradition risks 175 years in prison, a life sentence. This RT report is a good summary of the facts of the matter to date and the risk for all journalists worldwide as the US pursues its extraterritorial prosecution for something that has long been known to be legal in the US -- publishing illicitly obtained documents. Since the US knows it can't get anywhere with this line of argument, the US indictment alleges that Assange materially assisted Manning with obtaining the Iraq & Afghan war logs. But there's no new evidence on this, nothing that would suggest this to be the case. Also, there's no reason to believe that Manning (an intelligence analyst assigned to an Army unit at the time) needed anyone's help because Manning already had access to classified documents. Getting physical custody by way of Sweden remains a plan B for the US -- in case extradition from the UK to the US fails, Sweden's slow-walked so-called "preliminary investigation" into sexual misconduct allegations could result in Sweden requesting extradition. If such an extradition request were made and honored, the US could get Assange in Sweden. The UK has the power to deny Sweden extradition on the basis that Sweden is going to hand him over to the US, but the UK might not choose to use this power. Assange remains a publisher who is an Australian citizen (formerly also an Ecuadorian citizen), WikiLeaks remains not an American publishing organization, and thus the US' prosecution of Assange remains extraterritorial ultimately based in doing something American publishers are ostensibly allowed to do (what the Washington Post was allowed to do with the Pentagon Papers) -- reveal US war crimes via illicitly obtained documents provided by third parties. https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/news/press-releases-and-statements/mi5-%E2%80%9Cunlawfully%E2%80%9D-handled-bulk-surveillance-data-liberty https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2UaOdRNd5s -- RT's report UK civil liberties group "Liberty" has filed suit against MI5 (UK's domestic counter-intelligence and security service) and during discovery found that > The British security service MI5 has been unlawfully retaining innocent > people’s data for years. > > It also failed to give senior judges accurate information about repeated > breaches of its duty to delete bulk surveillance data, and has been > criticised for mishandling sensitive legally privileged material. The data appears to be data collected about UK citizens via indiscriminate surveillance mechanisms (widely known as "mass surveillance") meaning data is collected even if that data describes something not tied to any current investigation. Some of the data involved was highly sensitive and stored in ways that granted access to hundreds of people who should not have had access to that data. [...] > So serious was the breach that, when first notified, IPCO – [the The > Investigatory Powers Commissioner’s Office --] the body responsible for > overseeing government surveillance practices – sent a team of inspectors > to MI5 for a week-long investigation. > > In a statement quietly released by Home Secretary Sajid Javid, it was > confirmed that MI5 had breached the IPA in their handling and retention > of data belonging to the public. According to the statement, IPCO > concluded those risks were “serious and required immediate mitigation”. > Home Secretary Sajid Javid has said that he will now launch an > independent review of this incident. Thanks to Liberty's work, we now know that: Investigatory Powers Commissioner, Lord Justice Fulford, concluded that what MI5 did was "undoubtedly unlawful". MI5 knew for 3 years that what they were doing was illegal before informing the IPCO. Liberty also wrote: > Warrants for bulk surveillance were issued by senior judges (known as > Judicial Commissioners) on the understanding that MI5’s data handling > obligations under the IPA were being met - when they were not. The > Commissioner has pointed out that warrants would not have been issued if > breaches were known. The Commissioner states that “it is impossible to > sensibly reconcile the explanation of the handling of arrangements the > Judicial Commissioners were given in briefings…with what MI5 knew over a > protracted period of time was happening." On Corbyn facing bogus claims of antisemitism and Pompeo's claim that Corbyn must be stopped because he challenges militarism https://www.jacobinmag.com/2019/06/trump-jeremy-corbyn-pompeo-coup-labour-antisemitism David Broder wrote: > “I don’t see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist > due to the irresponsibility of its own people. The issues are much too > important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves.” > > Henry Kissinger pronounced these words at a June 1970 meeting of the > CIA’s 40 Committee, which spent up to $6.5 million trying to turn that > fall’s Chilean election against socialist Salvador Allende. It didn’t > work, and Allende won anyway, so the CIA began working to remove him > through strikes, internal subversion and ultimately, military force. > > The United Kingdom isn’t about to suffer a coup. But it seems that the > week after Donald Trump made his state visit to London, our countries’ > “special relationship” doesn’t include much respect for British > democracy. When Trump picked out Boris Johnson as his favored candidate > to succeed Theresa May, at least he’d been asked to do it. In fact, the > Tory leadership candidates were positively queuing up to seek the > Donald’s support, as they tried to appeal to their party’s hard-right > base. > > But this weekend Secretary of State Mike Pompeo went much further. In > private remarks recorded by the Washington Post[1], he insisted that the > irresponsibility of the British voters couldn’t be allowed to bring > Jeremy Corbyn into office: the issues are just too important. Corbyn’s > record of opposition to US militarism as well as his challenge to the > power of the wealthiest Brits just aren’t acceptable to Washington. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/pompeo-pledges-not-to-wait-for-britains-elections-to-push-back-against-corbyn-and-anti-semitism/2019/06/07/dfeaa180-9c27-4495-9322-3d16b7d1541a_story.html Venezuelan coup is failing because opposition supporters are in it for their own interests and aren't uniting behind our coup says Mike Pompeo https://on.rt.com/9vuk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yw67uMl4GZo > The effort to cobble together a united front against Maduro is not a > thing of "these past months," according to Pompeo. It has been ongoing > since he became CIA director, just after Donald Trump's swearing-in as > president. > > "Since the day I became CIA director, that was something that was at the > center of what President Donald Trump was trying to do," he said. > > The task "has proven devilishly difficult" though, as everybody in the > opposition camp is after their own interests and wants to fight over the > spoils rather than focus on the common cause of a coup. > > "The moment Maduro leaves, everybody's going to raise their hands and > [say], "Take me, I'm the next president of Venezuela.' It would be > forty-plus people who believe they're the rightful heir to Maduro," > Pompeo reportedly said in the audio. > > In an attempt to force Washington's various stooges to team up, Pompeo > sought to enlist help from religious organizations. > > "We were trying to support various religious... institutions to get the > opposition to come together," he said. > > Pompeo blamed the disarray among the opposition for the failure of the > April 30 coup attempt by a group of soldiers, which fizzled out within > 24 hours. Foreign policy doesn't help explain anything does it? https://www.blackagendareport.com/black-lives-matter-founder-launches-huge-project-shrink-black-lives -- Black Agenda Report.com's Glen Ford on the scam of NYT's recent poll of Black political opinion which leaves out foreign policy in order to help the Democratic Party look like that party is focused on issues of importance to Black voters. > Alicia Garza, of Black Lives Matter fame, last week introduced her > latest project in the pages of the New York Times: a survey of “more > than 31,000 black people from all 50 states” to determine, as the > headline announced, “What Black People Want.” The Black Census > Project“is the largest independent survey of black people ever conducted > in the United States,” wrote Garza. A collaboration of Garza’s Black > Futures Lab, Color of Change, Dēmos, and Socioanalítica Research, the > project “trained more than 100 black organizers and worked with some 30 > grass-roots organizations” to elicit Black people’s views on a range of > domestic subjects – but asked not a single question related to war and > peace. > > Garza & Co. have thus performed a kind of lobotomy on the Black polity > in the United States, excising from public policy discussion Black > Americans’ views on the nation’s endless military and economic wars > against people of color around the world. Garza’s team appears to have > operated on the premise that Black people have no opinion on the death > of millions and the destruction of whole societies, crimes that are > committed in their name by the U.S. government. As if Black Americans > don’t see the connection between ever-expanding war budgets and > constantly shrinking domestic social spending. The project is structured > as if African Americans are provincial boobs who don’t give a damn about > foreign affairs or the intersection of U.S. foreign and domestic policy. [...] > The survey is a hustle to make Garza, Color of Change and their (already > deeply-connected) financial backers bigger players in the Democratic > Party – without challenging lawless U.S. empire, “the greatest purveyor > of violence in the world, today,” as Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. stated > more than half a century ago, and as Malcolm X hammered home till his > dying breath. > > Garza knows what she’s doing. The Movement for Black Lives platform, > titled “A Vision for Black Lives: Policy Demands for Black Power, > Freedom and Justice," is quite radical in its demands to end the > (domestic) war on Black people, and on reparations, disinvestment of > oppressive government and economic institutions, economic justice, > community control, and decriminalizing Black political activity. It puts > forward no demands on U.S. foreign policy, but instead offers an > apology: “While the movement's platform largely focuses on the > implementation of domestic policies that will advance black communities > in America, the movement also recognizes that patriarchy, exploitative > capitalism, militarism, and white supremacy know no borders.” > > But Garza knows the borders of what is acceptable to the corporate > Democratic Party, and adheres to the limits imposed by the fat cats – > who are also among her donors. This is sometimes called political > “capture” of dissidents by the ruling class. However, the term “capture” > hardly fits when the prey is begging to be caught. Elections: American meddling in foreign elections is still in vogue https://news.yahoo.com/german-stars-lead-call-shun-far-goerliwood-113129343.html https://today.rtl.lu/news/world/a/1359376.html https://www.breitbart.com/news/german-stars-lead-call-to-shun-far-right-in-goerliwood/ -- AfP's report https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jT_3ftLYZHE -- RT's report (which features insightful interviews with people on the street and not just a corporate viewpoint) Goerlitz, a German town which escaped being bombed in WWII, has many older buildings and generally retains an older look which Hollywood film producers find useful for their productions (examples include Wes Anderson's "The Grand Budapest Hotel" from 2014 and Quentin Tarantino's "Inglourious Basterds" from 2009 which were both shot in and around Goerlitz). Goerlitz will soon hold a mayoral election. The anti-establishment candidate, Sebastian Wippel from the AfD (Alternative for Germany/Deutschland) party, has the current lead in first-round elections over Octavian Ursu from the establishment CPD (Christian Democratic) party (36.4% for Wippel versus 30.3% for Ursu). The second round vote will occur on June 16. Green Party candidate Franziska Schubert, 37, came in third place with 27.9%. The Associated Free Press wrote: > Goerlitz, Germany's most eastern town, has seen a mass exodus -- like > many others in the former East -- as people sought higher wages in > western regions. This seems consistent with reactions against neoliberal economic policies around the world. In response, some movie stars will release a joint statement to be published on Monday which is said to include: > Don't give in to hate and hostility, conflict and exclusion. > > Please vote wisely... Don't betray your convictions the moment someone > claims to be able to solve problems for you. Shortly after Trump was duly elected as US president, those who backed the Hillary Clinton campaign (which certainly includes many inside the American entertainment industry) claimed that Russians had somehow put Trump in office. The claim was that Russian meddled in the 2016 US election merely by commenting on that election (however distantly) via social media (chiefly Facebook and Twitter). This disproven claim kicked off over 2 years of repeated allegations of "Russian interference" in US elections. Similar allegations were started elsewhere and always just before an election (only to be shot down soon after). Going back further, the US is widely known to have sent in the CIA to interfere with elections around the world, including assassinating democratically elected leaders the US Permanent Government (Deep State) does not approve. Why should Goerlitz citizens seriously consider what outsiders say (particularly those connected with the American entertainment industry) when they hear the aforementioned statement? How are those words not "Hollywood interference" in Goerlitz elections? Isn't this just another clear indication of election hypocrisy following in a long line of such hypocrisies? Brazil: Leaked documents indicate unfair prosecution against Lula https://www.democracynow.org/2019/6/12/secret_files_show_how_brazils_elites -- Democracy Now interview with Glenn Greenwald and transcript. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gUKBFskQUI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NluOgOwlg8A -- RT's reports. Brazilian prosecutor Deltan Dallagnol and Intercept's Rafael Moro Martins are interviewed. https://theintercept.com/2019/06/09/brazil-lula-operation-car-wash-sergio-moro/ https://theintercept.com/2019/06/09/brazil-car-wash-prosecutors-workers-party-lula/ https://theintercept.com/2019/06/09/brazil-archive-operation-car-wash/ -- Intercept articles on leaked documents about Brazil's operation "Car Wash": > These stories are based on a massive archive of previously undisclosed > materials — including private chats, audio recordings, videos, photos, > court proceedings, and other documentation — provided to us by an > anonymous source. They reveal serious wrongdoing, unethical behavior, > and systematic deceit about which the public, both in Brazil and > internationally, has the right to know. A powerful judge (Judge Sergio Moro) and a prosecutor appear to have: > led to the imprisonment of former President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva > last year. Lula’s conviction by [Judge Sergio Moro], once it was > quickly affirmed by an appellate court, rendered him [Lula] ineligible > to run for president at a time when all polls showed that Lula — who was > twice elected president by large margins in 2002 and in 2006 before > being term-limited out of office in 2010 with an 87 percent approval > rating — was the frontrunner in the 2018 presidential race. Lula’s > exclusion from the election, based on Moro’s finding of guilt, was a key > episode that paved the way for Bolsonaro’s election victory. > > Perhaps most remarkably, after Bolsonaro won the presidency, he created > a new position of unprecedented authority, referred to by Brazilians as > “super justice minister,” to oversee an agency with consolidated powers > over law enforcement, surveillance, and investigation previously > interspersed among multiple ministries. Bolsonaro created that position > for the benefit of the very judge who found Lula guilty, Sergio Moro, > and it is the position Moro now occupies. In other words, Moro now > wields immense police and surveillance powers in Brazil — courtesy of a > president who was elected only after Moro, while he was as judge, > rendered Bolsonaro’s key adversary ineligible to run against him. Brazil's Supreme Court is investigating this. https://theintercept.com/2019/06/11/brazil-lula-ro-khanna-operation-car-wash/ -- US Rep. Ro Khanna is also calling for an investigation into Brazil's prosecution of Lula. RT interviewed The Intercept's Rafael Moro Martins about their own publications based on the leaked documents: > Rafael Moro Martins: We are continuing our work on the case. As we said, > these are just our first reports. We have a lot of information; we have > analyzed, I think, only 1% of the conversations. We will publish > materials from these messages. Brexit fallout continues: Half of Brits have no public trust in Boris Johnson or Michael Gove. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9rD41K05Ho -- RT's report which echoes what came before the US 2016 presidential election in which two very disliked candidates (Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump) ran and the public largely didn't know about Green and Libertarian party candidates. In the 2016 US presidential election, most registered voters chose to not vote for US president at all. Despite massive favorable coverage in the media (whether saying outright that the host liked her for president or merely failing to report on her politics), Mrs. Clinton apparently failed to convince these voters to come out to the polls to vote for her. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtxXSviKnJ4 -- meanwhile, Boris Johnson and Rory Stewart lead in the polls to be best Prime Minister. Economy: It's all about class...and debt https://www.wsj.com/video/best-moments-from-the-commencement-speeches-of-2019/4F48A380-A086-4700-91FF-8EE809E687AF.html -- Wall St. Journal's "Highlights from the Commencement Speeches of 2019" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqSo3eKfRsc -- Jimmy Dore reaction What do billionaires have to teach the recent college graduates of 2019? > Media entrepreneur Oprah Winfrey: So, take a deep breath with me right > now. [Takes a deep breath] And repeat this: Everything is always working > out for me. [The crowd remains silent.] I wanna hear it: Everything is > always working out for me. [The crowd remains silent.] That's my mantra. > Make it yours. Everything is always working out for me. Because it is > and it has and it will continue to be as you forge and discover your own > path. > Apple CEO Tim Cook: As you go out into the world, don't waste time on > problems that have been solved. Don't get hung up on what other people > say is practical. Instead, steer your ship into the choppy seas. Look > for the rough spots. The problems that seem too big. The complexities > that other people are content to work around. It's in those places that > you will find your purpose. It's there that you can make your greatest > contribution. One "rough spot", one "problem that seems too big" is paying off one's own college loan debt. Another is asking why students in one of the wealthiest countries in the world have college loan debt in the first place. Or why so many young people are economically forced to live with their parents again (an occurrence so common now it has a term -- "boomerang". According to Pew Research (from https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/05/05/its-becoming-more-common-for-young-adults-to-live-at-home-and-for-longer-stretches/ ) > As of 2016, 15% of 25- to 35-year-old Millennials were living in their > parents’ home. This is 5 percentage points higher than the share of > Generation Xers who lived in their parents’ home in 2000 when they were > the same age (10%), and nearly double the share of the Silent Generation > who lived at home in 1964 (8%). According to Forbes magazine (from https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfriedman/2019/02/25/student-loan-debt-statistics-2019/ ) > Student loan debt in 2019 is the highest ever. > > The latest student loan debt statistics for 2019 show how serious the > student loan debt crisis has become for borrowers across all > demographics and age groups. There are more than 44 million borrowers > who collectively owe $1.5 trillion in student loan debt in the U.S. > alone. Student loan debt is now the second highest consumer debt > category - behind only mortgage debt - and higher than both credit cards > and auto loans. Borrowers in the Class of 2017, on average, owe $28,650, > according to the Institute for College Access and Success. So perhaps one will need more than merely repeating a mantra to oneself like "everything is always working out for [them]". "Steering [one's] ship into the choppy seas" apparently doesn't pay the rent. Not one of the clips from Wall St. Journal's commencement speech summaries (dating back years) features anyone saying that young people should become activists pushing to reduce the war budget by 50%. Not one of the invariably wealthy politicians, entertainers, and industrialists who give these vapid speeches recommends that the citizenry agitate to reallocate federal money to pay off all current college loan debt, liberate future students from college loan debt, and end homelessness -- all of which could be paid for by reallocating a few trillion dollars away from killing people around the world. I don't think that's an accident. Law: A recent case points to a problem with the term "intellectual property" and why one should never use that term except to criticize use of that term. Also, can the state do whatever they want? https://www.chron.com/business/article/UH-can-be-sued-for-using-photo-judge-rules-12992526.php https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/article/Texas-court-says-photographer-has-no-recourse-13973674.php -- > [Houston photographer Jim Olive, who] has made a career out of getting > difficult and dangerous aerial shots from open helicopters, sued the > University of Houston two years ago with a novel argument that using one > of his photographs without compensation or permission was an unlawful > "taking" under the Texas Constitution, which prohibits government > agencies from taking private property without adequate compensation. > > Olive tried the approach after the University of Houston rejected his > claim that the public university should pay for a photo it used without > permission in web and print publications, contending the university has > sovereign immunity, a well-established legal principle that protects a > state from getting sued. > > Olive was elated his constitutional takings case was allowed to proceed > last year, but this week he was trying to make sense of what happened. > He has never been paid for the picture by the University of Houston, now > he can't recover damages and he was ordered by the appeals court to pay > the legal fees of the University of Houston, which Olive said he had no > idea how he was going to do. > > "It just doesn't seem fair to me," he said. > > The bigger issue for the creative community, he said, is that the > decision means that public institutions in Texas -- including public > hospitals, universities and government agencies -- don't have to pay for > photographs and other creative content. > > "With this, they can just run rampant over copyright and take > intellectual property with impunity," said Olive. It's strange that Jim Olive didn't pursue this as a straightforward copyright infringement case but instead chose this "novel argument" (as the Houston Chronicle put it in their article) of calling the University's behavior an "unlawful 'taking' under the Texas Constitution". Did this argument come from thinking about the phrase "intellectual property" and conflating physical property with information? It makes sense that if one sues for the wrong thing, one risks losing their case. But if the court "contend[ed that] the university has sovereign immunity, a well-established legal principle that protects a state from getting sued" (again, as the Houston Chronicle wrote), how far does that power go? Unfortunately the available descriptions of the case in these articles raise more questions than they answer but so-called "intellectual property" doesn't comport with physical property (such as land). The Free Software Foundation has written about the problems with the phrase "intellectual property": From https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#IntellectualProperty > Publishers and lawyers like to describe copyright as “intellectual > property”—a term also applied to patents, trademarks, and other more > obscure areas of law. These laws have so little in common, and differ so > much, that it is ill-advised to generalize about them. It is best to > talk specifically about “copyright,” or about “patents,” or about > “trademarks.” > > The term “intellectual property” carries a hidden assumption—that the > way to think about all these disparate issues is based on an analogy > with physical objects, and our conception of them as physical property. > > When it comes to copying, this analogy disregards the crucial difference > between material objects and information: information can be copied and > shared almost effortlessly, while material objects can't be. > > To avoid spreading unnecessary bias and confusion, it is best to adopt a > firm policy not to speak or even think in terms of “intellectual > property”.[1] > > The hypocrisy of calling these powers “rights” is starting to make the > World “Intellectual Property” Organization embarrassed.[2] [1] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.html [2] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/wipo-PublicAwarenessOfCopyright-2002.html Presumably if the University of Houston had taken ownership of Olive's land, Olive might have been paid. It's also interesting to consider who benefits from the state arrogating this "sovereign immunity" power to itself: not University of Houston students seeking gratis textbooks (which apparently that University may copy and distribute at no charge without paying a copyright holder) and not prisoners or Houstonians who want a full library of works of all kinds (most of which are under copyright). -J From jbn at forestfield.org Fri Jun 14 23:45:56 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 18:45:56 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News from Neptune #424 notes Message-ID: <64472f98-95de-eb47-22ba-44d16239b5ce@forestfield.org> News from Neptune #424 A "Deep Fake" edition Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knELJ8LSl94 A list of links to items referenced on the show. Craig Murray on "The Gulf of Credibility" https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/06/the-gulf-of-credibility/ "Human Smoke: The Beginnings of World War II, the End of Civilization" by Nicholson Baker https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Smoke ISBN: 9781416572466 "The Meaning of the Second World War" by Ernest Mandel ISBN-13: 978-1844674794 ISBN-10: 1844674797 Complete book: https://kok.memoryoftheworld.org/Ernest%20Mandel/The%20Meaning%20of%20the%20Second%20World%20War%20(25)/The%20Meaning%20of%20the%20Second%20World%20War%20-%20Ernest%20Mandel.pdf David Brooks on "Voters, Your Foreign Policy Views Stink!: Rogue nations thrive when the good lose all conviction." https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/13/opinion/foreign-policy-populism.html "The Jungle Grows Back" by Robert Kagan ISBN-10: 0525521658 ISBN-13: 978-0525521655 “Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.” ― Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Peloponnesian_War Complete work: http://classics.mit.edu/Thucydides/pelopwar.html Jeffrey St. Clair on "Roaming Charges: In the Land of 10,000 Talkers, All With Broken Tongues" https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/14/roaming-charges-in-the-land-of-10000-talkers-all-with-broken-tongues/ Julian Assange extradition hearing now scheduled to occur in February 2020 https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/jun/14/julian-assange-to-face-us-extradition-hearing-in-uk-next-year https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/14/18678222/julian-assange-extradition-us-uk-extradition-hearing-2020 https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/julian-assange-to-face-a-full-extradition-hearing-in-2020/2019/06/14/a91e7ed0-8e97-11e9-adf3-f70f78c156e8_story.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/14/world/europe/assange-extradition-court-appearance.html https://www.cnet.com/news/julian-assange-extradition-hearing-set-for-2020/ https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/14/uk-court-sets-assanges-us-extradition-hearing-for-february-2020.html https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/06/uk-court-sets-assange-extradition-hearing-february-2020-190614103926196.html https://www.foxnews.com/world/british-court-2020-date-julian-assange-extradition News-Gazette opinions (including Letters to the Editor) http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion Aaron Maté on Russiagate https://twitter.com/aaronjmate/status/1124136736563638272 Caitlin Johnstone's articles on Medium.com https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone Craig Murray on "The Real Muellergate Scandal" https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/05/the-real-muellergate-scandal/ Related: "Empire Files" Abby Martin interview with Bill Binney -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjHs-E2e2V4 Lula's interview with The Intercept's Glenn Greenwald Transcript: https://theintercept.com/2019/05/22/lula-brazil-ex-president-prison-interview/ Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93MgeyNqc_k Brazil’s Top Prosecutors Who Indicted Lula Schemed in Secret Messages to Prevent His Party From Winning 2018 Election https://theintercept.com/2019/06/09/brazil-car-wash-prosecutors-workers-party-lula/ Leaked Chats Between Brazilian Judge and Prosecutor Who Imprisoned Lula Reveal Prohibited Collaboration and Doubts Over Evidence https://theintercept.com/2019/06/09/brazil-lula-operation-car-wash-sergio-moro/ Related: How and Why The Intercept is Reporting on a Vast Trove of Materials About Brazil's "Operation Car Wash" and Justice Minister Sergio Moro https://theintercept.com/2019/06/09/brazil-archive-operation-car-wash/ -J From davidgreen50 at gmail.com Sat Jun 15 15:04:04 2019 From: davidgreen50 at gmail.com (David Green) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2019 10:04:04 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News from Neptune #424 notes In-Reply-To: <64472f98-95de-eb47-22ba-44d16239b5ce@forestfield.org> References: <64472f98-95de-eb47-22ba-44d16239b5ce@forestfield.org> Message-ID: Below is the relevant passage in full from Ernest Mandel's book as discussed on the program (1500 words): But if the meaning of the Second World War, like that of its predecessor, can be grasped only in the context of the imperialist drive for world domination, its significance lies in the fact that it was the ultimate test of the relative strength of the competing imperialist states. Its outcome determined the particular pattern of the world accumulation of capital for a whole period. In the world organised by capital based on nation-states, war is the mechanism for the final resolution of differences. For although military power is not the only kind of pressure which a capitalist state can bring to bear upon its rivals, nevertheless it is the highest form of power: the potential or actual use of armed might to impose its will is the decisive proof of an imperialist state’s superiority. Therefore, what we are dealing with here is the capacity of each of the belligerents to use military force in a sustained way and more successfully than its opponents, which in turn depends on the ability of each state to mobilize all necessary resources, human as well as material, for victory. Consequently, wars on this scale are the supreme test of the solidity of the social order and its economic health, as they are of the political stamina of the ruling classes and their leaderships. So far as the latter are concerned, the central issue is the ability of the bourgeoisie to reign in its own back yard, above all over its native working class. In the final analysis, imperialist expansion expresses an insatiable thirst for surplus value, its production and realization - the snowball dynamic of capital accumulation. But qualitatively increased surplus-value production is possible only through a specific relationship with wage labour, a subordination of the working class to capital. Hence a strategic integration of the working class in the metropolitan centres is a necessary component of the imperialist countries’ ability to pursue the struggle for world dominance. The world that emerged from the 1914-1918 war was at least partially shaped by the unprecedented rise in working class self-organization and self-confidence, especially in Europe but also in the USA, during the quarter century that preceded it. The attitude of the working class to imperialist wars was therefore of importance not only to the ruling classes, but also to the future of the working class itself. The historic debate which took place among the parties of the Second International between 1907 and 1917 - a debate which started before the war (though at a time when the warring alliances were already in place) and continued right through it - linked the question of the forthcoming war to a wider discussion on whether the workers’ organizations should be instruments of reform of the bourgeois order or its grave-diggers. When the war started, and after initial nationalist euphoria had evaporated amidst hunger, death and destruction, the social truce broke under its impact right across the continent. Mutinies in the French, German, Austrian and Russian armies; hunger marches and strikes in factories; the overthrow of Tsarism in Russia; the dissolution of Austria-Hungary; the overthrow of the Ottoman sultanate; the abdication of the German Kaiser; the advent of revolution in the cities of Central, East and Southeastern Europe; and finally the success of the Bolshevik-led revolution in Russia - these represent the many varied attempts by the exploited populations of this part of Europe and Asia to find alternative solutions to captalism’s intensifying structural crisis and to the war-prone anarchy of the international order established by the bourgeoisie. The abdication of the Second International majority before the raison d’etat of the national ruling classes in 1914 found its response in the organization of the minority into a Third International and in the formation of Communist parties throughout the world to challenge the discredited social-democratic formations. Labour’s resistance to the hegemonic drive of the bourgeoisie, and the young Soviet republic, which survived despite the concentrated efforts of the imperialist powers to destroy it, constituted formidable obstacles to the pursuit of imperialist designs, especially for European capital. Both had to be, if not eliminated, then at least neutralized before any imperialist power could seriously contemplate starting another international war. The history of the preparation and unleashing of WWII is, therefore, not just the history of an increasingly explosive differentiation of sectional (national) interests of the world bourgeoisie, but also of its sustained and more or less successful efforts to remove these obstacles. In other words, it is also a history of counter-revolution. By 1939 the record of this counter-revolutionary consolidation was promising but uneven. The fate and evolution of the Soviet Union was particularly crucial. The revolutionary upheavals following WWI had been strong enough to prevent the restoration of capitalism in erstwhile Imperial Russia. But the fact that they produced no new victories gravely weakened the Soviet working class: the Soviet republic had survived, but in a greatly distorted form. This in turn contributed to the impotence of the European working class in the inter-war period. A downturn of revolution gave the green light for a new onslaught against the labour movement as soon as the crisis demanded this. The stepping-stones towards World War Two were Chiang Kai-Shek’s massacre of Communist and other labour militants in Shanghai in 1927; the rise of fascism in Italy and Germany in the 1920s and 1930s; the defeat of the Spanish republic; the collapse of the Popular Front in France. The failure of the British General Strike and the stranglehold imposed by the CIO bureaucracy upon the rising militancy of the American working class likewise played far from marginal roles in preparing the new conflict. The assertion here that the real stake of WWII was the establishment of the world hegemony of one imperialist power, and that the war was also the culmination of a process of counter-revolution, should not, of course, be taken to refer solely to the particularly abhorrent role played by Hitler and German Nazism in bringing about a new world war. On the contrary, it represents a general judgement upon imperialism, as a specific form of capitalism generated by the fundamental contradiction between the internationalization and socialization of the productive process, on the one hand, and its continued organization by private and national interests, on the other. Those revolutionary Marxists, beginning with Trotsky, who clearly understood this and said so repeatedly from the early 1930s on, showed more foresight than those who waited for the Cold War and the Korean conflict to rediscover the structurally barbaric nature of imperialism as a system, not limited to any particular political form of the bourgeois state or any particular national ruling class. In addition, because ever since the mid-nineteenth century wars between great powers have led to revolution or at least drastic reform on the losing side, the ruling class of the imperialist states, individually and collectively, of necessity also learned to manage counterrevolution. Here the historic turning-point was 1914. The abdication of large parts of the labour movement’s leading strata, and of key sectors of the liberal intelligentsia, in the face of colonialism , imperialism and war signified an acceptance of violence, mass slaughter, nationalism and racism, as well as the restriction of civil and working-class rights (i.e. an acceptance of the impermanence of the civilizational gains of many generations) for reasons of Realpolitik dictated by national bourgeoisies. Those who refused to pay any possible price for overthrowing the bourgeois order in 1918-23 and then again in 1932-37, and accepted the very real and horrible price of imperialism and war, bear the historic responsibility for allowing a second attempt at an imperialist solution to the world crisis of capitalism - this time, at a price far greater in human life and suffering than that paid in 1914-18. Nobody who soberly examines the history of 1918-45 can seriously question the conclusion that Nazism and World War Two were the price which humanity paid for what even Leon Blum called the refusal, or failure, of German Social Democracy to overthrow the bourgeois order in November-December 1918. Stalin and his followers share this responsibility, because of the contribution of their policy to the establishment of the Nazi regime in Germany, the defeat of the Spanish revolution and the strengthening of bourgeois rule in France. T h e 1914 war opened with a shot fired by a Bosnian youth at a future Emperor of Austria, seen as personifying national oppression and social injustice. It closed with an unsuccessful intervention by Western liberal states on the side of counterrevolution The Meaning of the Second World War in the civil war in Russia. This was no mere accident: the two events symbolized the close relationship between imperialist wars and wars of national liberation and revolution. The issue of national self-determination was forced onto the agenda at Versailles by revolutionary Russia; unlike Wilson and Clemenceau, who limited this right to the peoples of Eastern Europe and the Balkans, the Soviet Union under Lenin extended its support to the emergent national liberation movements in colonial and semicolonial countries (it should be recalled that the Amritsar massacre and the emergence of the May 4 Movement in China occurred during the peace deliberations at Versailles). As the centre of world politics shifted away from Europe, the anti-colonial struggles in turn became crucial allies of the proletariat in the advanced capitalist countries. On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 6:46 PM J.B. Nicholson via Peace-discuss < peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > News from Neptune #424 > A "Deep Fake" edition > Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knELJ8LSl94 > > A list of links to items referenced on the show. > > Craig Murray on "The Gulf of Credibility" > https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/06/the-gulf-of-credibility/ > > "Human Smoke: The Beginnings of World War II, the End of Civilization" by > Nicholson Baker > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Smoke > ISBN: 9781416572466 > > "The Meaning of the Second World War" by Ernest Mandel > ISBN-13: 978-1844674794 > ISBN-10: 1844674797 > Complete book: > > https://kok.memoryoftheworld.org/Ernest%20Mandel/The%20Meaning%20of%20the%20Second%20World%20War%20(25)/The%20Meaning%20of%20the%20Second%20World%20War%20-%20Ernest%20Mandel.pdf > > David Brooks on "Voters, Your Foreign Policy Views Stink!: Rogue nations > thrive when the good lose all conviction." > https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/13/opinion/foreign-policy-populism.html > > "The Jungle Grows Back" by Robert Kagan > ISBN-10: 0525521658 > ISBN-13: 978-0525521655 > > “Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, > while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.” > ― Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Peloponnesian_War > Complete work: http://classics.mit.edu/Thucydides/pelopwar.html > > Jeffrey St. Clair on "Roaming Charges: In the Land of 10,000 Talkers, All > With Broken Tongues" > > https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/14/roaming-charges-in-the-land-of-10000-talkers-all-with-broken-tongues/ > > Julian Assange extradition hearing now scheduled to occur in February 2020 > > https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/jun/14/julian-assange-to-face-us-extradition-hearing-in-uk-next-year > > https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/14/18678222/julian-assange-extradition-us-uk-extradition-hearing-2020 > > https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/julian-assange-to-face-a-full-extradition-hearing-in-2020/2019/06/14/a91e7ed0-8e97-11e9-adf3-f70f78c156e8_story.html > > https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/14/world/europe/assange-extradition-court-appearance.html > https://www.cnet.com/news/julian-assange-extradition-hearing-set-for-2020/ > > https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/14/uk-court-sets-assanges-us-extradition-hearing-for-february-2020.html > > https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/06/uk-court-sets-assange-extradition-hearing-february-2020-190614103926196.html > > https://www.foxnews.com/world/british-court-2020-date-julian-assange-extradition > > News-Gazette opinions (including Letters to the Editor) > http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion > > > > Aaron Maté on Russiagate > https://twitter.com/aaronjmate/status/1124136736563638272 > > Caitlin Johnstone's articles on Medium.com > https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone > > Craig Murray on "The Real Muellergate Scandal" > > https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/05/the-real-muellergate-scandal/ > > Related: > "Empire Files" Abby Martin interview with Bill Binney -- > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjHs-E2e2V4 > > > > Lula's interview with The Intercept's Glenn Greenwald > Transcript: > > https://theintercept.com/2019/05/22/lula-brazil-ex-president-prison-interview/ > Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93MgeyNqc_k > > Brazil’s Top Prosecutors Who Indicted Lula Schemed in Secret Messages to > Prevent His Party From Winning 2018 Election > > https://theintercept.com/2019/06/09/brazil-car-wash-prosecutors-workers-party-lula/ > > Leaked Chats Between Brazilian Judge and Prosecutor Who Imprisoned Lula > Reveal Prohibited Collaboration and Doubts Over Evidence > > https://theintercept.com/2019/06/09/brazil-lula-operation-car-wash-sergio-moro/ > > Related: > How and Why The Intercept is Reporting on a Vast Trove of Materials About > Brazil's "Operation Car Wash" and Justice Minister Sergio Moro > https://theintercept.com/2019/06/09/brazil-archive-operation-car-wash/ > > -J > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jbn at forestfield.org Sat Jun 15 23:53:25 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2019 18:53:25 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News from Neptune #424 notes In-Reply-To: <64472f98-95de-eb47-22ba-44d16239b5ce@forestfield.org> References: <64472f98-95de-eb47-22ba-44d16239b5ce@forestfield.org> Message-ID: I wrote: > Lula's interview with The Intercept's Glenn Greenwald > Transcript: > https://theintercept.com/2019/05/22/lula-brazil-ex-president-prison-interview/ > Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93MgeyNqc_k > > Brazil’s Top Prosecutors Who Indicted Lula Schemed in Secret Messages to > Prevent His Party From Winning 2018 Election > https://theintercept.com/2019/06/09/brazil-car-wash-prosecutors-workers-party-lula/ > > > Leaked Chats Between Brazilian Judge and Prosecutor Who Imprisoned Lula > Reveal Prohibited Collaboration and Doubts Over Evidence > https://theintercept.com/2019/06/09/brazil-lula-operation-car-wash-sergio-moro/ > > > Related: > How and Why The Intercept is Reporting on a Vast Trove of Materials About > Brazil's "Operation Car Wash" and Justice Minister Sergio Moro > https://theintercept.com/2019/06/09/brazil-archive-operation-car-wash/ The following was just published: https://theintercept.com/2019/06/15/watch-glenn-greenwald-explains-the-political-earthquake-in-brazil-caused-by-our-ongoing-exposes/ is a followup to all of this summarizing who's involved, what has occurred so far, and what's at stake locally and worldwide. If you're looking for an introduction to what's going on in this developing story, please read this article and watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCnSJ5yDv1g which is the 14m44s video of Glenn Greenwald explaining this in plain, easily understood language. The corruption is not only compelling in its own right, but in light of what resources are at stake (the Amazon, oil resources), and how fragile democratic governments are even against massive public support for an elected official (such as is the case for former Brazilian president Lula who was railroaded into prison on bogus charges with bogus evidence by a group that may very well have never had the authority to do so). It certainly looks like no country is safe from this when journalists are either not engaged to do investigative work or blocked from doing investigations (hence a clear connection to Assange & Manning's respective persecutions). The documents The Intercept's source provided are still being reviewed and published. There's certainly more to say on this as this work proceeds. From moboct1 at aim.com Mon Jun 17 13:17:05 2019 From: moboct1 at aim.com (Mildred O'brien) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2019 13:17:05 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Meg Minor's Letter to N-G Ed March 15 References: <889871635.2178750.1560777425839.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <889871635.2178750.1560777425839@mail.yahoo.com> I clipped Meg Minor's great letter of March 15 and saved it for a good reason, which re-surfaced recently during organizing some of my loose papers.  I saw no follow-up reaction to her letter so it bears repeating below.  Meg is a veteran of one of the Bushs' wars (I think Desert Storm) who was a regular at First Saturday anti-war demonstrations. "Bush is a poor choice for award   The Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library Foundation is showcasing more poor decisions.  They are not financial this time.  They announced that former President George W. Bush is their 2019 Lincoln Leadership Prize recipient, praising him for things that truly deserve condemnation. They praise the No Child Left Behind Act, but states balked at federal overreach and Congress declined to reauthorize it in 2007.   They praise his global HIV/AIDS initiative and fail to mention the Global Gag Rule on family planning he reinstated from Ronald Reagan's era. They praise his global coalition building 'to remove violent regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq,' but anti-American sentiment abounds and violent regimes now mimic us by using anti-terrorism as an excuse to crush dissent.  The people of Afghanistan and Iraq did nothing to threaten us pre-9/11, but they have every reason to hate us now.   Lincoln struggled to bring the country together against the warped ideology and market forces supporting slavery.  His idea of coalition building involved listening to people who disagreed with him.     Bush promoted American solidarity by telling us to go shopping.  His idea of coalition building was "you are either with us or against us." The legacy of Bush's presidency is the economic and moral downfall of America.  He tore Southwest Asia apart for his own interests, and it has cost us nearly five trillion dollars.  This cost does not reflect the generations of Americans, coalition and 'enemy' children left behind in his wake." Meg MinorMansfield       -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From naiman at justforeignpolicy.org Mon Jun 17 20:17:58 2019 From: naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (Robert Naiman) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2019 15:17:58 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] could there be an estimate of Pentagon spending by census tract? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation has a tool where you can look up the life expectancy for your census tract. https://www.rwjf.org/en/library/interactives/whereyouliveaffectshowlongyoulive.html The point being to illustrate how life expectancy is correlated with census tract which is correlated with income which is highly skewed. Could we do this exercise for Pentagon spending? In the UMass paper they mapped Pentagon spending to occupational codes which they matched to income distribution. Could a similar technique map Pentagon spending to census tracts? The idea would be to show that Pentagon spending by census tract is positively correlated with life expectancy by census tract. But that would not show that Pentagon spending is a good thing. It would show that Pentagon spending is a form of disinvestment away from the communities with lower life expectancy, a transfer away from them to communities with higher life expectancy. So then you could say to people: go do the RWJ thing. If the life expectancy in your neighborhood is lower than that of the high Pentagon spending impact neighborhoods, you're getting ripped off by Pentagon spending, and there is no prospect that your neighborhood's share of that military pie is going to increase. So long as that piece of pie you don't have is part of the military pie, you're not seeing that pie. Your only chance to get that piece of pie is if it's transferred to the domestic pie. === Robert Reuel Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (202) 448-2898 x1 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Jun 18 15:19:43 2019 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 15:19:43 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?b?VVMgcHJlcGFyaW5nIOKAnGFzc2F1bHTigJ0g?= =?utf-8?q?against_Iran?= Message-ID: US preparing “assault” against Iran By Peter Symonds 18 June 2019 The Pentagon announced on Monday that the US is sending 1,000 additional troops and other military resources to the Middle East amid belligerent threats against Iran by the Trump administration. The troop movement follows the previous deployment of the USS Lincoln aircraft carrier and its battle group to the Persian Gulf, along with a bomber strike group led by nuclear capable B-52s. An article from the Israeli website Maariv Online, republished in the Jerusalem Post, reported that the Trump administration is actively preparing a “tactical assault” on Iran. The report, based on diplomatic sources at the UN in New York, stated that “since Friday, the White House has been holding incessant discussions involving senior military commanders, Pentagon representatives and advisers to President Donald Trump.” [https://www.wsws.org/asset/836c943d-f72e-44ca-8863-619ce17f90dF/image.png?rendition=image480]An American guided missile cruiser fires a tomahawk missile during the 2003 US invasion of Iraq [Credit: US Navy] According to Maariv Online, the unnamed officials said that “the military action under consideration would be an aerial bombardment of an Iranian facility linked to its nuclear program.” A Western diplomat commented: “The bombing will be massive but will be limited to one target.” Announcing the troop deployment, acting US Defence Secretary Patrick Shanahan stated: “The recent Iranian attacks validate the reliable, credible intelligence we have received on hostile behaviour by Iranian forces and their proxy groups that threaten United States personnel and interests across the region.” He then absurdly added: “The United States does not seek conflict with Iran.” In reality, the current explosive situation in the Persian Gulf is entirely of Washington’s manufacture. In breach of UN resolutions, the Trump administration unilaterally abrogated the 2015 deal between Iran and the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany to limit its nuclear program in return for sanctions relief. The US subsequently re-imposed and strengthened its crippling sanctions on Iran aimed at cutting off all oil exports and collapsing the Iranian economy. It also threatened to take punitive economic measures against companies breaching its unilateral sanctions. Washington’s actions amount to an economic blockade of Iran and an act of war. With US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in the lead, the Trump administration is exploiting attacks on two tankers in the Persian Gulf last Thursday as the pretext for threatening to strike Iran. On Sunday, Pompeo declared that the US was “considering a full range of options,” including “a military response.” The US Central Command, which would oversee any attack on Iran, released a video which it claims shows a small boat of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) approaching and removing an unexploded limpet mine from one of the damaged tankers—the Japanese-owned Kokuka Courageous. It followed up yesterday with photos of the same alleged activity. US officials have continued to blame Iran for the attacks despite a declaration from the tanker’s owner that the vessel was hit by a flying object according to its crew members. Both Japan and Germany have questioned Washington’s claims and called for further evidence, saying the video did not constitute sufficient proof. Iran has denied any involvement in the attacks. The UN sources quoted in the Jerusalem Post article claimed that Trump himself had not been enthusiastic, but had lost his patience and given the green light to Pompeo, who has been pushing for action. Pompeo is due to travel today to US Central Command (CENTCOM) headquarters in Florida. He will meet with two top military leaders—CENTCOM commander General Kenneth McKenzie and General Richard Clarke, head of the Special Operations Command—to “discuss regional security concerns and operations.” CNN noted that the visit was “unusual” as Pompeo was not accompanied by acting US Defence Secretary Shanahan, who was remaining in Washington to “continue to develop options.” The US has also seized on Iranian statements on Monday warning that its low-level enrichment of uranium will exceed the limit set under the 2015 agreement within 10 days to further wind up tensions. Speaking to the media on Monday, US National Security Council spokesman Garrett Marquis branded Iran’s actions as “nuclear blackmail” and insisted it must be met with “increasing international pressure.” What staggering hypocrisy! The US has torn up the 2015 agreement, is crippling Iran’s economy and menacing war. Less than a month ago, Trump declared that if it came to conflict, it would be “the official end of Iran”—implying that the US would use its full arsenal including nuclear weapons to obliterate the Iranian population of more than 80 million. Yet when Tehran suggests that it will no longer be bound by the deal, it is declared to be “blackmail.” Marquis also reiterated Trump’s lie that the US pulled out because “the horrible nuclear deal left their capabilities intact.” In fact, the 2015 agreement, which Iran only agreed to under the Obama administration’s threat of war, severely curtailed its nuclear programs, placing them under highly intrusive inspections. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has repeatedly found Iran in compliance with the agreement’s stringent requirements. Iran has only tentatively moved towards abrogating the agreement, even though it would be fully justified in doing so by Washington’s illegal actions. In early May, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani set a 60-day deadline for the other signatories—Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China—to put tangible measures in place to enable Iran to export oil and transact with international banks. The deadline expires on July 7. The European powers have sought to save the agreement, but so far have taken little action. An alternative payment system, INSTEX, which that would circumvent the existing US-dominated international financial and banking system, has been launched but is not yet operational. Even if it were up and running, it would initially only apply to trade in food and medicine. A fully operational system would bring the European powers into open conflict with the United States, which would undoubtedly retaliate. The Trump administration’s warmongering in the Persian Gulf is opening up divisions in Europe. While German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas has openly questioned US “evidence” of Iranian involvement in last week’s tanker attacks, Britain has quickly fallen into line. On Monday, Italy’s deputy prime minister Matteo Salvini, leader of the fascist Lega, signalled Rome’s support for Washington’s war drive against Iran. The Trump administration is recklessly preparing for a war against Iran. Any US airstrike on Iran, even if limited to one attack, would rapidly escalate into an all-out war that would not only involve other US regional allies such as Saudi Arabia and Israeli, but also threaten to drag in other major powers to defend their vital interests. The World Socialist Web Site has repeatedly warned about the growing dangers of a catastrophic world war that would plunge humanity back into barbarism. The only alternative is the building of an international anti-war movement of the working class based on a socialist program to put an end to the root cause of war—capitalism and its outmoded division of the world into rival nation states. WSWS.ORG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidgreen50 at gmail.com Tue Jun 18 16:47:20 2019 From: davidgreen50 at gmail.com (David Green) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 11:47:20 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] My letter in the N-G Message-ID: This letter was "unfortunately" printed without quotes around Davis's comments, making it somewhat hard to understand the meaning of the letter. In his Memorial Day message, Congressman Rodney Davis “remembered … Petty Officer Logan Palmer by dedicating the Harristown post office as the Logan S. Palmer Post Office. Logan died … when a tanker collided with the USS John McCain in 2017. The year Logan died, our nation lost more servicemembers to accidents than we did in combat. That’s unacceptable.” However, a deeper look at this incident (10 deaths), one other recent Navy incident (USS Fitzgerald, 7 deaths), and two crashes of the Boeing 737 Max (338 total deaths), all in the context of long-established priorities of the Navy and the defense industry, would lead one to believe that these deaths are indeed quite acceptable—including to the vast majority of Congresspersons. Clear culpability regarding training and procedural issues is not unrelated to the American imperialism that requires Davis and at least 500 of his colleagues to support sending poorly trained youth on large, dangerous boats halfway around the world to police Asia. Two long, detailed investigations by ProPublica about these naval incidents provide no reason to believe that more Pentagon funding will be used to address underlying issues, as Davis asserted in his message. The risks are systemic and historically-rooted, as Andrew Cockburn argues in “The Military-Industrial Virus” in *Harper’s.* This general critique is also applied to Boeing by Marshall Auerback in “Boeing Might Represent the Greatest Indictment of 21st-Century Capitalism.” Davis’s message contained less than half-truths in service of militarism and political opportunism—not that Democrats present an alternative. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidgreen50 at gmail.com Tue Jun 18 17:22:34 2019 From: davidgreen50 at gmail.com (David Green) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 12:22:34 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] could there be an estimate of Pentagon spending by census tract? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Item in today's News-Gazette: BUSINESS UPDATE Lockheed Martin set for $142M expansion LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) — Lockheed Martin said Monday that it will spend $142 million and hire 326 new workers over the next few years as it expands its southern Arkansas facility. The Maryland-based company announced the expansion of its plant in Camden, about 85 miles southwest of Little Rock. The facility currently employs about 700 workers. Company officials told reporters on a conference call that the expansion will be completed by 2024. The expansion will support new construction and improve existing facilities for products such as the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, the Army Tactical Missile System and others, plus new machinery and equipment. On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 3:18 PM Robert Naiman via Peace-discuss < peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > > Robert Wood Johnson Foundation has a tool where you can look up the life > expectancy for your census tract. > > > https://www.rwjf.org/en/library/interactives/whereyouliveaffectshowlongyoulive.html > > The point being to illustrate how life expectancy is correlated with > census tract which is correlated with income which is highly skewed. > > Could we do this exercise for Pentagon spending? In the UMass paper they > mapped Pentagon spending to occupational codes which they matched to income > distribution. Could a similar technique map Pentagon spending to census > tracts? > > The idea would be to show that Pentagon spending by census tract is > positively correlated with life expectancy by census tract. But that would > not show that Pentagon spending is a good thing. It would show that > Pentagon spending is a form of disinvestment away from the communities with > lower life expectancy, a transfer away from them to communities with higher > life expectancy. > > So then you could say to people: go do the RWJ thing. If the life > expectancy in your neighborhood is lower than that of the high Pentagon > spending impact neighborhoods, you're getting ripped off by Pentagon > spending, and there is no prospect that your neighborhood's share of that > military pie is going to increase. So long as that piece of pie you don't > have is part of the military pie, you're not seeing that pie. Your only > chance to get that piece of pie is if it's transferred to the domestic pie. > > === > > Robert Reuel Naiman > Policy Director > Just Foreign Policy > www.justforeignpolicy.org > naiman at justforeignpolicy.org > (202) 448-2898 x1 > > > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Wed Jun 19 11:12:54 2019 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 11:12:54 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Washington pushes to the brink of war with Iran Message-ID: Washington pushes to the brink of war with Iran By Bill Van Auken 19 June 2019 The US confrontation with Iran has brought the world closer to the brink of a catastrophic global conflict than at any time since the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. This week has seen the announcement that yet another 1,000 US troops are being sent to the Middle East in order to provide “force protection” against an alleged threat from Iran for the tens of thousands already deployed in the region, along with the report in the Israeli media that preparations are already being made to launch a “tactical assault” on an Iranian nuclear facility involving “massive” bombing. The report from Israel, based upon diplomatic sources at the United Nations in New York, was initially produced by Maariv Online and then picked up by the Jerusalem Post. The “military action would be an aerial bombardment of an Iranian facility linked to its nuclear program,” according to the diplomatic sources. One Western diplomat specified that “The bombing will be massive but will be limited to one target.” It is striking that this ominous report has been virtually blacked out of the US media. No major newspaper or network or cable news outlet has bothered to inform the American public of an impending action with implications for the lives of millions. The threat of war was underscored by a pair of statements from China and Russia pointing to the growing danger posed by the US escalation. Beijing warned that Washington’s “practice of extreme pressure” threatened to open a “Pandora’s Box” in the Middle East. Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov, meanwhile, told reporters in Moscow that the “unending and sustained US attempts to crank up political, psychological, economic and, yes, military pressure on Iran … cannot be assessed as anything but a conscious course to provoke war.” Trump told reporters on the White House lawn Tuesday: “We are looking at Iran, we have a lot of things going with Iran. We are very prepared . We'll see what happens... Regardless of what goes, we are very prepared.” The imminent threat of a direct US military attack comes in the wake of a steady escalation of US aggression against Iran. Washington has publicly touted its campaign of “maximum pressure” against the nation of 83 million people, imposing a crushing sanctions regime that is unilateral and illegal after abrogating the 2015 Iranian nuclear accord to which Washington was a signatory, along with China, Russia, the UK, France and Germany. For the Iranian people these sanctions—compounded by the capitalist austerity policies and privatizations pursued by the Iran’s bourgeois nationalist regime—have meant falling real wages, an inflation rate that is expected to top 50 percent this year, rising unemployment and shortages of medicines and other essentials that have resulted in death and suffering. This economic blockade has been imposed with the express aim of forcing a collapse of the economy and a disintegration of society designed to bring down the Iranian government and replace it with a puppet regime along the lines of the despotic US-backed dictatorship of the Shah, overthrown in the 1979 revolution. The US “maximum pressure” policy is tantamount to a state of war. Under conditions of already extreme tensions created by this policy, the Trump administration has carried out a steady military escalation against Iran, sending a US aircraft carrier battle group, a bomber strike group led by nuclear-capable B-52s and 1,500 additional troops, before the latest deployment of another 1,000. All of this has been carried out under the pretext that Iran is posing a threat of aggression against “US interests” in the Middle East, i.e., that they are defensive measures against a supposedly aggressive Iran. What nonsense! US imperialism has steadily encircled Iran with a ring of steel while seeking to starve its people into submission. Since 2001, it has invaded Afghanistan, on Iran’s northeastern border and Iraq to its west. It has set up a string of air and naval bases facing Iran’s shores across the Persian Gulf and has maintained tens of thousands of US troops in the region. The claims of Iranian aggression and the US posturing as the aggrieved party acting in self-defense is bound up with the search for a pretext for a US military assault. This has ranged from an errant missile that landed a third of a mile away from the US embassy in Baghdad’s Green Zone to alleged threats from Iranian-backed militias in Syria to the murky events surrounding the damaging of tankers in the Gulf of Oman, which the Pentagon, with no credible proof, has attributed to Iran. It appears, however, that the Trump administration has decided to make Iran’s threat to fall out of compliance with the nuclear accord that Washington itself ripped up its casus belli. When it comes to shameless hypocrisy, US imperialism has few real competitors. Tehran announced Monday that it will exceed the cap imposed by the nuclear accord on its accumulation of low-enriched uranium in 10 days. The action is part of an attempt to prod the European powers still upholding the agreement—the UK, Germany and France—to make good on their promise to restore normal trade and investment relations, which have been disrupted by the US sanctions. Thus far, while paying lip service to the agreement and promising to implement a new exchange system to bypass the sanctions, the European powers have done little to challenge Washington’s economic blockade. The feverish character of the US drive to war was expressed Tuesday in a highly unusual trip by US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to MacDill Air Force Base in Florida for a meeting with the chief of CENTCOM, which oversees US military operations throughout the Middle East, and the commander of US Special Operations troops. CENTCOM’s Marine Gen. Kenneth McKenzie reportedly requested the deployment of another 20,000 US troops to the Iran battle zone but was overruled by the Joint Chiefs of Staff who feared that it could provoke a war. Like McKenzie, Army Lt. Gen. Richard Clarke, the head of Special Operations Command, was recently placed in charge by the Trump administration. After the meeting, Pompeo insisted that Trump “does not want war,” but then went on to spell out an aggressive policy that leads inexorably to just that. While Pompeo was in Florida, it was announced in Washington that the acting secretary of defense, Patrick Shanahan, had resigned before his formal nomination could go to the Senate, allegedly over a nine-year-old domestic abuse allegation. Shanahan, a former top executive at Boeing, is to be replaced by Army Secretary Mark Esper, a former vice president of government relations at defense contractor Raytheon and chief of staff at the right-wing Heritage Foundation. What precise relation this shakeup has to the drive to war against Iran is as yet unknown, but the claim that it was the result of family issues strains credulity. “Shanahan's departure will increase uncertainty at the Pentagon at a moment of significant potential military risk,” wrote Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, who enjoys close ties to the US military-intelligence apparatus. “Allied jitters are likely to expand, too, with Monday's announcement that the U.S. is sending 1,000 additional troops to the Persian Gulf,” he added. Much has been made within the media about the apparent divisions within the Trump administration between the president, a supposed isolationist who eschews new Middle East wars, and the two point men on Iranian policy: his national security adviser, John Bolton, who has advocated for bombing Iran into regime change for decades, and Pompeo, the Christian fundamentalist warmonger, who insists that all of his work is dedicated to preparing for the “rapture.” Whatever these divisions, the drive to war against Iran is deeply rooted in the crisis of American capitalism. For nearly three decades, since the dissolution of the Soviet Union by the Moscow Stalinist bureaucracy, the US capitalist class, acting through Democratic and Republican administrations alike, has sought to offset its crises and the erosion of its domination of world markets through the use of military force. The war of imperialist aggression against Iraq, followed by subsequent wars for regime change initiated by the Obama administration in Libya and Syria, have left US policy in the region in shambles. In both Iraq and Syria, where Washington sought to bring to power puppet regimes in preparation for war against Iran, Tehran has substantially increased its influence and status as a regional power, posing an obstacle to the US drive for hegemony over the oil-rich region. At the same time, Iran constitutes a major source of energy imports for China as well as a key link in its planned One Belt, One Road strategy to deepen its integration with Eurasia. The drive to war also has its source in the acute social crisis within the United States itself, where social inequality and the growth of strikes and social unrest pose a threat to the ruling financial oligarchy which seeks to direct these internal tensions outward in a new explosion of military violence. The attempt by Washington to eliminate its regional rival and assert is hegemony over the Middle East in order to secure a stranglehold over China’s energy imports by means of a new war against Iran can yield only a far greater and potentially global catastrophe. Without any attempt to make a case to the American people for war, Washington is preparing to launch a military assault on Iran, a country with three times the population of Iraq in 2003 and four times the land mass. The American people face the prospect of a series of shocks. The bombing of an Iranian nuclear facility may be answered with an Iranian attack on a US warship as well as rocket attacks on US bases across the Persian Gulf with the possibility of thousands of American casualties overnight. A war with Iran will require an army of hundreds of thousands, necessitating the revival of the draft. Moreover, because of its strategic position, a war against Iran will inevitably draw in the entire Middle East, while posing military confrontation with nuclear-armed China and Russia. Within the working class there is hostility to war and a deep distrust in the lies of the government and the media that finds no expression within the existing political setup. The resurgence of the class struggle, however, provides a powerful foundation for the emergence of a new mass antiwar movement based on the independent political mobilization of the working class and the fight for socialism. Bill Van Auken WSWS.ORG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Wed Jun 19 20:16:55 2019 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 15:16:55 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Reparations Message-ID: <0FB8ECF8-5C8D-4ED3-A75A-D83913163B4A@gmail.com> [Bruce A. Dixon] Just what would a constructive and useful discussion of reparations for the descendants of Africans enslaved in the US look like. Certainly it would bear no resemblance to the nonsense emanating from Ta-Nehisi Coates and others… The fundamental justice of the reparations proposition seems indisputable. Grievous harm was done to millions in the course of slavery, Jim Crow, the urban ghettoes and the current neoliberal prison state. In slavery alone, the vast sums of capital generated by stolen labor on stolen land were essential to the building of 19th and 20th century US capitalism and US rise to global economic prominence. Surely the victimized and exploited deserve to be made whole. Bringing reparations for tens of millions from idea to reality however would mean reallocation of resources on a vast scale. Broadly defining politics as the methods and institutions human beings devise to conduct our collective affairs, making reparations actually happen is a huge political project requiring the support of significant constituencies other than African Americans. But as Adolph Reed pointed out back in 2002, the advocates of reparations, some of whom claim to be part of a “reparations movement” seemingly cannot be bothered with the task of coming up with even the sketchiest plans, roadmaps, or strategies to actually win the reparations they say they want and that we all need. And let's be clear, lawsuits are not a roadmap to winning the broad support necessary to carrying out the heavy political lifting of reparations. So reparations then, seems to be a cause you can “join” with nothing more than an empty declaration, and once you join the exclusive club all you get is the privilege of denouncing those who have not embraced reparations for not being as unapologetically black as you are. In a January 2016 interview on Doug Henwood's KPFA show posted elsewhere in this week's issue of Black Agenda Report, 'Behind The News,' Adolph Reed extends the interrogation of reparations and the class politics of reparations. He explains that Coates and others eschew class analysis while holding that race, that white supremacy and systemic racial injustice explain the past and present, and that ultimately only reparations can cure these. Reed holds that reparations is not an answer to the politics of class, it IS the political preference of a very specific class –- the black misleadership class which has always positioned itself as brokers and spokespeople for the rest of us, and the administrators of any and all race based patronage, spoils, affirmative action, minority set-asides ad the like. For the vast majority of African Americans, free college education, millions of new jobs, a living wage, universal health care (instead of Obamacare's universal private insurance) and rolling back the prison state are great things and absolutely welcome whether or not they are labeled “reparations.” Reed also questions the frequently heard reparations argument that since slavery, Jim Crow and the rest were racially specific that they can only be dealt with by racially specific remedies. One can point to the US prison state erected since 1970, which houses the largest number of incarcerated people of any nation in history. The fact is that millions, disproportionately black and brown have been imprisoned without a single racially specific statute or administrative rule. So if reparistas will not and cannot come forward with specific plans to win reparations, why can't jobs programs and other redistributive policies be fought for and won which target specific groups without calling it “reparations?” The questions that Reed raises would be the basis for a serious discussion of reparations if such a discussion ever happens. In a media campaign where the Republican front runner is a straightup demagogic buffoon, where one of the Democrats will allows followers to call him a “socialist” the way Barack Obama allowed the deluded to call him a peace candidate, an environmentalist and a civil liberties advocate, and the Democrat front runner is the contemptible Hillary Clinton, serious and constructive discussions are not even supposed to happen. Serious discussions about reparations will ask whether the heavy political lifting required can be accomplished at all under that name, and if it can, what it would look like. Serious discussion on reparation would take account of its class content and class differentiation among blacks, rather than ignoring it in favor of the fake racial solidarity that allowed the development of the black misleadership class over the last hundred years since Booker T. The only places where this kind of serious study, discussion and examination will take place will be those spaces we claim and create to examine our history, our failures and our successes, and the work ahead. The January 8-10 Philly conference on the Black Radical Tradition was one such space. We must and we will create more like it. Those critical examinations will take place in our public and private meetings and study groups, in churches and union halls and bars, in classrooms, in basketball courts, on back porches, in rec centers and in bedrooms. The people will have to organize and lead those discussions ourselves. We'll have to do it without any help from the Atlantic or Ta Nehesi Coates, without grants from funders of the nonprofit sector, and without exclusive dependence on corporate social media. ### From naiman at justforeignpolicy.org Wed Jun 19 20:30:46 2019 From: naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (Robert Naiman) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 15:30:46 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Reparations In-Reply-To: <0FB8ECF8-5C8D-4ED3-A75A-D83913163B4A@gmail.com> References: <0FB8ECF8-5C8D-4ED3-A75A-D83913163B4A@gmail.com> Message-ID: I think the BAR critique of TNC on this is dated. There is a political strategy, and the political strategy seems to be working. There was a hearing in the House today. A bunch of Dem POTUS 2020 candidates have signed up, including Bernie. Danny Glover and Bernie Sanders had a colloquy about this today. https://twitter.com/SenSanders/status/1141390808320544768 I'm proud to celebrate #*Juneteenth* with @*MrDannyGlover* . This year's holiday takes on special significance because of today's House hearing on H.R. 40 to study the impacts of slavery. We must come to terms with slavery's horrors and how they affect every aspect of our lives today. === Robert Reuel Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (202) 448-2898 x1 On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 3:17 PM C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss < peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > < > https://www.alternet.org/2019/06/house-reparations-hearing-erupts-in-applause-after-ta-nehisi-coates-gives-mcconnell-an-epic-lesson-on-racism/ > > > > [Bruce A. Dixon] Just what would a constructive and useful discussion of > reparations for the descendants of Africans enslaved in the US look like. > Certainly it would bear no resemblance to the nonsense emanating from > Ta-Nehisi Coates and others… > > The fundamental justice of the reparations proposition seems indisputable. > Grievous harm was done to millions in the course of slavery, Jim Crow, the > urban ghettoes and the current neoliberal prison state. In slavery alone, > the vast sums of capital generated by stolen labor on stolen land were > essential to the building of 19th and 20th century US capitalism and US > rise to global economic prominence. Surely the victimized and exploited > deserve to be made whole. > > Bringing reparations for tens of millions from idea to reality however > would mean reallocation of resources on a vast scale. Broadly defining > politics as the methods and institutions human beings devise to conduct our > collective affairs, making reparations actually happen is a huge political > project requiring the support of significant constituencies other than > African Americans. > > But as Adolph Reed pointed out back in 2002, the advocates of reparations, > some of whom claim to be part of a “reparations movement” seemingly cannot > be bothered with the task of coming up with even the sketchiest plans, > roadmaps, or strategies to actually win the reparations they say they want > and that we all need. And let's be clear, lawsuits are not a roadmap to > winning the broad support necessary to carrying out the heavy political > lifting of reparations. So reparations then, seems to be a cause you can > “join” with nothing more than an empty declaration, and once you join the > exclusive club all you get is the privilege of denouncing those who have > not embraced reparations for not being as unapologetically black as you are. > > In a January 2016 interview on Doug Henwood's KPFA show posted elsewhere > in this week's issue of Black Agenda Report, 'Behind The News,' Adolph Reed > extends the interrogation of reparations and the class politics of > reparations. > > He explains that Coates and others eschew class analysis while holding > that race, that white supremacy and systemic racial injustice explain the > past and present, and that ultimately only reparations can cure these. Reed > holds that reparations is not an answer to the politics of class, it IS the > political preference of a very specific class –- the black misleadership > class which has always positioned itself as brokers and spokespeople for > the rest of us, and the administrators of any and all race based patronage, > spoils, affirmative action, minority set-asides ad the like. > > For the vast majority of African Americans, free college education, > millions of new jobs, a living wage, universal health care (instead of > Obamacare's universal private insurance) and rolling back the prison state > are great things and absolutely welcome whether or not they are labeled > “reparations.” > > Reed also questions the frequently heard reparations argument that since > slavery, Jim Crow and the rest were racially specific that they can only be > dealt with by racially specific remedies. One can point to the US prison > state erected since 1970, which houses the largest number of incarcerated > people of any nation in history. The fact is that millions, > disproportionately black and brown have been imprisoned without a single > racially specific statute or administrative rule. So if reparistas will not > and cannot come forward with specific plans to win reparations, why can't > jobs programs and other redistributive policies be fought for and won which > target specific groups without calling it “reparations?” > > The questions that Reed raises would be the basis for a serious discussion > of reparations if such a discussion ever happens. In a media campaign where > the Republican front runner is a straightup demagogic buffoon, where one of > the Democrats will allows followers to call him a “socialist” the way > Barack Obama allowed the deluded to call him a peace candidate, an > environmentalist and a civil liberties advocate, and the Democrat front > runner is the contemptible Hillary Clinton, serious and constructive > discussions are not even supposed to happen. > > Serious discussions about reparations will ask whether the heavy political > lifting required can be accomplished at all under that name, and if it can, > what it would look like. Serious discussion on reparation would take > account of its class content and class differentiation among blacks, rather > than ignoring it in favor of the fake racial solidarity that allowed the > development of the black misleadership class over the last hundred years > since Booker T. > > The only places where this kind of serious study, discussion and > examination will take place will be those spaces we claim and create to > examine our history, our failures and our successes, and the work ahead. > The January 8-10 Philly conference on the Black Radical Tradition was one > such space. We must and we will create more like it. > > Those critical examinations will take place in our public and private > meetings and study groups, in churches and union halls and bars, in > classrooms, in basketball courts, on back porches, in rec centers and in > bedrooms. The people will have to organize and lead those discussions > ourselves. We'll have to do it without any help from the Atlantic or Ta > Nehesi Coates, without grants from funders of the nonprofit sector, and > without exclusive dependence on corporate social media. > > ### > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brussel at illinois.edu Wed Jun 19 22:02:59 2019 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 22:02:59 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Bromwich essay Message-ID: <677CAE51-41BB-40AB-B49B-D9E25106B8EB@illinois.edu> I liked it, and it even gave me a little, stress little, hope for Yale, here he teaches. A quote: Senator Bernie Sanders was recently asked, “Do you feel you would be capable of using nuclear weapons in defense of the country?” He answered with bitter sarcasm, “Oh, yeah, anytime!” -- and to make the meaning of “greatness” clear, he added: “Am I capable of blowing up the world?” The interviewer responded that he believed whether or not a politician would order a nuclear strike was “a great moral question.” To this Sanders responded, “It’s a great immoral question.” There are questions that should never be answered, because they degrade anyone involved in answering or even listening to them. The overriding legitimate question for governments today is this: Will the world end in fire or in flood -- in nuclear catastrophe or climate catastrophe? With the exception of scientists, a few politicians, and increasing numbers of school-age children, most citizens and most of our leaders are looking away from the flood while greeting the fire with clichés as familiar as lullabies. … The full article is smart: http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/176573/tomgram%3A_david_bromwich%2C_what_it_means_to_be_%22great%22_on_a_planet_going_down -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jbn at forestfield.org Thu Jun 20 00:56:49 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 19:56:49 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] AOTA #483 notes Message-ID: <674fd810-037d-8bae-c073-e925564a8ed6@forestfield.org> AWARE on the Air #483 Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNevn7WJGaY Links to items referenced on the show. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/15/us/politics/trump-cyber-russia-grid.html -- New York Times' Russiagate-backing article Caitlin Johnstone on "Russia Expert’s 2017 Prophecy About The Nuclear Threat Of Russiagate Is Coming True" https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/russia-experts-2017-prophecy-about-the-nuclear-threat-of-russiagate-is-coming-true-5b7726cb17e5 -- response to above NYT article; this also contains links to items the article references. The update to Johnstone's article also refers to: https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1140065300186128384 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1140065304019644427 -- Pres. Trump's tweets on the above NYT article. Robert Naiman on "Block Warmonger Eliot Engel’s Push to Send MANPADS to Ukraine" https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/6/18/1865570/-Block-Warmonger-Eliot-Engel-s-Push-to-Send-MANPADS-to-Ukraine Shlomo Shamir on "U.N. officials: U.S. planning a 'tactical assault' in Iran" (English translation from Maariv Online) https://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Iran-News/UN-officials-US-is-planning-a-tactical-assault-in-Iran-592832 Israel's nuclear weapons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction -- "Israel is widely believed to possess weapons of mass destruction, and to be one of four nuclear-armed countries not recognized as a Nuclear Weapons State by the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Israel -- "Current estimates put the size of the Israeli nuclear arsenal at between 80 and 400 nuclear warheads [...]" "Imperialism on Trial - Free Assange" -- talks on Assange's imprisonment, extradition, why this is happening to him at all, and what this means for all journalists worldwide. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hW1Mwy9YZks (2h46m40s) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fcyi-gmjKpw (3h25m) -J From r-szoke at illinois.edu Thu Jun 20 18:03:45 2019 From: r-szoke at illinois.edu (Szoke, Ron) Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2019 18:03:45 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] World Without War: Emergency Appeal Message-ID: Stephen Miles Thu 6/20/2019 11:55 AM Szoke, Ron Ron — we are in all-out crisis mode. Iran just shot down a U.S. drone — and whose airspace the drone was in is being disputed right now. This marks a new escalation in a very tense situation — and with the Trump administration stacked with warmongers, we are scared we are witnessing the beginning of a war. I'll give it to you straight: Win Without War is doing everything we can to try and stop a needless, costly, and destructive war with Iran. And we can't fall flat financially while we're fighting so hard for peace.  _________________________ Ron— we are on the brink of an absolutely unnecessary, catastrophic, and costly war with Iran. After the oil tanker attacks last week, the Trump war cabinet instantly blamed Iran, ordered 1,000 more troops, and set their pro-Iran-war public relations campaign on full blast. It is a MIRACLE missiles haven’t already been launched. We CANNOT let that happen. We remember the Iraq War. We know the immense human horror and heartbreak that we are SO CLOSE to again — which is why Win Without War has been working flat-out to put an emergency break on this march to war through Congress, the media, and with allies around the world. But Pompeo, Bolton, and Trump’s campaign is more aggressive, more extreme, and more sustained than anything we’ve faced in a very long time. So I won’t mince words: we can’t fall short financially just as our campaign to stop war with Iran is reaching a back-breaking level of intensity. Can you make a one-time emergency gift of $4 to sustain our work stopping war with Iran now? If you've stored your info with ActBlue, we'll process your contribution instantly: $4 $6 $8 $12 $16 OTHER AMOUNT Regardless of who is responsible for the tanker attacks, the ensuing crisis and potential escalation toward war is literally because of the actions of Donald Trump and his war cabinet. Since he took office, Trump has walked away from the historic Iran deal, waged economic warfare through suffocating sanctions, launched an administration-wide “maximum pressure” campaign of hostility and antagonism, and built up military forces in the Middle East with the express goal of “confronting Iran.” In the past few days, we’ve also learned that behind closed doors, Mike Pompeo has been telling lawmakers that the 2001 AUMF — a law passed 18 YEARS ago in response to the 9/11 attacks — would give them authority to wage war against Iran. We’re seeing Team Trump launch a public relations campaign selling anti-Iranian and anti-Muslim hate to set the stage for a destructive war with Iran. One by one, they’re trying to lock in everything they need to launch a war against Iran. The good news is it looks like the public isn’t buying it. A recent poll showed just 32% of Americans approve of the way Trump is handling the situation with Iran. [1] And both the House and Senate have introduced legislation that would bar funding for an illegal, unauthorized war with Iran. But we are in a race against time to stop Trump’s warmongers crossing over a self-determined threshold before bombs start to rain down. We have been at this for MONTHS, and we could be at this for MONTHS MORE, and we need your support to keep up this break-neck pace: Can you make a one-time emergency gift of $4 to sustain our work stopping war with Iran now? Thank you for working for peace, Stephen, Ben, Amy, and the Win Without War team --- [1] CNN, "Survey" Donate © Win Without War Education Fund 2019 1 Thomas Circle NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20005 (202) 656-4999 | info at winwithoutwar.org This email was sent to r-szoke at illinois.edu. Email is the most important way for us to reach you about opportunities to act. If you'd like to receive fewer mailings, click here. If you need to remove yourself from our email list, click here to unsubscribe. From jbn at forestfield.org Fri Jun 21 03:49:51 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2019 22:49:51 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Notes Message-ID: <5f7759d7-a87e-2ac2-c943-c5f091bbfb5d@forestfield.org> Notes for AOTA & News from Neptune Here are some topics to spur discussion. Have a great show guys. War, Iran: Iran shoots down a US drone https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1Q5VJB-N-k -- footage of the downing War, Iran: Congress holds hearing on "The oversight of the Trump administration's Iran Policy" after Trump administration adds 1,000 more troops to the Middle East https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTRYM8nB83k -- anti-nuclear activist Timmon Wallis, Exec. Director of nuclearban.us is interviewed about the JCPOA. Manufacturing: Weapons manufacturer and aviation company Boeing saw stock rise 5.4% in one day and receives 200 new orders (worth $24 billion) for 737 Max planes after bad press for plane crashes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONNe0OlpCww -- RT's report https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/18/british-airways-parent-places-first-new-order-for-boeing-737-max-since-grounding.html From CNBC: > Boeing on Tuesday won its first order for 737 Max planes since the jets > were grounded worldwide in March after two fatal crashes. The vote of > confidence from British Airways' parent sent shares of the manufacturer > sharply higher. > > International Consolidated Airlines Group, or IAG, signed a letter of > intent at the Paris Air Show to order 200 Boeing 737 Max planes. Boeing > won't post the planes on its monthly order tally until the agreement is > finalized. > > Aviation authorities grounded the Boeing 737 Max worldwide after two > crashes within five months killed a total of 346 people. Boeing and > airlines are awaiting approval from regulators to resume flights with > the jets, but officials have said they have no firm timeline so far. > > Boeing shares surged 5.4% to close at $373.96, outpacing the broader > market and leading the Dow Jones Industrial Average higher. It was their > biggest one-day percentage gain in almost five months. Russiagate: Now Roger Stone is helping to take down Russiagate claim that "Russia hacked DNC servers". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1j-4-EmMKo -- A bit of background on the players: The DNC hired a firm (which calls itself an IT security agency but looks more like a PR firm) called "CrowdStrike" to investigate the alleged "hack" of DNC's servers. These were the servers from which some Russians are alleged to have remotely copied emails over the Internet, later to be released to WikiLeaks and later published in July 2016. Evidence from Bill Binney shows this is not how those emails got to WikiLeaks -- the amount of data copied could not have been copied over the Internet from the DNC's server to Russia in the timeframe indicated. But the speed of copying matches that of a local copy to something such as a USB key. Hence, the DNC emails were leaked from within the DNC not obtained remotely ("hacked"). Seth Rich, former DNC employee and later murder victim, was capable of copying such data as he had both the skill and the access needed to do this job. His murder was so clumsily described by police (initially described as a "robbery gone wrong") and never investigated fully that it could be that the police are essentially cooperating with a hit against Rich as revenge because someone (presumably at the DNC) found out Seth Rich was the source of the DNC emails to WikiLeaks. The DNC's claim that Russia hacked DNC emails is falling apart for the Democrats in a new way via discovery in the Roger Stone (former Trump campaign adviser) lawsuit. Stone was indicted for witness tampering and making false statements all related to WikiLeaks. The US government's evidence so far is lacking (likely because the entire set of allegations aren't true). Apparently, CrowdStrike prepared 3 draft reports all with redactions. Stone's attorneys said: > The government ... does not possess [unredacted CrowdStrike reports] > the defendant [Stone] seeks. > > It is clear ... that the government has relied on the assumptions made > by a source outside of the U.S. intelligence community that the Russian > State was involved in the hacking and that the data taken from the > various servers were given to WikiLeaks. The government does not have > the evidence, when it applied for these search warrants. CrowdStrike never provided an unredacted report to the DNC. The FBI has apparently been content to never inspect the DNC's servers (being satisfied with copies of some data -- server images -- CrowdStrike provided instead) and we now see accepting a redacted document which ostensibly describes "steps taken to remediate the attack and to harden the DNC and DCCC systems against future attack" (according to the government's response to Stone's motion to compel unredacted CrowdStrike reports). CrowdStrike's data and redacted report constitute the chief evidence of Russian involvement behind the DNC's continuing (bogus) claim that "Russians hacked the DNC servers". James Comey (FBI Director 2013-2017, 2013 liar about the invasion of Iraq) told Congress why CrowdStrike was investigating this case at all and not the FBI: > James Comey: Our forensics folks would always prefer to get access to > the original device or server that's involved. So it's the best > evidence. > > Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC): Were you given access to do the forensics on > those servers? > > James Comey: We were not. We were-- a highly respected private company > eventually got access and shared with us what they saw there. The DNC is not to be believed despite repeated DNC insistence because the evidence doesn't back up their claims. Crowdstrike is not a 'trusted analyst' but a suspect. Ray McGovern on this issue: > There's no factual basis for the Russian "hacking" into the DNC > computers. And now we know that the FBI went along with very spurious > evidence -- evidence with no chain of custody, evidence incomplete and > redacted. The game was this: So as soon as the Democrats realize that > Julian Assange had these messages, they composed a cover story. When > Julian Assange released those emails, went to the press, the press was a > willing accomplice and they said "Look, Russia did it! Russia did it!". > And so the headlines were not Clinton steals nomination from Sanders, > but rather "The Russians hacked!", "When did the Russians hack?", "Why > isn't this an act of war?". It worked like a charm. I call it a > magnificent distraction. Economy: Students entering the sex industry gets more coverage in corporate media but calling this economic exploitation is outside the limits of allowable debate. - Students are famously poor. - UK students are no exception; trying to pay for their education without getting a loan or paying off student loans is very difficult. - Sex workers are famously poor. - According to a new British TV series called "Student Sex Workers", "It's estimated that 1 in 20 work in the sex industry.". - Surveyers don't seem to ask if sex workers would have ever entered into this work (or continue the work) if they weren't poor. Apparently this phenomenon of students working in the sex industry that there's enough participants to host a traditional TV series. As of Friday, June 14, 2019 "Student Sex Workers" has run 2 episodes. See https://www.c21media.net/c5s-student-sex-workers-goes-global/ for more information on international interest in the program. The students profiled in Student Sex Workers seem to be £60k in debt due to the cost of their college education. The show said: > Since the beginning of this year [2019] there is £105 billion worth of > outstanding student loans. One woman pursuing a 3-year paramedic degree, "Jasmine", discussed her income with her friend: > Jasmine: I can make, like, what, a grand a night maybe on a good night. > Friend: A grand? > Jasmine: Yeah, you can make a grand easy, especially at this time of > year. > Friend: I think I'll do it! Jasmine's sex work is webcamming -- doing erotic things to herself in front of a live webcam while she chats with people online as they watch her and pay for her to do increasingly sexually revealing things. Considering her claim of £1k/night webcamming it's easier to understand why sex work is attractive to indebted students -- other jobs available to students (such as bartending, computer lab monitoring, and tutoring) don't pay anywhere near as much. Jasmine also seeks to become a "sugar baby" -- someone who seeks a wealthy person (known as a "sugar daddy") to pay for things they want in exchange for spending time with the wealthy person (such as going on a date or having dinner) or possibly sex. The show claims "Last year, 75,000 students registered as sugar babies on one UK website -- a 30% spike". Jasmine's university made allegations against her regarding her sex work and "her attitude" (as she described it) which were never clearly described in the show. The university's power to make these allegations or take any specific action as the result of the allegations remained unclear, but by the end of the show Jasmine said she did not want to continue her paramedic degree, "The whole situation has sort of put me off. I don't want to continue my course. I'm going to continue working within the industry, doing my dancing and my modeling and my camming.". Student Tom, meanwhile, is an escort -- a prostitute -- he has sex for money. Tom's profile is available online, customers pay him to have sex with them by arranging a meeting online where they reveal who they are (giving their name, picture, age, and other salient details) online, and Tom decides with whom he'll agree to have sex. Graduate student "Luke", is an adult film performer. Another woman, "Carly Rae", calls herself "a porn star" -- she makes her own adult movies for the adult movie industry and videos for her own website. She works at home and she owns the work she makes for her own site. When she was in college she webcammed. She is still paying off her student loans. Carly Rae's friend, "Roo", also shoots movies with her and webcams. Roo dropped out of college after her second year but kept working in the sex trade. The show claims > Like 25% of student sex workers, the girls [Carly Rae and Roo] have > continued working in porn after graduation. Porn is a multi-billion > pound industry where female performers earn more than men. On how much the participants make: - One woman: I make between £600 to £1,300 per day creating sex videos. - Tom: I make about £120 an hour as an escort. - A stripper (woman): Between £20 and £200 per dance. - A stripper (male): Anything from £200 to £500 per strip. - Jasmine was shown heading toward a shoot where she said she'll make £250 for "a few hours" work. - The photographer shooting Jasmine noted "[I've] had a lot of students in [my studio] over the years that I've been doing this. If they were modeling for three or four hours, they would probably make as much money in that time as what somebody working in a shop makes in a week.". As a woman in the show mentioned: > The sex industry is not seen as a dirty little secret anymore. and I think that is correct and will only become more commonplace as the economy gets worse for the 99% worldwide. But this show is typical of these documentaries in that there's no challenge to power: the show makes no mention of government responsibility to its citizens. There's no mention of practical ways in which government can and should be expected to help society avoid jobs which people seem to take up only due to economic pressure (including sex work, mining, and various minimum-wage service jobs). Billions (or more) spent on war, the state's chief expenditure, goes undiscussed. Half of that could be very effectively reallocated for programs of public benefit. There's no mention of organized campaigning for setting up a guaranteed annual income, Medicare for All (or strengthening the UK's NHS), ending homelessness, and more. Documentaries like this thus present no threat to current economic power, hence their continued reappearance on corporate media. A guaranteed annual income, a national jobs program (presumably being paid to be trained and build/maintain needed national infrastructure such as roads, bridges, railroads, and universal high-speed networking, among other things), guaranteeing a home, and in the US Medicare for All, could go a ways toward giving people a reason to consider other lines of work that would avoid the problems these interviewees identified (social stigma, on-the-job physical hazards, and unsustainable pay among others). War, Democrats: Bernie Sanders has a history of being for weapons manufacturing and war funding. Two articles present challenges for voters considering backing his campaign (or, I dare say, any other Democratic Party campaign). https://archive.fo/ccDGh https://www.leftvoice.org/not-on-our-side-on-bernie-sanders-and-imperialism -- a review of Sanders' long support of militarism while offering the excuse of 'jobs'. > In a recent interview with the New York Times, Bernie Sanders discusses > his record on foreign affairs, particularly during the 1980s while Mayor > of Burlington Vermont. Sanders remains unrepentant in his opposition to > US support for right-wing death squads in Central America, stating: “I > did my best to stop American foreign policy.” > > Sanders’ opposition to U.S.-backed death squads in Central America is to > be welcomed. But did he do is best? During the 1980s, Vermont was one of > the largest recipients of Defense Department weapons contracts, such as > the General Electric Plant in Burlington, which produced gatling guns > for death squads. When peace activists planned to block the gate to the > GE factory on June 20, 1983, Sanders refused to support them and had > them arrested. According to Greg Guma, editor of the Vermont Vanguard > Press, Sanders “viewed his key constituencies as the unions and the > poor. Bread and butter’ economics framed his analysis, pushing long-term > issues such as peace conversion to the margins of society.” Even during > his “radical period”, Sanders was only opposed to militarism unless it > affected the jobs of American workers. > > It is that same rationale that justifies Sanders’ long-standing support > for the F-35 fighter jet, which at 1.5 trillion dollars is the most > expensive program in military weapons history. Sanders has made no > secret that he wants that investment in Vermont, which will provide at > least 1400 jobs and $124 million worth of investment, stating: “My view > is that given the reality of the damn plane, I’d rather it come to > Vermont than to South Carolina. And that’s what the Vermont National > Guard wants, and that means hundreds of jobs in my city. That’s it.” > Sanders’ lobbying has paid off since he managed to persuade Lockheed > Martin to place a research center in Burlington and get 19 F-35s > stationed at the city airport. [...] > Bernie Sanders’ record is not one of opposition to war and imperialism, > since he has continually voted to provide the funds necessary to wage > war. However, Sanders’ votes for war funding are often rationalized by > his left-wing backers who claim that he is voting for omnibus bills that > contain diverse and unrelated types of legislation. So the excuse goes, > when Sanders votes for an omnibus bill that includes veterans’ benefits > and support for military occupation, he is actually only supporting the > former and not the latter. Or that when Sanders’ votes for funding > military operations, it is simply to show support for the troops and to > make sure they’re adequately funded. > > However, what these amount to are excuses to rationalize Sanders’ > support for war. The excuses is that we cannot achieve “ultra-leftist” > things like stopping the military at a stroke, but should focus on > achieving what minimal social reforms that we can now. Therefore, we > should be practical and focus on getting small reforms now. The logical > end point of this is the denial of both a socialist program and > principles, which is precisely the position of Bernie Sanders. When it > comes to the omnibus bills, Rosa Luxemburg long ago spoke against the > logic of opportunistic support for the military budget provided it was > tied to social funding and direct taxation: > > "Now if one says that we should offer an exchange – our consent to > militaristic and tariff legislation in return for political concessions > or social reforms – then one is sacrificing the basic principles of the > class struggle for momentary advantage, and one’s actions are based on > opportunism. Opportunism, incidentally, is a political game which can > be lost in two ways: not only basic principles but also practical > success may be forfeited. The assumption that one can achieve the > greatest number of successes by making concessions rests on a complete > error. Here, as in all great matters, the most cunning persons are not > the most intelligent. Bismarck once told a bourgeois opposition party: > ‘You will deprive yourselves of any practical influences if you always > and as a matter of course say no.’…We who oppose the entire present > order see things quite differently. In our no, in our intransigent > attitude, lies our whole strength. It is this attitude that earns us the > fear and respect of the enemy and the trust and support of the people." > > In other words, a principled socialist position is to vote no without > exception against any and all funding to the military. Some leftists are > willing to acknowledge Sanders’ pro-imperialism, but still argue that it > is necessary to be a part of his campaign in order to reach the masses > attracted to his message. After all, we are told that politics is about > getting “our hands dirty” and practicing the “art of the possible.” > Somehow, we are told, making these types of compromises by supporting > Bernie Sanders and softening our criticism of his imperialism, will > enable leftists to advance their own agenda. However, the inevitable end > result of this support is a downplaying of any criticism of imperialism > and an urge to be “patient” and “realistic” while fostering illusions in > Bernie Sanders. In the end, support for Bernie Sanders’ domestic reforms > becomes more important than opposing imperialism. > > In the final analysis, if we are serious about giving life to the slogan > “workers of the world, unite!” then we must always and everywhere stand > with the oppressed against the oppressors. And for US socialists, that > means resolute and uncompromising opposition to our own government, the > greatest purveyor of violence in the world. And in that struggle, we > cannot put any faith in Bernie Sanders because his record makes > abundantly clear that he is not on our side. https://newrepublic.com/article/154086/bernies-red-vermont -- It seems that Bernie Sanders isn't just accommodating of war now he has a history of being so accommodating. Here's what he told "Meet the Press" in 2016: > Look, a drone is a weapon. When it works badly, it is terrible and it is > counterproductive. When you blow up a facility or a building which kills > women and children, you know what? … It’s terrible.". When asked if > drones would be a part of his counter-terror plans he replied "All of > that and more. More recently, the New Republic article describes an event from Sanders' past: > Despite its reputation for small-scale agriculture and green hills, > Vermont was one of the largest recipients of Defense Department weapons > contracts in the early ’80s, thanks to the production of Gatling guns at > the General Electric plant in Burlington. > > That summer, a group of peace activists met with Sanders to tell him > about their plan to block the gate to Burlington’s General Electric > factory. Sanders was upset with them, Guma says in his book, The > People’s Republic: Vermont and the Sanders Revolution, for “blaming the > workers” and not focusing their attention on the federal centers of > strategic thinking on U.S. foreign policy. Sanders accused the activists > of pointing “the finger of guilt at working people,” according to the > Burlington Free Press. He reportedly came around to opposing the sit-in > after meeting with the workers’ union leaders. “Not everyone has the > luxury of choosing where they are going to work,” he told the Press. His > position flew in the face of increased local activism around war and > peace issues, especially in Vermont, where 159 out of 180 towns had > passed nuclear freeze resolutions. > > Sanders was unmoved by the activists’ arguments and said he would “have > no choice but to order their arrest,” according to Guma’s account. Soon > after the protest began the morning of June 20, dozens of activists were > arrested as, Guma says, “the mayor watched from the side of the road.” > > There was thus a split between Sanders and part of his activist base. > Sanders “viewed his key constituencies as the unions and the poor,” Guma > writes. “‘Bread and butter’ economics framed his analysis, pushing > long-term issues such as peace conversion to the margins of society.” Elections: Meddling in German elections? https://news.yahoo.com/german-stars-lead-call-shun-far-goerliwood-113129343.html https://www.breitbart.com/news/german-stars-lead-call-to-shun-far-right-in-goerliwood/ -- AfP's report https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jT_3ftLYZHE -- RT's report (which features insightful interviews with people on the street and not just a corporate viewpoint) Goerlitz, a German town which escaped being bombed in WWII, has many older buildings and generally retains an older look which Hollywood film producers find useful for their productions (examples include Quentin Tarantino's "Inglourious Basterds" from 2009 and Wes Anderson's "The Grand Budapest Hotel" from 2014). Goerlitz will soon hold a mayoral election and the anti-establishment candidate, Sebastian Wippel from the APD party has the current lead in first-round elections over Octavian Ursu from the establishment CPD party (36.4% for Wippel versus 30.3% for Ursu). The second round vote will occur on June 16. In a joint statement to be published on Monday, movie stars including Daniel Brühl (who hails from Berlin) and British director Stephen Daldry signed a petition which said: > Don't give in to hate and hostility, conflict and exclusion. > > Please vote wisely... Don't betray your convictions the moment someone > claims to be able to solve problems for you. When it was claimed that Russians had something to say about the American elections in 2016, that was repeatedly labeled as "Russian interference with US elections". What some Russians allegedly did was comment (however clumsily) on the 2016 US elections (remember the rendering of Bernie Sanders as a muscled bikini-wearing beachgoer?). What does it say of this commentary about the Goerlitz mayoral elections signed by non-Goerlitz citizens with Hollywood connections? Russiagate as basis for more belligerency -- Anti-Russian sanctions (war against the poor) aren't enough war to sate the Permanent Government (Deep State)? Now we're told that the US is attacking Russia's power grid, keeping Pres. Trump in the dark about this operation, and increasing the odds we'll see a nuclear winter. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-7Dp8O6YxI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-AkPfAElGE -- RT's report https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/15/us/politics/trump-cyber-russia-grid.html -- New York Times' Russiagate-backing article https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/russia-experts-2017-prophecy-about-the-nuclear-threat-of-russiagate-is-coming-true-5b7726cb17e5 -- Caitlin Johnstone's excellent analysis in response. In January, Rachel Maddow fear-mongered her viewers that Russia could (somehow) turn off the heat to states with colder weather like North Dakota and Minnesota. Rachel Maddow said: > China and Russia can do this -- today. Now. Whenever they want to. In > other words, we're relying on their good graces that they're not. And > it is like negative 50 degrees in the Dakotas right now. What would > happen if Russia killed the power in Fargo today? What would happen if > all the natural gas lines that service Sioux Falls just 'poofed' on the > coldest day in recent memory and it wasn't in our power whether to turn > them back on? Earlier, Russiagate repeaters (such as Maddow and the Washington Post) lied and told us that Russia had broken into a Vermont power station which risked the integrity of the entire US electrical grid. None of these things happened the way Russiagators told them; there's no evidence to back up Maddow's fearmongering. But we were supposed to think ill of Russia all the same; these and other lies were supposed to be substitutes for the lack of evidence Russiagators had to explain how Hillary Clinton could lose to Donald Trump. Now the New York Times tells us that the US is "Escalat[ing] Online Attacks on Russia’s Power Grid". We know the US is fully capable of doing this, after all WikiLeaks has published leaked CIA internal documents (the Vault 7 series of documents) some of which conduct electronic warfare and some of which cover up the attacks by misleading investigators into believing another party did it. Despite the unwisdom of receiving information from anonymous sources, the corporate media tells us that current and former officials speaking on condition of anonymity have confirmed that the Vault 7 documents are genuine. Edward Snowden concurred saying the documents looked authentic. On March 15, 2017 President Trump said, "the CIA was hacked, and a lot of things taken". So there is good reason to believe that WikiLeaks' unbroken record of never lying to us (every document they release is what they claim it to be) continues. The NYT report claimed the US had installed: > "potentially crippling malware inside the Russian system at a depth and > with an aggressiveness that had never been tried before" which could > potentially "plunge Russia into darkness or cripple its military," with > one anonymous official reporting that "We are doing things at a scale > that we never contemplated a few years ago." https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1140065300186128384 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1140065304019644427 -- President Trump tweeted that this was "a virtual act of Treason", "not true", and a product of the "Corrupt News Media". It's not clear who's lying in this but the evidence would suggest American belligerency and provocation is not to be taken lightly. The US has a strong history of provoking attacks: From the Washington Institute for Near East Policy from a talk called "How to Build US-Israeli Coordination on Preventing an Iranian Nuclear Breakout" with Patrick Clawson, David Makovsky, and Dennis Ross: > Patrick Clawson: I, frankly, think that crisis initiation is really > tough. And it's very hard for me to see how the United States President > can get us to war with Iran. Which leads me to conclude that if, in > fact, compromise is not accompanying that the traditional way America > gets to war is what would be best for US interests. Some people might > think that Mr. Roosevelt wanted to get us into World War II as David > [Makovsky] mentioned, you may recall we had to wait for Pearl Harbor. > Some people might think that Mr. Wilson wanted to get us into World War > I, you may recall we had to wait for the Lusitania episode. Some people > might think that Mr. Johnson wanted to send troops to Vietnam, you > might recall we had to wait for the Gulf of Tonkin episode. We didn't go > to war with Spain until the Maine exploded. And, may I point out, that > Mr. Lincoln did not feel he could call off a whole army until Fort > Sumter was attacked which is why he ordered the commander of Fort Sumter > to do exactly that thing which the South Carolinians had said would > cause an attack. So if, in fact, the Iranians aren't going to > compromise, it would be best if somebody else started the war. One can > combine other means of pressure with sanctions. I mentioned that > explosion on August 17th. We could step up the pressure: I mean, look > people, Iranian submarines periodically go down. Someday one of them > might not come up. [holds out his arms and shrugs his shoulder in a > gesture as if he were saying "I don't know"] Who would know why? What line of reasoning makes it reasonable for us to get angry with Russia to allegedly do to us what we are fully capable of (and we're now told we are actively doing) to Russia? 'What if Trump said this?' department: Joe Biden promises to cure cancer in his first term if elected president https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_d9DZRZM5NM -- video of Joe Biden making his promise. https://on.rt.com/9w7l https://sputniknews.com/us/201906121075812468-joe-biden-promises-cure-cancer-if-elected-president-2020/ -- Sputnik's report with some background including his 2016 "cancer moonshot" program during the Obama administration when he said he'd put in an effort to cure cancer. Joe Biden told a crowd in Ottumwa, Iowa: > I've worked so hard in my career, that I promise you, if I'm elected > president you're gonna see the single most important thing that changes > America, we’re gonna cure cancer. Related: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=km6i9d4X-mk https://therealnews.com/stories/is-joe-bidens-folksy-shtick-beginning-to-backfire -- The Real News report on this which goes very light on Joe Biden and the Democrats. TRNN offers no reason to think of this as anything other than being "a little wacky" (as one commentator put it), certainly nothing to provoke listeners to put together larger connections that would cause one to reject the Democratic party as hypocrites or not being an opposition party. But that's to be expected when you have guests like Norman Solomon who simply won't bring themselves to structurally criticize liberalism or the Democratic party. Solomon has to prop up Sen. Bernie Sanders while critiquing Joe Biden and that leaves no room for identifying how the Democrats have nothing to offer the 99%. Recall that Rep. John Conyers' HR676 Medicare for All bill was never brought up for a vote even when the Democrats had a majority in both houses of Congress and a Democratic party president in Obama. https://www.livescience.com/65717-biden-cancer-cure.html -- includes a clear explanation of one of the ways in which Biden's promise is flatly a lie: LiveScience.com writes: > "Are we going to open the news one day and hear that cancer has been > cured? No," , told Live Science. "It's just > not that simple," she added. This campaign promise is misleading because > it suggests that cancer is one disease with one cure, which is not the > case, Attai said. > > There are more than 100 kinds of cancer, according to the National > Institutes of Health. Each of those cancers has a different cause, from > viruses to radiation. Each demands its own treatment. Developing > individual treatments for each variety of cancer — from screening tools > to therapies — is a piecemeal process. "It's two steps forward, one step > back," Attai said. > > So when Biden promises to cure cancer, he's talking about curing not > just one, but many diseases. Some of those diseases, we may > realistically never be able to cure. After all, cancer is characterized > by cells that "take on a life of their own," she added. These cells can > mutate, change and evade the drugs scientists develop. > > So a single cure for all cancers? That's not going to happen, Attai > said. > > Even a single, incredibly effective cancer drug takes much more than a > presidential term to develop. Before they become available to patients, > treatments must go through years of animal testing and clinical trials. > The whole process can take years, often longer than a single > presidential term, Attai said. It's quite telling to put this into the perspective of the fake partisan fight between Republicans and Democrats (as if they disagree on the largest issues of the day) -- if Trump (either as candidate or US president) had said something like what Biden promised, we'd never hear the end of what a liar Trump is but we'd never hear what lies the Democrats have been telling us for years on issues of great importance such as healthcare and war. Recall Obama's "if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor" phrase which he repeated many times while on a national speaking tour promoting "ObamaCare" (the ACA, née RomneyCare)? Recall the criticism Obama gave the 2003 Iraq War calling it "a dumb war ... a rash war" and that that war was a "cynical attempt" to shove "ideological agendas down our throats" and would distract from domestic problems such as poverty and health care. Apparently that talk was in no way representative of the policy choices his administration made which resulted in continuing that war for 8 more years, adding more wars (including sharply ramping up the drone war) thus ensuring that Obama would become the first US president to be in war every year of his time in office. His administration would also increase immiseration due to poverty and lack of Medicare for All. Biden appears to be running with the same politics and strategy as Mrs. Clinton ran with in her second losing presidential campaign. So it's more reasonable to conclude that the Democrats don't care about winning elections as much as they care about pleasing their corporate funders. The Democrats please their funders quite well in collusion with the Republicans using a variety of tactics including excluding third parties and independent candidates from their so-called "debates", keeping ballot access laws such that only the corporate parties can gain access, and running party primary scams like cheating Sen. Sanders out of a fair shot at winning the 2016 Democratic party primaries. Party loyalists like Sanders go along with this and disappoint all of his supporters along the way. In the end, neoliberals and neoconservatives represent that party. The Democrats simply are not an opposition party and are therefore not to be trusted. Economy: "Young adults have less to spend on non-essentials, study says" https://www.theguardian.com/inequality/2019/jun/20/young-adults-have-less-to-spend-on-non-essentials-study-says > In an inaugural national audit of intergenerational spending power, > which is likely to reignite tensions between young and old, the > Resolution Foundation thinktank concludes that today’s 18- to > 29-year-olds are also spending less on shoes and clothes, hobbies and > travel in real terms than those at the same age in 2001 as housing costs > have soared. Compared with people the same age at the turn of the > millennium they are 7% poorer in real terms, after paying rent, or if > they can afford it, mortgage dues. > > Meanwhile, in a story that will be familiar to the rising millions of > twentysomethings who can’t afford to move out from their parents home, > baby boomers have cranked up their spending on fun, laying out more on > recreation, restaurants, hotels and culture, as people aged 65 and over > have enjoyed a steep 37% rise in spending power compared with the same > generation in 2001. [...] > Claire Turner, a director at the Centre for Ageing Better, urged caution > at framing challenges in terms of intergenerational fairness and using > statistical averages “which could distract us from the very real poverty > and disadvantage experienced by people across all ages”. > > “Many of the issues identified in this report are the result of decades > of political short-termism and a failure by successive governments to > respond to Britain’s changing population structure,” she said. > > But Angus Hanton, the co-founder of the Intergenerational Foundation, > said older voters have allowed policies that levied high taxes on the > young, and made it hard for them to save for a pension or own their own > home. > > “When asked to ease the pressure on the intergenerational contract by > contributing a little more if they have it, older generations demand > intergenerational solidarity and universal benefits for their > generation, but not for others,” he said. War, Venezuela: Colombian authorities say Guaidó was caught embezzling "humanitarian aid" cash, leaked documents are being looked into https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6l9qbkiCCw4 -- RT's report on the theft. https://es.panampost.com/orlando-avendano/2019/06/14/enviados-de-guaido-se-apropian-de-fondos-para-ayuda-humanitaria-en-colombia/ -- the leaked documents on the theft From RT in https://on.rt.com/9wm7 > [...S]everal of [Guaidó's] aides have been named by Colombian > intelligence in a leak revealing the embezzlement of US funds intended > for paying Venezuelan army defectors. The funds were raised by a Live > Aid-style concert, organized by billionaire philanthropist Richard > Branson in February, and intended to coincide with Guaido’s followers > forcing open the border with Colombia to US “humanitarian aid.” [...] > The leaked documents – published by PanAm Post, an outlet sympathetic to > Guaido – now reveal why that never happened. Regional coordinator for > Guaido’s Popular Will Party, Kevin Rojas, and the “interim president’s” > chief of staff Rossana Barrera were accused of spending hundreds of > thousands of dollars in cash on fancy hotels, expensive clothes, booze, > car and other high-life items. > > In one example, Rojas and Barrera claimed to have spent money on seven > hotels to house over 1,400 defectors, but Colombian authorities counted > only half that number crossing the border, and only two hotels were > actually paid for. Instead, receipts reveal the duo blew over $125,000 > on luxuries for themselves, including $40,000 in April alone. The > following month, one of the hotels evicted 65 defectors and their > families, over more than $20,000 in unpaid bills. > > The publication forced Guaido into full damage control mode. On Monday, > he finally acknowledged the existence of the allegations and vowed to > “clarify the case of officials appointed to serve our military in > Cúcuta,” appointing aid coordinator Lester Toledo to join the > investigation in Colombia. > > “Dictatorships cover [up] corruption,” he added. “We do not.” [...] > The US has given $213 million in humanitarian aid to Guaido so far, > Pence boasted. Left unanswered is how much of that ended up lining the > pockets of his aides, or was spent on hotels, cars, booze and trinkets > across Colombia. The RT report claims that: > In addition to the embezzled funds, Guaido’s staff botched the > distribution of aid sent by the US, with an estimated 60 percent rotting > in the warehouses and having to be thrown away. The full extent of the > scandal is yet to be revealed, as the PanAm Post has more unpublished > documents in its possession. But I'm not sure what that first part meant -- perhaps those funds were spent on perishables (such as fruit and vegetables) which were warehoused instead of being distributed to people and have now rotted and need to be thrown away. But that's not what RT wrote. War, Venezuela: Potable water is harder to come by because of US sanctions; sanctions continue to be war on the poor. https://therealnews.com/stories/us-sanctions-leave-millions-of-venezuelans-without-water -- TRNN report transcript https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfU-LMDYgIk -- TRNN video https://www.greenleft.org.au/content/venezuela-us-sanctions-leave-millions-without-water > Yolimar Contreras [a resident of Altos de Lidice, a poor barrio on the > hillsides of Caracas] told [The Real News Network]: “We haven’t had > water for three to four months, because we’re high up on the hillside.” > > It has not stopped her from washing the floors, but now in order to get > water, they have to carry it up — one 23-litre jug at a time. She is not > alone. Water is out across major portions of the neighborhood. > > “All week long you see people carrying water by here. Saturdays and > Sundays in particular, when people are off from work,” she said. > > The pump needed to push the water up the hill and into their homes is > broken. US sanctions are blocking the country from acquiring new pumps, > motors, pipes and replacement parts. > > In Venezuela, they call it the “blockade”. That is what it feels like. > > According to many residents, the Venezuelan government is doing what it > can to mitigate the situation. Twice a week, it sends a tanker of > potable water to the neighborhood, down the hill from Contreras’s home. > > Some residents here say they have been without running water for a year > and a half. They pour into the streets with their waist-high buckets, to > wait their turn for their containers to be filled. [...] > [The state water company] Hidroven says that most water storage > facilities around the country are working at 50-60% capacity. Over the > last three years, the influx of water into Caracas has been reduced by > nearly 30%, because of failing pipes and pumps, and the inability to > maintain the system, because they need equipment from abroad. Equipment > they just can’t get, because of the Trump-imposed U.S. sanctions. > > And this is the clear goal of the U.S. government. To tighten the grip > and make the Venezuelan people suffer, with the hope that they will get > fed up and rise up. The Trump administration would have you believe > that the blame lies on Venezuelan incompetence, but many Venezuelans are > just not buying it. Amazon pitches new credit card (which is only good at Amazon and has an interest rate that goes up to 28%) and highlights that banking is where the real money is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PY3j_LJs4JU -- RT's report on Amazon's new predatory credit card because this card is chiefly pitched at the poor and has a high max interest rate. Apple has also entered banking with their Apple Pay service which, among other things, lets Apple tack on a per-transaction service fee. -J From karenaram at hotmail.com Fri Jun 21 13:21:23 2019 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2019 13:21:23 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: The US as Rogue Nation Number 1/Good article in Counterpunch References: Message-ID: > > https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/21/the-us-as-rogue-nation-number-1/ > UPDATE: Francis Boyle, professor of international law at the University of Illinois, has this to say about the legality of a US attack on Iran: > > "Iran has not committed an "armed attack" upon the United States that would trigger the right of self-defense set forth in UN Charter Article 51. So under the current circumstances as they stand now, a U.S. military attack upon Iran would constitute Armed Aggression and a Nuremberg Crime against Peace as set forth even in US Army Field Manual 27-10 (1956), which is still valid and binding. Also the Trump administration has no authorization from the United States Congress to wage war against Iran and thus an attack upon Iran would violate the War Powers Clause of the United States Constitution and Congress's own War Powers Resolution. For these reasons, such an attack would also constitute an Impeachable Offense under the U.S.Constitution. As a preventive measure, it would be my advice that a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives immediately introduce Bills of Impeachment against John Bolton and Mike Pompeo. I hereby offer my services free of charge to any Member of the U.S. House willing to do so." From jbn at forestfield.org Fri Jun 21 23:51:05 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2019 18:51:05 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News from Neptune #425 notes Message-ID: News from Neptune #425 Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyeioMElcyM A "Killer's Trial" edition Links to items referenced on the show. Michael D. Shear, Eric Schmitt, Michael Crowley and Maggie Haberman on "Strikes on Iran Approved by Trump, Then Abruptly Pulled Back" https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/20/world/middleeast/iran-us-drone.html Related: https://news.yahoo.com/donald-trump-tweets-the-us-was-cocked-and-loaded-to-strike-iran-but-stooped-after-being-told-people-would-die-142915687.html https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/21/politics/trump-military-strikes-iran/index.html https://www.news.com.au/world/north-america/trump-irans-shootdown-of-us-drone-was-a-very-big-mistake/news-story/23801308e8d7c8e1eb9864fba8d1b921 Kim Dotcom on US launching then canceling attack against Iran https://twitter.com/KimDotcom/status/1141942682555572225 Pres. Trump tweets about not attacking Iran (but being "cocked & loaded" to carry out the attack) https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1142055388965212161 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1142055392488374272 Soli Özel interview with Stephen Walt from 2019-06-12 https://www.institutmontaigne.org/en/blog/fall-american-primacy "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy" by John J. Mearsheimer and. Stephen M. Walt ISBN-10: 0374531501 ISBN-13: 978-0374531508 Complete book: https://bamdadi.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/the-israel-lobby-and-us-foreign-policy-bamdadi-dot-com.pdf Paul McLeary and Sydney J. Freedberg Jr. on "Former Boeing Exec Shanahan Out at Pentagon, Former Raytheon Lobbyist Esper Steps In" https://breakingdefense.com/2019/06/former-boeing-exec-shanahan-out-at-pentagon-former-raytheon-lobbyist-esper-steps-in/ Jeffrey St. Clair on "Roaming Charges: Ask Your Local Death Squad" https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/21/roaming-charges-ask-your-local-death-squad/ Robert W. Service https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_service "Merchants of Death" by H. C. Engelbrecht and F. C. Hanighen Complete book: https://archive.org/download/MerchantsOfDeath-AStudyOfTheInternationalArmamentIndustry/MerchantsOfDeath-AStudyOfTheInternationalArmamentIndustryByH.c.Engelbrecht.pdf https://mises-media.s3.amazonaws.com/The%20Merchants%20of%20Death_2.pdf More formats: https://archive.org/details/MerchantsOfDeath-AStudyOfTheInternationalArmamentIndustry Rationale for the Iraq War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationale_for_the_Iraq_War Ben Hubbard on "Military Reasserts Its Allegiance to Its Privileges" https://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/world/middleeast/Egyptian-military-reasserts-its-allegiance-to-its-privileges.html David D. Kirkpatrick on "Army Ousts Egypt’s President; Morsi Is Taken Into Military Custody" https://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/world/middleeast/egypt.html Mona Eltahawy 2013 tweet https://twitter.com/monaeltahawy/status/352521826175426562 Ali Abunimah in response to aforementioned Mona Eltahawy tweet https://twitter.com/AliAbunimah/status/1141141337162616832 Mona Eltahawy on "Mohamed Morsi Died in a Soundproof Cage" https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/18/opinion/morsi-death-egypt.html The Angry Arab (As`ad AbuKhalil) on twitter.com https://twitter.com/asadabukhalil http://angryarab.blogspot.com/ -- blog The Angry Arab on Consortium News https://consortiumnews.com/tag/asad-abukhalil/ The Angry Arab on "How to Bring Down a Regime in the Arab World" https://consortiumnews.com/2019/06/18/the-angry-arab-how-to-bring-down-a-regime-in-the-arab-world/ Notes including those on Roger Stone's lawsuit https://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/2019-June/050950.html William Barr https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_barr Medicare for All forum -- June 23, 2019 at Champaign Public Library (200 W. Green St, Champaign, IL 61820-5193) at 1PM https://twitter.com/ChambanaDSA/status/1133546686029156352 Champaign-Urbana chapter of Democratic Socialists of America (organizer of Medicare for All forum above) https://cudsa.red/ -J From deb.pdamerica at gmail.com Sat Jun 22 09:17:05 2019 From: deb.pdamerica at gmail.com (Debra Schrishuhn) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2019 04:17:05 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] alert--ICE raids tomorrow Message-ID: https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/06/21/not-our-watch-rights-groups-rally-help-immigrant-communities-ahead-reported-weekend -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidgreen50 at gmail.com Sat Jun 22 16:35:44 2019 From: davidgreen50 at gmail.com (David Green) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2019 11:35:44 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News from Neptune #425 notes In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thank you Jeff. It's definitely worth reading the Eltawahy tweet from 2013 and the responses to it, keeping the reflection of As'ad AbuKhalil (the Angry Arab) in response. But I was remiss in not mentioning the good coverage of Sharif Abdel Kouddous: https://www.democracynow.org/2019/6/18/egypt_mohamed_morsi_dead_at_67 and a good interviewee of the lousy Marc Steiner: https://therealnews.com/stories/morsis-death-represents-the-demise-of-hope-for-democracy-in-egypt I recommend just reading what the interviewee has to say in the transcript. DG On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 6:51 PM J.B. Nicholson via Peace-discuss < peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > News from Neptune #425 > Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyeioMElcyM > A "Killer's Trial" edition > > Links to items referenced on the show. > > Michael D. Shear, Eric Schmitt, Michael Crowley and Maggie Haberman on > "Strikes on Iran Approved by Trump, Then Abruptly Pulled Back" > https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/20/world/middleeast/iran-us-drone.html > > Related: > > https://news.yahoo.com/donald-trump-tweets-the-us-was-cocked-and-loaded-to-strike-iran-but-stooped-after-being-told-people-would-die-142915687.html > > https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/21/politics/trump-military-strikes-iran/index.html > > https://www.news.com.au/world/north-america/trump-irans-shootdown-of-us-drone-was-a-very-big-mistake/news-story/23801308e8d7c8e1eb9864fba8d1b921 > > Kim Dotcom on US launching then canceling attack against Iran > https://twitter.com/KimDotcom/status/1141942682555572225 > > Pres. Trump tweets about not attacking Iran (but being "cocked & loaded" > to > carry out the attack) > https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1142055388965212161 > https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1142055392488374272 > > Soli Özel interview with Stephen Walt from 2019-06-12 > https://www.institutmontaigne.org/en/blog/fall-american-primacy > > "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy" by John J. Mearsheimer and. > Stephen M. Walt > ISBN-10: 0374531501 > ISBN-13: 978-0374531508 > Complete book: > > https://bamdadi.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/the-israel-lobby-and-us-foreign-policy-bamdadi-dot-com.pdf > > Paul McLeary and Sydney J. Freedberg Jr. on "Former Boeing Exec Shanahan > Out at Pentagon, Former Raytheon Lobbyist Esper Steps In" > > https://breakingdefense.com/2019/06/former-boeing-exec-shanahan-out-at-pentagon-former-raytheon-lobbyist-esper-steps-in/ > > Jeffrey St. Clair on "Roaming Charges: Ask Your Local Death Squad" > > https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/21/roaming-charges-ask-your-local-death-squad/ > > > > Robert W. Service > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_service > > "Merchants of Death" by H. C. Engelbrecht and F. C. Hanighen > Complete book: > > https://archive.org/download/MerchantsOfDeath-AStudyOfTheInternationalArmamentIndustry/MerchantsOfDeath-AStudyOfTheInternationalArmamentIndustryByH.c.Engelbrecht.pdf > https://mises-media.s3.amazonaws.com/The%20Merchants%20of%20Death_2.pdf > > More formats: > > https://archive.org/details/MerchantsOfDeath-AStudyOfTheInternationalArmamentIndustry > > > > Rationale for the Iraq War > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationale_for_the_Iraq_War > > > > Ben Hubbard on "Military Reasserts Its Allegiance to Its Privileges" > > https://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/world/middleeast/Egyptian-military-reasserts-its-allegiance-to-its-privileges.html > > David D. Kirkpatrick on "Army Ousts Egypt’s President; Morsi Is Taken Into > Military Custody" > https://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/world/middleeast/egypt.html > > Mona Eltahawy 2013 tweet > https://twitter.com/monaeltahawy/status/352521826175426562 > > Ali Abunimah in response to aforementioned Mona Eltahawy tweet > https://twitter.com/AliAbunimah/status/1141141337162616832 > > Mona Eltahawy on "Mohamed Morsi Died in a Soundproof Cage" > https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/18/opinion/morsi-death-egypt.html > > The Angry Arab (As`ad AbuKhalil) on twitter.com > https://twitter.com/asadabukhalil > http://angryarab.blogspot.com/ -- blog > > The Angry Arab on Consortium News > https://consortiumnews.com/tag/asad-abukhalil/ > > The Angry Arab on "How to Bring Down a Regime in the Arab World" > > https://consortiumnews.com/2019/06/18/the-angry-arab-how-to-bring-down-a-regime-in-the-arab-world/ > > > > > Notes including those on Roger Stone's lawsuit > https://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/2019-June/050950.html > > William Barr > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_barr > > > > Medicare for All forum -- June 23, 2019 at Champaign Public Library (200 > W. > Green St, Champaign, IL 61820-5193) at 1PM > https://twitter.com/ChambanaDSA/status/1133546686029156352 > > Champaign-Urbana chapter of Democratic Socialists of America (organizer of > Medicare for All forum above) > https://cudsa.red/ > > -J > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Sat Jun 22 21:37:11 2019 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2019 16:37:11 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] "Obama paid $600,000 for a single speech" Message-ID: https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/06/20/obam-j20.html "WAIT! WHAT? The guy who was gonna roll up his sleeves and wear comfortable boots to join workers on their picket lines? The guy who went to Flint numerous times to assure the poisoned children of Flint that he would fix things? The guy who went to Standing Rock to support the rights of Indigenous People against Big Oil? The guy who said NO to the Banks and Wall Streets and instead bailed out countless economically suffering Americans and helped them keep their homes? The guy who refused to appoint a former Monsanto VP to head the FDA?The guy who refused to have a homophobic white preacher deliver the prayer at the first inauguration? The guy who turned down the Nobel Peace Prize because he could not accept and be a warmongering murderer of millions? THAT GUY?" ~ Sidney Danz Locally, he split (and essentially destroyed) the local anti-war movement even before he became president. From almost 15 years ago:. ============================================= "His administration oversaw the largest redistribution of wealth in history from the bottom to the top one percent, spearheading the attack on the living standards of teachers and autoworkers. Under Obama’s watch the stock markets soared as the Dow Jones Industrial Average increased by 149 percent. Meanwhile, the “war on terror” in the Middle East was expanded with Obama becoming the first president to spend every day of his two terms at war, much to the delight of the military-industrial complex. "As the wars raged on and the financial oligarchs fattened themselves off the ever-increasing mountain of wealth being concentrated at the top of society, real wages stagnated and an unprecedented opioid overdose crisis spun out of control. Rising numbers of “deaths of despair” during Obama’s tenure, particularly among the working class, resulted in a decline in life expectancy unprecedented in the modern era…” ### From cgestabrook at gmail.com Sat Jun 22 22:11:05 2019 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2019 17:11:05 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Your message to Peace awaits moderator approval References: Message-ID: <065EF2F0-92F1-4408-B28C-FAEC90B52EFA@gmail.com> Censorship continues on AWARE email list. > Begin forwarded message: > > From: peace-owner at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Your message to Peace awaits moderator approval > Date: June 22, 2019 at 4:41:30 PM CDT > To: cgestabrook at gmail.com > > Your mail to 'Peace' with the subject > > "Obama paid $600,000 for a single speech" > > Is being held until the list moderator can review it for approval. > > The reason it is being held: > > Post to moderated list > > Either the message will get posted to the list, or you will receive > notification of the moderator's decision. If you would like to cancel > this posting, please visit the following URL: > > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/confirm/peace/1ca7773908295982a2f4340116d6e395a711fa02 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jbn at forestfield.org Sat Jun 22 22:47:54 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2019 17:47:54 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] "Obama paid $600,000 for a single speech" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <748b3911-5244-dcb9-9fb1-bec0a1e780ef@forestfield.org> C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: > From almost 15 years ago:. > ============================================= > "His administration oversaw the largest redistribution of wealth in > history from the bottom to the top one percent, spearheading the attack > on the living standards of teachers and autoworkers. Under Obama’s watch > the stock markets soared as the Dow Jones Industrial Average increased > by 149 percent. [...] Mr. "We tortured some folks"[1] (but we're going to "look forward not backward"[2] so that nobody in power pays a price) apparently wants Wall St. to thank him instead of "grumblin' about anti-business". Consider what Obama recently told bankers from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjVFfX4BtvI > I know we're an oil country, and we need American energy and, by the > way, American energy production. You wouldn't always know it but it went > up every year I was president. [light applause] And that whole suddenly > America's like the biggest oil producer and the biggest ga-- that was > me, people, I just want you to-- [laughter] So, so [Obama chuckles] It's > a little like, sometimes you go to Wall Street and folks be grumblin' > about anti-business. I said "Have you checked where your stocks were > when I came into office and where they are now? What? What are you > talkin'-- What are you complainin' about? Just say 'Thank you' please.". > Because I wanna raise your taxes a couple percent to make sure, you > know, kids have a chance to go to school? It's not clear that Wall St. firms paid these higher taxes or that college students were relieved of student loan debt as a result of a higher tax burden. -J [1] "'We tortured some folks' is not accountability. President Obama's refusal to declassify the torture report left the door open—a dark legacy." (such as "Biggest @AP scoop in a long time: US government behind UAE torture in Yemen, with some reportedly grilled alive.") Edward Snowden in https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/877906451187998722 which also links to https://apnews.com/4925f7f0fa654853bd6f2f57174179fe [2] Dan Froomkin on "Obama Wanted to ‘Look Forward, Not Backward’ on Torture, But He Failed to Look Either Way" https://medium.com/@DanFroomkin/obama-wanted-to-look-forward-not-backward-on-torture-but-he-failed-to-look-either-way-c1b258ac3258 . Froomkin said he found Obama's choice here to be "inexplicable" but it's easily understood as being consistent with other US administrations (including Donald "Lock her up" Trump's administration). These choices are designed to keep previous administrations insulated from accountability. Similarly the US's choice to selectively recognize the International Court of Justice -- as the Wikipedia article on the World Court points out in the 'Criticisms' section: "[P]ermanent members of the [UN] Security Council [have the power] to veto enforcement of cases, even those to which they consented to be bound. Because the jurisdiction does not have binding force itself, in many cases, the instances of aggression are adjudicated by Security Council by adopting a resolution, etc. There is, therefore, a likelihood for the permanent member states of Security Council to avoid the legal responsibility brought up by International Court of Justice, as shown in the example of Nicaragua v. United States." See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_court#Criticisms for more. From cgestabrook at gmail.com Sun Jun 23 01:48:58 2019 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2019 20:48:58 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: [New post] Starvation Sanctions Are Worse Than Overt Warfare References: <139971992.6737.0@wordpress.com> Message-ID: <9ACB7C9E-1FE0-4D43-BEE8-146D6A4E85E5@gmail.com> > > New post on Caitlin Johnstone > > > Starvation Sanctions Are Worse Than Overt Warfare by Caitlin Johnstone > "We are putting major additional Sanctions on Iran on Monday," President Trump tweeted today. "I look forward to the day that Sanctions come off Iran, and they become a productive and prosperous nation again - The sooner the better!" > > Iran's economy is already floundering due to the steadily mounting sanctions that the Trump administration has been heaping upon it since its withdrawal from the JCPOA last year. Crucial goods are four times the price they used to be, sick Iranians are having difficulty obtaining life-saving medicine , and life in general has been getting much more difficult for the poorest and frailest Iranian civilians . > > For this reason, it is a very safe bet that there have been Iranians who have died because of the sanctions. Being unable to obtain enough life-saving medicine will inevitably increase mortality rates, as will inadequate nutrition and care for those whose health is at risk. There's not really any way around that, and it's only going to get worse. > > And that's exactly what was supposed to happen. As far as their intended purpose is concerned, the sanctions are working. They're doing exactly what they were intended to do: hurt Iranian civilians. > > How do I know this? Well for one thing America's Secretary of State has said it openly. The New York Times reports the following : > > Last week, Mr. Pompeo acknowledged to Michael J. Morrell, a former acting director of the C.I.A., that the administration’s strategy would not persuade Iranian leaders to change their behavior. > > “I think what can change is the people can change the government,” he said on a podcast hosted by Mr. Morrell, in what appeared to be an endorsement of regime change. > > The Trump administration isn't leveling these sanctions because it believes they'll cause Tehran to capitulate to Washington's impossible list of demands ; they know full well that that will never happen. What they claim, based on no evidence or historical precedent whatsoever, is that by making life so painful for the hungry and malnourished Iranian people they'll be forced to rise up against their government to effect regime change themselves. > > Can you think of anything more sociopathic than this? Off the top of my head, I personally cannot. > > ....Death to America. I terminated deal, which was not even ratified by Congress, and imposed strong sanctions. They are a much weakened nation today than at the beginning of my Presidency, when they were causing major problems throughout the Middle East. Now they are Bust!.... > > — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 21, 2019 > Starvation sanctions kill people. Tens of thousands of Venezuelans have reportedly already died as a result of this administration's relentless assault on their economy; those human beings are no less dead than they would have been if the US had killed them by dropping cluster bombs on Caracas. Yet these deaths have received virtually no mainstream media coverage, and Americans, while they strongly oppose attacking Iran militarily , have had very little to say about Trump's attacks on the nation's economy. The economy which people use to feed their children, to care for their elderly and their sick. > > I'm titling this essay "Starvation Sanctions Are Worse Than Overt Warfare", and I mean it. I am not saying that starvation sanctions are more destructive or deadly than overt military force in and of themselves; what I am saying is that the overall effect is worse, because there's no public accountability for them and because they deliberately target civilians. > > If the US were to launch a barrage of Tomahawk missiles into an Iranian suburb with the goal of killing civilians, there'd be international outrage and the cohesion of the US-centralized power alliance would take a major hit. Virtually everyone would recognize this as an unforgivable war crime. Yet America will be able to kill the same number of civilians with the same deliberate intention of inflicting deadly force, and it would suffer essentially no consequences at all. There's no public or international pressure holding that form of violence at bay, because it's invisible and poorly understood. > > It reminds me of the way financial abuse gets overlooked and under-appreciated in our society. Financial abuse can be more painful and imprisoning than physical or psychological abuse (and I speak from experience), especially if you have children, yet you don't generally see movies and TV shows getting made about it. In a society where people have been made to depend on money for survival, limiting or cutting off their access to it is the same as any other violent attack upon their personal sovereignty, and can easily be just as destructive. But as a society we haven't yet learned to see and understand this violence, so it doesn't attract interest and attention. That lack of interest and attention enables the empire to launch deadly campaigns targeting civilian populations unnoticed, without any public accountability. > > What does is say about MSM that Fox News is the only MSM outlet to have covered the @ceprdc study showing that US sanctions have killed 40,000 Venezuelans? NYT, WaPo, MSNBC and CNN have all ignored it and promoted murderous sanctions and regime change. https://t.co/RLqfaIK166 > — Dan Cohen (@dancohen3000) May 8, 2019 > We must as a society evolve our understanding of what sanctions are and what they do, and stop seeing them as in any way superior or preferable to overt warfare. > > The fact that people generally oppose senseless military violence but are unable to see and comprehend a slow, boa constrictor-like act of slaughter via economic strangulation is why these siege warfare tactics have become the weapon of choice for the US-centralized empire. It is a more gradual way of murdering people than overt warfare, but when you control all the resources and have an underlying power structure which maintains itself amid the comings and goings of your officially elected government, you're in no hurry. The absence of any public accountability makes the need for patience a very worthwhile trade-off. > > So you see this siege warfare strategy employed everywhere by the US-centralized empire: > > You see it with Iran and Venezuela. > You see it in Yemen, where in addition to deadly blockades the Saudis have been deliberate targeting farms, fishing boats, marketplaces, food storage sites and cholera treatment centers with US-assisted airstrikes. > You see it in North Korea, where boats full of dead people have been washing up on Japan's shores because fishermen get stuck out at sea trying to catch food since they can't afford enough fuel to get back to shore, which former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson attributed to US sanctions . > You see it in Gaza, where people are being deprived of an adequate amount of nutrients due to an Israeli blockade designed to "put the Palestinians on a diet". > You saw it with Julian Assange , where Ecuador collaborated with the US to slowly make life in the embassy more and more hellish in the hope that he'd step outside to be arrested by British police. > You're seeing it now with Chelsea Manning , who is currently racking up $500 a day fines for her principled stand against a corrupt grand jury proceeding against Assange, fines which will double next month to $1,000 a day. > The US-centralized power alliance is so powerful in its ability to hurt nations with financial influence that in 1990 when Yemen voted against a UN Security Council Resolution authorizing the attack against Iran, a senior US diplomat was caught on a hot mic telling the Yemeni ambassador, "That will be the most expensive 'no' vote you ever cast." According to German author Thomas Pogge , "The US stopped $70 million in aid to Yemen; other Western countries, the IMF, and World Bank followed suit. Saudi Arabia expelled some 800,000 Yemeni workers, many of whom had lived there for years and were sending urgently needed money to their families." > > That's real power. Not the ability to destroy a nation with bombs and missiles, but the ability to destroy it without firing a shot. > > > It's no wonder, then, that the drivers of this empire work so hard to continue growing and expanding it. The oligarchs and their allies in opaque government agencies no doubt envision a world where all noncompliant nations like Iran, Russia and China have been absorbed into the blob of empire and war becomes obsolete, not because anyone has become any less violent, but because their economic control will be so complete that they can obliterate entire populations just by cutting them off from the world economy whenever any of them become disobedient. > > This is the only reason Iran is being targeted right now. That's why you'll never hear a factually and logically sound argument defending Trump's withdrawal from the nuclear deal; there is none. There was no problem with the JCPOA other than the fact that it barred America from inflicting economic warfare upon Iran, which it needed for the purpose of toppling the nation's government so that it can be absorbed into the blob of the US-centralized empire. > > And all the innocent human beings who die of starvation and disease? They don't matter. Imperial violence only matters if there are consequences for it. The price of shoring up the total hegemony of the empire will have been worth it . > > _______________________________ > > The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website , which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported , so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook , following my antics on Twitter , throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal , purchasing some of my sweet merchandise , buying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone , or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers . For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I'm trying to do with this platform, click here . Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish or use any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge. > > > > Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2 > > Caitlin Johnstone | June 23, 2019 at 1:29 am | Tags: #Trump , caitlin johnstone , civilians , Iran , sanctions , war | Categories: Article | URL: https://wp.me/p9tj6M-1KF > Comment See all comments > Unsubscribe to no longer receive posts from Caitlin Johnstone. > Change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions . > > Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: > https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2019/06/23/starvation-sanctions-are-worse-than-overt-warfare/ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Sun Jun 23 02:03:36 2019 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2019 21:03:36 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Your message to Peace awaits moderator approval References: Message-ID: <45C7AE73-79AA-44B4-813C-B7E28D21005D@gmail.com> More AWARE censorship. > Begin forwarded message: > > From: peace-owner at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Your message to Peace awaits moderator approval > Date: June 22, 2019 at 8:53:23 PM CDT > To: cgestabrook at gmail.com > > Your mail to 'Peace' with the subject > > Fwd: [New post] Starvation Sanctions Are Worse Than Overt Warfare > > Is being held until the list moderator can review it for approval. > > The reason it is being held: > > Post to moderated list > > Either the message will get posted to the list, or you will receive > notification of the moderator's decision. If you would like to cancel > this posting, please visit the following URL: > > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/confirm/peace/8aba44859fe22ad11d2d3e360508d9dff5b7acf8 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brussel at illinois.edu Sun Jun 23 04:20:44 2019 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2019 04:20:44 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?Chomsky=E2=80=A6?= Message-ID: <9171D0A0-CA2C-4ECB-B416-A43C33470A34@illinois.edu> A far-reaching interview, a trifle old but still apt, by Noam Chomsky: https://fair.org/home/still-manufacturing-consent-an-interview-with-noam-chomsky/?awt_l=MhEdm&awt_m=gNYipYGPYmOI_TQ —mkb -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kmedina67 at gmail.com Sun Jun 23 05:23:24 2019 From: kmedina67 at gmail.com (kmedina67) Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2019 00:23:24 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Your message to Peace awaits moderator approval Message-ID: <5d0f0ccf.1c69fb81.8c085.e1ca@mx.google.com> If the mountain won't come to Muhammad... If there is not a Wikipedia entry on you... null -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From naiman at justforeignpolicy.org Sun Jun 23 07:18:09 2019 From: naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (Robert Naiman) Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2019 02:18:09 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Starvation Sanctions Are Worse Than Overt Warfare In-Reply-To: <9ACB7C9E-1FE0-4D43-BEE8-146D6A4E85E5@gmail.com> References: <139971992.6737.0@wordpress.com> <9ACB7C9E-1FE0-4D43-BEE8-146D6A4E85E5@gmail.com> Message-ID: So here's an idea on this that I have been pitching to Congressional staff. Let's try to spread this idea around. Sometime in July the NDAA [National Defense Authorization Act, generally seen as a "must-pass bill" because it "funds the troops"] is expected to hit the House floor. Before that, it will go to the Rules Committee, where amendments will be offered. Let's agitate that an amendment be offered that limits broad economic sanctions in some modest way, in order to try to force a vote on the House floor on profligate economic sanctions that are hurting civilians. Such as: trying to limit such sanctions so that they protect access to food and medicine, as required by international law. Or: trying to limit the President's unilateral power to impose economic sanctions by declaring an "emergency." === Robert Reuel Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (202) 448-2898 x1 On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 8:49 PM C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss < peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > > > New post on *Caitlin Johnstone* > Starvation Sanctions Are Worse > Than Overt Warfare > > by Caitlin Johnstone > > "We are putting major additional Sanctions on Iran on Monday," President > Trump tweeted > today. "I > look forward to the day that Sanctions come off Iran, and they become a > productive and prosperous nation again - The sooner the better!" > > Iran's economy is already floundering due to > the steadily mounting sanctions > > that the Trump administration has been heaping upon it since its > withdrawal from the JCPOA last year. Crucial goods are four times the price > they used to be, sick Iranians are having difficulty obtaining > life-saving medicine > , > and life in general has been getting much more difficult > > for the poorest and frailest Iranian civilians > > . > > For this reason, it is a very safe bet that there have been Iranians who > have died because of the sanctions. Being unable to obtain enough > life-saving medicine will inevitably increase mortality rates, as will > inadequate nutrition and care for those whose health is at risk. There's > not really any way around that, and it's only going to get worse. > > And that's exactly what was supposed to happen. As far as their intended > purpose is concerned, the sanctions are working. They're doing exactly what > they were intended to do: hurt Iranian civilians. > > How do I know this? Well for one thing America's Secretary of State has > said it openly. *The New York Times* reports the following > : > > Last week, Mr. Pompeo acknowledged to Michael J. Morrell, a former acting > director of the C.I.A., that the administration’s strategy would not > persuade Iranian leaders to change their behavior. > > “I think what can change is the people can change the government,” he said > on a podcast hosted by Mr. Morrell, in what appeared to be an endorsement > of regime change. > > The Trump administration isn't leveling these sanctions because it > believes they'll cause Tehran to capitulate to Washington's impossible > list of demands > ; > they know full well that that will never happen. What they claim, based on > no evidence or historical precedent whatsoever, is that by making life so > painful for the hungry and malnourished Iranian people they'll be forced to > rise up against their government to effect regime change themselves. > > Can you think of anything more sociopathic than this? Off the top of my > head, I personally cannot. > > ....Death to America. I terminated deal, which was not even ratified by > Congress, and imposed strong sanctions. They are a much weakened nation > today than at the beginning of my Presidency, when they were causing major > problems throughout the Middle East. Now they are Bust!.... > > — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 21, 2019 > > > Starvation sanctions kill people. Tens of thousands of Venezuelans have > reportedly already died > > as a result of this administration's relentless assault on their > economy; those human beings are no less dead than they would have been if > the US had killed them by dropping cluster bombs on Caracas. Yet these > deaths have received virtually no mainstream media coverage, and Americans, > while they strongly oppose attacking Iran militarily > , > have had very little to say about Trump's attacks on the nation's economy. > The economy which people use to feed their children, to care for their > elderly and their sick. > > I'm titling this essay "Starvation Sanctions Are Worse Than > Overt Warfare", and I mean it. I am not saying that starvation sanctions > are more destructive or deadly than overt military force in and of > themselves; what I am saying is that the overall effect is worse, because > there's no public accountability for them and because they deliberately > target civilians. > > If the US were to launch a barrage of Tomahawk missiles into an Iranian > suburb with the goal of killing civilians, there'd be international outrage > and the cohesion of the US-centralized power alliance would take a major > hit. Virtually everyone would recognize this as an unforgivable war crime. > Yet America will be able to kill the same number of civilians with the same > deliberate intention of inflicting deadly force, and it would suffer > essentially no consequences at all. There's no public or international > pressure holding that form of violence at bay, because it's invisible and > poorly understood. > > It reminds me of the way financial abuse gets overlooked and > under-appreciated in our society. Financial abuse can be more painful and > imprisoning than physical or psychological abuse (and I speak from > experience), especially if you have children, yet you don't generally see > movies and TV shows getting made about it. In a society where people have > been made to depend on money for survival, limiting or cutting off their > access to it is the same as any other violent attack upon their personal > sovereignty, and can easily be just as destructive. But as a society we > haven't yet learned to see and understand this violence, so it doesn't > attract interest and attention. That lack of interest and attention enables > the empire to launch deadly campaigns targeting civilian populations > unnoticed, without any public accountability. > > What does is say about MSM that Fox News is the only MSM outlet to have > covered the @ceprdc study > showing that US sanctions have killed 40,000 Venezuelans? NYT, WaPo, MSNBC > and CNN have all ignored it and promoted murderous sanctions and regime > change. https://t.co/RLqfaIK166 > > — Dan Cohen (@dancohen3000) May 8, 2019 > > > We must as a society evolve our understanding of what sanctions are and > what they do, and stop seeing them as in any way superior or preferable to > overt warfare. > > The fact that people generally oppose senseless military violence but are > unable to see and comprehend a slow, boa constrictor-like act of slaughter > via economic strangulation is why these siege warfare tactics have become > the weapon of choice for the US-centralized empire. It is a more gradual > way of murdering people than overt warfare, but when you control all the > resources and have an underlying power structure which maintains itself > amid the comings and goings of your officially elected government, you're > in no hurry. The absence of any public accountability makes the need for > patience a very worthwhile trade-off. > > So you see this siege warfare strategy employed everywhere by the > US-centralized empire: > > - You see it with Iran and Venezuela. > - You see it in Yemen, where in addition to deadly blockades the > Saudis have been deliberate targeting > farms, > fishing boats, marketplaces, food storage sites and cholera treatment > centers > with > US-assisted airstrikes. > - You see it in North Korea, where boats full of dead people have been > washing up on Japan's shores > > because fishermen get stuck out at sea trying to catch food since > they can't afford enough fuel to get back to shore, which former Secretary > of State Rex Tillerson attributed to US sanctions > . > - You see it in Gaza, where people are being deprived of an adequate > amount of nutrients > > due to an Israeli blockade designed to "put the Palestinians on a > diet". > - You saw it with Julian Assange > , > where Ecuador collaborated with the US to slowly make life in the embassy > more and more hellish in the hope that he'd step outside to be arrested by > British police. > - You're seeing it now with Chelsea Manning > , > who is currently racking up $500 a day fines for her principled stand > against a corrupt grand jury proceeding against Assange, fines which will > double next month to $1,000 a day. > > The US-centralized power alliance is so powerful in its ability to hurt > nations with financial influence that in 1990 when Yemen voted against a UN > Security Council Resolution authorizing the attack against Iran, a senior > US diplomat was caught on a hot mic telling the Yemeni ambassador, "That > will be the most expensive 'no' vote you ever cast." According to German > author Thomas Pogge > , > "The US stopped $70 million in aid to Yemen; other Western countries, the > IMF, and World Bank followed suit. Saudi Arabia expelled some 800,000 > Yemeni workers, many of whom had lived there for years and were sending > urgently needed money to their families." > > That's real power. Not the ability to destroy a nation with bombs and > missiles, but the ability to destroy it without firing a shot. > > > > It's no wonder, then, that the drivers of this empire work so hard to > continue growing and expanding it. The oligarchs and their allies in opaque > government agencies no doubt envision a world where all noncompliant > nations like Iran, Russia and China have been absorbed into the blob of > empire and war becomes obsolete, not because anyone has become any less > violent, but because their economic control will be so complete that they > can obliterate entire populations just by cutting them off from the world > economy whenever any of them become disobedient. > > This is the only reason Iran is being targeted right now. That's why > you'll never hear a factually and logically sound argument defending > Trump's withdrawal from the nuclear deal; there is none. There was no > problem with the JCPOA other than the fact that it barred America from > inflicting economic warfare upon Iran, which it needed for the purpose of > toppling the nation's government so that it can be absorbed into the blob > of the US-centralized empire. > > And all the innocent human beings who die of starvation and disease? They > don't matter. Imperial violence only matters if there are consequences for > it. The price of shoring up the total hegemony of the empire will have been > worth it . > > _______________________________ > > *The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the > stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website > , which will get you an email notification > for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported > , > so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me > on **Facebook* *, following > my antics on* *Twitter* *, **throwing some > money into my hat on **Patreon* > * or* *Paypal* , *purchasing some of > my sweet merchandise > , **buying > my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone > , or my previous book **Woke: A Field > Guide for Utopia Preppers* > *. > For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I'm trying to do with > this platform, click here > . > Everyone, racist platforms excluded, **has my permission* > * to > republish or use any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in > any way they like free of charge.* > > *Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2* > *Caitlin Johnstone * | June 23, > 2019 at 1:29 am | Tags: #Trump > , caitlin > johnstone > , > civilians > , Iran , > sanctions > , war | > Categories: Article > | URL: > https://wp.me/p9tj6M-1KF > > Comment > > See all comments > > > Unsubscribe > > to no longer receive posts from Caitlin Johnstone. > Change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions > . > > *Trouble clicking?* Copy and paste this URL into your browser: > > https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2019/06/23/starvation-sanctions-are-worse-than-overt-warfare/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidgreen50 at gmail.com Sun Jun 23 16:35:09 2019 From: davidgreen50 at gmail.com (David Green) Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2019 11:35:09 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?Chomsky=E2=80=A6?= In-Reply-To: <9171D0A0-CA2C-4ECB-B416-A43C33470A34@illinois.edu> References: <9171D0A0-CA2C-4ECB-B416-A43C33470A34@illinois.edu> Message-ID: A good review of the basic issues, historically and journalistically. On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 11:21 PM Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss < peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > A far-reaching interview, a trifle old but still apt, by Noam Chomsky: > > > https://fair.org/home/still-manufacturing-consent-an-interview-with-noam-chomsky/?awt_l=MhEdm&awt_m=gNYipYGPYmOI_TQ > > —mkb > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kmedina67 at gmail.com Mon Jun 24 00:57:49 2019 From: kmedina67 at gmail.com (kmedina67) Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2019 19:57:49 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] 4th of July march vs. 13th of July march Message-ID: <5d102011.1c69fb81.38876.e976@mx.google.com>  The Theme could be moved From "Flight in space" to ....* "We immigrated to space and nobody called us criminals"* "peace takes a lot of work, about as much as going to space. Let's do the work" - Karen Medina"The really great make you feel that you, too, can become great" - Mark Twain null -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carl at newsfromneptune.com Mon Jun 24 17:28:09 2019 From: carl at newsfromneptune.com (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:28:09 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: [H-PAD] No War With Iran !! Call Congress Today! References: Message-ID: Begin forwarded message: > From: Carolyn Eisenberg via H-PAD > Date: June 24, 2019 at 11:02:53 AM CDT > To: "h-pad at historiansforpeace.org" > Subject: [H-PAD] No War With Iran !! Call Congress Today! > Reply-To: Carolyn Eisenberg > > No War With Iran !!! > > Fortunately the President cancelled last week's air strikes on Iran. However, since withdrawing from the nuclear deal, he has been pursuing a dangerously provocative course towards Iran. Leading figures within the Administration clearly welcome the prospect of war and are seizing opportunities to bring this about. At this time, members of Congress are of vital importance in pressing for a policy of restraint. For that to occur they need to hear from constituents. In recent days, several national groups have focused on this task. Historians for Peace and Democracy encourage you to join that effort. > > Please call your Representative and Senators with a few simple points and ask them to speak out now: > > No War With Iran > > Resolve Conflict with Diplomacy > > End Economic Sanctions > > Rejoin Iran Nuclear Deal > > To reach your Congressional Representative and Senators > > Call the Congressional Switchboard at 202-225-3121 and ask to speak to your elected official. * Most offices keep a count of the incoming messages on important topics. In this dangerous time, numbers matter. > > > > > Note: You are receiving this email as a member or friend of Historians for Peace and Democracy (see https://www.historiansforpeace.org/). If you no longer wish to receive these occasional messages, send an email to h-pad-request at historiansforpeace.org?subject=unsubscribe. > _______________________________________________ > H-PAD mailing list > H-PAD at lists.historiansforpeace.org > http://lists.historiansforpeace.org/listinfo.cgi/h-pad-historiansforpeace.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stuartnlevy at gmail.com Mon Jun 24 17:50:56 2019 From: stuartnlevy at gmail.com (Stuart Levy) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:50:56 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Housing discrimination in Champaign - 7pm 6/25 city council study session Message-ID: <36d62f15-a4fa-df5f-d32a-21c8de983af9@gmail.com> Tomorrow evening 6/25, at 7pm, the Champaign City Council will hold a study session, looking at a discriminatory ordinance it had passed in the 1990s.    If you can, especially if you live in Champaign, please come out and at least let the Council know the public cares about this. The Champaign law, "section 17-4.5", specifically allows landlords to discriminate against people incarcerated within the last five years.  It doesn't matter that their sentence is complete, it doesn't matter what their current situation is.  They may be fully capable of paying the rent and being a good neighbor to their fellow tenants - the landlord can reject them based solely on that history. The landlords in town generally want to keep this law.   They control some 55% of all the housing in Champaign - a lot of power over the fate of formerly incarcerated people. Some 700+ signatures have been gathered, by the Fair Housing Coalition and others, asking for section 17-4.5 to be repealed. Urbana does not have this carve-out to their anti-discrimination ordinance.    This doesn't mean that Urbana landlords don't discriminate based on past incarceration - certainly some do, and it's even written into the rental agreements for some rental properties.   But at least Urbana has a law which could be used to challenge those policies.  Champaign doesn't even have that. [1] Back in the '70s, both Urbana and Champaign passed anti-discrimination laws.    In 1994, Champaign amended its discrimination law to allow this specific kind of discrimination. [2]Since this is a study session, they're not offering a chance for the public to speak before the Council's discussion.   However there is a chance to speak afterward. [3]Here's the agenda for Tuesday at 7:      http://documents.ci.champaign.il.us/v/1W7f-2oLv7euIlajhsKseyUVQXAgmRdWN with details here:      http://documents.ci.champaign.il.us/v/1PwZzZsOzlpbHNyqL-efVLXPIlSGtuIWT      "The Administration requests that the City Council provide direction to staff on whether to draft modifications to Section 17-4.5 of the Human Rights Ordinance for consideration by Council at a future Regular Meeting." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jbn at forestfield.org Wed Jun 26 01:53:31 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 20:53:31 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] AWARE on the Air #484 notes Message-ID: AWARE on the Air #484 Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIGJz0vS1HE Links to items referenced on the show. Jim Kavanagh on "Eve of Destruction: Iran Strikes Back" https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/24/eve-of-destruction-iran-strikes-back/ The Polemicist blog http://www.thepolemicist.net/ -J From cgestabrook at gmail.com Thu Jun 27 14:58:14 2019 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2019 09:58:14 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Iran References: <8615996C-5852-4793-8A27-B0AB1AB1AEF5@gmail.com> Message-ID: <9E7E31B1-015D-45DD-AE09-9213BD5928A0@gmail.com> > Begin forwarded message: > > From: C G Estabrook > Subject: Re: Iran > Date: June 27, 2019 at 9:48:58 AM CDT > To: tammy at tammyduckworth.com > > Sen. Duckworth: > > US troops (and weapons) should be removed from the Mideast. > > The US should rejoin the JCPOA and remove the sanctions on Iran. > > Regards, > > (Dr.) C. G. Estabrook > 107 North Elm Street - #312 > Champaign IL 61820-3964 > > >> On Jun 27, 2019, at 9:34 AM, Tammy Duckworth wrote: >> >> >> >> C. G., >> >> When I decided to run for office, I knew I wanted to be a voice for servicemembers and Veterans. That’s why this week, I gave a speech on the Senate floor about a looming international crisis that will affect our troops most of all: >> >> The Trump Administration’s purposeful escalation of tensions with Iran. >> >> Last week, Trump ordered a strike on Iran, which could have dragged the U.S. into a full-fledged war. He called it off before anyone was hurt, but it was far too close. >> >> Now, Trump wants us to think that he is some kind of peacemaker because he didn’t follow through with his attack. Well, Donald Trump gets no points from me for narrowly avoiding a crisis he himself manufactured. >> >> The entire Administration, led by National Security Advisor John Bolton, are purposefully pushing us closer towards two scenarios they believe would justify an Iran War: >> >> The first way is if Iran edges closer to making a nuclear weapon. Of course, pulling out of the Iran Nuclear Deal opened the door for Iran to do just that — and for the U.S. to retaliate. The second way is an attack on U.S. forces, made more likely by the fact that Trump is openly looking for excuses to send more troops to the area, increasing the likelihood of casualties. They are using our troops as bait. >> >> This attack and the armed conflict that would undoubtedly follow were narrowly avoided — this time. But there’s no guarantee that Trump’s incoherent strategy in the Middle East won’t lead us to this exact same point tomorrow, or the next day, or next month. >> >> Let me be clear: The President does NOT have the power to declare war, and neither does John Bolton. That sacred and solemn responsibility lies only with Congress. Our brave troops do their jobs every day, even in the face of great danger. Now, it’s time for Congress to do our job. >> >> It’s time for Congress to hold a public debate about authorization for use of military force. By failing to take up this debate, we are ceding our authority to the White House — which was clearly behind this manufactured crisis in the first place. >> >> If the Trump Administration wants to go to war, let them bring their case to Congress and let the elected representatives of the American people decide. Let them explain why war with Iran is worth American lives. After they’ve made their case, Congress must vote. >> >> C. G., Iran is no friend to the United States. And I understand that war is sometimes necessary. Trump may have shirked military duty during the Vietnam War, but I was proud to serve my country overseas. But it is a dereliction of our duty to allow even a single U.S. soldier to shed blood in a conflict that Congress has not authorized. >> >> I will not sit by as the Trump Administration uses the same playbook that got us into the War in Iraq to once again pull us into a long and devastating conflict. And I hope my colleagues in Congress don’t either. >> >> Yours, >> >> Tammy >> >> >> >> >> >> Contributions or gifts to Tammy for Illinois are not tax deductible. This email was sent to galliher at uiuc.edu. If that is not your preferred email address, click here. Click here if you'd like to unsubscribe. We try to send only the most important information and opportunities to participate via email. >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Thu Jun 27 18:11:34 2019 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2019 13:11:34 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] From the only anti-war candidate References: Message-ID: <21E90717-78D2-446D-B8A0-51403386276B@gmail.com> > > > Tulsi didn’t walk onto that debate stage last night trying to impress anyone. She walked on stage with the sole mission to tell the truth no matter the political cost. > And it worked. Multiple news outlets declared Tulsi to be the breakaway winner of Wednesday’s debate. And search data shows that more people were googling Tulsi than any other debate candidate: > > > Help us take advantage of this incredible momentum. Chip in $25, $10 or $5 now so we can turn all this online buzz into real supporters, volunteers and Tulsi voters. > If you've saved payment info with ActBlue Express, your contribution will be processed immediately: > > Express Donate: $3 > > Express Donate: $15 > > Express Donate: $20 > > Express Donate: $50 > > Express Donate: $100 > > Express Donate: $250 > > Or, donate another amount > > > This graph and the images below show how people respond when they see a presidential candidate who is real, authentic and focused on the greatest threats to our country and not on their own popularity. > > Before the debate: > > > After the debate: > > > > This data also shows that, for many viewers, this was their first introduction to Tulsi. We must capitalize on this moment. > > Here’s how: All of this interest in Tulsi will only translate into supporters and primary voters with your help. Your donation will pay for the gas to get our field team to battleground states, educating voters and training up new organizers. Your generosity will pay for the online ads and billboards that will reach hundreds of thousands more people than can be reached face to face. > > In short, your help now will help ensure that Tulsi will walk on to the NEXT debate stage in September. > Tulsi told the truth about regime change wars and the new Cold War costing thousands of lives and trillions of dollars. About the fact that we’re still in Afghanistan 20 years later, fighting the wrong enemy. And about the fact that Saudi Arabia right now is protecting our enemy, al-Qaeda. > > You saw — she did it all with complete composure. While other candidates cut each other off and interrupted the moderators for a few more seconds of airtime, Tulsi stayed focused on telling the American people the most important things they needed to hear. > > It’s clear that Tulsi’s uncompromising honesty is refreshing and appealing, that it speaks to people. But there’s a ton of work to do to turn that into concrete support. > > Chip in now to help us capture this precious momentum for Tulsi. > > Onward, > TULSI2020 > > > > > > > PAID FOR BY TULSI NOW > PO Box 75255 Kapolei HI 96707 > > The truth is that email is one of the most important tools we have to update supporters like you. It is one way we come together as a community of progressives to make change in this world. Should you want to unsubscribe—and we would hate to see you leave—go here . Finally, if you believe we need to end the culture of corruption and greed in Washington, then now is the time to make a contribution to TULSI 2020 . If you'd like to make a recurring contribution to TULSI 2020, please click here . > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From naiman at justforeignpolicy.org Thu Jun 27 19:23:52 2019 From: naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (Robert Naiman) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2019 14:23:52 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] JTA: De Blasio rebuked Beto on war powers; Gabbard rebuked Tim Ryan on Afghanistan In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: De Blasio, taking the "hard line" on war powers among Democrats, insisted that under the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution, Congress has to authorize first, *even for a so-called "humanitarian war," like Libya 2011. * Tulsi Gabbard called out Tim Ryan for using "engagement" as a euphemism for "putting U.S. soldiers into a situation where they will be killed for no reason." https://www.jta.org/2019/06/26/politics/cory-booker-was-the-only-democrat-at-the-first-debate-who-didnt-commit-to-rejoining-the-iran-deal Cory Booker was the only Democrat at the first debate who didn’t commit to rejoining the Iran deal BY RON KAMPEAS JUNE 26, 2019 10:39 PM WASHINGTON (JTA ) — Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., was alone among the 10 Democratic presidential candidates at the first debate not to commit to rejoining the Iran nuclear deal. Moderators at the debate Wednesday evening in Miami asked the candidates whether they would rejoin the deal President Donald Trump abandoned a year ago. It swapped sanctions relief for a rollback of Iran’s nuclear program. Booker was the only one not to raise his hand. The others who did raise their hands are: former U.S. Reps. Beto O’Rourke of Texas and John Delaney of Maryland; current U.S. Reps. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii and Tim Ryan of Ohio; Washington Gov. Jay Inslee; Sens. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota; New York Mayor Bill De Blasio; and former Housing Secretary Julian Castro. Moderator Savannah Guthrie framed the question by noting the recent escalation between the United States and Iran in the Strait of Hormuz, through which transits 40 percent of the world’s oil. Trump came close last week to ordering a strike on Iran after an unmanned American drone was shut down. Booker nevertheless said Trump was wrong to pull out of the deal, which made Iran’s nuclear program more transparent. “Donald Trump is marching us to a far more dangerous situation,” Booker said. But he said he would not automatically reenter it, and would instead negotiate for a better deal. “I’m not going to stand up on a primary stage and announce that I am unilaterally or de facto go back into the deal,” Booker told CNN after the debate. Booker voted for the deal in 2015, alienating some of his backers in the pro-Israel community. Klobuchar and Gabbard, the only others who were permitted to speak on the issue, also said they would seek better terms. Klobuchar said she would seek longer “sunset” provisions to the deal — meaning longer periods of time during which Iran is not allowed to get back to uranium enrichment. Gabbard said she would seek to include missile development into the deal. Later the same evening, the candidates were asked to name the greatest geopolitical challenge — most named China. Only Klobuchar mentioned the Middle East. The only significant foreign policy difference that emerged among the candidates came when they were asked if the United States should intervene in a genocide if American lives were not threatened. Beto O’Rourke was the first to be asked to take the question, and he said that he believed America should intervene, but only as part of an alliance. “That action should always be undertaken with allies and partners and friends,” he said. De Blasio rebuked O’Rourke, saying any president should seek the approval of Congress. “We should be ready, congressman, to intervene, god forbid if there is a genocide but not without congressional approval,” he said. Moderators then pivoted to Ryan, asking him about whether the United States should remain in Afghanistan, noting that two U.S. soldiers were killed in that country on Wednesday. Ryan said Afghanistan posed a continued threat, prompting a rebuke from Gabbard, a veteran whose most distinguishing policy is her isolationism. “Is that what you will tell the parents of those two soldiers killed in Afghanistan, ‘We have to be engaged’?” she said. “As a soldier, I have to tell you that’s unacceptable.” === Robert Reuel Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (202) 448-2898 x1 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Thu Jun 27 23:12:20 2019 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2019 18:12:20 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The establishment tries to hold back Americans' anti-war sentiment Message-ID: In spite of the one-sided presentation by US media-- "First poll has Tulsi Gabbard as the shock winner of the first Democratic debate…" "NBC’s debate hosts weren’t very interested in Tulsi Gabbard, but Google searches for her name soared” Gabbard was the sole anti-war candidate on that stage. Her 'hands-down win' is another illustration of the truth that the American populace is historicallt opposed to war and has had to be manipulated into it by an American elite who arranged to have their enemy appear to strike first - from Lexington through Ft. Sumter, the Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, and the Gulf of Tonkin to our own day. President John Adams observed in 1813, "The middle third [of the US population] is composed principally of the Yeomanry, the soundest part of the Nation and always averse to War.” Gabbard's win suggests that that is still the case. Going thru my files I find this note from an earlier July 4 celebration: ==================================================== The theme of this year’s July 4 parade in C-U is “Celebrate America.” I suggest we celebrate Americans’ historic reluctance to fight wars. They have had to manipulated - and lied - into it from the beginning: AMERICAN ‘WAR OF INDEPENDENCE’ 1775-83 American leaders encourage separation from Britain not for ‘liberty’ but to protect the slave economy from British threats to abolish it AMERICAN CIVIL WAR 1860-65 Lincoln and the Republicans attack the South not to free the slaves but to bring the whole country’s economy under Northern control (“a house divided”) - because (Southern) chattel slavery is more profitable than (Northern) wage-slavery WORLD WAR I 1917-18 Pres. Wilson is re-elected in 1916 on the slogan, “He kept us out of war!” - while he is scheming with NY banks to get the U.S. into the First World War (cf. Creel Commission) WORLD WAR II 1941-45 Pres. Roosevelt uses Pearl Harbor (probably known in advance) to get an anti-war public to continue the fight for US economic control of the Pacific KOREA 1950-53 Pres. Truman, having used the atomic bombs to show US military superiority to the post-WWII world, uses Russia & China to “scare hell out of the American people” & continue war economy VIETNAM 1962-75 Pres. Kennedy carpet-bombs & sends troops to deter “the threat of a good example” - a post-colonial society developing outside US world economic control (‘domino theory’) TERROR WARS I: CENTRAL AMERICA 1981-96 Pres. Reagan plans to do in Central America what Kennedy did in SE Asia but is prevented by post-Vietnam anti-war sentiment; instead sponsors proxy wars throughout the region TERROR WARS II: MIDEAST 1991-ongoing Pres. Bush I attacks Iraq in 1991 to “kick the Vietnam syndrome” [= the public’s aversion to war] & begin a generation of US attacks on the Mideast to control its energy resources. =================================== —CGE From jbn at forestfield.org Fri Jun 28 03:58:57 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2019 22:58:57 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Notes Message-ID: Some notes to spur discussion on News from Neptune and AWARE on the Air. I'll be looking forward to seeing the next shows guys. -J Censorship needs workers: The human cost of being a censor (pardon me, "moderator") at Facebook apparently includes horrible working conditions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-h8Ny4SAjr0 -- Facebook censors (called "moderators") describe their working conditions: - "You always see death every single day. You see pain and suffering. And it just makes you angry. Because they're [Facebook] not doing anything!" one moderator says. - Seeing 200 graphic videos daily including videos of animal cruelty and violence. - Unsanitary conditions including bed bug infestations, "regular 'bodily waste' at workstations", and "numerous verbal and physical fights". - There was unspecific mention of "sexual harassment cases". Facebook employs about 15,000 people worldwide including contractors. Facebook replied: > There will inevitably be employee challenges or dissatisfaction that > call our commitment to this work and our partners' employees into > question. When the circumstances warrant action o nthe part of > management, we make sure it happens. This all comes after pressure from multiple groups (including US and UK governments) to stop various posts from being republished. Some groups want their political adversaries' posts to be censored (such as the US/UK governments who disguise their desire for censorship as stopping "election meddling" ala the ongoing baseless Russiagate conspiracy theory). Others saw the Christchurch footage of murders being committed in real-time and want that recording (and others like it) to not be available. My commentary: There is no technology that will accomplish this censorship other than humans picking what to allow to be republished, a task which requires a lot of "moderators" (censors) to even attempt to be effective in this in a timely fashion. Some of the problem is that what is to be censored is impossible to define in terms that are actionable on a computer -- if one can't define precisely how to identify what needs to be kept from being republished (censored), then one can't write software to do that job. Google (Alphabet) is facing similar pressure with YouTube and recently YouTube's reps have said the task is not possible (CNBC's corporate news hosts disagree but they offer no coherent reason for their disagreement). RT's so-called "debate" in this segment is comparable to CNBC's complaint: a call to "take more responsibility for their contractors" is unclear both in terms of what that means for censorship and how to improve the working conditions of an essentially shitty and possibly unnecessary job. Facebook has responded to recent criticism with health care for staff and salary increases. Another problem is that so much of what social media organizations censor is not in line with any country's speech laws. Private organizations are free to make whatever terms they want, users are free to not sign up or use the service and seek publication elsewhere. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JixEyhgC53k -- "Going Underground" interview with Jordan Peterson https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCLmpyZ-CTA -- RT report on Thinkspot A new so-called "anti-censorship" social media service will soon begin; Canadian psychologist and best-selling author Jordan Peterson is starting up "Thinkspot", a subscription-based publisher which claims: Jordan Peterson said: > Once you're on our platform, we won't take you down unless we're ordered > to by a US court of law. That's basically the idea. So we're trying to > make an anti-censorship platform. My commentary: This approach sounds reasonable to me and (if the site lives up to Peterson's claim) it will take US free speech laws at face value, particularly law that holds a publisher blameless so long as it obeys court orders (including title 2 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act which creates a "safe harbor" for online service providers against copyright infringement liability). It will be interesting to see how close one can come to living up to Chomsky's description of free speech ("Goebbels was in favor of free speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you’re really in favor of free speech, then you’re in favor of freedom of speech for precisely the views you despise. Otherwise, you’re not in favor of free speech.") and increasing the scope of allowable debate while at the same time complying with US law which disallows emergencies such as immediate threats of harm against people (such as a speaker instructing a crowd to "get" a specific individual identified to the crowd). Food: "Boycott GMO Impossible Burger. Make tofu. Cook Dal." recommends Dr. Vandana Shiva https://www.independentsciencenews.org/health/fake-food-fake-meat-big-foods-desperate-attempt-to-further-industrialisation-food/ https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/21/fake-food-fake-meat-big-foods-desperate-attempt-to-further-the-industrialisation-of-food/ > The “Impossible Burger “ based on GMO, Roundup sprayed soya is not a > “safe” option, as Zen Honeycutt and Moms across America just announced: > > “that the Impossible Burger tested positive for glyphosate. Thelevels > of glyphosate detected in the Impossible Burger[1] by Health Research > Institute Laboratories[2] were 11 X higher than the Beyond Meat Burger. > The total result (glyphosate and it’s break down AMPA) was 11.3 ppb. > Moms Across America also tested the Beyond Meat Burger and the results > were 1 ppb. > > “We are shocked to find that the Impossible Burger can have up to 11X > higher levels of glyphosate residues than the Beyond Meat Burger > according to these samples tested. This new product is being marketed > as a solution for “healthy” eating, when in fact 11 ppb of glyphosate > herbicide consumption can be highly dangerous. Only 0.1 ppb of > glyphosate has been shown to destroy gut bacteria[3], which is where > the stronghold of the immune system lies. I am gravely concerned that > consumers are being misled to believe the Impossible Burger is > healthy.” > > Recent court cases have showcased the links of Roundup to cancer. With > the build up of liabilities[4] related to cancer cases, the investments > in Roundup Ready GMO soya is blindness to the market. > > Or the hope that fooling consumers can rescue Bayer/Monsanto. [...] > Fake food is thus building on a century and a half of food imperialism > and food colonisation of our diverse food knowledges and food cultures. > > Big Food and Big Money is behind the Fake Food Industry. Bill Gates[5] > and Jeff Bezos are funding startups[6]. > > We need to decolonise our food cultures and our minds of Food > imperialism > > The industrial west has always been arrogant, and ignorant, of the > cultures it has colonised. “Fake Food” is just the latest step in a > history of food imperialism. > > Soya is a gift of East Asia, where it has been a food for millennia. It > was only eaten as fermented food to remove its’ anti-nutritive factors. > But recently, GMO soya has created a soya imperialism[7], destroying > plant diversity. It continues the destruction of the diversity of rich > edible oils and plant based proteins of Indian dals that we have > documented. > > Women from India’s slums called on me to bring our mustard back when GMO > soya oil started to be dumped on India, and local oils and cold press > units in villages were made illegal[8]. That is when we started the > “sarson (mustard) satyagraha“ to defend our healthy cold pressed oils > from dumping of hexane-extracted GMO soya oil. Hexane is a neurotoxin. > > While Indian peasants knew that pulses fix nitrogen, the west was > industrialising agriculture based on synthetic nitrogen which > contributes to greenhous gases, dead zones in the ocean, and dead soils. > While we ate a diversity of “dals” in our daily “dal roti“ the British > colonisers, who had no idea of the richness of the nutrition of pulses, > reduced them to animal food. Chana became chick pea, gahat became horse > gram, tur became pigeon pea. [1] https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/yesmaam/pages/8069/attachments/original/1557958339/COA_S0004900_Impossible_Burger_and_Beyond_Meat_patty_-_glyphosate.pdf?1557958339 [2] https://hrilabs.org/ [3] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23224412 [4] https://www.wsj.com/articles/bayers-roundup-woes-send-investors-fleeing-11558266059?mod=hp_lead_pos3 [5] https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfriedman/2017/08/25/why-bill-gates-richard-branson-clean-meat/#7b5670dcaf27 [6] https://vegnews.com/2019/2/jeff-bezos-bill-gates-and-richard-branson-lead-90-million-investment-to-create-next-vegan-impossible-burger [7] https://www.amazon.com/Stolen-Harvest-Hijacking-Global-Culture/dp/0813166551 [8] https://www.independentsciencenews.org/health/indias-colourless-revolution-replacement-of-traditional-oils-by-soy-and-palm-oils/ Water: Prosecutors drop criminal charges against those who ruined Flint, Michigan's water (which remains unpotable). https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/13/us/flint-water-crisis-charges-dropped.html -- Prosecutors claim: they're dropping charges so they can charge more people later, this will help collect "the evidence they need to be able to hold them accountable and throw away the key", and that "[e]verything we did was for the people of Flint". > Prosecutors stunned the city of Flint, Mich., on Thursday by dropping > all pending charges against officials accused of ruining the community’s > drinking water and ignoring signs of a crisis, casting doubt on what > some residents had seen as a small but tangible step toward justice. > > Fifteen state and local officials, including emergency managers who ran > the city and a member of the governor’s cabinet, had been accused by > state prosecutors of crimes as serious as involuntary manslaughter. > Seven had already taken plea deals. Eight more, including most of the > highest-ranking officials, were awaiting trial. > > On Thursday, more than three years after the first charges were filed, > the Michigan attorney general’s office, which earlier this year passed > from Republican to Democratic hands, abruptly dropped the eight > remaining cases. Prosecutors left open the possibility of recharging > some of those same people, and perhaps others, too. [...] > Flint’s mayor, Karen Weaver, said she took the prosecutors at their word > and hoped they would follow through with new charges. She said that > there was some confusion and frustration in her city about the decision > to drop charges, but that she believed it could ultimately be a > positive. > > “It is frustrating, but I’d rather be frustrated at this end and know > that they’re going to do a deep dive into what happened,” Ms. Weaver > said in an interview. She added: “I think this way, they may have the > evidence they need to be able to hold them accountable and throw away > the key.” > > Efforts to speak with Mr. Flood, the former lead prosecutor, and Mr. > Schuette, the former attorney general, on Thursday were not immediately > successful. Mr. Schuette defended his team’s work on Twitter. “We had an > experienced, aggressive and hard-driving team,” he wrote. “Everything we > did was for the people of Flint.” > > Among the officials whose charges were dropped: the former director of > the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, a state > epidemiologist, a former Flint public works director, and emergency > managers who had been appointed by Governor Snyder to oversee the city. > The decision to drop charges did not affect seven officials who had > already accepted deals with prosecutors and entered no-contest pleas, > but who had not yet been formally convicted by a judge. > > James White, a lawyer for Howard Croft, the former Flint public works > director, who was charged with involuntary manslaughter and has denied > wrongdoing, said the attorney general’s decision validated his concerns > about the investigation. Mr. White said his client, who was first > charged in 2016, was “carefully, cautiously elated” about the news. > > “I give a lot of the credit to the attorney general for having the > courage to do this,” Mr. White said. > > Juan A. Mateo, a lawyer for Darnell Earley, the former emergency manager > who made the decision to switch the water source, said his client had > always maintained his innocence. > > “This is an unprecedented decision,” Mr. Mateo said of the choice to > drop charges. “It is evidence of the real problems that plagued the > underlying investigation.” > > Ronald F. Wright, a criminal law professor at Wake Forest University, > said it was not uncommon for newly elected prosecutors to drop cases > brought by their predecessors. But it was far more unusual, he said, for > them to suggest that they might file new charges. > > “You inherit the file, you start looking through it, and the deeper you > get in the file, the more you realize there are possible weak spots in > your case,” Mr. Wright said. “I view this as a natural process of a new > chief prosecutor becoming familiar with the details of the case.” > > Ms. Nessel, the new attorney general, defended her prosecutors’ decision > to drop the charges, but she also sought to reassure Flint residents. “I > want to remind the people of Flint that justice delayed is not always > justice denied,” she said. Software/Control: Washington Post recommends Firefox for reasons that won't compel people to stick with free software https://digitalcitizen.info/2019/06/22/leaving-out-software-freedom-means-missing-the-point/ -- my essay about why Geoffrey Fowler's Washington Post article about switching away from Google Chrome to Firefox is good advice as far as it goes, but the advice gives Chrome users no reason to stick with Firefox (or any other free software browser) in the long run because the article never teaches the user about software freedom -- the freedom to run, inspect, share, and modify published computer software. Fowler's framing of the relevant issues comes down to a relatively minor issue that is easily solved with a browser add-on to control which cookies are deleted and when. There are more important fundamental issues left undiscussed which get to how Chrome (or any proprietary -- non-free -- program) undermines a user's privacy. War/Citizenship: Is the US right in detaining anyone forever without charge? How about detaining a US citizen without charge? https://theintercept.com/2019/06/21/guantanamo-bay-indefinite-detention/ -- Murtaza Hussain's piece for The Intercept reminds us of the power of these AUMFs (Authorization for Use of Military Force) and how many of our liberties we have given up by allowing them. > For over 17 years, Moath al-Alwi has been held at Guantánamo Bay without > charge. A Yemeni citizen, al-Alwi is one of Guantánamo’s “forever > prisoners,” those whom the U.S. government has not charged with a crime > but is unwilling to release. On June 10, the Supreme Court declined to > hear an appeal in his case, the latest setback in al-Alwi’s long effort > to obtain due process rights. Even though the court wouldn’t take > al-Alwi up, Justice Stephen G. Breyer wrote that it would only be a > matter of time before the court had to grapple with the forever > prisoners and the scope of the government’s power to hold them. > > The Supreme Court rejection — and Breyer’s comments — briefly brought > al-Alwi’s case back to national attention. Little noted, however, were > the eyebrow-raising assertions that the government has made in this case > about its powers to indefinitely detain not just al-Alwi, but anyone — > including U.S. citizens. > > In a filing with the Supreme Court this April, lawyers for the Justice > Department argued that the United States can continue to hold al-Alwi > indefinitely without charging him. They also embraced the power to > detain a U.S. citizen as an “enemy combatant”, an assertion they haven’t > advanced openly since the era of President George W. Bush. Notably, the > lawyers seemed to indicate, for the first time in a filing with the > Supreme Court, that the government could even detain a U.S. citizen for > as long as it has held al-Alwi, 17 years and counting, without charge.” > > “There is no bar to this Nation’s holding one of its own citizens as an > enemy combatant,” the filing read. Were al-Alwi a citizen, they argued, > he “would pose the same threat of returning to the front during the > ongoing conflict.” There were no “constitutional questions” raised by > this hypothetical, they maintained. > > The continued detention of al-Alwi has been justified by the government > under the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force, a law passed in > the days after 9/11. That AUMF entered the country into a state of war > that seems to have no particular endpoint. It has also allowed the > creation of a permanent state of legal exception that opens the door to > practices like indefinite detention without trial. These legal powers > are now being asserted by government lawyers almost 18 years after the > law was passed to ensure that they extend even to Americans potentially > detained as enemy combatants in the future. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIjWzBObnhc -- Russia says it has evidence that the US drone downed by Iran did violate Iran's airspace. Representatives from Russia, Israel, and the US met in Jerusalem and Nikolay Patrushev, Russian Security Council Secretary, said this: > Nikolay Patrushev: I have evidence from the Russian Ministry of Defense > that the drone was in Tehran's airspace. We did not receive any other > evidence. My commentary: It'll be interesting to see this evidence, but this would hardly surprise any serious analyst of US warmaking because the way the US has been dealing with Iran (sanctions -- which are war on the poor -- and heated rhetoric pushing for war) are right in line with how the US foments war with other countries. -J From jbn at forestfield.org Fri Jun 28 04:15:27 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2019 23:15:27 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Gabbard rebukes "engagement" as euphemism for putting soldiers in harm's way but is apparently down with "surgical strikes" that kill innocent people In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Robert Naiman wrote: > Tulsi Gabbard called out Tim Ryan for using "engagement" as a euphemism > for "putting U.S. soldiers into a situation where they will be killed > for no reason." I'd go easy on critiquing others' language choices, particularly war language, if I were her given what she told The Intercept in January 2018 starting around 28m43s into the recording of her interview. You can read https://digitalcitizen.info/2019/02/13/is-tulsi-gabbard-really-anti-war-no-shes-pro-drone-and-for-surgical-strikes/ for more details regarding this language (“Quick strike forces”, “surgical strikes”, “in and out, very quickly”, “no long-term deployment, no long-term occupation”) including a pointer to the 2018 Intercept interview and a relevant extract of the transcript of that interview. From naiman at justforeignpolicy.org Fri Jun 28 17:25:58 2019 From: naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (Robert Naiman) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 12:25:58 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] We need a Kamala Harris moment on Congressional War Powers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: https://www.facebook.com/robert.naiman/posts/10158396480572656 I wish Bill De Blasio had been on stage last night for one single purpose: to attack Joe Biden on Congressional War Powers. Kamala Harris prepared her attack on Joe Biden well and delivered it well. But the key reason that her attack was so devastating was that Biden was totally unprepared for it. Not because Biden’s people didn’t see it coming, but because Biden didn’t listen to his people. Biden thought, I’m Joe Biden, I’ve got this, I should be myself. So that’s what he did. Joe Biden was himself, and a bunch of Democrats were like, OMG. That’s Joe Biden, when Joe Biden is himself? OMG. Kamala Harris showed him a plank, and he gleefully walked off it with a song in his heart. She gave him a great opportunity to expose himself, and he rose to the occasion. If we want to end the wars, we need to do this to Joe Biden on Congressional War Powers. There is no way that Joe Biden can prepare to meet this attack, because there is no way that Joe Biden can become a person who doesn’t believe with all his heart in Presidential war. Joe Biden wants to run on having been Obama’s VP. But if he wants to take credit for the good things that the Obama-Biden Administration did, then he has to take responsibility for the bad things the Obama-Biden Administration did. This is no longer a taboo topic. Kamala Harris attacked Obama-Biden on immigration. So apparently we’re allowed to talk about this now. The Obama-Biden Administration did a terrible thing when it violated the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution to bomb Libya in 2011. It was terrible for the Constitution. It was terrible for our efforts to end the wars and prevent new ones. It was terrible for people in Libya. It was terrible for the region. It was a terrible precedent. It set loose fighters and guns. It helped create the expectation that the U.S. would overthrow Assad, which contributed massively to the devastation of the Syrian civil war. It created the precedent that Trump is using now to claim that he can bomb Iran without Congressional authorization, as I tried to warn the liberals in 2011. I said to the liberals: if you support Obama bombing Libya like this, a future Republican president will use this precedent to try to bomb Iran. But of course, the liberals didn’t listen, because the liberals would rather starve 85,000 Yemeni children to death than give up their irrational attachment to “humanitarian war.” But we’re in a new moment now, and Bill De Blasio’s performance at the first debate proves it. Whatever else is true of Bill De Blasio, he got the memo on Congressional War Powers. If you’re against torture, you’re against torture for Al Qaeda terrorists. If you believe in habeas corpus, you believe in habeas corpus for Al Qaeda terrorists. If you believe in the First Amendment, you believe in the First Amendment for the Nazis and the Communist Workers Party. If you believe in the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution, you believe in the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution for “humanitarian war.” If you don’t believe in a principle when the going gets tough, then you never believed in the principle in the first place. If you don’t believe in the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution for Libya 2011, then the blood of 85,000 Yemeni children is on your head, because there’s no way we can stop these atrocities if we can’t force Congress to vote beforehand. If you leave it up to the President, if you believe the President can do whatever the hell they want, whenever they want, say whatever about it they want, then you gave away the store, and we can hang up the project of trying to end U.S. atrocities by engaging U.S. public opinion. Joe Biden claims that he was right about Libya, in the sense that he was against going in. Maybe so. But he was wrong about Libya when he accepted the claim that it was Obama’s decision. It wasn’t Obama’s decision. Under the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution, the decision belonged to Congress. All history suggests that as long as we don’t get rid of Presidential war, the warmongers will always eventually win, because it’s too easy for the warmongers to manipulate the President, and it's too easy for the President to manipulate everything else. If we want to end the atrocities, we have to return the power to Congress. I’m as sure as I’m sure that I have two feet that Joe Biden will never sign up for this program. And that’s why we need a Bill De Blasio on the same debate stage as Joe Biden. === Robert Reuel Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (202) 448-2898 x1 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stuartnlevy at gmail.com Fri Jun 28 23:29:21 2019 From: stuartnlevy at gmail.com (Stuart Levy) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 18:29:21 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] July 4th parade - we're in. Signmaking 11am-1pm Sunday, probably in IMC Makerspace downstairs Message-ID: AWARE has a pro-peace/anti-war/anti-imperialist slot in the July 4th parade - we're in! [*] We have some signs but should make more.   If we're ambitious and have a good idea we could try to paint a banner. Let's have a signmaking party.    I'm suggesting this time and (probable) place:     Sunday 6/30, 11am - 1pm or so     probably in the Makerspace space in the downstairs of the Independent Media Center     If you have ideas for signs but can't make one, please let us know.[*]   I've set followups to peace-discuss, or you can write to me. (There might be another chance for signmaking together on the Wednesday evening of the 3rd.) Who would be up for marching? I think at least Carl plans to drive his convertible.   Carl, if we have some posterboard signs is there a way we can attach one to your car? [*] The year's parade theme is supposed to be "Flight in Space", for the 50th anniversary of the moon landing. Deb Schrishuhn suggested, Peace should be as American as apple pie.   I like this line! and included it in our parade application.   We should make a sign that says so. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Sat Jun 29 02:49:25 2019 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C. G. Estabrook ) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 21:49:25 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?Fwd=3A_=5BNew_post=5D_The_Forever_War_I?= =?utf-8?q?s_So_Normalized_That_Opposing_It_Is_=E2=80=9CIsolationism?= =?utf-8?b?4oCd?= References: <139971992.6793.0@wordpress.com> Message-ID: <52676387-E08B-4894-B15F-A755D9D0CFF7@gmail.com> Begin forwarded message: > From: Caitlin Johnstone > Date: June 28, 2019 at 8:30:54 PM CDT > To: cgestabrook at gmail.com > Subject: [New post] The Forever War Is So Normalized That Opposing It Is “Isolationism” > > > New post on Caitlin Johnstone > > > The Forever War Is So Normalized That Opposing It Is “Isolationism” > by Caitlin Johnstone > After getting curb stomped on the debate stage by Tulsi Gabbard, the campaign for Tim "Who the fuck is Tim Ryan?" Ryan posted a statement decrying the Hawaii congresswoman's desire to end a pointless 18-year military occupation as "isolationism". > > "While making a point as to why America can’t cede its international leadership and retreat from around the world, Tim was interrupted by Rep. Tulsi Gabbard,” the statement reads. “When he tried to answer her, she contorted a factual point Tim was making— about the Taliban being complicit in the 9/11 attacks by providing training, bases and refuge for Al Qaeda and its leaders. The characterization that Tim Ryan doesn’t know who is responsible for the attacks on 9/11 is simply unfair reporting. Further, we continue to reject Gabbard’s isolationism and her misguided beliefs on foreign policy. We refuse to be lectured by someone who thinks it’s ok to dine with murderous dictators like Syria’s Bashar Al-Assad who used chemical weapons on his own people.” > > Ryan's campaign is lying. During an exchange that was explicitly about the Taliban in Afghanistan, Ryan plainly said "When we weren't in there, they started flying planes into our buildings." At best, Ryan can argue that when he said "they" he had suddenly shifted from talking about the Taliban to talking about Al Qaeda without bothering to say so, in which case he obviously can't legitimately claim that Gabbard "contorted" anything he had said. At worst, he was simply unaware at the time of the very clear distinction between the Afghan military and political body called the Taliban and the multinational extremist organization called Al Qaeda. > > Watch the 5 minutes that have people talking Tulsi! > A soldier's truth about the establishment war machine driving US foreign policy https://t.co/JC0MqYSEmT #DemDebate - #TULSI2020 pic.twitter.com/kJnp3gRfKq > > — Tulsi Gabbard (@TulsiGabbard) June 27, 2019 > > More importantly, Ryan's campaign using the word "isolationism" to describe the simple common sense impulse to withdraw from a costly, deadly military occupation which isn't accomplishing anything highlights an increasingly common tactic of tarring anything other than endless military expansionism as strange and aberrant instead of normal and good. Under our current Orwellian doublespeak paradigm where forever war is the new normal, the opposite of war is no longer peace, but isolationism. This removal of a desirable opposite of war from the establishment-authorised lexicon causes war to always be the desirable option. > > This is entirely by design. This bit of word magic has been employed for a long time to tar any idea which deviates from the neoconservative agenda of total global unipolarity via violent imperialism as something freakish and dangerous. In his farewell address to the nation, war criminal George W Bush said the following: > > "In the face of threats from abroad, it can be tempting to seek comfort by turning inward. But we must reject isolationism and its companion, protectionism. Retreating behind our borders would only invite danger. In the 21st century, security and prosperity at home depend on the expansion of liberty abroad. If America does not lead the cause of freedom, that cause will not be led." > > A few months after Bush's address, Antiwar's Rich Rubino wrote an article titled "Non-Interventionism is Not Isolationism", explaining the difference between a nation which withdraws entirely from the world and a nation which simply resists the temptation to use military aggression except in self defense. > > "Isolationism dictates that a country should have no relations with the rest of the world," Rubino explained. "In its purest form this would mean that ambassadors would not be shared with other nations, communications with foreign governments would be mainly perfunctory, and commercial relations would be non-existent." > > "A non-interventionist supports commercial relations," Rubino contrasted. "In fact, in terms of trade, many non-interventionists share libertarian proclivities and would unilaterally obliterate all tariffs and custom duties, and would be open to trade with all willing nations. In addition, non-interventionists welcome cultural exchanges and the exchange of ambassadors with all willing nations." > > "A non-interventionist believes that the U.S. should not intercede in conflicts between other nations or conflicts within nations," wrote Rubino. "In recent history, non-interventionists have proved prophetic in warning of the dangers of the U.S. entangling itself in alliances. The U.S. has suffered deleterious effects and effectuated enmity among other governments, citizenries, and non-state actors as a result of its overseas interventions. The U.S. interventions in both Iran and Iraq have led to cataclysmic consequences." > > Statement from Ryan Campaign on Afghanistan pic.twitter.com/3vuV62kl1S > > — Tim Ryan (@TimRyan) June 27, 2019 > > Calling an aversion to endless military violence "isolationism" is the same as calling an aversion to mugging people "agoraphobia". Yet you'll see this ridiculous label applied to both Gabbard and Trump, neither of whom are isolationists by any stretch of the imagination, or even proper non-interventionists. Gabbard supports most US military alliances and continues to voice full support for the bogus "war on terror" implemented by the Bush administration which serves no purpose other than to facilitate endless military expansionism; Trump is openly pushing regime change interventionism in both Venezuela and Iran while declining to make good on his promises to withdraw the US military from Syria and Afghanistan. > > Another dishonest label you'll get thrown at you when debating the forever war is "pacifism". "Some wars are bad, but I'm not a pacifist; sometimes war is necessary," supporters of a given interventionist military action will tell you. They'll say this while defending Trump's potentially catastrophic Iran warmongering or promoting a moronic regime change invasion of Syria, or defending disastrous US military interventions in the past like Iraq. > > This is bullshit for a couple of reasons. Firstly, virtually no one is a pure pacifist who opposes war under any and all possible circumstances; anyone who claims that they can't imagine any possible scenario in which they'd support using some kind of coordinated violence either hasn't imagined very hard or is fooling themselves. If your loved ones were going to be raped, tortured and killed by hostile forces unless an opposing group took up arms to defend them, for example, you would support that. Hell, you would probably join in. Secondly, equating opposition to US-led regime change interventionism, which is literally always disastrous and literally never helpful, is not even a tiny bit remotely like opposing all war under any possible circumstance. > > She’s not “antiwar” - she’s anti a US war. She’s totally pro the Russian air war in Syria and celebrated Russian air strikes that have killed hundreds if not thousands of civilians. > > — Mehdi Hasan (@mehdirhasan) February 6, 2019 > > Another common distortion you'll see is the specious argument that a given opponent of US interventionism "isn't anti-war" because they don't oppose all war under any and all circumstances. This tweet by The Intercept's Mehdi Hasan is a perfect example, claiming that Gabbard is not anti-war because she supports Syria's sovereign right to defend itself with the help of its allies from the violent extremist factions which overran the country with western backing. Again, virtually no one is opposed to all war under any and all circumstances; if a coalition of foreign governments had helped flood Hasan's own country of Britain with extremist militias who'd been murdering their way across the UK with the ultimate goal of toppling London, both Tulsi Gabbard and Hasan would support fighting back against those militias. > > The label "anti-war" can for these reasons be a little misleading. The term anti-interventionist or non-interventionist comes closest to describing the value system of most people who oppose the warmongering of the western empire, because they understand that calls for military interventionism which go mainstream in today's environment are almost universally based on imperialist agendas grabbing at power, profit, and global hegemony. The label "isolationist" comes nowhere close. > > It all comes down to sovereignty. An anti-interventionist believes that a country has the right to defend itself, but it doesn't have the right to conquer, capture, infiltrate or overthrow other nations whether covertly or overtly. At the "end" of colonialism we all agreed we were done with that, except that the nationless manipulators have found far trickier ways to seize a country's will and resources without actually planting a flag there. We need to get clearer on these distinctions and get louder about defending them as the only sane, coherent way to run foreign policy. > > ____________________ > > The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal, purchasing some of my sweet merchandise, buying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone, or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I'm trying to do with this platform, click here. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish or use any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge. > > > > Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2 > > Caitlin Johnstone | June 29, 2019 at 1:30 am | Categories: Article | URL: https://wp.me/p9tj6M-1Lz > Comment See all comments > Unsubscribe to no longer receive posts from Caitlin Johnstone. > Change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions. > > Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: > https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2019/06/29/the-forever-war-is-so-normalized-that-opposing-it-is-isolationism/ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Sat Jun 29 09:05:44 2019 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C. G. Estabrook ) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2019 04:05:44 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?Fwd=3A__Fwd=3A_=5BNew_post=5D_The_Forev?= =?utf-8?q?er_War_Is_So_Normalized_That_Opposing_It_Is_=E2=80=9CIsolationi?= =?utf-8?b?c23igJ0=?= References: <52676387-E08B-4894-B15F-A755D9D0CFF7@gmail.com> Message-ID: Begin forwarded message: > From: "C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss" > Date: June 28, 2019 at 9:49:25 PM CDT > To: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net, peace at lists.chambana.net > Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: [New post] The Forever War Is So Normalized That Opposing It Is “Isolationism” > Reply-To: "C. G. Estabrook " > > > > > Begin forwarded message: > >> From: Caitlin Johnstone >> Date: June 28, 2019 at 8:30:54 PM CDT >> To: cgestabrook at gmail.com >> Subject: [New post] The Forever War Is So Normalized That Opposing It Is “Isolationism” >> >> >> New post on Caitlin Johnstone >> >> >> The Forever War Is So Normalized That Opposing It Is “Isolationism” >> by Caitlin Johnstone >> After getting curb stomped on the debate stage by Tulsi Gabbard, the campaign for Tim "Who the fuck is Tim Ryan?" Ryan posted a statement decrying the Hawaii congresswoman's desire to end a pointless 18-year military occupation as "isolationism". >> >> "While making a point as to why America can’t cede its international leadership and retreat from around the world, Tim was interrupted by Rep. Tulsi Gabbard,” the statement reads. “When he tried to answer her, she contorted a factual point Tim was making— about the Taliban being complicit in the 9/11 attacks by providing training, bases and refuge for Al Qaeda and its leaders. The characterization that Tim Ryan doesn’t know who is responsible for the attacks on 9/11 is simply unfair reporting. Further, we continue to reject Gabbard’s isolationism and her misguided beliefs on foreign policy. We refuse to be lectured by someone who thinks it’s ok to dine with murderous dictators like Syria’s Bashar Al-Assad who used chemical weapons on his own people.” >> >> Ryan's campaign is lying. During an exchange that was explicitly about the Taliban in Afghanistan, Ryan plainly said "When we weren't in there, they started flying planes into our buildings." At best, Ryan can argue that when he said "they" he had suddenly shifted from talking about the Taliban to talking about Al Qaeda without bothering to say so, in which case he obviously can't legitimately claim that Gabbard "contorted" anything he had said. At worst, he was simply unaware at the time of the very clear distinction between the Afghan military and political body called the Taliban and the multinational extremist organization called Al Qaeda. >> >> Watch the 5 minutes that have people talking Tulsi! >> A soldier's truth about the establishment war machine driving US foreign policy https://t.co/JC0MqYSEmT #DemDebate - #TULSI2020 pic.twitter.com/kJnp3gRfKq >> >> — Tulsi Gabbard (@TulsiGabbard) June 27, 2019 >> >> More importantly, Ryan's campaign using the word "isolationism" to describe the simple common sense impulse to withdraw from a costly, deadly military occupation which isn't accomplishing anything highlights an increasingly common tactic of tarring anything other than endless military expansionism as strange and aberrant instead of normal and good. Under our current Orwellian doublespeak paradigm where forever war is the new normal, the opposite of war is no longer peace, but isolationism. This removal of a desirable opposite of war from the establishment-authorised lexicon causes war to always be the desirable option. >> >> This is entirely by design. This bit of word magic has been employed for a long time to tar any idea which deviates from the neoconservative agenda of total global unipolarity via violent imperialism as something freakish and dangerous. In his farewell address to the nation, war criminal George W Bush said the following: >> >> "In the face of threats from abroad, it can be tempting to seek comfort by turning inward. But we must reject isolationism and its companion, protectionism. Retreating behind our borders would only invite danger. In the 21st century, security and prosperity at home depend on the expansion of liberty abroad. If America does not lead the cause of freedom, that cause will not be led." >> >> A few months after Bush's address, Antiwar's Rich Rubino wrote an article titled "Non-Interventionism is Not Isolationism", explaining the difference between a nation which withdraws entirely from the world and a nation which simply resists the temptation to use military aggression except in self defense. >> >> "Isolationism dictates that a country should have no relations with the rest of the world," Rubino explained. "In its purest form this would mean that ambassadors would not be shared with other nations, communications with foreign governments would be mainly perfunctory, and commercial relations would be non-existent." >> >> "A non-interventionist supports commercial relations," Rubino contrasted. "In fact, in terms of trade, many non-interventionists share libertarian proclivities and would unilaterally obliterate all tariffs and custom duties, and would be open to trade with all willing nations. In addition, non-interventionists welcome cultural exchanges and the exchange of ambassadors with all willing nations." >> >> "A non-interventionist believes that the U.S. should not intercede in conflicts between other nations or conflicts within nations," wrote Rubino. "In recent history, non-interventionists have proved prophetic in warning of the dangers of the U.S. entangling itself in alliances. The U.S. has suffered deleterious effects and effectuated enmity among other governments, citizenries, and non-state actors as a result of its overseas interventions. The U.S. interventions in both Iran and Iraq have led to cataclysmic consequences." >> >> Statement from Ryan Campaign on Afghanistan pic.twitter.com/3vuV62kl1S >> >> — Tim Ryan (@TimRyan) June 27, 2019 >> >> Calling an aversion to endless military violence "isolationism" is the same as calling an aversion to mugging people "agoraphobia". Yet you'll see this ridiculous label applied to both Gabbard and Trump, neither of whom are isolationists by any stretch of the imagination, or even proper non-interventionists. Gabbard supports most US military alliances and continues to voice full support for the bogus "war on terror" implemented by the Bush administration which serves no purpose other than to facilitate endless military expansionism; Trump is openly pushing regime change interventionism in both Venezuela and Iran while declining to make good on his promises to withdraw the US military from Syria and Afghanistan. >> >> Another dishonest label you'll get thrown at you when debating the forever war is "pacifism". "Some wars are bad, but I'm not a pacifist; sometimes war is necessary," supporters of a given interventionist military action will tell you. They'll say this while defending Trump's potentially catastrophic Iran warmongering or promoting a moronic regime change invasion of Syria, or defending disastrous US military interventions in the past like Iraq. >> >> This is bullshit for a couple of reasons. Firstly, virtually no one is a pure pacifist who opposes war under any and all possible circumstances; anyone who claims that they can't imagine any possible scenario in which they'd support using some kind of coordinated violence either hasn't imagined very hard or is fooling themselves. If your loved ones were going to be raped, tortured and killed by hostile forces unless an opposing group took up arms to defend them, for example, you would support that. Hell, you would probably join in. Secondly, equating opposition to US-led regime change interventionism, which is literally always disastrous and literally never helpful, is not even a tiny bit remotely like opposing all war under any possible circumstance. >> >> She’s not “antiwar” - she’s anti a US war. She’s totally pro the Russian air war in Syria and celebrated Russian air strikes that have killed hundreds if not thousands of civilians. >> >> — Mehdi Hasan (@mehdirhasan) February 6, 2019 >> >> Another common distortion you'll see is the specious argument that a given opponent of US interventionism "isn't anti-war" because they don't oppose all war under any and all circumstances. This tweet by The Intercept's Mehdi Hasan is a perfect example, claiming that Gabbard is not anti-war because she supports Syria's sovereign right to defend itself with the help of its allies from the violent extremist factions which overran the country with western backing. Again, virtually no one is opposed to all war under any and all circumstances; if a coalition of foreign governments had helped flood Hasan's own country of Britain with extremist militias who'd been murdering their way across the UK with the ultimate goal of toppling London, both Tulsi Gabbard and Hasan would support fighting back against those militias. >> >> The label "anti-war" can for these reasons be a little misleading. The term anti-interventionist or non-interventionist comes closest to describing the value system of most people who oppose the warmongering of the western empire, because they understand that calls for military interventionism which go mainstream in today's environment are almost universally based on imperialist agendas grabbing at power, profit, and global hegemony. The label "isolationist" comes nowhere close. >> >> It all comes down to sovereignty. An anti-interventionist believes that a country has the right to defend itself, but it doesn't have the right to conquer, capture, infiltrate or overthrow other nations whether covertly or overtly. At the "end" of colonialism we all agreed we were done with that, except that the nationless manipulators have found far trickier ways to seize a country's will and resources without actually planting a flag there. We need to get clearer on these distinctions and get louder about defending them as the only sane, coherent way to run foreign policy. >> >> ____________________ >> >> The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal, purchasing some of my sweet merchandise, buying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone, or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I'm trying to do with this platform, click here. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish or use any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge. >> >> >> >> Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2 >> >> Caitlin Johnstone | June 29, 2019 at 1:30 am | Categories: Article | URL: https://wp.me/p9tj6M-1Lz >> Comment See all comments >> Unsubscribe to no longer receive posts from Caitlin Johnstone. >> Change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions. >> >> Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: >> https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2019/06/29/the-forever-war-is-so-normalized-that-opposing-it-is-isolationism/ >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Sat Jun 29 13:51:25 2019 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2019 08:51:25 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] US presidential elections, the Left, and IP Message-ID: <32351563-9EAD-4879-80F8-6B8ACEABD01F@gmail.com> I voted for the Green party candidate in the last presidential election & expect to do the same in the next, given that Gabbard is not nominated. But I think the British ex-diplomat Craig Murray is correct: 'Every now and then, I feel myself compelled to write something I know that the majority of my readers will not agree with. That is because I do not go along with left wing groupthink any more than I go along with the line of the Establishment. I do not subscribe to a set of opinions but attempt to consider every question afresh. 'Wikileaks is much criticised for having published the leaked Hillary and Podesta emails, thus having “caused” Trump. At its extreme, this involves the entire evidence-free “Russiagate” paranoia. I find myself criticised for my association with Julian Assange on these same grounds. 'The major answer to this is that it would have been morally wrong to conceal the evidence of Hillary’s wrongdoing, her associations with the Saudis and the Bankers, and particularly the rigging of the primary elections against Bernie Sanders by Hillary and the DNC. If I was accused of association with concealing all that, I would not be able to defend Wikileaks. Another part of the answer is that I am not sure any of this much affected the actual votes cast. 'But the most important bit of the answer is that I am not sorry that Clinton lost and Trump won. I say that with apologies to all my American friends who are suffering from Trump’s harsh domestic policies and his version of the “hostile climate for immigrants” which we have long suffered in the UK. I do not underestimate the harm done by Trump’s penchant for trade wars, or his blindly pro-Israel policies and gestures, nor the continuation of the Saudi anti-Shia alliance. 'But the vital fact for the rest of the world is that Trump remains the only US President since Jimmy Carter not to have launched a major war. In this, he is true to what he said consistently during his election campaign. I do not think you have to look any further than that for the explanation of why he pulled out of the attack on Iran following the destruction of the US drone. The mechanics of the decision-taking are not its cause, contrary to all the speculation. 'I should take the time to congratulate Iran on shooting down the drone. The Americans have killed tens of thousands of people, all over the Middle East and Central Asia, using such drones. That they should holler so much when somebody knocks one down is ludicrous. 'I am absolutely convinced that, were Hillary President, the Middle East would now be devastated by the biggest of all the recent wars, and America would have invaded both Syria and Iran by now. 'Hillary was an enthusiast for the destruction of Iraq and Afghanistan and she was personally involved in starting the obliteration of the advanced Libyan state on the flimsiest of pretexts. The potential devastation she would have inflicted and the millions who would now be dead, maimed or orphaned outweighs in my view all the harm perpetrated by Trump. So my conclusion is this: I would far rather not have President Trump nor President Clinton, but forced into a straight binary choice I will take Trump. He has a better character; for all his faults he is the only one of the two who is not a psychopathic killer.’ 'How the Trump administration plays out, given the warmongering advisors from the political Establishment with whom Trump has surrounded himself, is a fascinating question. John Bolton is as near evil as any human being can be. Which brings me back to the faux left and their views. 'In 2013, I spoke in a ceremony at the Oxford Union to give the Sam Adams Award for Integrity, of which previous winners include Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden, John Kyriakou, Thomas Drake and myself. Hundreds of students from the “left” at Oxford University were engaged in a rowdy picket against the Sam Adams award aimed to stop the event because of the ridiculous allegations in Sweden against Assange. 'Now get this. Exactly the day before, the Oxford Union had hosted an evening with John Bolton. Not a single member of the “left”, who tried to prevent Ray McGovern and I from speaking, had demonstrated against the egregious war criminal, responsible for the death of millions. There could not be a more stark example of the spectacular success of the Establishment in using the false trail of identify politics to split and divert the left, particularly among young people.’ —CGE From brussel at illinois.edu Sat Jun 29 16:53:36 2019 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2019 16:53:36 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] US presidential elections, the Left, and IP In-Reply-To: <32351563-9EAD-4879-80F8-6B8ACEABD01F@gmail.com> References: <32351563-9EAD-4879-80F8-6B8ACEABD01F@gmail.com> Message-ID: <6391A19B-88DA-49F0-B02A-2B206D070A43@illinois.edu> Interesting analysis, which I can mostly agree with: The the ultimate answer to this view is that which will occur in the next decade or so. This will concern what evolves from American foreign policy, and what will happen on the climate change front. It is noteworthy that trying to portrayTrump as “antiwar" is inconsistent with his "growing of" our military and national security arsenals while surroundiing himself with characters such as Bolton, Pompeo and Abrams. His championing of fossil fuels will likely prevent the measures essential to slowing down the global warming we now experience. Anf then there are his domestic measures, which I can only charaterize as ignornant and pernicious for this country and more widely. Environment, civil rights, education, corporate control, etc., etc., etc. —mkb > On Jun 29, 2019, at 8:51 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: > > I voted for the Green party candidate in the last presidential election & expect to do the same in the next, given that Gabbard is not nominated. But I think the British ex-diplomat Craig Murray is correct: > > 'Every now and then, I feel myself compelled to write something I know that the majority of my readers will not agree with. That is because I do not go along with left wing groupthink any more than I go along with the line of the Establishment. I do not subscribe to a set of opinions but attempt to consider every question afresh. > > 'Wikileaks is much criticised for having published the leaked Hillary and Podesta emails, thus having “caused” Trump. At its extreme, this involves the entire evidence-free “Russiagate” paranoia. I find myself criticised for my association with Julian Assange on these same grounds. > > 'The major answer to this is that it would have been morally wrong to conceal the evidence of Hillary’s wrongdoing, her associations with the Saudis and the Bankers, and particularly the rigging of the primary elections against Bernie Sanders by Hillary and the DNC. If I was accused of association with concealing all that, I would not be able to defend Wikileaks. Another part of the answer is that I am not sure any of this much affected the actual votes cast. > > 'But the most important bit of the answer is that I am not sorry that Clinton lost and Trump won. I say that with apologies to all my American friends who are suffering from Trump’s harsh domestic policies and his version of the “hostile climate for immigrants” which we have long suffered in the UK. I do not underestimate the harm done by Trump’s penchant for trade wars, or his blindly pro-Israel policies and gestures, nor the continuation of the Saudi anti-Shia alliance. > > 'But the vital fact for the rest of the world is that Trump remains the only US President since Jimmy Carter not to have launched a major war. In this, he is true to what he said consistently during his election campaign. I do not think you have to look any further than that for the explanation of why he pulled out of the attack on Iran following the destruction of the US drone. The mechanics of the decision-taking are not its cause, contrary to all the speculation. > > 'I should take the time to congratulate Iran on shooting down the drone. The Americans have killed tens of thousands of people, all over the Middle East and Central Asia, using such drones. That they should holler so much when somebody knocks one down is ludicrous. > > 'I am absolutely convinced that, were Hillary President, the Middle East would now be devastated by the biggest of all the recent wars, and America would have invaded both Syria and Iran by now. > > 'Hillary was an enthusiast for the destruction of Iraq and Afghanistan and she was personally involved in starting the obliteration of the advanced Libyan state on the flimsiest of pretexts. The potential devastation she would have inflicted and the millions who would now be dead, maimed or orphaned outweighs in my view all the harm perpetrated by Trump. So my conclusion is this: I would far rather not have President Trump nor President Clinton, but forced into a straight binary choice I will take Trump. He has a better character; for all his faults he is the only one of the two who is not a psychopathic killer.’ > > 'How the Trump administration plays out, given the warmongering advisors from the political Establishment with whom Trump has surrounded himself, is a fascinating question. John Bolton is as near evil as any human being can be. Which brings me back to the faux left and their views. > > 'In 2013, I spoke in a ceremony at the Oxford Union to give the Sam Adams Award for Integrity, of which previous winners include Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden, John Kyriakou, Thomas Drake and myself. Hundreds of students from the “left” at Oxford University were engaged > in a rowdy picket against the Sam Adams award aimed to stop the event because of the ridiculous allegations in Sweden against Assange. > > 'Now get this. Exactly the day before, the Oxford Union had hosted an evening with John Bolton. Not a single member of the “left”, who tried to prevent Ray McGovern and I from speaking, had demonstrated against the egregious war criminal, responsible for the death of millions. There could not be a more stark example of the spectacular success of the > Establishment in using the false trail of identify politics to split and divert the left, particularly among young people.’ > > —CGE > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From brussel at illinois.edu Sat Jun 29 17:13:18 2019 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2019 17:13:18 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Iran recap Message-ID: A report by Keven Zeese and Margaret Flowers interpreting recent events wrt Iran/US.. https://popularresistance.org/as-conflict-with-iran-escalates-path-to-peace-can-be-found/ —mkb -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sat Jun 29 17:32:35 2019 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2019 17:32:35 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] US presidential elections, the Left, and IP In-Reply-To: <6391A19B-88DA-49F0-B02A-2B206D070A43@illinois.edu> References: <32351563-9EAD-4879-80F8-6B8ACEABD01F@gmail.com> <6391A19B-88DA-49F0-B02A-2B206D070A43@illinois.edu> Message-ID: In addition to Morton’s assessment, add Trumps sanctions on Iran, which are a form of war, and every bit as egregious, and devastating to the Iranian people as that which we criticized Madeline Albrecht for in relation to Iraq. While few deny Trump likely doesn’t want a military war, bad for business other than weapons, bad during an election year, this is just more evidence that it’s not about “the Party,” or individual President, but the system. > On Jun 29, 2019, at 09:53, Brussel, Morton K via Peace wrote: > > Interesting analysis, which I can mostly agree with: The the ultimate answer to this view is that which will occur in the next decade or so. This will concern what evolves from American foreign policy, and what will happen on the climate change front. > > It is noteworthy that trying to portrayTrump as “antiwar" is inconsistent with his "growing of" our military and national security arsenals while surroundiing himself with characters such as Bolton, Pompeo and Abrams. His championing of fossil fuels will likely prevent the measures essential to slowing down the global warming we now experience. > > Anf then there are his domestic measures, which I can only charaterize as ignornant and pernicious for this country and more widely. Environment, civil rights, education, corporate control, etc., etc., etc. > > —mkb > > >> On Jun 29, 2019, at 8:51 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> I voted for the Green party candidate in the last presidential election & expect to do the same in the next, given that Gabbard is not nominated. But I think the British ex-diplomat Craig Murray is correct: >> >> 'Every now and then, I feel myself compelled to write something I know that the majority of my readers will not agree with. That is because I do not go along with left wing groupthink any more than I go along with the line of the Establishment. I do not subscribe to a set of opinions but attempt to consider every question afresh. >> >> 'Wikileaks is much criticised for having published the leaked Hillary and Podesta emails, thus having “caused” Trump. At its extreme, this involves the entire evidence-free “Russiagate” paranoia. I find myself criticised for my association with Julian Assange on these same grounds. >> >> 'The major answer to this is that it would have been morally wrong to conceal the evidence of Hillary’s wrongdoing, her associations with the Saudis and the Bankers, and particularly the rigging of the primary elections against Bernie Sanders by Hillary and the DNC. If I was accused of association with concealing all that, I would not be able to defend Wikileaks. Another part of the answer is that I am not sure any of this much affected the actual votes cast. >> >> 'But the most important bit of the answer is that I am not sorry that Clinton lost and Trump won. I say that with apologies to all my American friends who are suffering from Trump’s harsh domestic policies and his version of the “hostile climate for immigrants” which we have long suffered in the UK. I do not underestimate the harm done by Trump’s penchant for trade wars, or his blindly pro-Israel policies and gestures, nor the continuation of the Saudi anti-Shia alliance. >> >> 'But the vital fact for the rest of the world is that Trump remains the only US President since Jimmy Carter not to have launched a major war. In this, he is true to what he said consistently during his election campaign. I do not think you have to look any further than that for the explanation of why he pulled out of the attack on Iran following the destruction of the US drone. The mechanics of the decision-taking are not its cause, contrary to all the speculation. >> >> 'I should take the time to congratulate Iran on shooting down the drone. The Americans have killed tens of thousands of people, all over the Middle East and Central Asia, using such drones. That they should holler so much when somebody knocks one down is ludicrous. >> >> 'I am absolutely convinced that, were Hillary President, the Middle East would now be devastated by the biggest of all the recent wars, and America would have invaded both Syria and Iran by now. >> >> 'Hillary was an enthusiast for the destruction of Iraq and Afghanistan and she was personally involved in starting the obliteration of the advanced Libyan state on the flimsiest of pretexts. The potential devastation she would have inflicted and the millions who would now be dead, maimed or orphaned outweighs in my view all the harm perpetrated by Trump. So my conclusion is this: I would far rather not have President Trump nor President Clinton, but forced into a straight binary choice I will take Trump. He has a better character; for all his faults he is the only one of the two who is not a psychopathic killer.’ >> >> 'How the Trump administration plays out, given the warmongering advisors from the political Establishment with whom Trump has surrounded himself, is a fascinating question. John Bolton is as near evil as any human being can be. Which brings me back to the faux left and their views. >> >> 'In 2013, I spoke in a ceremony at the Oxford Union to give the Sam Adams Award for Integrity, of which previous winners include Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden, John Kyriakou, Thomas Drake and myself. Hundreds of students from the “left” at Oxford University were engaged >> in a rowdy picket against the Sam Adams award aimed to stop the event because of the ridiculous allegations in Sweden against Assange. >> >> 'Now get this. Exactly the day before, the Oxford Union had hosted an evening with John Bolton. Not a single member of the “left”, who tried to prevent Ray McGovern and I from speaking, had demonstrated against the egregious war criminal, responsible for the death of millions. There could not be a more stark example of the spectacular success of the >> Establishment in using the false trail of identify politics to split and divert the left, particularly among young people.’ >> >> —CGE >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > > _______________________________________________ > Peace mailing list > Peace at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace From cgestabrook at gmail.com Sat Jun 29 17:41:43 2019 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2019 12:41:43 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] US presidential elections, the Left, and IP In-Reply-To: References: <32351563-9EAD-4879-80F8-6B8ACEABD01F@gmail.com> <6391A19B-88DA-49F0-B02A-2B206D070A43@illinois.edu> Message-ID: Murray offers a striking example of how identity politics is a distraction from - and in effect a support for - US war-making. > On Jun 29, 2019, at 12:32 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: > > In addition to Morton’s assessment, add Trumps sanctions on Iran, which are a form of war, and every bit as egregious, and devastating to the Iranian people as that which we criticized Madeline Albrecht for in relation to Iraq. > > While few deny Trump likely doesn’t want a military war, bad for business other than weapons, bad during an election year, this is just more evidence that it’s not about “the Party,” or individual President, but the system. > > >> On Jun 29, 2019, at 09:53, Brussel, Morton K via Peace wrote: >> >> Interesting analysis, which I can mostly agree with: The the ultimate answer to this view is that which will occur in the next decade or so. This will concern what evolves from American foreign policy, and what will happen on the climate change front. >> >> It is noteworthy that trying to portrayTrump as “antiwar" is inconsistent with his "growing of" our military and national security arsenals while surroundiing himself with characters such as Bolton, Pompeo and Abrams. His championing of fossil fuels will likely prevent the measures essential to slowing down the global warming we now experience. >> >> Anf then there are his domestic measures, which I can only charaterize as ignornant and pernicious for this country and more widely. Environment, civil rights, education, corporate control, etc., etc., etc. >> >> —mkb >> >> >>> On Jun 29, 2019, at 8:51 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: >>> >>> I voted for the Green party candidate in the last presidential election & expect to do the same in the next, given that Gabbard is not nominated. But I think the British ex-diplomat Craig Murray is correct: >>> >>> 'Every now and then, I feel myself compelled to write something I know that the majority of my readers will not agree with. That is because I do not go along with left wing groupthink any more than I go along with the line of the Establishment. I do not subscribe to a set of opinions but attempt to consider every question afresh. >>> >>> 'Wikileaks is much criticised for having published the leaked Hillary and Podesta emails, thus having “caused” Trump. At its extreme, this involves the entire evidence-free “Russiagate” paranoia. I find myself criticised for my association with Julian Assange on these same grounds. >>> >>> 'The major answer to this is that it would have been morally wrong to conceal the evidence of Hillary’s wrongdoing, her associations with the Saudis and the Bankers, and particularly the rigging of the primary elections against Bernie Sanders by Hillary and the DNC. If I was accused of association with concealing all that, I would not be able to defend Wikileaks. Another part of the answer is that I am not sure any of this much affected the actual votes cast. >>> >>> 'But the most important bit of the answer is that I am not sorry that Clinton lost and Trump won. I say that with apologies to all my American friends who are suffering from Trump’s harsh domestic policies and his version of the “hostile climate for immigrants” which we have long suffered in the UK. I do not underestimate the harm done by Trump’s penchant for trade wars, or his blindly pro-Israel policies and gestures, nor the continuation of the Saudi anti-Shia alliance. >>> >>> 'But the vital fact for the rest of the world is that Trump remains the only US President since Jimmy Carter not to have launched a major war. In this, he is true to what he said consistently during his election campaign. I do not think you have to look any further than that for the explanation of why he pulled out of the attack on Iran following the destruction of the US drone. The mechanics of the decision-taking are not its cause, contrary to all the speculation. >>> >>> 'I should take the time to congratulate Iran on shooting down the drone. The Americans have killed tens of thousands of people, all over the Middle East and Central Asia, using such drones. That they should holler so much when somebody knocks one down is ludicrous. >>> >>> 'I am absolutely convinced that, were Hillary President, the Middle East would now be devastated by the biggest of all the recent wars, and America would have invaded both Syria and Iran by now. >>> >>> 'Hillary was an enthusiast for the destruction of Iraq and Afghanistan and she was personally involved in starting the obliteration of the advanced Libyan state on the flimsiest of pretexts. The potential devastation she would have inflicted and the millions who would now be dead, maimed or orphaned outweighs in my view all the harm perpetrated by Trump. So my conclusion is this: I would far rather not have President Trump nor President Clinton, but forced into a straight binary choice I will take Trump. He has a better character; for all his faults he is the only one of the two who is not a psychopathic killer.’ >>> >>> 'How the Trump administration plays out, given the warmongering advisors from the political Establishment with whom Trump has surrounded himself, is a fascinating question. John Bolton is as near evil as any human being can be. Which brings me back to the faux left and their views. >>> >>> 'In 2013, I spoke in a ceremony at the Oxford Union to give the Sam Adams Award for Integrity, of which previous winners include Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden, John Kyriakou, Thomas Drake and myself. Hundreds of students from the “left” at Oxford University were engaged >>> in a rowdy picket against the Sam Adams award aimed to stop the event because of the ridiculous allegations in Sweden against Assange. >>> >>> 'Now get this. Exactly the day before, the Oxford Union had hosted an evening with John Bolton. Not a single member of the “left”, who tried to prevent Ray McGovern and I from speaking, had demonstrated against the egregious war criminal, responsible for the death of millions. There could not be a more stark example of the spectacular success of the >>> Establishment in using the false trail of identify politics to split and divert the left, particularly among young people.’ >>> >>> —CGE >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace mailing list >> Peace at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From jbn at forestfield.org Sat Jun 29 17:47:13 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2019 12:47:13 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News from Neptune #426 notes Message-ID: <469bdcad-19cc-1156-2216-c184e6f77542@forestfield.org> News from Neptune #426 Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtV918wobxA A "G20 and Gee Whiz" edition Links to items referenced on the show. First poll has Tulsi Gabbard as the shock winner of the first Democratic debate and Beto O'Rourke as the clear loser https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7186581/Internet-poll-shows-Tulsi-Gabbard-hands-winner-Democratic-debate.html RT on "NBC’s debate hosts weren’t very interested in Tulsi Gabbard, but Google searches for her name soared" https://on.rt.com/9x4q Letter from John Adams to James Lloyd, 28 January 1815 https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/99-02-02-6401 Jeffrey St. Clair on "Roaming Charges: Crash Test Dummy Politics" https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/28/roaming-charges-crash-test-dummy-politics/ Transcript of Gov. Bill Clinton saying "I feel your pain" during an exchange in 1992 to Bob Rafsky, a member of the AIDS activism group 'Act Up', at Laura Belle, a nightclub in Midtown Manhattan https://www.nytimes.com/1992/03/28/us/1992-campaign-verbatim-heckler-stirs-clinton-anger-excerpts-exchange.html "Bernie and the Sandernistas: Field Notes From a Failed Revolution" by Jeffrey St. Clair https://store.counterpunch.org/product/bernie-the-sandernistas/ Rob Hager on "Warren and Sanders: Compare and Contrast" https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/26/warren-and-sanders-compare-and-contrast/ Transcripts of the first 2019 Democratic Primary Debates (2 nights) 1 of 2: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/27/transcript-night-one-first-democratic-debate-annotated/?noredirect=on 2 of 2: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/28/transcript-night-first-democratic-debate/ Paul Street on "MSDNC, Single Payer, and the Serenity Prayer" https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/28/msdnc-single-payer-and-the-serenity-prayer/ Craig Murray on "The Question of Character" https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/06/the-question-of-character/ Anton Jäger on "The Masses Against the Classes, or, How to talk about populism without talking about class" https://nonsite.org/article/the-masses-against-the-classes-or-how-to-talk-about-populism-without-talking-about-class "The Beauty of a Social Problem" by Walter Benn Michaels Excerpt: https://brooklynrail.org/2011/10/art/the-beauty-of-a-social-problem ISBN-13: 978-0226421186 ISBN-10: 022642118X Walter Benn Michaels on "Let Them Eat Diversity" https://www.jacobinmag.com/2011/01/let-them-eat-diversity "Twenty-First Century Populism: The Spectre of Western European Democracy" by Daniele Albertazzi, Duncan McDonnell Introduction & Index: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260796605_Twenty-First_Century_Populism_The_Spectre_of_Western_European_Democracy Sample containing referenced quote: https://www.macmillanihe.com/resources/sample-chapters/9780230013490_sample.pdf The Communist Manifesto https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Manifesto Democracy Now interview with Aimee Allison https://www.democracynow.org/2019/6/27/sen_elizabeth_warren_we_need_to Lee Camp interview with John Kiriakou https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrVWeA2QmWk Loud & Clear audio show RSS feed: https://sputniknews.com/export/rss2/podcast/radio_loud_and_clear/ G20 talks commentary https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtV5y5I2VIQ -- RT on G20 meeting https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHTF4LD_f9c -- George Galloway on G20 meeting -J From karenaram at hotmail.com Sat Jun 29 20:34:33 2019 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2019 20:34:33 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] News from Neptune #426 notes In-Reply-To: <469bdcad-19cc-1156-2216-c184e6f77542@forestfield.org> References: <469bdcad-19cc-1156-2216-c184e6f77542@forestfield.org> Message-ID: Good one, and I agree with JB, Lee Camp offers in depth analysis with such creative and simple humor, yes often gross, but anyone can get it, along with his interviews. I, like JB and Jeff Sinclair, am also skeptical of Tulsi. I like what she says, and she is a very impressive lady, but I see her as a sheepherder for the DNC. The more they vilify her, the more the anti-war crowd will love and support her, and there we have our divide and conquer…….. > On Jun 29, 2019, at 10:47, J.B. Nicholson via Peace wrote: > > News from Neptune #426 > Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtV918wobxA > A "G20 and Gee Whiz" edition > > Links to items referenced on the show. > > > First poll has Tulsi Gabbard as the shock winner of the first Democratic debate and Beto O'Rourke as the clear loser > https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7186581/Internet-poll-shows-Tulsi-Gabbard-hands-winner-Democratic-debate.html > > RT on "NBC’s debate hosts weren’t very interested in Tulsi Gabbard, but Google searches for her name soared" > https://on.rt.com/9x4q > > Letter from John Adams to James Lloyd, 28 January 1815 > https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/99-02-02-6401 > > Jeffrey St. Clair on "Roaming Charges: Crash Test Dummy Politics" > https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/28/roaming-charges-crash-test-dummy-politics/ > > > > > > Transcript of Gov. Bill Clinton saying "I feel your pain" during an exchange in 1992 to Bob Rafsky, a member of the AIDS activism group 'Act Up', at Laura Belle, a nightclub in Midtown Manhattan > https://www.nytimes.com/1992/03/28/us/1992-campaign-verbatim-heckler-stirs-clinton-anger-excerpts-exchange.html > > "Bernie and the Sandernistas: Field Notes From a Failed Revolution" by Jeffrey St. Clair > https://store.counterpunch.org/product/bernie-the-sandernistas/ > > Rob Hager on "Warren and Sanders: Compare and Contrast" > https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/26/warren-and-sanders-compare-and-contrast/ > > Transcripts of the first 2019 Democratic Primary Debates (2 nights) > 1 of 2: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/27/transcript-night-one-first-democratic-debate-annotated/?noredirect=on > 2 of 2: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/28/transcript-night-first-democratic-debate/ > > Paul Street on "MSDNC, Single Payer, and the Serenity Prayer" > https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/28/msdnc-single-payer-and-the-serenity-prayer/ > > > > Craig Murray on "The Question of Character" > https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/06/the-question-of-character/ > > Anton Jäger on "The Masses Against the Classes, or, How to talk about populism without talking about class" > https://nonsite.org/article/the-masses-against-the-classes-or-how-to-talk-about-populism-without-talking-about-class > > "The Beauty of a Social Problem" by Walter Benn Michaels > Excerpt: https://brooklynrail.org/2011/10/art/the-beauty-of-a-social-problem > ISBN-13: 978-0226421186 > ISBN-10: 022642118X > > Walter Benn Michaels on "Let Them Eat Diversity" > https://www.jacobinmag.com/2011/01/let-them-eat-diversity > > > > > "Twenty-First Century Populism: The Spectre of Western European Democracy" by Daniele Albertazzi, Duncan McDonnell > Introduction & Index: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260796605_Twenty-First_Century_Populism_The_Spectre_of_Western_European_Democracy > Sample containing referenced quote: https://www.macmillanihe.com/resources/sample-chapters/9780230013490_sample.pdf > > The Communist Manifesto > https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Manifesto > > Democracy Now interview with Aimee Allison > https://www.democracynow.org/2019/6/27/sen_elizabeth_warren_we_need_to > > > > Lee Camp interview with John Kiriakou > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrVWeA2QmWk > > Loud & Clear audio show > RSS feed: https://sputniknews.com/export/rss2/podcast/radio_loud_and_clear/ > > > > > G20 talks commentary > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtV5y5I2VIQ -- RT on G20 meeting > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHTF4LD_f9c -- George Galloway on G20 meeting > > -J > _______________________________________________ > Peace mailing list > Peace at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace From cgestabrook at gmail.com Sat Jun 29 20:46:24 2019 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2019 15:46:24 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] News from Neptune #426 notes In-Reply-To: References: <469bdcad-19cc-1156-2216-c184e6f77542@forestfield.org> Message-ID: J. B. Nicholson & J. St.Clair are acute and informed analysts of US politics, but I hope Gabbard (or someone else) can energize the “anti-war crowd” - who have been too easily co-opted by Obama et al. —CGE > On Jun 29, 2019, at 3:34 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Good one, and I agree with JB, Lee Camp offers in depth analysis with such creative and simple humor, yes often gross, but anyone can get it, along with his interviews. > > I, like JB and Jeff Sinclair, am also skeptical of Tulsi. I like what she says, and she is a very impressive lady, but I see her as a sheepherder for the DNC. The more they vilify her, the more the anti-war crowd will love and support her, and there we have our divide and conquer…….. > > >> On Jun 29, 2019, at 10:47, J.B. Nicholson via Peace wrote: >> >> News from Neptune #426 >> Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtV918wobxA >> A "G20 and Gee Whiz" edition >> >> Links to items referenced on the show. >> >> >> First poll has Tulsi Gabbard as the shock winner of the first Democratic debate and Beto O'Rourke as the clear loser >> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7186581/Internet-poll-shows-Tulsi-Gabbard-hands-winner-Democratic-debate.html >> >> RT on "NBC’s debate hosts weren’t very interested in Tulsi Gabbard, but Google searches for her name soared" >> https://on.rt.com/9x4q >> >> Letter from John Adams to James Lloyd, 28 January 1815 >> https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/99-02-02-6401 >> >> Jeffrey St. Clair on "Roaming Charges: Crash Test Dummy Politics" >> https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/28/roaming-charges-crash-test-dummy-politics/ >> >> >> >> >> >> Transcript of Gov. Bill Clinton saying "I feel your pain" during an exchange in 1992 to Bob Rafsky, a member of the AIDS activism group 'Act Up', at Laura Belle, a nightclub in Midtown Manhattan >> https://www.nytimes.com/1992/03/28/us/1992-campaign-verbatim-heckler-stirs-clinton-anger-excerpts-exchange.html >> >> "Bernie and the Sandernistas: Field Notes From a Failed Revolution" by Jeffrey St. Clair >> https://store.counterpunch.org/product/bernie-the-sandernistas/ >> >> Rob Hager on "Warren and Sanders: Compare and Contrast" >> https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/26/warren-and-sanders-compare-and-contrast/ >> >> Transcripts of the first 2019 Democratic Primary Debates (2 nights) >> 1 of 2: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/27/transcript-night-one-first-democratic-debate-annotated/?noredirect=on >> 2 of 2: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/28/transcript-night-first-democratic-debate/ >> >> Paul Street on "MSDNC, Single Payer, and the Serenity Prayer" >> https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/28/msdnc-single-payer-and-the-serenity-prayer/ >> >> >> >> Craig Murray on "The Question of Character" >> https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/06/the-question-of-character/ >> >> Anton Jäger on "The Masses Against the Classes, or, How to talk about populism without talking about class" >> https://nonsite.org/article/the-masses-against-the-classes-or-how-to-talk-about-populism-without-talking-about-class >> >> "The Beauty of a Social Problem" by Walter Benn Michaels >> Excerpt: https://brooklynrail.org/2011/10/art/the-beauty-of-a-social-problem >> ISBN-13: 978-0226421186 >> ISBN-10: 022642118X >> >> Walter Benn Michaels on "Let Them Eat Diversity" >> https://www.jacobinmag.com/2011/01/let-them-eat-diversity >> >> >> >> >> "Twenty-First Century Populism: The Spectre of Western European Democracy" by Daniele Albertazzi, Duncan McDonnell >> Introduction & Index: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260796605_Twenty-First_Century_Populism_The_Spectre_of_Western_European_Democracy >> Sample containing referenced quote: https://www.macmillanihe.com/resources/sample-chapters/9780230013490_sample.pdf >> >> The Communist Manifesto >> https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Manifesto >> >> Democracy Now interview with Aimee Allison >> https://www.democracynow.org/2019/6/27/sen_elizabeth_warren_we_need_to >> >> >> >> Lee Camp interview with John Kiriakou >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrVWeA2QmWk >> >> Loud & Clear audio show >> RSS feed: https://sputniknews.com/export/rss2/podcast/radio_loud_and_clear/ >> >> >> >> >> G20 talks commentary >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtV5y5I2VIQ -- RT on G20 meeting >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHTF4LD_f9c -- George Galloway on G20 meeting >> >> -J >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace mailing list >> Peace at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From jbw292002 at gmail.com Sat Jun 29 21:09:54 2019 From: jbw292002 at gmail.com (John W.) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2019 16:09:54 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] US presidential elections, the Left, and IP In-Reply-To: <6391A19B-88DA-49F0-B02A-2B206D070A43@illinois.edu> References: <32351563-9EAD-4879-80F8-6B8ACEABD01F@gmail.com> <6391A19B-88DA-49F0-B02A-2B206D070A43@illinois.edu> Message-ID: Carl says: "I do not subscribe to a set of opinions but attempt to consider every question afresh." Actually, Carl, you DO subscribe to a set of opinions which is almost always as predictable as the sunrise. You're very ideologically driven, and for the most part a single-issue thinker and voter. To be fair, most of us are pretty set in our ways by the time we reach middle age, and we hold dear two or three dominant paradigms with which we "consider every question afresh" and then arrive at the exact same, highly predictable conclusions. On Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 11:54 AM Brussel, Morton K via Peace < peace at lists.chambana.net> wrote: Interesting analysis, which I can mostly agree with: The the ultimate > answer to this view is that which will occur in the next decade or so. This > will concern what evolves from American foreign policy, and what will > happen on the climate change front. > > It is noteworthy that trying to portrayTrump as “antiwar" is inconsistent > with his "growing of" our military and national security arsenals while > surroundiing himself with characters such as Bolton, Pompeo and Abrams. His > championing of fossil fuels will likely prevent the measures essential to > slowing down the global warming we now experience. > > Anf then there are his domestic measures, which I can only charaterize as > ignornant and pernicious for this country and more widely. Environment, > civil rights, education, corporate control, etc., etc., etc. > > —mkb > > > > On Jun 29, 2019, at 8:51 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss < > peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > > > > I voted for the Green party candidate in the last presidential election > & expect to do the same in the next, given that Gabbard is not nominated. > But I think the British ex-diplomat Craig Murray is correct: > > > > 'Every now and then, I feel myself compelled to write something I know > that the majority of my readers will not agree with. That is because I do > not go along with left wing groupthink any more than I go along with the > line of the Establishment. I do not subscribe to a set of opinions but > attempt to consider every question afresh. > > > > 'Wikileaks is much criticised for having published the leaked Hillary > and Podesta emails, thus having “caused” Trump. At its extreme, this > involves the entire evidence-free “Russiagate” paranoia. I find myself > criticised for my association with Julian Assange on these same grounds. > > > > 'The major answer to this is that it would have been morally wrong to > conceal the evidence of Hillary’s wrongdoing, her associations with the > Saudis and the Bankers, and particularly the rigging of the primary > elections against Bernie Sanders by Hillary and the DNC. If I was accused > of association with concealing all that, I would not be able to defend > Wikileaks. Another part of the answer is that I am not sure any of this > much affected the actual votes cast. > > > > 'But the most important bit of the answer is that I am not sorry that > Clinton lost and Trump won. I say that with apologies to all my American > friends who are suffering from Trump’s harsh domestic policies and his > version of the “hostile climate for immigrants” which we have long suffered > in the UK. I do not underestimate the harm done by Trump’s penchant for > trade wars, or his blindly pro-Israel policies and gestures, nor the > continuation of the Saudi anti-Shia alliance. > > > > 'But the vital fact for the rest of the world is that Trump remains the > only US President since Jimmy Carter not to have launched a major war. In > this, he is true to what he said consistently during his election campaign. > I do not think you have to look any further than that for the explanation > of why he pulled out of the attack on Iran following the destruction of the > US drone. The mechanics of the decision-taking are not its cause, contrary > to all the speculation. > > > > 'I should take the time to congratulate Iran on shooting down the drone. > The Americans have killed tens of thousands of people, all over the Middle > East and Central Asia, using such drones. That they should holler so much > when somebody knocks one down is ludicrous. > > > > 'I am absolutely convinced that, were Hillary President, the Middle East > would now be devastated by the biggest of all the recent wars, and America > would have invaded both Syria and Iran by now. > > > > 'Hillary was an enthusiast for the destruction of Iraq and Afghanistan > and she was personally involved in starting the obliteration of the > advanced Libyan state on the flimsiest of pretexts. The potential > devastation she would have inflicted and the millions who would now be > dead, maimed or orphaned outweighs in my view all the harm perpetrated by > Trump. So my conclusion is this: I would far rather not have President > Trump nor President Clinton, but forced into a straight binary choice I > will take Trump. He has a better character; for all his faults he is the > only one of the two who is not a psychopathic killer.’ > > > > 'How the Trump administration plays out, given the warmongering advisors > from the political Establishment with whom Trump has surrounded himself, is > a fascinating question. John Bolton is as near evil as any human being can > be. Which brings me back to the faux left and their views. > > > > 'In 2013, I spoke in a ceremony at the Oxford Union to give the Sam > Adams Award for Integrity, of which previous winners include Julian > Assange, Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden, John Kyriakou, Thomas Drake and > myself. Hundreds of students from the “left” at Oxford University were > engaged > > in a rowdy picket against the Sam Adams award aimed to stop the event > because of the ridiculous allegations in Sweden against Assange. > > > > 'Now get this. Exactly the day before, the Oxford Union had hosted an > evening with John Bolton. Not a single member of the “left”, who tried to > prevent Ray McGovern and I from speaking, had demonstrated against the > egregious war criminal, responsible for the death of millions. There could > not be a more stark example of the spectacular success of the > > Establishment in using the false trail of identify politics to split and > divert the left, particularly among young people.’ > > > > —CGE > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sat Jun 29 21:17:47 2019 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2019 21:17:47 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] News from Neptune #426 notes In-Reply-To: References: <469bdcad-19cc-1156-2216-c184e6f77542@forestfield.org> Message-ID: Right into the lap of the DNC, just as did Obama. > On Jun 29, 2019, at 13:46, C G Estabrook wrote: > > J. B. Nicholson & J. St.Clair are acute and informed analysts of US politics, but I hope Gabbard (or someone else) can energize the “anti-war crowd” - who have been too easily co-opted by Obama et al. —CGE > > >> On Jun 29, 2019, at 3:34 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> Good one, and I agree with JB, Lee Camp offers in depth analysis with such creative and simple humor, yes often gross, but anyone can get it, along with his interviews. >> >> I, like JB and Jeff Sinclair, am also skeptical of Tulsi. I like what she says, and she is a very impressive lady, but I see her as a sheepherder for the DNC. The more they vilify her, the more the anti-war crowd will love and support her, and there we have our divide and conquer…….. >> >> >>> On Jun 29, 2019, at 10:47, J.B. Nicholson via Peace wrote: >>> >>> News from Neptune #426 >>> Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtV918wobxA >>> A "G20 and Gee Whiz" edition >>> >>> Links to items referenced on the show. >>> >>> >>> First poll has Tulsi Gabbard as the shock winner of the first Democratic debate and Beto O'Rourke as the clear loser >>> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7186581/Internet-poll-shows-Tulsi-Gabbard-hands-winner-Democratic-debate.html >>> >>> RT on "NBC’s debate hosts weren’t very interested in Tulsi Gabbard, but Google searches for her name soared" >>> https://on.rt.com/9x4q >>> >>> Letter from John Adams to James Lloyd, 28 January 1815 >>> https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/99-02-02-6401 >>> >>> Jeffrey St. Clair on "Roaming Charges: Crash Test Dummy Politics" >>> https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/28/roaming-charges-crash-test-dummy-politics/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Transcript of Gov. Bill Clinton saying "I feel your pain" during an exchange in 1992 to Bob Rafsky, a member of the AIDS activism group 'Act Up', at Laura Belle, a nightclub in Midtown Manhattan >>> https://www.nytimes.com/1992/03/28/us/1992-campaign-verbatim-heckler-stirs-clinton-anger-excerpts-exchange.html >>> >>> "Bernie and the Sandernistas: Field Notes From a Failed Revolution" by Jeffrey St. Clair >>> https://store.counterpunch.org/product/bernie-the-sandernistas/ >>> >>> Rob Hager on "Warren and Sanders: Compare and Contrast" >>> https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/26/warren-and-sanders-compare-and-contrast/ >>> >>> Transcripts of the first 2019 Democratic Primary Debates (2 nights) >>> 1 of 2: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/27/transcript-night-one-first-democratic-debate-annotated/?noredirect=on >>> 2 of 2: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/28/transcript-night-first-democratic-debate/ >>> >>> Paul Street on "MSDNC, Single Payer, and the Serenity Prayer" >>> https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/28/msdnc-single-payer-and-the-serenity-prayer/ >>> >>> >>> >>> Craig Murray on "The Question of Character" >>> https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/06/the-question-of-character/ >>> >>> Anton Jäger on "The Masses Against the Classes, or, How to talk about populism without talking about class" >>> https://nonsite.org/article/the-masses-against-the-classes-or-how-to-talk-about-populism-without-talking-about-class >>> >>> "The Beauty of a Social Problem" by Walter Benn Michaels >>> Excerpt: https://brooklynrail.org/2011/10/art/the-beauty-of-a-social-problem >>> ISBN-13: 978-0226421186 >>> ISBN-10: 022642118X >>> >>> Walter Benn Michaels on "Let Them Eat Diversity" >>> https://www.jacobinmag.com/2011/01/let-them-eat-diversity >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> "Twenty-First Century Populism: The Spectre of Western European Democracy" by Daniele Albertazzi, Duncan McDonnell >>> Introduction & Index: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260796605_Twenty-First_Century_Populism_The_Spectre_of_Western_European_Democracy >>> Sample containing referenced quote: https://www.macmillanihe.com/resources/sample-chapters/9780230013490_sample.pdf >>> >>> The Communist Manifesto >>> https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Manifesto >>> >>> Democracy Now interview with Aimee Allison >>> https://www.democracynow.org/2019/6/27/sen_elizabeth_warren_we_need_to >>> >>> >>> >>> Lee Camp interview with John Kiriakou >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrVWeA2QmWk >>> >>> Loud & Clear audio show >>> RSS feed: https://sputniknews.com/export/rss2/podcast/radio_loud_and_clear/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> G20 talks commentary >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtV5y5I2VIQ -- RT on G20 meeting >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHTF4LD_f9c -- George Galloway on G20 meeting >>> >>> -J >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Peace mailing list >>> Peace at lists.chambana.net >>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > From cgestabrook at gmail.com Sat Jun 29 21:28:26 2019 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2019 16:28:26 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] US presidential elections, the Left, and IP In-Reply-To: References: <32351563-9EAD-4879-80F8-6B8ACEABD01F@gmail.com> <6391A19B-88DA-49F0-B02A-2B206D070A43@illinois.edu> Message-ID: John, you’ve mistaken the attributions. Not I but Craig Murray is the author of the remark to which you object. By 'set of opinions’ here, he seems to mean something like the conventional Left, of which I’ve long been a critic (even before the rise of identity politics). As a Chomskyan anarchist and a Catholic Marxist (those positions are not incompatible), I’ve long argued for a number of opinions to which I know you take exception. But what is the “single issue” by which you think I’m ”driven”? Perhaps we should discuss that candidly. —CGE > On Jun 29, 2019, at 4:09 PM, John W. wrote: > > > > Carl says: "I do not subscribe to a set of opinions but attempt to consider every question afresh." > > Actually, Carl, you DO subscribe to a set of opinions which is almost always as predictable as the sunrise. You're very ideologically driven, and for the most part a single-issue thinker and voter. To be fair, most of us are pretty set in our ways by the time we reach middle age, and we hold dear two or three dominant paradigms with which we "consider every question afresh" and then arrive at the exact same, highly predictable conclusions. > > > > On Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 11:54 AM Brussel, Morton K via Peace wrote: > > Interesting analysis, which I can mostly agree with: The the ultimate answer to this view is that which will occur in the next decade or so. This will concern what evolves from American foreign policy, and what will happen on the climate change front. > > It is noteworthy that trying to portrayTrump as “antiwar" is inconsistent with his "growing of" our military and national security arsenals while surroundiing himself with characters such as Bolton, Pompeo and Abrams. His championing of fossil fuels will likely prevent the measures essential to slowing down the global warming we now experience. > > Anf then there are his domestic measures, which I can only charaterize as ignornant and pernicious for this country and more widely. Environment, civil rights, education, corporate control, etc., etc., etc. > > —mkb > > > > On Jun 29, 2019, at 8:51 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: > > > > I voted for the Green party candidate in the last presidential election & expect to do the same in the next, given that Gabbard is not nominated. But I think the British ex-diplomat Craig Murray is correct: > > > > 'Every now and then, I feel myself compelled to write something I know that the majority of my readers will not agree with. That is because I do not go along with left wing groupthink any more than I go along with the line of the Establishment. I do not subscribe to a set of opinions but attempt to consider every question afresh. > > > > 'Wikileaks is much criticised for having published the leaked Hillary and Podesta emails, thus having “caused” Trump. At its extreme, this involves the entire evidence-free “Russiagate” paranoia. I find myself criticised for my association with Julian Assange on these same grounds. > > > > 'The major answer to this is that it would have been morally wrong to conceal the evidence of Hillary’s wrongdoing, her associations with the Saudis and the Bankers, and particularly the rigging of the primary elections against Bernie Sanders by Hillary and the DNC. If I was accused of association with concealing all that, I would not be able to defend Wikileaks. Another part of the answer is that I am not sure any of this much affected the actual votes cast. > > > > 'But the most important bit of the answer is that I am not sorry that Clinton lost and Trump won. I say that with apologies to all my American friends who are suffering from Trump’s harsh domestic policies and his version of the “hostile climate for immigrants” which we have long suffered in the UK. I do not underestimate the harm done by Trump’s penchant for trade wars, or his blindly pro-Israel policies and gestures, nor the continuation of the Saudi anti-Shia alliance. > > > > 'But the vital fact for the rest of the world is that Trump remains the only US President since Jimmy Carter not to have launched a major war. In this, he is true to what he said consistently during his election campaign. I do not think you have to look any further than that for the explanation of why he pulled out of the attack on Iran following the destruction of the US drone. The mechanics of the decision-taking are not its cause, contrary to all the speculation. > > > > 'I should take the time to congratulate Iran on shooting down the drone. The Americans have killed tens of thousands of people, all over the Middle East and Central Asia, using such drones. That they should holler so much when somebody knocks one down is ludicrous. > > > > 'I am absolutely convinced that, were Hillary President, the Middle East would now be devastated by the biggest of all the recent wars, and America would have invaded both Syria and Iran by now. > > > > 'Hillary was an enthusiast for the destruction of Iraq and Afghanistan and she was personally involved in starting the obliteration of the advanced Libyan state on the flimsiest of pretexts. The potential devastation she would have inflicted and the millions who would now be dead, maimed or orphaned outweighs in my view all the harm perpetrated by Trump. So my conclusion is this: I would far rather not have President Trump nor President Clinton, but forced into a straight binary choice I will take Trump. He has a better character; for all his faults he is the only one of the two who is not a psychopathic killer.’ > > > > 'How the Trump administration plays out, given the warmongering advisors from the political Establishment with whom Trump has surrounded himself, is a fascinating question. John Bolton is as near evil as any human being can be. Which brings me back to the faux left and their views. > > > > 'In 2013, I spoke in a ceremony at the Oxford Union to give the Sam Adams Award for Integrity, of which previous winners include Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden, John Kyriakou, Thomas Drake and myself. Hundreds of students from the “left” at Oxford University were engaged > > in a rowdy picket against the Sam Adams award aimed to stop the event because of the ridiculous allegations in Sweden against Assange. > > > > 'Now get this. Exactly the day before, the Oxford Union had hosted an evening with John Bolton. Not a single member of the “left”, who tried to prevent Ray McGovern and I from speaking, had demonstrated against the egregious war criminal, responsible for the death of millions. There could not be a more stark example of the spectacular success of the > > Establishment in using the false trail of identify politics to split and divert the left, particularly among young people.’ > > > > —CGE From cgestabrook at gmail.com Sat Jun 29 21:37:04 2019 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2019 16:37:04 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] News from Neptune #426 notes In-Reply-To: References: <469bdcad-19cc-1156-2216-c184e6f77542@forestfield.org> Message-ID: <5EC47092-951C-42DE-A80E-D1B5879946A2@gmail.com> What do you think the chances are of the Democrat party's nominating an anti-war candidate in 2020? Some Democrats thought they did so in 2008. They were the more deceived. > On Jun 29, 2019, at 4:17 PM, Karen Aram via Peace wrote: > > Right into the lap of the DNC, just as did Obama. > > >> On Jun 29, 2019, at 13:46, C G Estabrook wrote: >> >> J. B. Nicholson & J. St.Clair are acute and informed analysts of US politics, but I hope Gabbard (or someone else) can energize the “anti-war crowd” - who have been too easily co-opted by Obama et al. —CGE >> >> >>> On Jun 29, 2019, at 3:34 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >>> >>> Good one, and I agree with JB, Lee Camp offers in depth analysis with such creative and simple humor, yes often gross, but anyone can get it, along with his interviews. >>> >>> I, like JB and Jeff Sinclair, am also skeptical of Tulsi. I like what she says, and she is a very impressive lady, but I see her as a sheepherder for the DNC. The more they vilify her, the more the anti-war crowd will love and support her, and there we have our divide and conquer…….. >>> >>> >>>> On Jun 29, 2019, at 10:47, J.B. Nicholson via Peace wrote: >>>> >>>> News from Neptune #426 >>>> Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtV918wobxA >>>> A "G20 and Gee Whiz" edition >>>> >>>> Links to items referenced on the show. >>>> >>>> >>>> First poll has Tulsi Gabbard as the shock winner of the first Democratic debate and Beto O'Rourke as the clear loser >>>> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7186581/Internet-poll-shows-Tulsi-Gabbard-hands-winner-Democratic-debate.html >>>> >>>> RT on "NBC’s debate hosts weren’t very interested in Tulsi Gabbard, but Google searches for her name soared" >>>> https://on.rt.com/9x4q >>>> >>>> Letter from John Adams to James Lloyd, 28 January 1815 >>>> https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/99-02-02-6401 >>>> >>>> Jeffrey St. Clair on "Roaming Charges: Crash Test Dummy Politics" >>>> https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/28/roaming-charges-crash-test-dummy-politics/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Transcript of Gov. Bill Clinton saying "I feel your pain" during an exchange in 1992 to Bob Rafsky, a member of the AIDS activism group 'Act Up', at Laura Belle, a nightclub in Midtown Manhattan >>>> https://www.nytimes.com/1992/03/28/us/1992-campaign-verbatim-heckler-stirs-clinton-anger-excerpts-exchange.html >>>> >>>> "Bernie and the Sandernistas: Field Notes From a Failed Revolution" by Jeffrey St. Clair >>>> https://store.counterpunch.org/product/bernie-the-sandernistas/ >>>> >>>> Rob Hager on "Warren and Sanders: Compare and Contrast" >>>> https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/26/warren-and-sanders-compare-and-contrast/ >>>> >>>> Transcripts of the first 2019 Democratic Primary Debates (2 nights) >>>> 1 of 2: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/27/transcript-night-one-first-democratic-debate-annotated/?noredirect=on >>>> 2 of 2: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/28/transcript-night-first-democratic-debate/ >>>> >>>> Paul Street on "MSDNC, Single Payer, and the Serenity Prayer" >>>> https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/28/msdnc-single-payer-and-the-serenity-prayer/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Craig Murray on "The Question of Character" >>>> https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/06/the-question-of-character/ >>>> >>>> Anton Jäger on "The Masses Against the Classes, or, How to talk about populism without talking about class" >>>> https://nonsite.org/article/the-masses-against-the-classes-or-how-to-talk-about-populism-without-talking-about-class >>>> >>>> "The Beauty of a Social Problem" by Walter Benn Michaels >>>> Excerpt: https://brooklynrail.org/2011/10/art/the-beauty-of-a-social-problem >>>> ISBN-13: 978-0226421186 >>>> ISBN-10: 022642118X >>>> >>>> Walter Benn Michaels on "Let Them Eat Diversity" >>>> https://www.jacobinmag.com/2011/01/let-them-eat-diversity >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> "Twenty-First Century Populism: The Spectre of Western European Democracy" by Daniele Albertazzi, Duncan McDonnell >>>> Introduction & Index: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260796605_Twenty-First_Century_Populism_The_Spectre_of_Western_European_Democracy >>>> Sample containing referenced quote: https://www.macmillanihe.com/resources/sample-chapters/9780230013490_sample.pdf >>>> >>>> The Communist Manifesto >>>> https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ >>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Manifesto >>>> >>>> Democracy Now interview with Aimee Allison >>>> https://www.democracynow.org/2019/6/27/sen_elizabeth_warren_we_need_to >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Lee Camp interview with John Kiriakou >>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrVWeA2QmWk >>>> >>>> Loud & Clear audio show >>>> RSS feed: https://sputniknews.com/export/rss2/podcast/radio_loud_and_clear/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> G20 talks commentary >>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtV5y5I2VIQ -- RT on G20 meeting >>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHTF4LD_f9c -- George Galloway on G20 meeting >>>> >>>> -J >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Peace mailing list >>>> Peace at lists.chambana.net >>>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss >> > > _______________________________________________ > Peace mailing list > Peace at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace From karenaram at hotmail.com Sat Jun 29 21:50:51 2019 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2019 21:50:51 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] News from Neptune #426 notes In-Reply-To: <5EC47092-951C-42DE-A80E-D1B5879946A2@gmail.com> References: <469bdcad-19cc-1156-2216-c184e6f77542@forestfield.org> <5EC47092-951C-42DE-A80E-D1B5879946A2@gmail.com> Message-ID: Highly unlikely, but if the debates prove the people would prefer one, then the DNC has one. I may not be an “acute and informed analyst of US politics” as are J.B. and Jeffrey, but I know when I see a charade. > On Jun 29, 2019, at 14:37, C G Estabrook wrote: > > What do you think the chances are of the Democrat party's nominating an anti-war candidate in 2020? > > Some Democrats thought they did so in 2008. They were the more deceived. > > > >> On Jun 29, 2019, at 4:17 PM, Karen Aram via Peace wrote: >> >> Right into the lap of the DNC, just as did Obama. >> >> >>> On Jun 29, 2019, at 13:46, C G Estabrook wrote: >>> >>> J. B. Nicholson & J. St.Clair are acute and informed analysts of US politics, but I hope Gabbard (or someone else) can energize the “anti-war crowd” - who have been too easily co-opted by Obama et al. —CGE >>> >>> >>>> On Jun 29, 2019, at 3:34 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >>>> >>>> Good one, and I agree with JB, Lee Camp offers in depth analysis with such creative and simple humor, yes often gross, but anyone can get it, along with his interviews. >>>> >>>> I, like JB and Jeff Sinclair, am also skeptical of Tulsi. I like what she says, and she is a very impressive lady, but I see her as a sheepherder for the DNC. The more they vilify her, the more the anti-war crowd will love and support her, and there we have our divide and conquer…….. >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Jun 29, 2019, at 10:47, J.B. Nicholson via Peace wrote: >>>>> >>>>> News from Neptune #426 >>>>> Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtV918wobxA >>>>> A "G20 and Gee Whiz" edition >>>>> >>>>> Links to items referenced on the show. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> First poll has Tulsi Gabbard as the shock winner of the first Democratic debate and Beto O'Rourke as the clear loser >>>>> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7186581/Internet-poll-shows-Tulsi-Gabbard-hands-winner-Democratic-debate.html >>>>> >>>>> RT on "NBC’s debate hosts weren’t very interested in Tulsi Gabbard, but Google searches for her name soared" >>>>> https://on.rt.com/9x4q >>>>> >>>>> Letter from John Adams to James Lloyd, 28 January 1815 >>>>> https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/99-02-02-6401 >>>>> >>>>> Jeffrey St. Clair on "Roaming Charges: Crash Test Dummy Politics" >>>>> https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/28/roaming-charges-crash-test-dummy-politics/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Transcript of Gov. Bill Clinton saying "I feel your pain" during an exchange in 1992 to Bob Rafsky, a member of the AIDS activism group 'Act Up', at Laura Belle, a nightclub in Midtown Manhattan >>>>> https://www.nytimes.com/1992/03/28/us/1992-campaign-verbatim-heckler-stirs-clinton-anger-excerpts-exchange.html >>>>> >>>>> "Bernie and the Sandernistas: Field Notes From a Failed Revolution" by Jeffrey St. Clair >>>>> https://store.counterpunch.org/product/bernie-the-sandernistas/ >>>>> >>>>> Rob Hager on "Warren and Sanders: Compare and Contrast" >>>>> https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/26/warren-and-sanders-compare-and-contrast/ >>>>> >>>>> Transcripts of the first 2019 Democratic Primary Debates (2 nights) >>>>> 1 of 2: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/27/transcript-night-one-first-democratic-debate-annotated/?noredirect=on >>>>> 2 of 2: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/28/transcript-night-first-democratic-debate/ >>>>> >>>>> Paul Street on "MSDNC, Single Payer, and the Serenity Prayer" >>>>> https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/28/msdnc-single-payer-and-the-serenity-prayer/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Craig Murray on "The Question of Character" >>>>> https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/06/the-question-of-character/ >>>>> >>>>> Anton Jäger on "The Masses Against the Classes, or, How to talk about populism without talking about class" >>>>> https://nonsite.org/article/the-masses-against-the-classes-or-how-to-talk-about-populism-without-talking-about-class >>>>> >>>>> "The Beauty of a Social Problem" by Walter Benn Michaels >>>>> Excerpt: https://brooklynrail.org/2011/10/art/the-beauty-of-a-social-problem >>>>> ISBN-13: 978-0226421186 >>>>> ISBN-10: 022642118X >>>>> >>>>> Walter Benn Michaels on "Let Them Eat Diversity" >>>>> https://www.jacobinmag.com/2011/01/let-them-eat-diversity >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "Twenty-First Century Populism: The Spectre of Western European Democracy" by Daniele Albertazzi, Duncan McDonnell >>>>> Introduction & Index: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260796605_Twenty-First_Century_Populism_The_Spectre_of_Western_European_Democracy >>>>> Sample containing referenced quote: https://www.macmillanihe.com/resources/sample-chapters/9780230013490_sample.pdf >>>>> >>>>> The Communist Manifesto >>>>> https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ >>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Manifesto >>>>> >>>>> Democracy Now interview with Aimee Allison >>>>> https://www.democracynow.org/2019/6/27/sen_elizabeth_warren_we_need_to >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Lee Camp interview with John Kiriakou >>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrVWeA2QmWk >>>>> >>>>> Loud & Clear audio show >>>>> RSS feed: https://sputniknews.com/export/rss2/podcast/radio_loud_and_clear/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> G20 talks commentary >>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtV5y5I2VIQ -- RT on G20 meeting >>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHTF4LD_f9c -- George Galloway on G20 meeting >>>>> >>>>> -J >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Peace mailing list >>>>> Peace at lists.chambana.net >>>>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace mailing list >> Peace at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace > From cgestabrook at gmail.com Sat Jun 29 22:08:27 2019 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2019 17:08:27 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] News from Neptune #426 notes In-Reply-To: References: <469bdcad-19cc-1156-2216-c184e6f77542@forestfield.org> <5EC47092-951C-42DE-A80E-D1B5879946A2@gmail.com> Message-ID: What’s that song, ”I Love a Charade”? The Democrats want all America singing... > On Jun 29, 2019, at 4:50 PM, Karen Aram wrote: > > Highly unlikely, but if the debates prove the people would prefer one, then the DNC has one. > > I may not be an “acute and informed analyst of US politics” as are J.B. and Jeffrey, but I know when I see a charade. > >> On Jun 29, 2019, at 14:37, C G Estabrook wrote: >> >> What do you think the chances are of the Democrat party's nominating an anti-war candidate in 2020? >> >> Some Democrats thought they did so in 2008. They were the more deceived. >> >> >> >>> On Jun 29, 2019, at 4:17 PM, Karen Aram via Peace wrote: >>> >>> Right into the lap of the DNC, just as did Obama. >>> >>> >>>> On Jun 29, 2019, at 13:46, C G Estabrook wrote: >>>> >>>> J. B. Nicholson & J. St.Clair are acute and informed analysts of US politics, but I hope Gabbard (or someone else) can energize the “anti-war crowd” - who have been too easily co-opted by Obama et al. —CGE >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Jun 29, 2019, at 3:34 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Good one, and I agree with JB, Lee Camp offers in depth analysis with such creative and simple humor, yes often gross, but anyone can get it, along with his interviews. >>>>> >>>>> I, like JB and Jeff Sinclair, am also skeptical of Tulsi. I like what she says, and she is a very impressive lady, but I see her as a sheepherder for the DNC. The more they vilify her, the more the anti-war crowd will love and support her, and there we have our divide and conquer…….. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Jun 29, 2019, at 10:47, J.B. Nicholson via Peace wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> News from Neptune #426 >>>>>> Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtV918wobxA >>>>>> A "G20 and Gee Whiz" edition >>>>>> >>>>>> Links to items referenced on the show. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> First poll has Tulsi Gabbard as the shock winner of the first Democratic debate and Beto O'Rourke as the clear loser >>>>>> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7186581/Internet-poll-shows-Tulsi-Gabbard-hands-winner-Democratic-debate.html >>>>>> >>>>>> RT on "NBC’s debate hosts weren’t very interested in Tulsi Gabbard, but Google searches for her name soared" >>>>>> https://on.rt.com/9x4q >>>>>> >>>>>> Letter from John Adams to James Lloyd, 28 January 1815 >>>>>> https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/99-02-02-6401 >>>>>> >>>>>> Jeffrey St. Clair on "Roaming Charges: Crash Test Dummy Politics" >>>>>> https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/28/roaming-charges-crash-test-dummy-politics/ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Transcript of Gov. Bill Clinton saying "I feel your pain" during an exchange in 1992 to Bob Rafsky, a member of the AIDS activism group 'Act Up', at Laura Belle, a nightclub in Midtown Manhattan >>>>>> https://www.nytimes.com/1992/03/28/us/1992-campaign-verbatim-heckler-stirs-clinton-anger-excerpts-exchange.html >>>>>> >>>>>> "Bernie and the Sandernistas: Field Notes From a Failed Revolution" by Jeffrey St. Clair >>>>>> https://store.counterpunch.org/product/bernie-the-sandernistas/ >>>>>> >>>>>> Rob Hager on "Warren and Sanders: Compare and Contrast" >>>>>> https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/26/warren-and-sanders-compare-and-contrast/ >>>>>> >>>>>> Transcripts of the first 2019 Democratic Primary Debates (2 nights) >>>>>> 1 of 2: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/27/transcript-night-one-first-democratic-debate-annotated/?noredirect=on >>>>>> 2 of 2: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/28/transcript-night-first-democratic-debate/ >>>>>> >>>>>> Paul Street on "MSDNC, Single Payer, and the Serenity Prayer" >>>>>> https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/28/msdnc-single-payer-and-the-serenity-prayer/ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Craig Murray on "The Question of Character" >>>>>> https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/06/the-question-of-character/ >>>>>> >>>>>> Anton Jäger on "The Masses Against the Classes, or, How to talk about populism without talking about class" >>>>>> https://nonsite.org/article/the-masses-against-the-classes-or-how-to-talk-about-populism-without-talking-about-class >>>>>> >>>>>> "The Beauty of a Social Problem" by Walter Benn Michaels >>>>>> Excerpt: https://brooklynrail.org/2011/10/art/the-beauty-of-a-social-problem >>>>>> ISBN-13: 978-0226421186 >>>>>> ISBN-10: 022642118X >>>>>> >>>>>> Walter Benn Michaels on "Let Them Eat Diversity" >>>>>> https://www.jacobinmag.com/2011/01/let-them-eat-diversity >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> "Twenty-First Century Populism: The Spectre of Western European Democracy" by Daniele Albertazzi, Duncan McDonnell >>>>>> Introduction & Index: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260796605_Twenty-First_Century_Populism_The_Spectre_of_Western_European_Democracy >>>>>> Sample containing referenced quote: https://www.macmillanihe.com/resources/sample-chapters/9780230013490_sample.pdf >>>>>> >>>>>> The Communist Manifesto >>>>>> https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ >>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Manifesto >>>>>> >>>>>> Democracy Now interview with Aimee Allison >>>>>> https://www.democracynow.org/2019/6/27/sen_elizabeth_warren_we_need_to >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Lee Camp interview with John Kiriakou >>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrVWeA2QmWk >>>>>> >>>>>> Loud & Clear audio show >>>>>> RSS feed: https://sputniknews.com/export/rss2/podcast/radio_loud_and_clear/ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> G20 talks commentary >>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtV5y5I2VIQ -- RT on G20 meeting >>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHTF4LD_f9c -- George Galloway on G20 meeting >>>>>> >>>>>> -J >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Peace mailing list >>>>>> Peace at lists.chambana.net >>>>>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>>>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>>>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Peace mailing list >>> Peace at lists.chambana.net >>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace >> > From jbw292002 at gmail.com Sun Jun 30 01:36:53 2019 From: jbw292002 at gmail.com (John W.) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2019 20:36:53 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] US presidential elections, the Left, and IP In-Reply-To: References: <32351563-9EAD-4879-80F8-6B8ACEABD01F@gmail.com> <6391A19B-88DA-49F0-B02A-2B206D070A43@illinois.edu> Message-ID: On Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 4:28 PM C G Estabrook wrote: John, you’ve mistaken the attributions. Not I but Craig Murray is the > author of the remark to which you object. > Ah, I see. Thanks. > By 'set of opinions’ here, he seems to mean something like the > conventional Left, of which I’ve long been a critic (even before the rise > of identity politics). > Yes, you sort of have. > As a Chomskyan anarchist and a Catholic Marxist (those positions are not > incompatible), I’ve long argued for a number of opinions to which I know > you take exception. > Not too many, actually. Just the narrowness or rigidity of them, sometimes. > But what is the “single issue” by which you think I’m ”driven”? Perhaps we > should discuss that candidly. —CGE > I'm not quite sure what Voltaire has to do with it. :-) But in a word, anti-war. > > On Jun 29, 2019, at 4:09 PM, John W. wrote: > > > > Carl says: "I do not subscribe to a set of opinions but attempt to > consider every question afresh." > > > > Actually, Carl, you DO subscribe to a set of opinions which is almost > always as predictable as the sunrise. You're very ideologically driven, > and for the most part a single-issue thinker and voter. To be fair, most > of us are pretty set in our ways by the time we reach middle age, and we > hold dear two or three dominant paradigms with which we "consider every > question afresh" and then arrive at the exact same, highly predictable > conclusions. > > > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 11:54 AM Brussel, Morton K via Peace < > peace at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > > > > Interesting analysis, which I can mostly agree with: The the ultimate > answer to this view is that which will occur in the next decade or so. This > will concern what evolves from American foreign policy, and what will > happen on the climate change front. > > > > It is noteworthy that trying to portrayTrump as “antiwar" is > inconsistent with his "growing of" our military and national security > arsenals while surroundiing himself with characters such as Bolton, Pompeo > and Abrams. His championing of fossil fuels will likely prevent the > measures essential to slowing down the global warming we now experience. > > > > Anf then there are his domestic measures, which I can only charaterize > as ignornant and pernicious for this country and more widely. Environment, > civil rights, education, corporate control, etc., etc., etc. > > > > —mkb > > > > > > > On Jun 29, 2019, at 8:51 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss < > peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > > > > > > I voted for the Green party candidate in the last presidential > election & expect to do the same in the next, given that Gabbard is not > nominated. But I think the British ex-diplomat Craig Murray is correct: > > > > > > 'Every now and then, I feel myself compelled to write something I know > that the majority of my readers will not agree with. That is because I do > not go along with left wing groupthink any more than I go along with the > line of the Establishment. I do not subscribe to a set of opinions but > attempt to consider every question afresh. > > > > > > 'Wikileaks is much criticised for having published the leaked Hillary > and Podesta emails, thus having “caused” Trump. At its extreme, this > involves the entire evidence-free “Russiagate” paranoia. I find myself > criticised for my association with Julian Assange on these same grounds. > > > > > > 'The major answer to this is that it would have been morally wrong to > conceal the evidence of Hillary’s wrongdoing, her associations with the > Saudis and the Bankers, and particularly the rigging of the primary > elections against Bernie Sanders by Hillary and the DNC. If I was accused > of association with concealing all that, I would not be able to defend > Wikileaks. Another part of the answer is that I am not sure any of this > much affected the actual votes cast. > > > > > > 'But the most important bit of the answer is that I am not sorry that > Clinton lost and Trump won. I say that with apologies to all my American > friends who are suffering from Trump’s harsh domestic policies and his > version of the “hostile climate for immigrants” which we have long suffered > in the UK. I do not underestimate the harm done by Trump’s penchant for > trade wars, or his blindly pro-Israel policies and gestures, nor the > continuation of the Saudi anti-Shia alliance. > > > > > > 'But the vital fact for the rest of the world is that Trump remains > the only US President since Jimmy Carter not to have launched a major war. > In this, he is true to what he said consistently during his election > campaign. I do not think you have to look any further than that for the > explanation of why he pulled out of the attack on Iran following the > destruction of the US drone. The mechanics of the decision-taking are not > its cause, contrary to all the speculation. > > > > > > 'I should take the time to congratulate Iran on shooting down the > drone. The Americans have killed tens of thousands of people, all over the > Middle East and Central Asia, using such drones. That they should holler so > much when somebody knocks one down is ludicrous. > > > > > > 'I am absolutely convinced that, were Hillary President, the Middle > East would now be devastated by the biggest of all the recent wars, and > America would have invaded both Syria and Iran by now. > > > > > > 'Hillary was an enthusiast for the destruction of Iraq and Afghanistan > and she was personally involved in starting the obliteration of the > advanced Libyan state on the flimsiest of pretexts. The potential > devastation she would have inflicted and the millions who would now be > dead, maimed or orphaned outweighs in my view all the harm perpetrated by > Trump. So my conclusion is this: I would far rather not have President > Trump nor President Clinton, but forced into a straight binary choice I > will take Trump. He has a better character; for all his faults he is the > only one of the two who is not a psychopathic killer.’ > > > > > > 'How the Trump administration plays out, given the warmongering > advisors from the political Establishment with whom Trump has surrounded > himself, is a fascinating question. John Bolton is as near evil as any > human being can be. Which brings me back to the faux left and their views. > > > > > > 'In 2013, I spoke in a ceremony at the Oxford Union to give the Sam > Adams Award for Integrity, of which previous winners include Julian > Assange, Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden, John Kyriakou, Thomas Drake and > myself. Hundreds of students from the “left” at Oxford University were > engaged > > > in a rowdy picket against the Sam Adams award aimed to stop the event > because of the ridiculous allegations in Sweden against Assange. > > > > > > 'Now get this. Exactly the day before, the Oxford Union had hosted an > evening with John Bolton. Not a single member of the “left”, who tried to > prevent Ray McGovern and I from speaking, had demonstrated against the > egregious war criminal, responsible for the death of millions. There could > not be a more stark example of the spectacular success of the > > > Establishment in using the false trail of identify politics to split > and divert the left, particularly among young people.’ > > > > > > —CGE > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stuartnlevy at gmail.com Sun Jun 30 13:58:35 2019 From: stuartnlevy at gmail.com (Stuart Levy) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2019 08:58:35 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] July 4th signmaking *today* 11-1 at IMC Makerspace In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <07b256f5-5a32-6bfc-251d-e999d4c5981e@gmail.com> Confirming July 4th signmaking, and how to get there:      Antiwar signmaking party *today*, Sunday, 11am-1pm or so,      Makerspace area in the basement of the IMC Getting there:      See this video!         https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtVYBwzWRjY      Or: Come to the alleyway between the IMC and Lincoln Square (south side of IMC).      Near the radio tower, there's a set of cement steps leading downward.   A bicycle marks the doorway.      Walk through the door, and take the first leftward hallway you see.      Straight at the end of that hallway is the Makerspace.      Come make some signs for July 4th!      We have markers, foam core, posterboard.      On 6/28/19 6:29 PM, Stuart Levy wrote: > AWARE has a pro-peace/anti-war/anti-imperialist slot in the July 4th > parade - we're in! [*] > > We have some signs but should make more.   If we're ambitious and have > a good idea we could try to paint a banner. > > Let's have a signmaking party.    I'm suggesting this time and > (probable) place: > >     Sunday 6/30, 11am - 1pm or so >     probably in the Makerspace space in the downstairs of the > Independent Media Center >     > If you have ideas for signs but can't make one, please let us know.[*] >   I've set followups to peace-discuss, or you can write to me. > > (There might be another chance for signmaking together on the > Wednesday evening of the 3rd.) > > Who would be up for marching? > > I think at least Carl plans to drive his convertible.   Carl, if we > have some posterboard signs is there a way we can attach one to your car? > > [*] The year's parade theme is supposed to be "Flight in Space", for > the 50th anniversary of the moon landing. > > Deb Schrishuhn suggested, Peace should be as American as apple pie.   > I like this line! and included it in our parade application.   We > should make a sign that says so. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Sun Jun 30 16:20:37 2019 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2019 11:20:37 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] July 4th signmaking *today* 11-1 at IMC Makerspace In-Reply-To: <07b256f5-5a32-6bfc-251d-e999d4c5981e@gmail.com> References: <07b256f5-5a32-6bfc-251d-e999d4c5981e@gmail.com> Message-ID: <052D2672-AB0E-4EBD-A156-2F94EE6489B7@gmail.com> Happy to drive my little convertible (the Mighty Miata) in the parade (esp. because I don’t think I’m up to walking the route this year). And I’m not a furnish-fetishist - we can tape signs to the MM as space allows. Perhaps we can find a way to fly the US flag with peace symbol that we use on AWARE ON THE AiR. (We’d need a flag pole attachable to the car) > On Jun 30, 2019, at 8:58 AM, Stuart Levy via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Confirming July 4th signmaking, and how to get there: > > Antiwar signmaking party *today*, Sunday, 11am-1pm or so, > Makerspace area in the basement of the IMC > > Getting there: > See this video! > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtVYBwzWRjY > > Or: Come to the alleyway between the IMC and Lincoln Square (south side of IMC). > Near the radio tower, there's a set of cement steps leading downward. A bicycle marks the doorway. > Walk through the door, and take the first leftward hallway you see. > Straight at the end of that hallway is the Makerspace. > > Come make some signs for July 4th! > > We have markers, foam core, posterboard. > > > On 6/28/19 6:29 PM, Stuart Levy wrote: >> AWARE has a pro-peace/anti-war/anti-imperialist slot in the July 4th parade - we're in! [*] >> >> We have some signs but should make more. If we're ambitious and have a good idea we could try to paint a banner. >> >> Let's have a signmaking party. I'm suggesting this time and (probable) place: >> >> Sunday 6/30, 11am - 1pm or so >> probably in the Makerspace space in the downstairs of the Independent Media Center >> >> If you have ideas for signs but can't make one, please let us know.[*] I've set followups to peace-discuss, or you can write to me. >> >> (There might be another chance for signmaking together on the Wednesday evening of the 3rd.) >> >> Who would be up for marching? >> >> I think at least Carl plans to drive his convertible. Carl, if we have some posterboard signs is there a way we can attach one to your car? >> >> [*] The year's parade theme is supposed to be "Flight in Space", for the 50th anniversary of the moon landing. >> >> Deb Schrishuhn suggested, Peace should be as American as apple pie. I like this line! and included it in our parade application. We should make a sign that says so. > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss